46 
And yet, absurd tbougb they seem, it is, no doubt, im- 
portant that we should frankly face all such notions, and put 
the reasonings by which men seek to sustain them to the 
test of sound and serious argument. To do so, we cannot 
rest satisfied with the teachings of what is frequently called 
Science, to the exclusion of that which is regarded as Philo- 
sophy. It is one of the grand delusions of a somewhat 
popular style of thought at the present day, that a man needs 
only to know “ phenomena ” in order to be truly intelligent in 
relation to nature. But the philosophy which so confines 
itself can have nothing to do with the origin and causes of 
things ; neither can it throw the very least light on the nature 
of the changes which they undergo. The lad who marvelled 
that the large wheel of a coach did not run over the little one, 
was occupied with “ phenomena,” but showed true humanity 
in wondering after their relations. We must understand 
these relations if we would satisfy the intellect, and to do so 
really, we must reason about that which has all its existence 
in thought, as well as observe that which has its being in the 
material only. 
It is well, therefore, in approaching a controverted scientific 
subject like that now before us, to note, at the outset, the 
fundamental principles which it involves. If our beliefs are at 
antipodes as to these, it is not probable that we shall reach 
anything like harmony, however long we may protract our 
discussions. 
By that which is properly metaphysical reasoning, we learn 
that a form in itself is nothing. It is only a mode of existence 
in that substance whose form it is for the moment. When 
men speak of “ forms 33 apart from individual things or beings, 
it should be 'borne in mind that they speak of that which has 
no existence in nature. There are material substances, each 
of which has its ever-changing form ; but these substances are 
things or beings, not forms. 
A type in itself is nothing. It is not even a mode of 
existence in anything other than the mind in which it may 
perhaps be an idea for the time. There is nothing in nature 
corresponding to the word tc type” as used by the naturalist. 
When, therefore, men speak of “ types ” or of “ typical 
forms,” they speak of that which really is not, except as a 
state of their own imaginations. 
Life, in itself, has no separate existence, any more than form 
or type. It is only a state of existence in a substance which, 
for the time being, is alive. It is, I believe, only a state of 
movement. That which we call life 33 in a material substance is 
motion, and nothing more. Should we use a microscope power- 
