diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | .gitattributes | 3 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 30743-h.zip | bin | 0 -> 30452 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | 30743-h/30743-h.htm | 1518 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 30743.txt | 1438 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 30743.zip | bin | 0 -> 28859 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | LICENSE.txt | 11 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | README.md | 2 |
7 files changed, 2972 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6833f05 --- /dev/null +++ b/.gitattributes @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +* text=auto +*.txt text +*.md text diff --git a/30743-h.zip b/30743-h.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..641f217 --- /dev/null +++ b/30743-h.zip diff --git a/30743-h/30743-h.htm b/30743-h/30743-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d6bb724 --- /dev/null +++ b/30743-h/30743-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,1518 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" + "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> + +<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> + <head> + <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" /> + <title> + The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Philosophy of Evolution, by Stephen H. Carpenter. + </title> + <style type="text/css"> + + p { margin-top: .75em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .75em; + } + h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 { + text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ + clear: both; + } + hr { width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; + clear: both; + } + + body{margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; + } + + hr.smler { width: 10%; } + + .pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ + /* visibility: hidden; */ + position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: smaller; + text-align: right; + text-indent: 0px; + } /* page numbers */ + + .smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + + .tbrk {margin-bottom: 2em;} + + .fnanchor {font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;} + + </style> + </head> +<body> + + +<pre> + +Project Gutenberg's The Philosophy of Evolution, by Stephen H. Carpenter + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: The Philosophy of Evolution + and The Metaphysical Basis of Science + +Author: Stephen H. Carpenter + +Release Date: December 23, 2009 [EBook #30743] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION *** + + + + +Produced by David Edwards, Martin Pettit and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This +book was produced from scanned images of public domain +material from the Google Print project.) + + + + + + +</pre> + + +<h3>THE</h3> + +<h1>PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION</h1> + +<p class="tbrk"> </p> + +<h4>TOGETHER WITH A PRELIMINARY ESSAY ON</h4> + +<p class="tbrk"> </p> + +<h2>THE METAPHYSICAL BASIS OF SCIENCE.</h2> + +<hr class="smler" /> + +<h2>TWO PAPERS</h2> + +<h4>Read before <span class="smcap">The Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters</span> at the Annual<br /> +Meetings of February, 1873 and February, 1874.</h4> + +<p class="tbrk"> </p> + +<h3>BY</h3> + +<h2>STEPHEN H. CARPENTER, LL. D.,</h2> + +<h4><i>Professor of Logic, etc., in the University of Wisconsin, and President of the<br /> +Department of Speculative Philosophy in the Wisconsin<br /> +Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters.</i></h4> + +<p class="tbrk"> </p> + +<hr class="smler" /> + +<h4>[<span class="smcap">Reprinted From the Academy's Transactions.</span>]</h4> + +<hr class="smler" /> + +<p class="tbrk"> </p> + +<h4>MADISON, WIS.:<br />ATWOOD & CULVER, PRINTERS AND STEREOTYPERS.<br />1874.</h4> + +<hr /> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[Pg 1]</a></span></p> + +<h2>THE METAPHYSICAL BASIS OF SCIENCE.</h2> + +<p>All knowledge is essentially one. The object-matter upon which intellect +exerts itself, does not affect the subjective act of knowing. Physics, +when stripped of that which is merely contingent, becomes metaphysics. +Physical science deals with object-matter, and discusses the signs by +which nature communicates her message—that is, phenomena. Metaphysical +science has to do with the subject-mind, and discusses the meaning of +the message. The one converts God's hieroglyphics into +easily-intelligible language; the other translates this language into +Idea. If this be true, there must be a unity of method in all science, +however great the diversity of the object-matter investigated. This +method is subjectively determined, that is, by the constitution of the +mind, and not by the particular form of matter upon which intellectual +energy may be exerted. If there is an essential unity in all knowledge, +it is because there is a corresponding unity of method in all mental +activity. It is only when we look upon what is to be known, that truth +separates into sciences; but particular truths become particular +sciences only under assumed relations to the whole of which they form a part.</p> + +<p>Objectively considered, science is classified knowledge; subjectively +viewed, it is the laws or principles according to which knowledge is +classified. Every actor implies an act—every<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[Pg 2]</a></span> thinker a thought. We may +therefore universally make this dual classification, according as we +view the mental operation involved, or the attributes of objects which +form the subject of thought. The possibility of science is conditioned +upon the possibility of classification. Mere knowledge is not science, +as the world ought to have learned by costly experience. Even classified +knowledge may not be science; it becomes science not through previous +classification, but in the act of being classified, and therefore only +as the principle of classification is apprehended—that is, only as the +particular application of the law of generalization is distinctly +recognized. A man may know a book and know nothing more; he knows the +science only when he is capable of making the book for himself. Mere +knowledge thus differs from science in that the one is held only by the +apprehensive powers of the mind, while the other passes beyond these +into the reflective or ratiocinative. Pure science, then, must be wholly +abstract. The forms and substances of Nature with which the scientific +student deals, are only the discrete figures of the young mathematician, +to be thrown aside with advancing knowledge. Matter is only the staff on +which the mind leans, while too feeble to go alone. It is not the finely +chiseled statue that renders a man a sculptor; it is the conception +which is therein embodied. A day-laborer may have cut the stone, but +only the artist could conceive the idea. So in science, we care but +little for the particular results at which we arrive, compared with the +laws, according to which the results have been attained.</p> + +<p>But conceptions cannot be communicated without being rendered objective. +The ideal of the artist is locked up in his own mind, until on canvas, +in marble, or by means of some other physical symbol, he communicates +his high imaginings. Matter, then, according to the present constitution +of things is the condition of intellectual communication. Law cannot be +studied as abstract law; it can be studied only while acting, and that +which exhibits this activity must be matter<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</a></span>—something which will +always and uniformly obey. There can be no conception of force except as +acting, and the sole medium of such activity is matter. Thus again, +matter is the condition of all communication from nature to man. Science +is thus, in a measure, determined by the conditions of its discovery and +communication. But we must distinguish between an invariable condition +and that which is thus conditioned. Matter is not science; it is only +the condition of its discovery and communication. Air is not hearing; it +is the condition of hearing. We do not study matter for the sake of the +matter when we study science, but for the sake of the law communicated +to us in these changes of matter, and Law is a metaphysical, not a +physical idea. Reason, not sense, apprehends it. Law is, so to speak, +formulated in the physical, but it is not material. Matter is only the +vehicle of science, as language is the vehicle of thought.</p> + +<p>It is plain, then, that just as in mathematics we have a division into +pure and mixed, according as we deal with matter in the abstract or in +the concrete, so we may in any science make a corresponding division, +according as we confine our attention to the laws revealed by matter or +to the matter revealing the laws: in other words; just as we give +attention to the ideas of the message, or to the language in which it is +communicated. The language must first be learned, but the words used to +communicate the message may be separately understood, and yet the +meaning of the message wholly missed. Knowing only the one makes a +charlatan; knowing the other makes a savan. The sciences based upon this +objective study of Nature are denominated Natural Sciences; and because +they lisp the first syllables of Nature's message to man, they should be +his primary teachers. It is by their aid that the universal message of +God to man must be read. They form, as it were, a public highway leading +from Nature to God. But the difficulty is that observing men become so +absorbed in admiring some splendid piece of Divine <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</a></span>engineering that +they stop to gaze and wonder, until losing sight of everything above and +beyond, they refuse to advance, fondly imagining that they have reached +the end of the journey.</p> + +<p>The science based upon this subjective study of Nature is called +metaphysics. Logic has been defined as "The Science of Thought;" it +should be termed "The Science of Thinking." It is not a dead body which +we are studying by dissection, but a living, vital Force, which we study +by observing its activities. We find here the same error which we find +elsewhere—a stopping with the material symbol, and an ignoring of the +intellectual force which clothed itself with the symbol. Astronomy is +not the science of circles and spheres, ellipses and ellipsoids, but of +the Force whose sensible utterances are given in these curves. We might +as well call Painting the science of pictures, or Sculpture the science +of statues. So Language, the medium of thought, is only a symbol, less +material indeed than pictures and statues, but still physical. What we +want in "The Science of Thinking" is not the knowledge of symbols, but +the knowledge of that which is symbolized. The chemist does not care for +the compounds he finds in his retort; he seeks after the truth which +these compounds formulate. Metaphysics and Physics evidently agree in +this; that both are seeking to frame an articulate utterance of the Idea +given in the diverse manifestations of Force—the Idea which includes +all Potencies, the summing up of all phenomena into that final +generalization which includes the intellectual as well as the material, +until at last we reach the essential unity of all Truth.</p> + +<p>Science, then, is classification, or the discovery of the principles of +classification, rather than an arbitrary acquaintance with things +classified. Every science, however, must have an objective +expression—that is, must be formulated. In this, both metaphysical and +physical science agree; the only difference in this respect is, that in +Physics, Nature gives us in the first place the material interpretation +of the idea—that is,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</a></span> the basis of classification—which we have only +to translate into idea: while in metaphysics, we first have the idea to +which we must furnish the objective utterance. We see here the precise +difference between what is called the logical and the natural +method—the one being usually called the reverse of the other. The +difference is not so much a difference in intellectual procedure as in +objective expression. For instance: The botanist has before him the +whole range of vegetable forms. He notes resemblances and differences, +and groups plants into species and genera, but his work is not ended +when these are named and known, and their qualities discovered. He is +seeking amidst these multifarious forms for the law of vegetable growth +and reproduction. Every organ of the plant is the symbol of an idea, and +these ideas form the science of Botany. These Ideas are +metaphysical—that is intellectual, and only their sensible +manifestation is physical. The symbols of these Ideas, being given in +Nature, must be learned from observation before they can be used +intelligently, just as words must be learned before one can speak a +language. Mastery of the means of expression is as essential to the +communication of ideas an is the possession of the ideas themselves. The +botanist observes an individual plant, and notes its characteristics. He +observes others which possess some of these characteristics whilst +others are wanting. He forms a class-type from these agreeing +attributes, and gives this new collocation of characteristics a name. +Nature never presents this class-type absolutely; it is found nowhere +but in intellect. What has the botanist done but to retranslate the +communication of Nature into Idea, and then to express this idea by less +complicated and less physical symbols? Man's province in this case is +simply to interpret the hieroglyphics of Nature into a more readily +comprehended language—to express that simply which nature has expressed +confusedly. The scientist restricts himself to the interpretation of a +single class of symbols, as the Botanist to plants, the Zoologist to +animals, but the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</a></span> end sought in each case is the same—that is, to +change all these physical utterances of Nature into Idea, and to secure +for this Idea a method of expression involving the least possible +materiality of symbol—that is, to change individual facts and phenomena +into general principles, which, because abstract, are unchangeable. When +this has been done, the work of the Naturalist ceases, but the work of +Man, the Thinker is not done; it is only just begun. By assuming the +ultimate expressions of the various natural sciences as individual and +not as typical, we can treat the truths reached by them precisely as the +Botanist treated plants, and, rejecting points of of difference, may +find in them all some central idea. This is the province of the +metaphysician. He seeks the law of Idea, he determines the law of +Thinking, just as all other laws are determined, from a study of the +symbols formulating its expression in Nature. When this law has been +distinctly enunciated, and freed from all intermixture with the +contingent, then the work of the metaphysician ceases, the <i>summum +genus</i> has been reached. The truths communicated in the symbols of +Nature, have been correlated and enunciated, and finally translated from +the dialect of man the physical into the language of man the +intellectual. Physical science determines the separate words of this +message of God, the letters of which are scattered throughout Nature. +Metaphysics combines these words into propositions which enunciate a +distinct truth. There is therefore neither conflict nor variation +between the method of Logic and the method of Nature. The movement of +both is in the same direction; the only difference is in the point of +starting. And another truth no less important, which follows from the +foregoing discussion, is that the method of Nature is fundamental to the +method of Logic. Physics should precede metaphysics, but not exclude it; +both are essential to every true science, and physics, which stops with +physics, leads man by dazzling promises into some Utopian desert only to +leave him there to die of hunger. And it is no less true that +<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</a></span>metaphysics, without this basis in experimental science, is illusory +and untrustworthy, wherever the original data are necessarily empirical.