0 
hypothesis of Lucretius; for had not man any inventive powers 
at all, there would have been some show of reason in his 
philosophy. 
Thus, we might argue, — man, feeling instinctively the pangs 
of hunger, would eat what he accidentally found to suit him, 
and could with justice say that he had no reason for supposing 
that it was made for him to eat, but, finding it agreeable, he 
used it as food.* Again, having no knowledge or belief in any 
futurity, he could see no use in his existence; but finding out 
that some things or circumstances gave him the sensation of 
pleasure, others of pain, he could only be led to think that it 
was best to get as much of the former as possible, and avoid as 
much of the latter. We know too well to what this would 
lead! 
Now, reverse this view, and look on the other picture, wdiere 
man recognizes God, sees His actions in the hosts of heaven 
and the myriads on earth ; sees in himself the final stroke of 
that elaborate design which has taken incalculable ages to work 
out, and which no being on earth but himself could understand ; 
feels in his ow r n soul an internal evidence to the existence of 
Deity of which he is a reflection, and feels in himself an instinc- 
tive yearning for better things to come, together with the con- 
ception of the possibility of a realization of his hopes ; the very 
existence of which conception is an evidence of his natural 
fitness for eternity. 
The ordinary Teleological Views of Natural Theologians. 
Dismissing the Epicurean hypothesis, let us take up the 
third, w r hich more nearly concerns us, or that which is held 
by the majority of teleologists. Their stand-point is that all 
things were created by God as we see them now. That every 
species of animal and plant is an absolute entity designed and 
executed by the Great Artificer, and that all structures are 
perfect f in form and function; so that every portion of struc- 
the principle of necessary progressive development leaves untouched the 
fact that animals of the lowest groups abound at the present day, i.e., 
it ignores the principle of Retention of Type, which must be united hand to 
hand with that of evolution. 
* The only illustration that I can think of at the moment which would 
tally with the Lucretian idea is, that writing-clerks, finding their ears suit- 
able for holding their pens, use them as such. 
+ Some modification of the idea of perfection of organs is held by a few 
teleologists who have more extensive knowledge of facts than the majority ; 
and so have not failed to recognize the existence of rudimentary and “ useless ” 
organs, perceiving thereby the relative and not absolute character of nature’s 
perfections. — See Plurality of Worlds (by Dr. Whewell], p. 345. 
