i§79-] 
The Course of Nature . 
7i 
From the earliest times at which man began to think, two 
modes of explaining the operations of nature have presented 
themselves to his attention. Those modes are sometimes 
designated as the teleological and the mechanical. 
The teleological explanation of nature presupposes that her 
operations are akin to human actions insomuch as they are 
under the control of, and directed by, one or more intelligent 
beings having certain ends in view ; that the events are so 
dire(5ted as to compass these ends ; and, finally, that the 
relation of the events to the ends admits of being discovered 
by observation and study. This last condition is a very 
important one, because without it the teleological explana- 
ton of the cause of nature would not be a scientific one. 
Tie doCtrine that the Author of Nature has certain ends in 
vi«w, and directs the whole course of events so as to bring 
thm about, will not enable us to explain and predict the 
eveits unless we know what those ends are. But, as I 
hav already said, the test of scientific advance is the power 
of fresight — of foreseeing what result any combination of 
circinstances will lead to. If we always had to wait for 
the lsult, and could then only say, I know this is the result 
whic was intended, because it has happened, no aCtual 
foresiht would be possible ; and however excellent the 
doCtrie might be as a theological one, it would not admit 
of beig tested by observation and experiment, and the 
quests of its truth would, therefore, not admit of being 
settlediy scientific investigation. 
You ay recall the remark of a satirical philosopher when 
he saw ie gifts which those who escaped the dangers of a 
certain eacherous and stormy sea offered up to the goddess 
who hachis sea at her command : “ I see no offerings from 
those wl were lost,” said he. It was not till the voyager 
had got {fely to shore that he found himself under the pro- 
tection olfie goddess. 
It musbe well understood that the teleological theory of 
nature, oi\s it is now familiarly called, the explanation of 
natural plnomena by design, has two distinct forms, the 
scientific al the theological. These forms are not antago- 
nistic onesthe one held by scientific men and the other 
bytheologis; for, as you may well know, the scientific 
form is the ie in which scientific men almost universally 
rejeCt the t-ological theory, while they have nothing to 
say against * other forms. The forms refer only to the 
fields to whi the theory may belong, the scientific and 
the theologic. The distinction turns on whether we sup- 
pose the enc which the Creator has in view to be dis- 