</p> + +<p>Two conditions are thus necessary to all science: a body of knowable +truth capable of being systematized; and an intelligence capable of +apprehending and systematizing it. One of these conditions is physical +and one is metaphysical; and all true science must be the resultant of +Law and Idea, the Objective and the Subjective, the twin forces of +Nature and Man. If either of these conditions be wanting, there can be +no true science, for science can neither be "evolved from the depths of +the personal consciousness," nor can the scattered letters of scientific +truth, as given in nature, arrange themselves into the words of a +significant message. Knowledge must be classified before it is science, +and that which classifies can only be intellect—discovering and +enunciating this classification according to the laws of mental action. +As prominence is given to one or other of these two conditions we have +the division into Logical and Natural, but the fundamental principle of +classification is the same in both—it being simply the law of +intellectual action—just as the law which governs the action of the +levers of a loom will determine the pattern of the woven fabric. There +can, therefore, be no conflict between the methods of Logic and those of +Nature. The determining element in all classification, whether of the +phenomena of Mind or of the grosser phenomena of Matter is uniformly and +always the same—the law of intellectual action.</p> + +<p>Science then resolves itself into a determination of this Law of mental +activity, so that in an ultimate analysis, all science is metaphysical, +just as all science primarily is physical. Here, as elsewhere, Law can +be studied only in its objective manifestations. The Law of Thinking can +be educed only from expressed Thought, but the Law is not objective +thought, any more than the idea of the sculptor is marble, or the +conception<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</a></span> of the painter is paint. The simplest expression of thought +is not the syllogism but the logical proposition. Now, it is plain that +if the proposition is the formulation—the material representative of +thought—if we study it as we study other natural symbols, we will find +in it the fundamental Law of Thinking, and ultimately the fundamental +Law of all Science: just as, if it were possible to reduce all +elementary substances to one, the chemist would be able to find in that +one a condensed expression of chemical science.</p> + +<p>What then is a proposition? Simply stated, it is the assertion of +relation between two terms; or more abstractly, it is the reference of +an individual to its species—the assertion of a classification. We find +here the same duality which we noticed above. If we give prominence to +the individual notion, we consider the proposition in extension; if we +turn our attention to the specific notion we consider the proposition in +intention: in the one case referring to the individuals composing the +class, in the other to the attributes composing the class-type. The +first corresponds to induction, the second to deduction. When we study +individuals we study physics; when we study the attributes composing the +class-type, we study metaphysics. The Law of Thinking as educed from a +study of the proposition is the law of classification. The proposition, +considered affirmatively, asserts explicitly agreement between certain +attributes of two terms; that is, it asserts a classification. The aim +of science is to reach this proposition, to discover and assert the +principle of classification—in other words, to formulate metaphysically +what nature has presented physically. We must find, then, the first or +fundamental law of thinking in this <i>integration</i> or classification. +This fundamental law may be subdivided into two species, according to +the two terms of the proposition; of which the first may be stated thus: +"Every possible object of thought is to a certain extent identical with +every other"; and as the proposition implicitly states disagreement, the +second may be stated thus:<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</a></span> "Every possible object of thought is to a +certain extent diverse from every other." The first gives the positive +(subjective) condition of the proposition, the second the negative +(objective) condition: both together constitute the conditions of +thinking. The proposition is thus the assertion of the same in the +different. The proposition also asserts, implicitly, the <i>tertium quid</i>, +or the basis of classification—the class-type, to which both terms are +referred—that is, the proposition secondarily asserts an analysis. +According to the first condition we have the inductive process; +according to the second we have the deductive process. A complete +movement of idea from its purely physical symbolization to its +metaphysical interpretation, must involve both these processes.</p> + +<p>The mind possesses the power of analysis; it can watch its own +operations and retrace its steps, until it arrives at the original data +of consciousness; but analysis cannot comprise the whole of the logical +process. Before there can be analysis there must be something to be +analyzed; before steps can be retraced, they must be taken. We must not +confound a condition with a Law—the one is a conception antecedent to +all action, a genus to which the particular activity may be referred; +the other is coincident with action. The one is the medium of the other. +We may illustrate this idea by science itself, which is reached only by +an analysis of Art. Matter is the condition of the expression of an +idea; hence to all but the artist, Art must precede Science, but this +cannot be in the case of the artist; in his mind the Idea is first +conceived, and there it is given expression in the forms of Art. Here, +as uniformly in Nature, the whole absolutely precedes the part—the +universal exists before the particular—God before man. Truth absolute +thus exists before truth conditioned. Science before Art. Remove +conditions and the conditioned becomes the absolute; art and science +coincide. But truth which is assumed to be out of all relations, cannot +be comprehended by man, and practically is not. Even the universal +propositions<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</a></span> of deduction express universality under conditions—that +is universality of relation; just as infinity in mathematics means that +which passes measurement, while in fact between infinity and measurement +there is no relation, and the infinite is thus incomprehensible as an +object of thought, although by no means unrecognizable as a necessary +condition antecedent to all intellectual action. It is of vital +importance that we note this distinction, because reasoning, i. e. +classification, is possible only so long as we deal with what is +admitted to be under relation: if we assume a term to be out of all +relation, it ceases to be an object of thought—it can neither be +classified nor unclassified; it is beyond reason. Mathematics can +proceed with its investigations only so long as it treats all quantities +as measurable; it must wholly cease its calculations if an infinite term +be introduced. To claim that analysis represents the complete normal +action of the intellect in reasoning, is ultimately to claim that the +initial point of thinking is the <i>summum genus</i> of thought—God. Now God +is undoubtedly the initial point of absolute thought, but he is not the +beginning of human thought. Intellectually speaking, God is the final +generalization; every movement possible to him must be one of +analysis—a differentiation of Himself, so to speak, by negatives. Thus +the course of absolute Thought, beginning with God, must be first +towards a complete differentiation into ultimate individualization; and +lastly a complete integration again of individuals into an infinite +whole. This dual action completes the circle of intellectual activity. +We have dropped attribute after attribute until we have reached the last +possible analysis; but we do not stop here, but by the assumption of +attributes we again reach the highest possible synthesis. This must be +the method of the divine activity, successive differentiation and +integration, the closing in of a mighty circle of infinity, embracing +all the finite, but never losing the essential characteristic of the infinite.</p> + +<p>Now, if this also represent the exact movement of the finite<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</a></span> mind in +action—that is, in reasoning, man must be God. Man is finite. Even his +infinite is only the immeasurable—not that which is without the +category of measure. He cannot begin where the Infinite begins, at the +highest possible generalization,—but he must begin with the finite. If +what we have shown above be true, man must begin with the individual, +and the first mental act of the positive character of thinking, is the +reference of this individual notion to a class. Now the <i>class-notion</i> +is the same as the individual notion, less certain attributes as +<i>individual</i> attributes, but gathered into a larger whole. This process +is plainly integration; we are rejecting from the new conception +whatever prevents enlarging the class. Each higher generalization +involves all the attributes of the lower, not individually, but +specifically or generically. In the final generalization, extension and +intension coalesce. Just as we reach the individual by differentiating a +universal through successive negations, we reach the universal again, by +integration, by successively denying the negations through which we just +now differentiated. The movement of the finite mind in reasoning is thus +from the individual through the universal to the individual again.</p> + +<p>Science thus parts into two great branches—one seeking to establish +principles by what we have called integration, and the other the +elucidation of facts by <i>a priori</i> reasoning instead of observation. +That is, the aim of true science is to free man from the restrictions of +the finite, and to place him in possession of the infinite—the closing +in of a lesser circle of infinite truth, yet never losing hold upon the +finite. In accordance with this view we see science pursuing its +integrations until it has identified as composing an essential unity all +the various manifestations of force. This is the finite becoming the +infinite, for unity is, in so far, infinity—God is one, a unity, not a +unit. But we also see science going beyond this point, and by a new +series of differentiations reaching truths new to experience, if indeed +not impossible to experience.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</a></span></p><p>Between these two limits all knowledge is forever moving. It can never +rest. The tide of thought sweeps onward towards the infinite—God +following it to its final absorption into the <i>I Am</i>, simple +being,—while finite man, because of his finiteness, can only reach +those universals which are infinite only to human thought. Like men on a +journey we leave the train when we have reached our journey's end, but +the train passes on out of sight in the distance, sending back, now and +then, tokens of its progress, as it thunders over a bridge, or whistles +shrill as it nears some further stopping place, until at last all is +still, not because the train has stopped, but because we can follow it +no further with our senses. Even after science has reached the utmost +limit possible to it, it is not satisfied to rest there, but starts at +once upon its return trip, to bring to notice undiscovered facts hidden +in these mighty generalizations. Thus the pendulum of intellectual +activity unceasingly vibrates between the infinite and the finite, never +resting, because Idea and Matter, the force of Man and the force of +Nature can never be completely identified.</p> + +<hr /> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</a></span></p> + +<h2>THE PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION.</h2> + +<p>The intellectual processes of a rational being must proceed according to +some law. They cannot succeed each other at hap-hazard. The notion of +rationality is conditioned upon this regular procedure; if this be +wanting, the essential character of rational action is wanting. But to +say that rational processes are determined by law, and conditioned upon +a regular procedure, is simply to assert that the steps in ratiocination +are so related to each other that the relation of each to every other +may be determined by the application of the law—the difference between +any two steps being analogous to the difference between any other two. +The astronomer determines the orbit of a planet from three observations, +because he thereby determines the law of variation between these points; +from which he assumes that this law will be constant, presenting a +series of terms each differentiated according the series of differences +already determined.</p> + +<p>Applying the same principle to mental phenomena, we may determine the +law of intellectual action. Thoughts are discriminated by the presence +or absence of certain attributes. At one extreme we find the <i>summum +genus</i>, comprising the fewest possible attributes distinguishing an +idea; at the other extreme we find the individual, comprising any number +of attributes. Between these two extremes we find a regular series of +intermediate terms. The movement of an idea from the general to the +individual is like the motion of a planet through one-half of its orbit; +while the return movement from the individual to the general, +corresponds to the motion of the planet over the remaining half of its +orbit. The same law governs both movements and unites the two halves of +the orbit into a<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</a></span> single whole; and a series of observations taken at +equal distances, will, by the uniformity of differences presented, +reveal the operation of the same law in this dual manifestation. Upon +examining the processes of deduction and induction, we find in each the +same series of terms, differing only in the fact that they are in +inverse order, and this correspondence reveals the operation of one and +the same law. An inductive series is only a deductive series read +backward. Any two terms in a series whether inductive or deductive, +differ only in the degree of generality, and differ similarly from a +third term, so that two being known the third can be therefrom +determined. In a deductive series the terms differ by a constant +increase in the number of individualizing attributes—a concept being +expanded into a deductive series by such regular additions. Having two +terms we can proceed to the third—that is, from two propositions +expressing this relation, we can proceed to a conclusion. In an +inductive series the terms differ by a constant diminution in the number +of individualizing attributes—an individual term being expanded into an +inductive series, by successively dropping the attributes which compose +the individual term, until we reach the required degree of generalization.</p> + +<p>Thought must proceed in one of these two directions. The object-matter +of thought being composed wholly of attributes can differ only in the +presence or absence of certain attributes. A combination, then, of these +two movements must complete the intellectual orbit. The direction of the +movement of the mind will be determined by the end proposed. When we +possess the knowledge of phenomena and wish to discover law—that is, +when we seek information—we proceed by induction, from the individual +to the general. When possessed of knowledge, we wish to discover its +applications, when knowing the law, we wish to determine the phenomena +necessarily resulting therefrom, we proceed by deduction—from the +general to the individual. Complete knowledge, then, consists in the +highest<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</a></span> possible generalization, and the expansion of this term into a +series, ending only with the last possible individualization. The aim of +physical science is to determine that half of the intellectual orbit +which lies between the individual and the general—the aim of +metaphysical science is to trace the other half which lies between the +general and the individual. When we seek to know what is, we proceed by +induction—the method of the phenomenal. When, knowing what is, we +proceed to determine what hence must be, we proceed by deduction—the +method of the Necessary. Thus Science, at first seeking principles, +proceeds by induction to establish them; but after these fundamental +principles have been established, it proceeds deductively to determine +what must result from them, without waiting to discover these truths by observation.</p> + +<p>Knowledge is thus complete just in proportion to the extension of its +scope through generalization. The higher the generalization, the more +inclusive will it be, and the <i>summum genus</i>, or the final +generalization, will be the highest attainable reach of knowledge. When +man can make no further generalization, his knowledge will be, in so +far, absolute and complete, and all that remains possible to him will be +the practical application of what he already knows. Perfect knowledge is +nothing but perfect generalization. The Supreme Intelligence being +hypothetically possessed of all knowledge, that is, having discriminated +the absolute <i>summum genus</i>, can proceed no further in this direction; +his intellectual activity must be exerted in a descending series, or +from the general towards the individual, and this process must be, as we +have seen above, by a determinate series of steps, fixed by the +operation of a definite law, which law proceeds by the successive +addition of attributes to the general.