188 
these conditions ever to be overturned, however much they 
may be controlled and employed — as, for instance, man does, 
partially, control and employ them. They do nob complain if 
natural ends are not realized by altogether the same methods 
which man would employ for their accomplishment. They 
accept all the apparent blunders and impotences of the “ Idea,” 
which would realize itself in nature, as (at least apparent) 
facts ; but they observe that these are simply incidents in a 
process by which, as matter of fact, the Idea is, after all, 
realized. For, that it is realized, Mr. Lewes admits — as, of 
course, every one does and must admit — since he says that 
although (according to him) “ the type [Idea] does not domi- 
nate the momenta,” yet “it emerges from them.”* Tele- 
ologists, of the kind now in view, simply insist that matter 
and its motions (“forces”) are not undirected, since the facts 
of natural existence are, they claim, inexplicable on the theory 
of blind necessity. They take their stand on this funda- 
mental and ultimate question, whether “ blind force ” is either 
possible or real (in the last analysis), and holding that it is 
not, they conceive that intelligence, as a principle in nature — 
the only one remaining possible — is saved. The methods of 
this intelligence they propose to ascertain by examination of 
the facts and no longer by ci priori speculation. 
The theory under discussion is that of matter, with the 
provisionally admitted forces of attraction and repulsion, as 
sufficient to explain natural forms. Mr. Lewes, in the articles 
referred to, may be still cited as representing this doctrine. 
But his explanations — in this sharing an infirmity of mate- 
rialistic explanations in general — presuppose what they osten- 
sibly furnish. The shape assumed by a forming crystal, ho 
says, “ represents .... the direction of its forces, the polarity 
of its molecules.” True ; but the very thing to be explained 
is this very direction of the forces, this polarity of the mole- 
cules, whence the shape results or which it “ represents.” 
Again : “ The harmony of a complex structure results from 
the mutual relations of its parts.” Very true; these relations 
constitute (materially) the harmony ; they are, so to speak, its 
body ; but who or what determines the relations ? Further : 
“ The Law of Epigenesis, which is simply the expression of 
the material process determined by the polarity of molecules, 
* It is instructive to note, and pertinent here to mention, the strong 
language in ■which Strauss, in his recent atheistic Confession, expresses his 
sense of the presence of the “ Idea ” in nature. “ The world,” lie says, 
“ jnay be defined as a whole of infinitely judicious contrivance” (§ 36 ). 
