1880. | A Review of the Modern Doctrine of Evolution. 269 
or later eliminated by men from their society, either by death, 
seclusion or ostracism. 
But the organized moral qualities cannot normally transcend in 
power, as motives of human action, those which secure his physi- 
cal preservation. Lines of men in whom the sympathetic and 
generous qualities predominate over the self-preservative, must 
inevitably become extinct. Evolution can produce no higher 
development of the race (whatever may sometimes appear in indi- 
viduals), than an equivalency in these two classes of forces. 
Beyond this the organization of the social faculities of the brain 
must always be repressed in the race, so that we can only expect 
to attain an equilibrium between them and the more purely selfish 
ones, as the very highest result of unassisted evolution. In this 
position the judgment is suspended between the opposing classes 
of motives; and it must ever remain doubtful in general as to 
whether resulting action’ will be just and right, or the reverse. 
I exclude from this question those generous acts which do not 
appear to the actor to conflict with self-interest. These may be 
termed sympathetic acts, and are quite distinct from the altruistic.’ 
The sympathetic actions are seen at times in most animals. The 
altruistic acts, on the other hand, are those that express what is 
usually called “ moral principle.” Such acts may often coincide 
with the interest of the actor, but so long as they do not appear 
_to him to do so, they are altruistic. It is part of the doctrine of 
evolution, that habits will ultimately disappear on the removal of 
their stimulating cause.’ The moral nature originated, and has 
been maintained, through the pressure of the fear of consequences. 
The removal of this pressure, through the acquisition of power, 
would then ultimately result in the diminution or loss of the moral 
“nature, through disuse. The abuses of power are well known. 
This appears to be all that evolution can do for us in the produc- 
tion of the moral nature. So it would appear that no organized 
faculty of self-sufficient altruistic justice can be derived by the pro- 
cess of mental evolution. The result is rather a continued strug- 
gle between justice and injustice. It is, then, evident that any 
Power which shall cause the permanent predominance of the just 
Over the selfish faculties must be derived from without. 
After we omit from customary religion, cosmogony, which 
belongs to science, and theogony, which belongs to the imagina- 
tion, we have left an art which has for its object the aa seg 
On the Origin of the Will. Penn Monthly, 1877. 