</p> + +<p>Complete knowledge, being complete generalization, the lines of all +science will necessarily converge, as they approach this generalization, +until all sciences coalesce in one science, and all truth is reduced to +a single expression in the utterance<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</a></span> of the final conception. In +accordance with the laws of thinking, this general term is reached by +successive omissions of particularizing attributes, until at last we +reach Being—the absolute <i>summum genus</i>, wholly free from individual +attributes, and thereby embracing everything possible to thought, +whether material or immaterial. But this <i>summum genus</i> must be +predicable of this whole. Matter and mind may thus be reduced to a +single category, and the physical and the intellectual finally coalesce +in this last generalization. Materialism and idealism thus differ merely +in the degree of generalization reached—or rather they both agree in +avoiding the final generalization which identifies both matter and mind. +Materialism must always deal with the individual, for matter can appear +under no other form. Idealism must always rest upon the general, for +thought, to be thought, must state a generalization. Each, however, +finds its explanation in the other, and both are harmonized by the +application of the law of intellectual action above given. Matter and +Mind are complementary, not incompatible. They differ with each other, +but they agree in being similarly related to a third term. Matter is +objective; it is thought taking form, becoming individual, manifesting +itself in space. Mind is subjective. The one appeals to the senses; the +other is known only to the consciousness.</p> + +<p>Science reaches its full development only when it includes both physical +and intellectual phenomena within its scope. Every step which it takes +carries it further from the purely physical, and brings it nearer the +purely intellectual—that is the development of physical science is from +the individual towards the general, and it reaches its end, its +completion, only when the last distinction, that of subjective and +objective, has disappeared in the last possible generalization. When the +objective has been identified with the subjective, the distinction +between Mind and Matter has been obliterated, and we have reached the +Supreme Intelligence—the "I Am" of Scripture—simple Being.</p> + +<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</a></span></p><p>Matter is the formal expression of thought, or the necessary condition +of such expression, and in this condition is found the link that +connects the subjective and objective manifestations of <i>being</i>. +Subjectivity is ideality, as objectivity is materiality. The +consciousness can take cognizance only of what is within itself, and +therefore without every other. Consciousness is therefore wholly +personal. To communicate an idea it must be placed within the +consciousness of another. To reach this result it must cease to be +personal, must pass out of the subjective consciousness into objective +form, so as to be placed in the same relation to the speaker and the +hearer. Thought, out of the consciousness of the thinker, is objective +to him, and to render thought objective is to give it material form. +Thought to be communicated, must pass out of the consciousness of the +thinker into a material representation. The assumption of material form +individualizes the idea. The artist's mind may be filled with splendid +conceptions, but no one but he can look within his consciousness and see +them. Before others can have any knowledge of his thoughts, he must give +them form, or embody them in statues or paintings. The soul of the +musician may be thrilled by the harmonies that his imagination creates, +but no other soul can join him in this ecstasy until he has given form +to his conceptions. So the thinker must embody his thoughts in language +before he can communicate them to another. Matter, then, is the vehicle +by which thought is communicated, and, so far as we are concerned, the +necessary condition of such communication, so that the conception of +thought apart from the thinker involves the intervention of material +forms, and it is by the interpretation of these symbolical forms that we +discover the idea.</p> + +<p>Now, let us suppose a Supreme Intelligence. The intellectual processes +of such a Being, to be conceived as rational by us, must be identical +with ours, or at least analogous to ours. The possession of infinite +attributes may in fact free him from the control of any law, but it is +impossible for us to conceive<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</a></span> an intelligence acting otherwise than in +accordance with law. So that if the Supreme Intelligence is to +communicate with man, it must be in obedience to the laws which control +our mental activities. The Divine thought must, then, like human +conceptions, be communicated by means of physical symbols.</p> + +<p>The Supreme Intelligence, being the final generalization, must possess +all knowledge, and the only intelligent action possible to him from our +point of view, is from this absolute generalization towards the concrete +and individual. The absolute general is purely subjective, which, to +become cognizable, must be rendered objective. This can be secured to us +only through the intervention of material forms. From this point of +view, matter is only the symbol of thought—thought apart from the +thinker. The first result of the divine activity in self-manifestation +would be the analysis of <i>being</i> into subjective and objective—that is +the discrimination of mind and matter, which terms are severally the +final generalizations of the two fundamental divisions of science. +Matter, then, mere formless, chaotic matter, would be the first result +of creative activity. Following the development of this idea in its +continually increasing individuality, as new attributes are severally +added, matter assumes determinate form and becomes related in systems, +as the various so-called elementary substances are discriminated, until +finally all truth, capable of being revealed by inorganic matter, is +presented to us.</p> + +<p>Add the idea of organism and we have the two great divisions of +phenomena—material and vital. The higher the generalization, the fewer +will be the attributes composing the concept, and thus the simpler will +be the form symbolizing its expression. As in the case of matter, the +first result of the divine activity was more matter, undiscriminated by +any further attribute; so here, we have, as the first organic creation, +a concrete expression of the highest possible generalization comprising +the fewest possible attributes—that is, forms of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</a></span> life involving the +fewest individual characteristics. To matter add the simplest organic +attribute—that is, the one lying nearest the genus—and we have mere +organized matter, the simple cell, the foundation of all life, no matter +how great its future complexity, equally the origin of animal and +vegetable growth, which are as yet entirely undiscriminated. This would +be the first appearance of life.<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> Differentiating again by the +addition of a new attribute, and organic being is subdivided into the +two species, vegetable and animal. Beginning with these typical forms, +adding single attributes in a continuous series, we at last reach the +highest types of animals and plants. Finally, add rationality to the +animal, and we reach man, the highest and therefore the most complex +type of life, and who, so far as we are concerned, must be the end of +creation. We cannot conceive of any higher creation, because we cannot +add an attribute to those we already possess, any more than we can +conceive of an additional sense by which to cognize such new attribute.</p> + +<p>This process has been determined from the very outset by those +intellectual laws which we cannot disobey, and which we cannot conceive +disobeyed by an intelligent creator. If the law of intellectual action +require this process from the simple to the complex, the concrete +representation of the steps of this process must indicate the operation +of this law, and must also proceed from the simple and rudimentary to +the complex and highly developed. An intelligent Creator in revealing +his thought must follow the method which our minds must follow in +interpreting this revelation. When we know and seek to communicate our +knowledge, we proceed from the general to the specific.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> The Creator +assumed to be infinite in knowledge would therefore follow this process +instead of the method peculiar to investigation. The law of intellectual +action <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</a></span>determines this method, and the conditions of intellectual +communication determine the representation of this method in the +material expression of the ideas communicated. Considering the operation +of this law under these conditions, we find that the thought +communicating only, as nearly as may be, the generic idea, will be +distinguished from it by the addition of but a single attribute as the +generic by itself is incapable of being represented in concrete form, +the expression of this thought in form will present us matter +distinguished from matter in general by but a single attribute. The +least possible individualizing attribute added to the highest possible +generalization gives us the simplest expression of an idea, and the form +or the organism symbolizing this thought will be the simplest form and +the simplest organism possible. For instance: in organic life the +highest generalization barely individualized will give us the simple +cell; and no matter what degree of complexity we subsequently reach by +the addition of an almost infinite number of attributes, we nevertheless +begin in every case with the same starting point.</p> + +<p>Each higher type is reached by adding to a lower. The higher thus +embraces all that can be found in the lower, and something besides. This +method is invariable, and can never be departed from. The genus must +always be predicable of every individual component of every species +contained under it. Translating this law into the forms of material +expression, and it requires each higher species to physically include +all lower species, and to differ from them only by addition. Man, the +highest type, must thus include all the attributes of the cell as +physically expressed, and without them he would not be man. The +differences between no two terms in a series can be total. If the +successive steps in a train of thought must be related, so that no two +notions will be wholly distinct from each other, these notions will +constitute a series, each term of which will, in a measure, determine +the next, so soon as the law of the series is discovered; and if this +train of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</a></span> thought be objectively presented, it will afford a +corresponding series of physical terms, each one of which will in like +manner determine the next. But thought is impossible unless by a train +of ideas so related. Its physical expression will therefore be equally +impossible except by a series of physical terms similarly related, each +one of which in some manner determines the next. There must then be a +perfect continuity in the line that reaches from the simplest form of +matter through all grades of organic life up to man, the highest +expression of the divine idea. There can be no break in the chain of +thought, because the law of the logical process forbids it: there can be +no break in the series of material symbols for the conditions of +concrete expression equally forbid it. A symbol is nothing except as it +represents that which is to be symbolized. So the symbols form a +physical series, because the thoughts symbolized form a logical series.</p> + +<p>If the creator has fully revealed his thought, it must be by a series of +physical terms arranged in such a manner as to indicate the logical +series of ideas symbolized. Every form of matter is a symbol of thought, +and challenges interpretation. Every change in form corresponds to an +antecedent change in idea, and must be intended to reveal it. As +thought, then, begins its evolution with the general and proceeds to the +individual by a series of terms each of which is similarly related to +both extremes, we must find the material enunciation of this process +assuming the form of a series of terms, beginning with mere nebulous +matter, grading into organic life, and organic life presenting us with a +similar series beginning with the mere cell and ending with man. So +rigid and invariable must this serial arrangement be that if a term in +either series be wanting, we are authorized to hypothetically interpolate it.</p> + +<p>"Nature never makes a leap," says the scientific investigator, as he +studies the material symbols of thought. "Thought never makes a leap," +says the metaphysician, as he studies the necessary laws of rational +action: and both have uttered the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</a></span> same truth. We prove a proposition by +determining the steps by which it was educed from a more generic +statement. Science must proceed in the same manner, for science only +discovers the track of mind—it does not make the track, it only follows +it. If then we find the chain of evolution broken at any point, science +must either stop there, or assume the wanting term in the series. We +have the right to interpolate these missing terms, for we must assume +that the thoughts of God communicated to us in material forms constitute +a continuous revelation, beginning with Himself, the final +generalization, and ending with man the highest individualization. These +limits are fixed—the one by the nature of God, and the other by the +nature of man. Between these two extremes we must find a series of +intermediate terms. Any other conception of their relation than that of +a determinate series is impossible and irrational; and a series, so far +as it means anything, means evolution of some sort. Finding the relation +between these terms—distinguishing the <i>same</i> which reproduces itself, +and the <i>different</i> which introduces a new term—that is, determining +the law of apparent evolution—is the problem presented to science.</p> + +<p>The astronomer found Bode's law to all appearance violated by the +omission of a planet between Mars and Jupiter. He could see no reason +for the law, but if the planets had been placed by an intelligent +Creator, some order of arrangement must be discoverable according to +which their position was determined. The Creator being intelligent, it +is impossible to conceive them placed fortuitously. There must then be a +link between Mars and Jupiter, because the law once established cannot +be broken. The same law may be observed in the arrangement of leaves +around the axis of a plant. If intelligence arranged them they must be +arranged in some order, for intelligence never performs the least act +without a purpose. Each leaf or pair of leaves is not a mere duplication +of the previous leaf or pair of leaves. The relation which subsists<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</a></span> +between any two sets in the series expresses the idea of the Creator, +and this must be constant. Completing the series as indicated by +different plants, we may assume that if any term is apparently wanting, +it is only because it has not been discovered. In neither of these cases +would it be asserted that any physical evolution had taken place—the +terms form a series of which each term is equally determined by the +operation of a fixed law; and yet it is an operation precisely analogous +to that which in the case of animals presents every appearance of a real +evolution. Take, for instance, a series of animals, presenting at one +period of time the simplest and most rudimentary forms, and at another +the most complex and highly organized; we cannot do otherwise than +conceive these two extremes as related by intermediate terms, through +the operation of some law which holds good throughout the series. The +relation subsisting between any two, must be the same as that subsisting +between any other two similarly situated, or a departure from that +relation which is itself governed by a definite law discoverable from a +comparison of two sets of terms. The application of this law is so +universal and so rigid that we need not hesitate to interpolate a +missing term, and confidently assert that it either does exist or has +existed. To deny this principle is to deny the necessity of continuity +in reasoning. This continuity of thought is represented in matter by the +persistence of generic forms under specific differences. But just as the +specific is the generic with certain additions, so the individual is +this same generic with still further additions; and these additions, +whether considered solely in space, as given in the symbols of physical +science, or in time as in the conceptions of intellectual science, must +be determined by the same unvarying law. The persistence of the same +form furnishes us the means of identifying this relation, while the +differences reveal to us the successive steps by which the generic was +differentiated into the individual.