264 
After showing how men come to the conclusion “that the order 
of nature was reasonable in the sense that everything was 
adapted to some good end/’ he continues, “ Further considera- 
tion, however, has led men out of the conclusion in two different 
ways.” He then attempts to show that the case has been 
wrongly stated ; that wonderful structures can be found that 
serve no good purpose at all • referring to the useless teeth of 
whales — the eyes of the mole being perfect in the young and 
destroyed in the adult — the uselessness of our own external 
ears — and he continues thus : “The eye, regarded as an optical 
instrument of human manufacture, was thus described by 
Helmholtz, the physiologist, who learned physics for the sake of 
his physiology, and mathematies for the sake of his physics, 
and is now in the first rank of all three. He said : f If an 
optician sent me that as an instrument, I should send it back to 
him with grave reproaches for the carelessness of his work, and 
demand the return of my money.’” 
56. Professor Clifford’s second reason for denying “ adapta- 
tion to some good end ” is that, “ both the adaptation and the 
non-adaptation which occur in organic structures have been 
explained. The scientific thought of Darwin, Herbert Spencer, 
and Mr. Wallace has described that hitherto unknown process 
of adaptation as consisting of perfectly well-known and familiar 
processes.” 
57. Here we have Darwinism shown to destroy our teleological 
view of nature, which it is often denied that it does. And 
this is effected by such weak arguments as the rudiments of 
teeth in the whale, forgetting the adaptation which replaces 
the useless organs; the blindness of the mole, which can easily 
be proved to be untrue ; the uselessness of our external ears, 
which are well known to concentrate the waves of sound ; and 
the scientific arrogance which can see imperfection in one of 
the most perfect and the most beautiful works of God.* 
58. Another effect of Darwinism may be witnessed in the 
recent attempt by a strong disciple of the school to deprive 
mankind of the great and inestimable privilege of prayer 
* A friend of mine assures me that if a live mole be confined in a box, 
although all its efforts are concentrated in the desire to get out at the bottom 
by burrowing, if a finger is introduced Carefully and slowly at the part 
furthest from the animal, it will immediately make a rush at it. Every one 
also knows that if the waves of sound are not sufficiently concentrated to 
suit partially deaf people, they elongate the external ear with their hands, 
and thus hear more plainly. A celebrated London physician in an address 
to a public scientific body, said that if he had to make a man he would 
make him without tonsils, for they are of no use. This statement is abso- 
lutely untrue, as the merest tyro in physiology full well knows. This is 
another instance of “ scientific arrogance. ;; 
