64 
from one little monad or molecule, the facts in support of such a belief 
ought to be very startling indeed. He complained that the facts given in 
support of the doctrine of evolution were wholly insufficient to sustain it, and 
protested that there was no reason to believe that man had descended from 
a monkey because there were certain breeds of pigeons or of horses which 
differed from one another. 
Mr. I. B. Nicholson complained that Dr. McCann’s paper was not of a 
sufficiently elementary character for those who really required instruction : 
it assumed too large an amount of knowledge among those who heard it 
read. He asked that some definition of the meaning of teleology should 
be given. 
Dr. McCann briefly replied. Having thanked the audience for the kindness 
with which his paper had been received, he said that he did not think there 
was any action on the part of a human being which was altogether automatic, 
but the great difficulty in dealing with such questions was the absence of 
definitions. The word automatic had never received any adequate definition, 
and the result was that different people speaking of automata meant some- 
thing quite different from one another. There was no analogy between a 
watch as an automaton and any conscious being ; but in mental action there 
were certain moods in which the mind became to some extent mechanical in 
following out a line of thought. There was a latent mental mode in which 
the mind, although it acted voluntarily, yet acted almost unconsciously, but 
not quite, or we should not remember afterwards what we had thought about. 
In threading our way through groups of people in the streets, we voluntarily 
turned to the left or right, as circumstances might render necessary, but we 
were almost unconscious of any mental operation at the time. With regard 
to inherited and inherent qualities, whatever was essential or necessary for 
a being was inherent, and could not well be described as inherited. Inherited 
qualities were clearly something in addition to those which were inherent — 
they were not essential, but acquired. The inherent habit he had referred 
to in his paper was that of the bee, which, in making its cell, was carrying 
on an operation which had never been performed by either of its parents, for 
the working bees were the neuters which had no descendants. With reference 
to the muscularity of Sheffield workmen, he could only say that he had seen 
a good many Sheffield babies, and they were not a bit heavier, stronger, or 
more muscular than others. As a matter of fact, however, these children 
began from their earliest years to develop their muscles, because they were 
put to work at as early an age as possible. He quite agreed with Dr. Currey 
that it was not right to reject a whole theory because of one failure of verifi- 
cation ; but it must be remembered that, in proportion to the value of the 
fact upset, was the theory weakened. As to the definition of Teleology, it 
simply meant purpose in the arrangement or contrivance of anything. If 
ho had a distinct end in view in the construction of anything, that was so 
far a teleological act. 
The Ciiairmain in closing the discussion said, it appeared to him that 