</p> + +<p>If the creative thought has been expressed by the forms of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</a></span> matter, the +laws of thought must be thus expressed in the relative forms of matter. +Anything less than this, while it might interpret isolated ideas, would +not communicate the method of the creative process, and science is +nothing but the discovery of this method. If the terms of the logical +process must be arranged in a series, the physical symbols rendering +this logical process cognizable, must be arranged in a similar series, +for science becomes impossible when the logical process becomes undiscoverable.</p> + +<p>The differences between the terms in this series must be cognizable. Two +terms which are indistinguishable are practically identical; and two +terms which are not identical vary by a difference which is cognizable +by itself apart from either term. The steps in the logical evolution of +the final term. <i>Being</i> must be separable to be cognizable, and the +material forms interpreting these steps to the senses must also be +distinguishable. A species differs from the genus by the addition of at +least one attribute. Now, if the species is distinguishable from the +genus, the attribute which differentiates it, must be separately +cognizable—so also the individual differs from the species by the +addition of attributes, which must in like manner be separately +cognizable, or the species will never be conceived independently of the +individuals. A thought cannot proceed by insensible steps, nor can its +material expression vary otherwise than by determinate and +distinguishable differences. The distinction of species is thus a +logical necessity. The addition of distinct attributes to the genus +gives origin to distinct species; variation in attributes not affecting +their substantial identity gives rise to varieties. One species, then, +cannot become another, except by the assumption of a new specific +attribute, so that one species passes into another precisely as the +genus passes into the species, and that is just as, and not otherwise, +than one thought passes into another.</p> + +<p>The fundamental law of the logical process is that we pass from the +generic towards the individual; from the simple to<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</a></span> the complex. +Induction can proceed only by assuming a genus at the outset—that is, +by assuming certain attributes in the individual to be generic. +Translate this law into material forms, and we have each higher—that is +more complex—species evolved from the lower by the addition of some new +characteristic. This new attribute cannot be added by the functional +activity of the lower organism; that can only reproduce itself. A +thought does not change merely through repeated expression. We pass to +the conclusion of a syllogism, not from each term, but from a comparison +of the premises—and this requires an intellectual operation entirely +distinct from a mere apprehension of the terms. It is one thing to +comprehend the premises; it is quite another to deduce a conclusion from +them. It may necessarily follow, but it requires a separate act of the +mind to reach it. Premises will not of themselves reach a conclusion.</p> + +<p>Reading this same truth in the forms of matter, we may say that species +will not pass into higher species without the intervention of a force +distinct from either. The impulse which adds a new attribute must be +intellectually separable from all those pre-existing, and its material +representation must be physically distinct from pre-existing forms. This +complete separability precludes the possibility of mere physical +genesis. The added attribute is presented by a new form of matter, +revealing the presence of a new thought—a new effect, requiring the +agency of a new cause. In accordance with the usual economy of nature, +who never duplicates her forces, change will be made only so far as may +be necessary to communicate the additional idea. Organisms representing +previous thoughts will be added to, in order to express the expansion of +the thought, instead of a creation <i>de novo</i> in each instance. Thus an +identical cellular structure will be found in all organic beings, from +the lowest to the highest, each higher type carrying forward the idea +and its physical expression found in the lower. The differences between +no two terms in the series can<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</a></span> be total, nor can any two terms be +identical, as each higher species will embrace all the attributes of the +lower, differing only by the addition of others. This is simply the +physical expression of the logical truth that whatever can be predicated +of the genus can be predicated of every individual contained under it. +As the individual is only the expansion of the genus, so higher physical +types must also be similar expansions of lower.</p> + +<p>Here, then, is evolution, or development: primarily an evolution of the +generic into the individual, the continued differentiation of a generic +idea through successive individualizations, each adding to the previous +group of attributes, thus rendering the idea increasingly complex; and, +secondly, an apparent physical evolution or development, interpreting +this logical process by a series of physical forms so related as to +reveal the relation existing between the thoughts thus interpreted. In +the physical representation of the ideas so related, there must be an +apparent physical evolution—that is, the process of evolution logically +must, like the ideas thus evolved, have a physical expression, and the +successive steps in this logical evolution must be revealed by material +forms bearing an analogous relation, and thereby expressing the logical +process. Matter is nothing, so far as we are now concerned, but the +condition necessary to the objective expression of thought. Every phase +of matter is simply an objective formulation of a corresponding phase of +thought. Every addition to form implies an antecedent increase of +thought, as there can be no formal expression until there is something +to be expressed. There can, then, be no such thing as mere material +evolution, for whatever is material is only symbolical.</p> + +<p>Matter being thus wholly inert, the origin of the impulse towards +greater complexity must be sought for outside of that which undergoes +the change. The movement by which one species becomes a higher is not an +elaboration, an extension or a differentiation of existing attributes, +but involves the <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</a></span>positive addition of a new attribute, different and +distinct from any or all previously existing. One species cannot pass +into another by an innate impulse, for a species is an entity composed +of a determinate number of attributes, and all attributes potentially +present must be considered as actually present. We cannot say that the +child is a different species from the man, and that one passes into the +other by a process of evolution, because all the essential attributes of +the man are potentially present in the child. If the polyp, by the +action of innate forces, operating through a series of ages, however +extended, can, without any impulse from without, develop itself into a +man, then the polyp is as much a man as a boy is, differing only in the +time required for development: and the data for the final deduction of +the highest types of creation must be furnished in the most elementary +forms of life.</p> + +<p>The force manifesting itself in organic life is readily distinguishable +from the organism by which it is manifested. Life and organization are +not synonyms; one is the condition of the other, but a condition is not +a cause. We can consider force apart from organism, and this possible +separation in thought proves that the same form may not represent both, +but that life can absolutely exist apart from organs which serve to give +it a physical manifestation.<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> Physical life being conditioned upon +organization, whenever the organism varies, the vital force thus +manifested must also vary, such variation being necessarily antecedent +to its manifestation. The organism varies, because it must, in order to +express the added thought. Change in organism, therefore, is not induced +by simple organic action, because the organs and the force acting +through them can be distinguished. Assuming that matter is the objective +or formal representation of thought, there can be no change in the +material expression without a corresponding change in the antecedent +conception. There can, then, be physical evolution, only as there is +antecedent logical <span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</a></span>evolution, and then only because of this logical +evolution and not because of the operation of an innate organic force. +Force, whatever may be its genesis, is only the exertion of power, not +the increase of it. Exertion limits the view to the force immediately in +operation. We may replace one manifestation by another, but the quantity +is neither increased nor diminished by this change. Change in form +implies the operation of force: and apart from such manifestation in +matter, it escapes the tests of science, and passes into the purely +metaphysical notion of cause. And unless the operation of force be +constant, or, if different forces are blended, variable according to +some determinate law, the action of which is constant and discoverable, +so that the different units of force are separately measurable, the +force thus irregular in its action can never be placed in any scientific +category. Evolution, then, cannot proceed from any innate organic +impulse, unless the force that tends to exact reproduction, and the +force that induces a change be equally and separately cognizable. Change +must proceed according to some law which accounts for the change, and +distinguishes between the normal exertion of power and that exertion +which causes a deviation. Science, to be science, must explain apparent +exceptions as fully as the regular operation of forces, and that which +causes the irregularity must be as distinctly cognizably by itself as +the force which acts regularly. Anything less than this is not science. +The discovery of Neptune was the result of the application of this +principle; it was a successful attempt to discriminate the force which +caused variation from the force which operated regularly.</p> + +<p>Each species represents the operation of certain vital forces, and one +cannot physically pass into another except by the increase of this +force, or at least by a change in the manner of its manifestation; and +this increase in amount or this change in direction must separately be +accounted for. Nor does it matter, for the purposes of this discussion, +as to the genesis of this added increment, further than to show that its +origin must<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</a></span> be exterior to the organism by which its presence is +manifested; for vital energy acting through an organism is a unit, and +cannot, even in thought, be separated into distinguishable portions. +Change in the direction of vital energy indicates that the original +impulse has been modified in its action by encountering another force, +for nothing but force can change the direction of force. It does not +fall within the range of this paper to determine the nature of this +exterior force which is thus distinguishable from that acting through +the vital organization, and therefore capable of separate objective +representation. Metaphysically we may say that force is resolvable into +will, but will being purely personal is incapable of material +representation, and thus cannot enter into the determinations of +physical science, which does not seek to discover the origin of force, +but deals solely with its presence.</p> + +<p>As the logician must assume his premises, and, as a logician, cannot +question their truth, so the physicist must assume a force in operation, +and, as a physicist, cannot examine its genesis. The physical or the +metaphysical method of inquiry is valid only so long as restricted to +physical or metaphysical processes: a mixture of the two methods will +give results satisfactory neither to science nor to philosophy. As logic +furnishes no criterion by which to test the absolute truth of +propositions, but deals wholly with conclusions drawn from given +premises, so science furnishes no data by which to determine the +absolute genesis of force, but restricts its enquiries to the phenomena +resulting from a force given. For the student of physical science cause +and effect is only the transference of a given and determined force from +one material form to another. If this idea is to be traced further, it +must be studied outside the limits of physics. This study belongs to metaphysics.</p> + +<p>Now, if physical science does not deal with the origin of the initial +force, but assumes at the outset its presence, no more does it fall +within its province to examine into the origin of the increments which +give to physical forms that variety which<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</a></span> renders science possible. +Science deals with results, not antecedents; and after having determined +results, it is not authorized to affirm that one species has produced +another by evolution, or has produced it at all. If there are agreements +between different organisms by which they are brought into relation, +there are also differences by which they are discriminated, and these +differences imply increments of force; and to assert that one organism +has evolved another is to determine not merely the presence of this new +increment, but also to determine its origin. Scientific investigation +deals with phenomena which give evidence to the senses of a +<i>transference</i> of force from one form or from one manifestation to +another. Transference is not increase—an effect can be no more than the +evolution of what was potentially present in the cause; it cannot add to +it. The origin of the force must be investigated according to intellectual laws.</p> + +<p class="tbrk"> </p> + +<p>It has been argued that a Supreme Intelligence in manifesting his +thought will, according to the necessary laws of rational activity, pass +from the universal and general to the particular and individual, or from +concepts involving few attributes to those involving these and others; +and that these steps in the rational process must be represented in a +corresponding physical series; and that the communication of thought is +conditioned upon this physical representation. If the logical series +comprises one thousand terms, each related to the preceding according to +logical law the physical series must comprise one thousand terms, each +physically related in such a manner as to reveal this law. As the +highest generalization comprises the fewest attributes, the concrete +expression of this idea will present the simplest possible physical form +and the least complexity of organization, and thus will present the +lowest types of life; and as the individual comprises the greatest +number of attributes, its concrete expression will present the greatest +complexity, and consequently the highest type of life.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</a></span> We have seen +that the logical process begins with the general and ends with the +individual; its material expression must therefore begin with the lowest +orders and end with the highest. But the individual cannot be +immediately derived from the general without the intervention of +intermediate generalizations. No more in the concrete expression of this +deduction can we pass from the lowest types to the highest without the +intervention of an intermediate series. These intermediate terms are not +capable of independent interpretation; they find their full explanation +only in the extremes of the series—God and Man.