that we have a fairly strong conviction in ourselves of 
its reality; and that the contrary supposition, that we 
are automata, that free will is an illusion, and that our 
actions are either predetermined or the result of chance, 
is a very unsatisfactory and unworkable one. Perhaps 
overmuch importance should not be given to the latter 
consideration, because, even if we were all convinced 
theoretically that fate or chance ruled supreme, it would 
probably make little difference to our actual life and 
happiness; we should carry on in much the same way, 
just as the majority of people who believe in a future 
life show little sign of the belief in their daily conduct. 
If we accept the reality of Free Will, I do not see how 
we can avoid considering the rudiment of such as being 
an inherent property of matter, 
36. I do not think we shall get much help towards 
a decision from historical views on the subject. The 
carly Greeks do not appear to have worried themselves 
in the matter, but to have taken freedom of the will for 
granted. Probably they gave more power to the will 
than any of us would give today, now that we appre- 
ciate the limitations of natural law under which it has 
to work. The Epicureans seem to have béen on the 
side of free will, the Stoics on the side of determinism: 
here, as in other matters, the Biosopher may feel more 
in sympathy with the Epicureans, although it may be 
noted that Winwood Reade, whom I should claim as a- 
Biosopher, had, in these other matters, a leaning towards 
the Stoics, Christian Philosophy appears from Augustine 
onwards to have been dominated by “predestination” 
(=determinism), and either to have believed in the 
abominable doctrine that each human being was born 
irrevocably to either damnation or salvation respectively, 
the former to be tortured forever because they neces- 
sarily follow their destiny, or else to have believed 
that all since Adam were born to dammation, but a - 
select few redeemed by the vicarious sufferings of Christ 
and the capricious grace of God. 
37. Much in the same way as theological dogmas of 
the omniscience and omnipotence of God encouraged in 
the churches belief in predestination, so the increasing 
appreciation in the nineteenth century of the validity of 
natural laws encouraged belief among scientists in deter- 
minism as regards human action. Many, perhaps the 
majority, considered man as being a “conscious auto- 
maton.” This view is strongly expressed in his book 
“The Service of Man” (1903) by the rationalist, James 
Cotter Morrison. “The doctrine of determinism,” Mor- 
rison says, *is now so generally accepted that it will 
not be needful to dwell upon it at any length here. The 
cumulative argument in its favor, says Mr. Sidgwick, is 
so strong as almost to"amount to complete proof.” In 
support of his contention, Morrison stresses the im- 
portance of inherited quality, and also of education and 
habits in determining man’s actions. “A man with a 
criminal nature and education, under given circumstances 
of temptation, can no more help committing crime than 
he could help having a headache under certain condi- 
tions of brain and stomach.” Now, I fully admit the 
force of this and a number of Mr. Morrison’s other 
45 
Some Forerunners of Biosophy 
arguments up to a point, but the question is whether 
there is a point beyond which they do not carry us, the 
point where free will actually comes into the picture. 
[In parenthesis Mr. Morrison's "criminal" is not a 
happy illustration. In our crazy world who are the 
criminals? Mr. Morrison himself was no doubt a 
criminal for the orthodox, and, had he lived no great 
number of years earlier, would have been lucky to 
escape the stake for his writings]. But a more important 
question is, did Mr. Morrison seriously and fully believe 
that from his heredity and environment he was irrevo- 
cably destined to write “The Service of Man” word for 
word as it appears, and that anyone with full knowledge 
of that heredity and environment could have predicted 
the same? Mr. Morrison’s case illustrates a remark I 
made a few paragraphs earlier, as, in spite of being a 
confirmed believer in determinism, he lived a full and 
useful life in the Service of Man, so that evidently his 
belief was no detriment as regards his conduct and hap- 
piness. 
38. However, I think modern physics allows a loop- 
hole for Free Will which was not foreseen in the nine- 
teenth century, and to admit free will presents πο 
greater difficulty than to admit consciousness, and that 
we all admit. Free will and consciousness are almost 
equally strong convictions óf our minds; the former, 
after allowing all necessary qualifications, cannot well 
be dismissed on any evidence we have, and it appears 
to me to afford a more satisfactory and more coherent 
basis for human conduct than the alternatives of either 
sheer determinism or chance. 
SOME FORERUNNERS OF BIOSOPHY. 
93. Biosophy being essentially a bringing together 
of Natural Science, Philosophy, Ethies and Politics as 
a base for human happiness and progress, I only include 
in this note on some forerunners of Biosophy those 
writers who have combined two or more of these groups 
of studies in a single work, Of course, the original 
investigators of single subjects are of far more impor- 
tance, seeing that they have provided the essential foun- 
dations on which Biosophy must build; but that is a 
different matter. 
40. The first book I refer to is, “Vestiges of the 
Natural History of Creation,” originally. published 
anonymously in two volumes, dated respectively 1843, 
1846, and acknowledged later as being the work of 
Robert Chambers (1802-1871), the well-known author 
and publisher. I have not the original edition at hand, 
the copy I quote from being the tenth edition, of 1853, 
in one volume. : Although Chambers speaks of God, 
he regards him.only as the original creator of the uni- 
verse, in which natural laws were established at the 
creation and there has been no further interference on 
his part. — Realisation of the unorthodoxy of this point 
of view caused Chambers to publish his book anony- 
mously. After an astronomical introduction, Chambers 
gives an account of the formation of the Earth and of 
