27 
SUPPLEMENTARY REMARKS, 
Since this address was printed_, my venerated friend, Doctor 
Kobinson, of Armagh, to whose suggestions I was already so 
much indebted, has pointed out to me an omission in the argu- 
ment from Adaptation given in pp. 16 and 17. I ought to have 
recognized the fact that that argument is sometimes met by 
the principle of the Survival of the Fittest.^^ Professor 
Tyndall, in his Belfast Address, gives some examples from 
Mr. Darwin^s book on The Origin of Species,^^ to show that 
this writer was fully aware of, and duly appreciated, the mul- 
titudinous adaptations which are to be found in what we call 
Nature. And in reference to this he observes, that it is the 
mind thus stored with the choicest materials of the teleologist 
that rejects teleology.^'’* The principle of the Survival of the 
Fittest assumes that innumerable combinations of atoms once 
existed, of which a very few, comparatively, were adapted to 
the surrounding circumstances. These few are supposed to 
have been preserved, while by far the greater number, not 
being so adapted, perished. From this it is argued that all is 
liaiohazard, and that there is no need to suppose an intelligent 
Creator, the combinations which endured being endowed with 
a power of self-adaptation, whereby they settled themselves 
into permanency. Now this is a mere gratuitous assumption ; 
for it can never be proved that combinations originally existed 
which perished out of existence, leaving no track. Moreover, if 
we should grant that such was the case, we are still confronted 
by the questions, “ How came these atoms to exist ? and how 
did they get the power to combine There can be but two 
hypotheses. Either they existed from all eternity, or they were 
created by an intelligent Being ; for the only two other sup- 
positions are so irrational that they may well be dismissed — 
namely, that they were created by an unconscious or unintelli- 
gent being, or that they created themselves. Now, the ques- 
tion which of the two former hypotheses is the true one, is 
not decided by granting the principle of the Survival of the 
Fittest. For there is nothing against reason in believing that 
an intelligent Creator should adopt that principle. To a cer- 
tain extent we see that the fittest combinations do alone sur- 
vive. Animals and plants that once were suited to certain 
climates have become extinct, or have been compelled to seek 
For the sake of some readers, it may be as well to state that “ teleology ” 
means the doctrine that there is a design or purpose in Creation. 