</p> + +<p>If, then, in the intellectual process from the abstract and universal +towards the concrete and individual, we find a constant evolution of +idea, each advance being an addition to the previous conception, each +new term in the series embracing all the attributes of the preceding, +and differing only by addition; and if thought is possible only on this +condition; it necessarily follows that the material representation of +this thought must present physical forms similarly related, so that, +leaving out of view the intellectual genesis of this relation, the +observer might conclude that these forms compose a series evolved from a +primordial cell in accordance with an organic law. But such we find to +be the universal law of intellectual procedure: this apparent +development or evolution must, therefore, be the condition of the +communication of such intellectual process, and the physical terms are +brought into this relation by the fact that they symbolize the logical +process. If the material symbols of thought were unrelated physically, +the thoughts thus expressed would also be unrelated and independent. But +such a supposition readers Science impossible, for its one aim is to +find the <i>same</i> in the <i>different</i>. If there be no <i>same</i>, there can be +no science: if there be no <i>different</i>, there can be no science. Thought +proceeds by adding the <i>different</i> to the <i>same</i> in an endless series, +and this addition of the <i>different</i> to the <i>same</i> expressed in concrete +forms is<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</a></span> what is called evolution. If no evolution were apparent in +Nature, there could be no Science; for those steps which to the +naturalist indicate evolution, being only the physical expression—the +formulation—of the logical process, afford the means by which the +student reaches the highest generalization. If these steps be wanting, +he cannot proceed.</p> + +<p>Admitting then to its fullest extent the fact that, judged from a purely +physical point of view, all organic forms seem to have been derived each +from its immediate predecessor, by a mere functional impulse; and +admitting that science is possible upon no other condition; we claim +that these material forms are brought into such relation by intellectual +evolution, and not by physical genesis; they represent an evolution of +Thought and not an evolution of Matter. We know from consciousness that +this process of evolution is the method of our thinking. We know also +that the divine thought can be rendered intelligible to us upon no other +hypothesis than that which supposes it to be governed by the laws which +control human thought. Translating the physical symbols which we see +about us, and which present this appearance of evolution, we infer that +this is the method according to which the divine mind proceeded. Science +will not materially err in its physical results, if it adopt the +hypothesis of physical evolution, but it must confine its attention to +physics; it is only as we attempt higher generalizations that the +insufficiency of the hypothesis becomes manifest in its failure to +satisfy the conditions of the problem as presented to philosophy.</p> + +<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> This, of course, does not absolutely determine the order of +organic creation; as in the case of the syllogism the conclusion or +either premise may be the proposition first enunciated, the order of +expression being determined by circumstances.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> Compare the demonstrations of Geometry.</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> As in the case of man after the death of the body.</p></div> +</div> + + + + + + + + +<pre> + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Philosophy of Evolution, by +Stephen H. Carpenter + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION *** + +***** This file should be named 30743-h.htm or 30743-h.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/3/0/7/4/30743/ + +Produced by David Edwards, Martin Pettit and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This +book was produced from scanned images of public domain +material from the Google Print project.) + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. + + +</pre> + +</body> +</html> diff --git a/30743.txt b/30743.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..86304e2 --- /dev/null +++ b/30743.txt @@ -0,0 +1,1438 @@ +Project Gutenberg's The Philosophy of Evolution, by Stephen H. Carpenter + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + + +Title: The Philosophy of Evolution + and The Metaphysical Basis of Science + +Author: Stephen H. Carpenter + +Release Date: December 23, 2009 [EBook #30743] + +Language: English + +Character set encoding: ASCII + +*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION *** + + + + +Produced by David Edwards, Martin Pettit and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This +book was produced from scanned images of public domain +material from the Google Print project.) + + + + + + +THE PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION + +TOGETHER WITH A PRELIMINARY ESSAY ON + +THE METAPHYSICAL BASIS OF SCIENCE. + + +TWO PAPERS + +Read before THE WISCONSIN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, ARTS, AND LETTERS +at the Annual Meetings of February, 1873 and February, 1874. + +BY + +STEPHEN H. CARPENTER, LL. D., + +_Professor of Logic, etc., in the University of Wisconsin, +and President of the Department of Speculative Philosophy +in the Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters._ + + +[REPRINTED FROM THE ACADEMY'S TRANSACTIONS.] + + +MADISON, WIS.: +ATWOOD & CULVER, PRINTERS AND STEREOTYPERS. +1874. + + + + +THE METAPHYSICAL BASIS OF SCIENCE. + + +All knowledge is essentially one. The object-matter upon which intellect +exerts itself, does not affect the subjective act of knowing. Physics, +when stripped of that which is merely contingent, becomes metaphysics. +Physical science deals with object-matter, and discusses the signs by +which nature communicates her message--that is, phenomena. Metaphysical +science has to do with the subject-mind, and discusses the meaning of +the message. The one converts God's hieroglyphics into +easily-intelligible language; the other translates this language into +Idea. If this be true, there must be a unity of method in all science, +however great the diversity of the object-matter investigated. This +method is subjectively determined, that is, by the constitution of the +mind, and not by the particular form of matter upon which intellectual +energy may be exerted. If there is an essential unity in all knowledge, +it is because there is a corresponding unity of method in all mental +activity. It is only when we look upon what is to be known, that truth +separates into sciences; but particular truths become particular +sciences only under assumed relations to the whole of which they form a +part. + +Objectively considered, science is classified knowledge; subjectively +viewed, it is the laws or principles according to which knowledge is +classified. Every actor implies an act--every thinker a thought. We may +therefore universally make this dual classification, according as we +view the mental operation involved, or the attributes of objects which +form the subject of thought. The possibility of science is conditioned +upon the possibility of classification. Mere knowledge is not science, +as the world ought to have learned by costly experience. Even classified +knowledge may not be science; it becomes science not through previous +classification, but in the act of being classified, and therefore only +as the principle of classification is apprehended--that is, only as the +particular application of the law of generalization is distinctly +recognized. A man may know a book and know nothing more; he knows the +science only when he is capable of making the book for himself. Mere +knowledge thus differs from science in that the one is held only by the +apprehensive powers of the mind, while the other passes beyond these +into the reflective or ratiocinative. Pure science, then, must be wholly +abstract. The forms and substances of Nature with which the scientific +student deals, are only the discrete figures of the young mathematician, +to be thrown aside with advancing knowledge. Matter is only the staff on +which the mind leans, while too feeble to go alone. It is not the finely +chiseled statue that renders a man a sculptor; it is the conception +which is therein embodied. A day-laborer may have cut the stone, but +only the artist could conceive the idea. So in science, we care but +little for the particular results at which we arrive, compared with the +laws, according to which the results have been attained. + +But conceptions cannot be communicated without being rendered objective. +The ideal of the artist is locked up in his own mind, until on canvas, +in marble, or by means of some other physical symbol, he communicates +his high imaginings. Matter, then, according to the present constitution +of things is the condition of intellectual communication. Law cannot be +studied as abstract law; it can be studied only while acting, and that +which exhibits this activity must be matter--something which will +always and uniformly obey. There can be no conception of force except as +acting, and the sole medium of such activity is matter. Thus again, +matter is the condition of all communication from nature to man. Science +is thus, in a measure, determined by the conditions of its discovery and +communication. But we must distinguish between an invariable condition +and that which is thus conditioned. Matter is not science; it is only +the condition of its discovery and communication. Air is not hearing; it +is the condition of hearing. We do not study matter for the sake of the +matter when we study science, but for the sake of the law communicated +to us in these changes of matter, and Law is a metaphysical, not a +physical idea. Reason, not sense, apprehends it. Law is, so to speak, +formulated in the physical, but it is not material. Matter is only the +vehicle of science, as language is the vehicle of thought. + +It is plain, then, that just as in mathematics we have a division into +pure and mixed, according as we deal with matter in the abstract or in +the concrete, so we may in any science make a corresponding division, +according as we confine our attention to the laws revealed by matter or +to the matter revealing the laws: in other words; just as we give +attention to the ideas of the message, or to the language in which it is +communicated. The language must first be learned, but the words used to +communicate the message may be separately understood, and yet the +meaning of the message wholly missed. Knowing only the one makes a +charlatan; knowing the other makes a savan. The sciences based upon this +objective study of Nature are denominated Natural Sciences; and because +they lisp the first syllables of Nature's message to man, they should be +his primary teachers. It is by their aid that the universal message of +God to man must be read. They form, as it were, a public highway leading +from Nature to God. But the difficulty is that observing men become so +absorbed in admiring some splendid piece of Divine engineering that +they stop to gaze and wonder, until losing sight of everything above and +beyond, they refuse to advance, fondly imagining that they have reached +the end of the journey. + +The science based upon this subjective study of Nature is called +metaphysics. Logic has been defined as "The Science of Thought;" it +should be termed "The Science of Thinking." It is not a dead body which +we are studying by dissection, but a living, vital Force, which we study +by observing its activities. We find here the same error which we find +elsewhere--a stopping with the material symbol, and an ignoring of the +intellectual force which clothed itself with the symbol. Astronomy is +not the science of circles and spheres, ellipses and ellipsoids, but of +the Force whose sensible utterances are given in these curves. We might +as well call Painting the science of pictures, or Sculpture the science +of statues. So Language, the medium of thought, is only a symbol, less +material indeed than pictures and statues, but still physical. What we +want in "The Science of Thinking" is not the knowledge of symbols, but +the knowledge of that which is symbolized. The chemist does not care for +the compounds he finds in his retort; he seeks after the truth which +these compounds formulate. Metaphysics and Physics evidently agree in +this; that both are seeking to frame an articulate utterance of the Idea +given in the diverse manifestations of Force--the Idea which includes +all Potencies, the summing up of all phenomena into that final +generalization which includes the intellectual as well as the material, +until at last we reach the essential unity of all Truth. + +Science, then, is classification, or the discovery of the principles of +classification, rather than an arbitrary acquaintance with things +classified. Every science, however, must have an objective +expression--that is, must be formulated. In this, both metaphysical and +physical science agree; the only difference in this respect is, that in +Physics, Nature gives us in the first place the material interpretation +of the idea--that is, the basis of classification--which we have only +to translate into idea: while in metaphysics, we first have the idea to +which we must furnish the objective utterance. We see here the precise +difference between what is called the logical and the natural +method--the one being usually called the reverse of the other. The +difference is not so much a difference in intellectual procedure as in +objective expression. For instance: The botanist has before him the +whole range of vegetable forms. He notes resemblances and differences, +and groups plants into species and genera, but his work is not ended +when these are named and known, and their qualities discovered. He is +seeking amidst these multifarious forms for the law of vegetable growth +and reproduction. Every organ of the plant is the symbol of an idea, and +these ideas form the science of Botany. These Ideas are +metaphysical--that is intellectual, and only their sensible +manifestation is physical. The symbols of these Ideas, being given in +Nature, must be learned from observation before they can be used +intelligently, just as words must be learned before one can speak a +language. Mastery of the means of expression is as essential to the +communication of ideas an is the possession of the ideas themselves. The +botanist observes an individual plant, and notes its characteristics. He +observes others which possess some of these characteristics whilst +others are wanting. He forms a class-type from these agreeing +attributes, and gives this new collocation of characteristics a name. +Nature never presents this class-type absolutely; it is found nowhere +but in intellect. What has the botanist done but to retranslate the +communication of Nature into Idea, and then to express this idea by less +complicated and less physical symbols? Man's province in this case is +simply to interpret the hieroglyphics of Nature into a more readily +comprehended language--to express that simply which nature has expressed +confusedly. The scientist restricts himself to the interpretation of a +single class of symbols, as the Botanist to plants, the Zoologist to +animals, but the end sought in each case is the same--that is, to +change all these physical utterances of Nature into Idea, and to secure +for this Idea a method of expression involving the least possible +materiality of symbol--that is, to change individual facts and phenomena +into general principles, which, because abstract, are unchangeable. When +this has been done, the work of the Naturalist ceases, but the work of +Man, the Thinker is not done; it is only just begun. By assuming the +ultimate expressions of the various natural sciences as individual and +not as typical, we can treat the truths reached by them precisely as the +Botanist treated plants, and, rejecting points of of difference, may +find in them all some central idea. This is the province of the +metaphysician. He seeks the law of Idea, he determines the law of +Thinking, just as all other laws are determined, from a study of the +symbols formulating its expression in Nature. When this law has been +distinctly enunciated, and freed from all intermixture with the +contingent, then the work of the metaphysician ceases, the _summum +genus_ has been reached. The truths communicated in the symbols of +Nature, have been correlated and enunciated, and finally translated from +the dialect of man the physical into the language of man the +intellectual. Physical science determines the separate words of this +message of God, the letters of which are scattered throughout Nature. +Metaphysics combines these words into propositions which enunciate a +distinct truth. There is therefore neither conflict nor variation +between the method of Logic and the method of Nature. The movement of +both is in the same direction; the only difference is in the point of +starting. And another truth no less important, which follows from the +foregoing discussion, is that the method of Nature is fundamental to the +method of Logic. Physics should precede metaphysics, but not exclude it; +both are essential to every true science, and physics, which stops with +physics, leads man by dazzling promises into some Utopian desert only to +leave him there to die of hunger. And it is no less true that +metaphysics, without this basis in experimental science, is illusory +and untrustworthy, wherever the original data are necessarily empirical. + +Two conditions are thus necessary to all science: a body of knowable +truth capable of being systematized; and an intelligence capable of +apprehending and systematizing it. One of these conditions is physical +and one is metaphysical; and all true science must be the resultant of +Law and Idea, the Objective and the Subjective, the twin forces of +Nature and Man. If either of these conditions be wanting, there can be +no true science, for science can neither be "evolved from the depths of +the personal consciousness," nor can the scattered letters of scientific +truth, as given in nature, arrange themselves into the words of a +significant message. Knowledge must be classified before it is science, +and that which classifies can only be intellect--discovering and +enunciating this classification according to the laws of mental action. +As prominence is given to one or other of these two conditions we have +the division into Logical and Natural, but the fundamental principle of +classification is the same in both--it being simply the law of +intellectual action--just as the law which governs the action of the +levers of a loom will determine the pattern of the woven fabric. There +can, therefore, be no conflict between the methods of Logic and those of +Nature. The determining element in all classification, whether of the +phenomena of Mind or of the grosser phenomena of Matter is uniformly and +always the same--the law of intellectual action. + +Science then resolves itself into a determination of this Law of mental +activity, so that in an ultimate analysis, all science is metaphysical, +just as all science primarily is physical. Here, as elsewhere, Law can +be studied only in its objective manifestations. The Law of Thinking can +be educed only from expressed Thought, but the Law is not objective +thought, any more than the idea of the sculptor is marble, or the +conception of the painter is paint. The simplest expression of thought +is not the syllogism but the logical proposition. Now, it is plain that +if the proposition is the formulation--the material representative of +thought--if we study it as we study other natural symbols, we will find +in it the fundamental Law of Thinking, and ultimately the fundamental +Law of all Science: just as, if it were possible to reduce all +elementary substances to one, the chemist would be able to find in that +one a condensed expression of chemical science. + +What then is a proposition? Simply stated, it is the assertion of +relation between two terms; or more abstractly, it is the reference of +an individual to its species--the assertion of a classification. We find +here the same duality which we noticed above. If we give prominence to +the individual notion, we consider the proposition in extension; if we +turn our attention to the specific notion we consider the proposition in +intention: in the one case referring to the individuals composing the +class, in the other to the attributes composing the class-type. The +first corresponds to induction, the second to deduction. When we study +individuals we study physics; when we study the attributes composing the +class-type, we study metaphysics. The Law of Thinking as educed from a +study of the proposition is the law of classification. The proposition, +considered affirmatively, asserts explicitly agreement between certain +attributes of two terms; that is, it asserts a classification. The aim +of science is to reach this proposition, to discover and assert the +principle of classification--in other words, to formulate metaphysically +what nature has presented physically. We must find, then, the first or +fundamental law of thinking in this _integration_ or classification. +This fundamental law may be subdivided into two species, according to +the two terms of the proposition; of which the first may be stated thus: +"Every possible object of thought is to a certain extent identical with +every other"; and as the proposition implicitly states disagreement, the +second may be stated thus: "Every possible object of thought is to a +certain extent diverse from every other." The first gives the positive +(subjective) condition of the proposition, the second the negative +(objective) condition: both together constitute the conditions of +thinking. The proposition is thus the assertion of the same in the +different. The proposition also asserts, implicitly, the _tertium quid_, +or the basis of classification--the class-type, to which both terms are +referred--that is, the proposition secondarily asserts an analysis. +According to the first condition we have the inductive process; +according to the second we have the deductive process. A complete +movement of idea from its purely physical symbolization to its +metaphysical interpretation, must involve both these processes. + +The mind possesses the power of analysis; it can watch its own +operations and retrace its steps, until it arrives at the original data +of consciousness; but analysis cannot comprise the whole of the logical +process. Before there can be analysis there must be something to be +analyzed; before steps can be retraced, they must be taken. We must not +confound a condition with a Law--the one is a conception antecedent to +all action, a genus to which the particular activity may be referred; +the other is coincident with action. The one is the medium of the other. +We may illustrate this idea by science itself, which is reached only by +an analysis of Art. Matter is the condition of the expression of an +idea; hence to all but the artist, Art must precede Science, but this +cannot be in the case of the artist; in his mind the Idea is first +conceived, and there it is given expression in the forms of Art. Here, +as uniformly in Nature, the whole absolutely precedes the part--the +universal exists before the particular--God before man. Truth absolute +thus exists before truth conditioned. Science before Art. Remove +conditions and the conditioned becomes the absolute; art and science +coincide. But truth which is assumed to be out of all relations, cannot +be comprehended by man, and practically is not. Even the universal +propositions of deduction express universality under conditions--that +is universality of relation; just as infinity in mathematics means that +which passes measurement, while in fact between infinity and measurement +there is no relation, and the infinite is thus incomprehensible as an +object of thought, although by no means unrecognizable as a necessary +condition antecedent to all intellectual action. It is of vital +importance that we note this distinction, because reasoning, i. e. +classification, is possible only so long as we deal with what is +admitted to be under relation: if we assume a term to be out of all +relation, it ceases to be an object of thought--it can neither be +classified nor unclassified; it is beyond reason. Mathematics can +proceed with its investigations only so long as it treats all quantities +as measurable; it must wholly cease its calculations if an infinite term +be introduced. To claim that analysis represents the complete normal +action of the intellect in reasoning, is ultimately to claim that the +initial point of thinking is the _summum genus_ of thought--God. Now God +is undoubtedly the initial point of absolute thought, but he is not the +beginning of human thought. Intellectually speaking, God is the final +generalization; every movement possible to him must be one of +analysis--a differentiation of Himself, so to speak, by negatives. Thus +the course of absolute Thought, beginning with God, must be first +towards a complete differentiation into ultimate individualization; and +lastly a complete integration again of individuals into an infinite +whole. This dual action completes the circle of intellectual activity. +We have dropped attribute after attribute until we have reached the last +possible analysis; but we do not stop here, but by the assumption of +attributes we again reach the highest possible synthesis. This must be +the method of the divine activity, successive differentiation and +integration, the closing in of a mighty circle of infinity, embracing +all the finite, but never losing the essential characteristic of the +infinite. + +Now, if this also represent the exact movement of the finite mind in +action--that is, in reasoning, man must be God. Man is finite. Even his +infinite is only the immeasurable--not that which is without the +category of measure. He cannot begin where the Infinite begins, at the +highest possible generalization,--but he must begin with the finite. If +what we have shown above be true, man must begin with the individual, +and the first mental act of the positive character of thinking, is the +reference of this individual notion to a class. Now the _class-notion_ +is the same as the individual notion, less certain attributes as +_individual_ attributes, but gathered into a larger whole. This process +is plainly integration; we are rejecting from the new conception +whatever prevents enlarging the class. Each higher generalization +involves all the attributes of the lower, not individually, but +specifically or generically. In the final generalization, extension and +intension coalesce. Just as we reach the individual by differentiating a +universal through successive negations, we reach the universal again, by +integration, by successively denying the negations through which we just +now differentiated. The movement of the finite mind in reasoning is thus +from the individual through the universal to the individual again. + +Science thus parts into two great branches--one seeking to establish +principles by what we have called integration, and the other the +elucidation of facts by _a priori_ reasoning instead of observation. +That is, the aim of true science is to free man from the restrictions of +the finite, and to place him in possession of the infinite--the closing +in of a lesser circle of infinite truth, yet never losing hold upon the +finite. In accordance with this view we see science pursuing its +integrations until it has identified as composing an essential unity all +the various manifestations of force. This is the finite becoming the +infinite, for unity is, in so far, infinity--God is one, a unity, not a +unit. But we also see science going beyond this point, and by a new +series of differentiations reaching truths new to experience, if indeed +not impossible to experience. + +Between these two limits all knowledge is forever moving. It can never +rest. The tide of thought sweeps onward towards the infinite--God +following it to its final absorption into the _I Am_, simple +being,--while finite man, because of his finiteness, can only reach +those universals which are infinite only to human thought. Like men on a +journey we leave the train when we have reached our journey's end, but +the train passes on out of sight in the distance, sending back, now and +then, tokens of its progress, as it thunders over a bridge, or whistles +shrill as it nears some further stopping place, until at last all is +still, not because the train has stopped, but because we can follow it +no further with our senses. Even after science has reached the utmost +limit possible to it, it is not satisfied to rest there, but starts at +once upon its return trip, to bring to notice undiscovered facts hidden +in these mighty generalizations. Thus the pendulum of intellectual +activity unceasingly vibrates between the infinite and the finite, never +resting, because Idea and Matter, the force of Man and the force of +Nature can never be completely identified. + + + + +THE PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION. + + +The intellectual processes of a rational being must proceed according to +some law. They cannot succeed each other at hap-hazard. The notion of +rationality is conditioned upon this regular procedure; if this be +wanting, the essential character of rational action is wanting. But to +say that rational processes are determined by law, and conditioned upon +a regular procedure, is simply to assert that the steps in ratiocination +are so related to each other that the relation of each to every other +may be determined by the application of the law--the difference between +any two steps being analogous to the difference between any other two. +The astronomer determines the orbit of a planet from three observations, +because he thereby determines the law of variation between these points; +from which he assumes that this law will be constant, presenting a +series of terms each differentiated according the series of differences +already determined. + +Applying the same principle to mental phenomena, we may determine the +law of intellectual action. Thoughts are discriminated by the presence +or absence of certain attributes. At one extreme we find the _summum +genus_, comprising the fewest possible attributes distinguishing an +idea; at the other extreme we find the individual, comprising any number +of attributes. Between these two extremes we find a regular series of +intermediate terms. The movement of an idea from the general to the +individual is like the motion of a planet through one-half of its orbit; +while the return movement from the individual to the general, +corresponds to the motion of the planet over the remaining half of its +orbit. The same law governs both movements and unites the two halves of +the orbit into a single whole; and a series of observations taken at +equal distances, will, by the uniformity of differences presented, +reveal the operation of the same law in this dual manifestation. Upon +examining the processes of deduction and induction, we find in each the +same series of terms, differing only in the fact that they are in +inverse order, and this correspondence reveals the operation of one and +the same law. An inductive series is only a deductive series read +backward. Any two terms in a series whether inductive or deductive, +differ only in the degree of generality, and differ similarly from a +third term, so that two being known the third can be therefrom +determined. In a deductive series the terms differ by a constant +increase in the number of individualizing attributes--a concept being +expanded into a deductive series by such regular additions. Having two +terms we can proceed to the third--that is, from two propositions +expressing this relation, we can proceed to a conclusion. In an +inductive series the terms differ by a constant diminution in the number +of individualizing attributes--an individual term being expanded into an +inductive series, by successively dropping the attributes which compose +the individual term, until we reach the required degree of +generalization. + +Thought must proceed in one of these two directions. The object-matter +of thought being composed wholly of attributes can differ only in the +presence or absence of certain attributes. A combination, then, of these +two movements must complete the intellectual orbit. The direction of the +movement of the mind will be determined by the end proposed. When we +possess the knowledge of phenomena and wish to discover law--that is, +when we seek information--we proceed by induction, from the individual +to the general. When possessed of knowledge, we wish to discover its +applications, when knowing the law, we wish to determine the phenomena +necessarily resulting therefrom, we proceed by deduction--from the +general to the individual. Complete knowledge, then, consists in the +highest possible generalization, and the expansion of this term into a +series, ending only with the last possible individualization. The aim of +physical science is to determine that half of the intellectual orbit +which lies between the individual and the general--the aim of +metaphysical science is to trace the other half which lies between the +general and the individual. When we seek to know what is, we proceed by +induction--the method of the phenomenal. When, knowing what is, we +proceed to determine what hence must be, we proceed by deduction--the +method of the Necessary. Thus Science, at first seeking principles, +proceeds by induction to establish them; but after these fundamental +principles have been established, it proceeds deductively to determine +what must result from them, without waiting to discover these truths by +observation. + +Knowledge is thus complete just in proportion to the extension of its +scope through generalization. The higher the generalization, the more +inclusive will it be, and the _summum genus_, or the final +generalization, will be the highest attainable reach of knowledge. When +man can make no further generalization, his knowledge will be, in so +far, absolute and complete, and all that remains possible to him will be +the practical application of what he already knows. Perfect knowledge is +nothing but perfect generalization. The Supreme Intelligence being +hypothetically possessed of all knowledge, that is, having discriminated +the absolute _summum genus_, can proceed no further in this direction; +his intellectual activity must be exerted in a descending series, or +from the general towards the individual, and this process must be, as we +have seen above, by a determinate series of steps, fixed by the +operation of a definite law, which law proceeds by the successive +addition of attributes to the general. + +Complete knowledge, being complete generalization, the lines of all +science will necessarily converge, as they approach this generalization, +until all sciences coalesce in one science, and all truth is reduced to +a single expression in the utterance of the final conception. In +accordance with the laws of thinking, this general term is reached by +successive omissions of particularizing attributes, until at last we +reach Being--the absolute _summum genus_, wholly free from individual +attributes, and thereby embracing everything possible to thought, +whether material or immaterial. But this _summum genus_ must be +predicable of this whole. Matter and mind may thus be reduced to a +single category, and the physical and the intellectual finally coalesce +in this last generalization. Materialism and idealism thus differ merely +in the degree of generalization reached--or rather they both agree in +avoiding the final generalization which identifies both matter and mind. +Materialism must always deal with the individual, for matter can appear +under no other form. Idealism must always rest upon the general, for +thought, to be thought, must state a generalization. Each, however, +finds its explanation in the other, and both are harmonized by the +application of the law of intellectual action above given. Matter and +Mind are complementary, not incompatible. They differ with each other, +but they agree in being similarly related to a third term. Matter is +objective; it is thought taking form, becoming individual, manifesting +itself in space. Mind is subjective. The one appeals to the senses; the +other is known only to the consciousness. + +Science reaches its full development only when it includes both physical +and intellectual phenomena within its scope. Every step which it takes +carries it further from the purely physical, and brings it nearer the +purely intellectual--that is the development of physical science is from +the individual towards the general, and it reaches its end, its +completion, only when the last distinction, that of subjective and +objective, has disappeared in the last possible generalization. When the +objective has been identified with the subjective, the distinction +between Mind and Matter has been obliterated, and we have reached the +Supreme Intelligence--the "I Am" of Scripture--simple Being. + +Matter is the formal expression of thought, or the necessary condition +of such expression, and in this condition is found the link that +connects the subjective and objective manifestations of _being_. +Subjectivity is ideality, as objectivity is materiality. The +consciousness can take cognizance only of what is within itself, and +therefore without every other. Consciousness is therefore wholly +personal. To communicate an idea it must be placed within the +consciousness of another. To reach this result it must cease to be +personal, must pass out of the subjective consciousness into objective +form, so as to be placed in the same relation to the speaker and the +hearer. Thought, out of the consciousness of the thinker, is objective +to him, and to render thought objective is to give it material form. +Thought to be communicated, must pass out of the consciousness of the +thinker into a material representation. The assumption of material form +individualizes the idea. The artist's mind may be filled with splendid +conceptions, but no one but he can look within his consciousness and see +them. Before others can have any knowledge of his thoughts, he must give +them form, or embody them in statues or paintings. The soul of the +musician may be thrilled by the harmonies that his imagination creates, +but no other soul can join him in this ecstasy until he has given form +to his conceptions. So the thinker must embody his thoughts in language +before he can communicate them to another. Matter, then, is the vehicle +by which thought is communicated, and, so far as we are concerned, the +necessary condition of such communication, so that the conception of +thought apart from the thinker involves the intervention of material +forms, and it is by the interpretation of these symbolical forms that we +discover the idea. + +Now, let us suppose a Supreme Intelligence. The intellectual processes +of such a Being, to be conceived as rational by us, must be identical +with ours, or at least analogous to ours. The possession of infinite +attributes may in fact free him from the control of any law, but it is +impossible for us to conceive an intelligence acting otherwise than in +accordance with law. So that if the Supreme Intelligence is to +communicate with man, it must be in obedience to the laws which control +our mental activities. The Divine thought must, then, like human +conceptions, be communicated by means of physical symbols. + +The Supreme Intelligence, being the final generalization, must possess +all knowledge, and the only intelligent action possible to him from our +point of view, is from this absolute generalization towards the concrete +and individual. The absolute general is purely subjective, which, to +become cognizable, must be rendered objective. This can be secured to us +only through the intervention of material forms. From this point of +view, matter is only the symbol of thought--thought apart from the +thinker. The first result of the divine activity in self-manifestation +would be the analysis of _being_ into subjective and objective--that is +the discrimination of mind and matter, which terms are severally the +final generalizations of the two fundamental divisions of science. +Matter, then, mere formless, chaotic matter, would be the first result +of creative activity. Following the development of this idea in its +continually increasing individuality, as new attributes are severally +added, matter assumes determinate form and becomes related in systems, +as the various so-called elementary substances are discriminated, until +finally all truth, capable of being revealed by inorganic matter, is +presented to us. + +Add the idea of organism and we have the two great divisions of +phenomena--material and vital. The higher the generalization, the fewer +will be the attributes composing the concept, and thus the simpler will +be the form symbolizing its expression. As in the case of matter, the +first result of the divine activity was more matter, undiscriminated by +any further attribute; so here, we have, as the first organic creation, +a concrete expression of the highest possible generalization comprising +the fewest possible attributes--that is, forms of life involving the +fewest individual characteristics. To matter add the simplest organic +attribute--that is, the one lying nearest the genus--and we have mere +organized matter, the simple cell, the foundation of all life, no matter +how great its future complexity, equally the origin of animal and +vegetable growth, which are as yet entirely undiscriminated. This would +be the first appearance of life.[1] Differentiating again by the +addition of a new attribute, and organic being is subdivided into the +two species, vegetable and animal. Beginning with these typical forms, +adding single attributes in a continuous series, we at last reach the +highest types of animals and plants. Finally, add rationality to the +animal, and we reach man, the highest and therefore the most complex +type of life, and who, so far as we are concerned, must be the end of +creation. We cannot conceive of any higher creation, because we cannot +add an attribute to those we already possess, any more than we can +conceive of an additional sense by which to cognize such new attribute. + +This process has been determined from the very outset by those +intellectual laws which we cannot disobey, and which we cannot conceive +disobeyed by an intelligent creator. If the law of intellectual action +require this process from the simple to the complex, the concrete +representation of the steps of this process must indicate the operation +of this law, and must also proceed from the simple and rudimentary to +the complex and highly developed. An intelligent Creator in revealing +his thought must follow the method which our minds must follow in +interpreting this revelation. When we know and seek to communicate our +knowledge, we proceed from the general to the specific.[2] The Creator +assumed to be infinite in knowledge would therefore follow this process +instead of the method peculiar to investigation. The law of intellectual +action determines this method, and the conditions of intellectual +communication determine the representation of this method in the +material expression of the ideas communicated. Considering the operation +of this law under these conditions, we find that the thought +communicating only, as nearly as may be, the generic idea, will be +distinguished from it by the addition of but a single attribute as the +generic by itself is incapable of being represented in concrete form, +the expression of this thought in form will present us matter +distinguished from matter in general by but a single attribute. The +least possible individualizing attribute added to the highest possible +generalization gives us the simplest expression of an idea, and the form +or the organism symbolizing this thought will be the simplest form and +the simplest organism possible. For instance: in organic life the +highest generalization barely individualized will give us the simple +cell; and no matter what degree of complexity we subsequently reach by +the addition of an almost infinite number of attributes, we nevertheless +begin in every case with the same starting point. + +Each higher type is reached by adding to a lower. The higher thus +embraces all that can be found in the lower, and something besides. This +method is invariable, and can never be departed from. The genus must +always be predicable of every individual component of every species +contained under it. Translating this law into the forms of material +expression, and it requires each higher species to physically include +all lower species, and to differ from them only by addition. Man, the +highest type, must thus include all the attributes of the cell as +physically expressed, and without them he would not be man. The +differences between no two terms in a series can be total. If the +successive steps in a train of thought must be related, so that no two +notions will be wholly distinct from each other, these notions will +constitute a series, each term of which will, in a measure, determine +the next, so soon as the law of the series is discovered; and if this +train of thought be objectively presented, it will afford a +corresponding series of physical terms, each one of which will in like +manner determine the next. But thought is impossible unless by a train +of ideas so related. Its physical expression will therefore be equally +impossible except by a series of physical terms similarly related, each +one of which in some manner determines the next. There must then be a +perfect continuity in the line that reaches from the simplest form of +matter through all grades of organic life up to man, the highest +expression of the divine idea. There can be no break in the chain of +thought, because the law of the logical process forbids it: there can be +no break in the series of material symbols for the conditions of +concrete expression equally forbid it. A symbol is nothing except as it +represents that which is to be symbolized. So the symbols form a +physical series, because the thoughts symbolized form a logical series. + +If the creator has fully revealed his thought, it must be by a series of +physical terms arranged in such a manner as to indicate the logical +series of ideas symbolized. Every form of matter is a symbol of thought, +and challenges interpretation. Every change in form corresponds to an +antecedent change in idea, and must be intended to reveal it. As +thought, then, begins its evolution with the general and proceeds to the +individual by a series of terms each of which is similarly related to +both extremes, we must find the material enunciation of this process +assuming the form of a series of terms, beginning with mere nebulous +matter, grading into organic life, and organic life presenting us with a +similar series beginning with the mere cell and ending with man. So +rigid and invariable must this serial arrangement be that if a term in +either series be wanting, we are authorized to hypothetically +interpolate it. + +"Nature never makes a leap," says the scientific investigator, as he +studies the material symbols of thought. "Thought never makes a leap," +says the metaphysician, as he studies the necessary laws of rational +action: and both have uttered the same truth. We prove a proposition by +determining the steps by which it was educed from a more generic +statement. Science must proceed in the same manner, for science only +discovers the track of mind--it does not make the track, it only follows +it. If then we find the chain of evolution broken at any point, science +must either stop there, or assume the wanting term in the series. We +have the right to interpolate these missing terms, for we must assume +that the thoughts of God communicated to us in material forms constitute +a continuous revelation, beginning with Himself, the final +generalization, and ending with man the highest individualization. These +limits are fixed--the one by the nature of God, and the other by the +nature of man. Between these two extremes we must find a series of +intermediate terms. Any other conception of their relation than that of +a determinate series is impossible and irrational; and a series, so far +as it means anything, means evolution of some sort. Finding the relation +between these terms--distinguishing the _same_ which reproduces itself, +and the _different_ which introduces a new term--that is, determining +the law of apparent evolution--is the problem presented to science. + +The astronomer found Bode's law to all appearance violated by the +omission of a planet between Mars and Jupiter. He could see no reason +for the law, but if the planets had been placed by an intelligent +Creator, some order of arrangement must be discoverable according to +which their position was determined. The Creator being intelligent, it +is impossible to conceive them placed fortuitously. There must then be a +link between Mars and Jupiter, because the law once established cannot +be broken. The same law may be observed in the arrangement of leaves +around the axis of a plant. If intelligence arranged them they must be +arranged in some order, for intelligence never performs the least act +without a purpose. Each leaf or pair of leaves is not a mere duplication +of the previous leaf or pair of leaves. The relation which subsists +between any two sets in the series expresses the idea of the Creator, +and this must be constant. Completing the series as indicated by +different plants, we may assume that if any term is apparently wanting, +it is only because it has not been discovered. In neither of these cases +would it be asserted that any physical evolution had taken place--the +terms form a series of which each term is equally determined by the +operation of a fixed law; and yet it is an operation precisely analogous +to that which in the case of animals presents every appearance of a real +evolution. Take, for instance, a series of animals, presenting at one +period of time the simplest and most rudimentary forms, and at another +the most complex and highly organized; we cannot do otherwise than +conceive these two extremes as related by intermediate terms, through +the operation of some law which holds good throughout the series. The +relation subsisting between any two, must be the same as that subsisting +between any other two similarly situated, or a departure from that +relation which is itself governed by a definite law discoverable from a +comparison of two sets of terms. The application of this law is so +universal and so rigid that we need not hesitate to interpolate a +missing term, and confidently assert that it either does exist or has +existed. To deny this principle is to deny the necessity of continuity +in reasoning. This continuity of thought is represented in matter by the +persistence of generic forms under specific differences. But just as the +specific is the generic with certain additions, so the individual is +this same generic with still further additions; and these additions, +whether considered solely in space, as given in the symbols of physical +science, or in time as in the conceptions of intellectual science, must +be determined by the same unvarying law. The persistence of the same +form furnishes us the means of identifying this relation, while the +differences reveal to us the successive steps by which the generic was +differentiated into the individual. + +If the creative thought has been expressed by the forms of matter, the +laws of thought must be thus expressed in the relative forms of matter. +Anything less than this, while it might interpret isolated ideas, would +not communicate the method of the creative process, and science is +nothing but the discovery of this method. If the terms of the logical +process must be arranged in a series, the physical symbols rendering +this logical process cognizable, must be arranged in a similar series, +for science becomes impossible when the logical process becomes +undiscoverable. + +The differences between the terms in this series must be cognizable. Two +terms which are indistinguishable are practically identical; and two +terms which are not identical vary by a difference which is cognizable +by itself apart from either term. The steps in the logical evolution of +the final term. _Being_ must be separable to be cognizable, and the +material forms interpreting these steps to the senses must also be +distinguishable. A species differs from the genus by the addition of at +least one attribute. Now, if the species is distinguishable from the +genus, the attribute which differentiates it, must be separately +cognizable--so also the individual differs from the species by the +addition of attributes, which must in like manner be separately +cognizable, or the species will never be conceived independently of the +individuals. A thought cannot proceed by insensible steps, nor can its +material expression vary otherwise than by determinate and +distinguishable differences. The distinction of species is thus a +logical necessity. The addition of distinct attributes to the genus +gives origin to distinct species; variation in attributes not affecting +their substantial identity gives rise to varieties. One species, then, +cannot become another, except by the assumption of a new specific +attribute, so that one species passes into another precisely as the +genus passes into the species, and that is just as, and not otherwise, +than one thought passes into another. + +The fundamental law of the logical process is that we pass from the +generic towards the individual; from the simple to the complex. +Induction can proceed only by assuming a genus at the outset--that is, +by assuming certain attributes in the individual to be generic. +Translate this law into material forms, and we have each higher--that is +more complex--species evolved from the lower by the addition of some new +characteristic. This new attribute cannot be added by the functional +activity of the lower organism; that can only reproduce itself. A +thought does not change merely through repeated expression. We pass to +the conclusion of a syllogism, not from each term, but from a comparison +of the premises--and this requires an intellectual operation entirely +distinct from a mere apprehension of the terms. It is one thing to +comprehend the premises; it is quite another to deduce a conclusion from +them. It may necessarily follow, but it requires a separate act of the +mind to reach it. Premises will not of themselves reach a conclusion. + +Reading this same truth in the forms of matter, we may say that species +will not pass into higher species without the intervention of a force +distinct from either. The impulse which adds a new attribute must be +intellectually separable from all those pre-existing, and its material +representation must be physically distinct from pre-existing forms. This +complete separability precludes the possibility of mere physical +genesis. The added attribute is presented by a new form of matter, +revealing the presence of a new thought--a new effect, requiring the +agency of a new cause. In accordance with the usual economy of nature, +who never duplicates her forces, change will be made only so far as may +be necessary to communicate the additional idea. Organisms representing +previous thoughts will be added to, in order to express the expansion of +the thought, instead of a creation _de novo_ in each instance. Thus an +identical cellular structure will be found in all organic beings, from +the lowest to the highest, each higher type carrying forward the idea +and its physical expression found in the lower. The differences between +no two terms in the series can be total, nor can any two terms be +identical, as each higher species will embrace all the attributes of the +lower, differing only by the addition of others. This is simply the +physical expression of the logical truth that whatever can be predicated +of the genus can be predicated of every individual contained under it. +As the individual is only the expansion of the genus, so higher physical +types must also be similar expansions of lower. + +Here, then, is evolution, or development: primarily an evolution of the +generic into the individual, the continued differentiation of a generic +idea through successive individualizations, each adding to the previous +group of attributes, thus rendering the idea increasingly complex; and, +secondly, an apparent physical evolution or development, interpreting +this logical process by a series of physical forms so related as to +reveal the relation existing between the thoughts thus interpreted. In +the physical representation of the ideas so related, there must be an +apparent physical evolution--that is, the process of evolution logically +must, like the ideas thus evolved, have a physical expression, and the +successive steps in this logical evolution must be revealed by material +forms bearing an analogous relation, and thereby expressing the logical +process. Matter is nothing, so far as we are now concerned, but the +condition necessary to the objective expression of thought. Every phase +of matter is simply an objective formulation of a corresponding phase of +thought. Every addition to form implies an antecedent increase of +thought, as there can be no formal expression until there is something +to be expressed. There can, then, be no such thing as mere material +evolution, for whatever is material is only symbolical. + +Matter being thus wholly inert, the origin of the impulse towards +greater complexity must be sought for outside of that which undergoes +the change. The movement by which one species becomes a higher is not an +elaboration, an extension or a differentiation of existing attributes, +but involves the positive addition of a new attribute, different and +distinct from any or all previously existing. One species cannot pass +into another by an innate impulse, for a species is an entity composed +of a determinate number of attributes, and all attributes potentially +present must be considered as actually present. We cannot say that the +child is a different species from the man, and that one passes into the +other by a process of evolution, because all the essential attributes of +the man are potentially present in the child. If the polyp, by the +action of innate forces, operating through a series of ages, however +extended, can, without any impulse from without, develop itself into a +man, then the polyp is as much a man as a boy is, differing only in the +time required for development: and the data for the final deduction of +the highest types of creation must be furnished in the most elementary +forms of life. + +The force manifesting itself in organic life is readily distinguishable +from the organism by which it is manifested. Life and organization are +not synonyms; one is the condition of the other, but a condition is not +a cause. We can consider force apart from organism, and this possible +separation in thought proves that the same form may not represent both, +but that life can absolutely exist apart from organs which serve to give +it a physical manifestation.[3] Physical life being conditioned upon +organization, whenever the organism varies, the vital force thus +manifested must also vary, such variation being necessarily antecedent +to its manifestation. The organism varies, because it must, in order to +express the added thought. Change in organism, therefore, is not induced +by simple organic action, because the organs and the force acting +through them can be distinguished. Assuming that matter is the objective +or formal representation of thought, there can be no change in the +material expression without a corresponding change in the antecedent +conception. There can, then, be physical evolution, only as there is +antecedent logical evolution, and then only because of this logical +evolution and not because of the operation of an innate organic force. +Force, whatever may be its genesis, is only the exertion of power, not +the increase of it. Exertion limits the view to the force immediately in +operation. We may replace one manifestation by another, but the quantity +is neither increased nor diminished by this change. Change in form +implies the operation of force: and apart from such manifestation in +matter, it escapes the tests of science, and passes into the purely +metaphysical notion of cause. And unless the operation of force be +constant, or, if different forces are blended, variable according to +some determinate law, the action of which is constant and discoverable, +so that the different units of force are separately measurable, the +force thus irregular in its action can never be placed in any scientific +category. Evolution, then, cannot proceed from any innate organic +impulse, unless the force that tends to exact reproduction, and the +force that induces a change be equally and separately cognizable. Change +must proceed according to some law which accounts for the change, and +distinguishes between the normal exertion of power and that exertion +which causes a deviation. Science, to be science, must explain apparent +exceptions as fully as the regular operation of forces, and that which +causes the irregularity must be as distinctly cognizably by itself as +the force which acts regularly. Anything less than this is not science. +The discovery of Neptune was the result of the application of this +principle; it was a successful attempt to discriminate the force which +caused variation from the force which operated regularly. + +Each species represents the operation of certain vital forces, and one +cannot physically pass into another except by the increase of this +force, or at least by a change in the manner of its manifestation; and +this increase in amount or this change in direction must separately be +accounted for. Nor does it matter, for the purposes of this discussion, +as to the genesis of this added increment, further than to show that its +origin must be exterior to the organism by which its presence is +manifested; for vital energy acting through an organism is a unit, and +cannot, even in thought, be separated into distinguishable portions. +Change in the direction of vital energy indicates that the original +impulse has been modified in its action by encountering another force, +for nothing but force can change the direction of force. It does not +fall within the range of this paper to determine the nature of this +exterior force which is thus distinguishable from that acting through +the vital organization, and therefore capable of separate objective +representation. Metaphysically we may say that force is resolvable into +will, but will being purely personal is incapable of material +representation, and thus cannot enter into the determinations of +physical science, which does not seek to discover the origin of force, +but deals solely with its presence. + +As the logician must assume his premises, and, as a logician, cannot +question their truth, so the physicist must assume a force in operation, +and, as a physicist, cannot examine its genesis. The physical or the +metaphysical method of inquiry is valid only so long as restricted to +physical or metaphysical processes: a mixture of the two methods will +give results satisfactory neither to science nor to philosophy. As logic +furnishes no criterion by which to test the absolute truth of +propositions, but deals wholly with conclusions drawn from given +premises, so science furnishes no data by which to determine the +absolute genesis of force, but restricts its enquiries to the phenomena +resulting from a force given. For the student of physical science cause +and effect is only the transference of a given and determined force from +one material form to another. If this idea is to be traced further, it +must be studied outside the limits of physics. This study belongs to +metaphysics. + +Now, if physical science does not deal with the origin of the initial +force, but assumes at the outset its presence, no more does it fall +within its province to examine into the origin of the increments which +give to physical forms that variety which renders science possible. +Science deals with results, not antecedents; and after having determined +results, it is not authorized to affirm that one species has produced +another by evolution, or has produced it at all. If there are agreements +between different organisms by which they are brought into relation, +there are also differences by which they are discriminated, and these +differences imply increments of force; and to assert that one organism +has evolved another is to determine not merely the presence of this new +increment, but also to determine its origin. Scientific investigation +deals with phenomena which give evidence to the senses of a +_transference_ of force from one form or from one manifestation to +another. Transference is not increase--an effect can be no more than the +evolution of what was potentially present in the cause; it cannot add to +it. The origin of the force must be investigated according to +intellectual laws. + + +It has been argued that a Supreme Intelligence in manifesting his +thought will, according to the necessary laws of rational activity, pass +from the universal and general to the particular and individual, or from +concepts involving few attributes to those involving these and others; +and that these steps in the rational process must be represented in a +corresponding physical series; and that the communication of thought is +conditioned upon this physical representation. If the logical series +comprises one thousand terms, each related to the preceding according to +logical law the physical series must comprise one thousand terms, each +physically related in such a manner as to reveal this law. As the +highest generalization comprises the fewest attributes, the concrete +expression of this idea will present the simplest possible physical form +and the least complexity of organization, and thus will present the +lowest types of life; and as the individual comprises the greatest +number of attributes, its concrete expression will present the greatest +complexity, and consequently the highest type of life. We have seen +that the logical process begins with the general and ends with the +individual; its material expression must therefore begin with the lowest +orders and end with the highest. But the individual cannot be +immediately derived from the general without the intervention of +intermediate generalizations. No more in the concrete expression of this +deduction can we pass from the lowest types to the highest without the +intervention of an intermediate series. These intermediate terms are not +capable of independent interpretation; they find their full explanation +only in the extremes of the series--God and Man. + +If, then, in the intellectual process from the abstract and universal +towards the concrete and individual, we find a constant evolution of +idea, each advance being an addition to the previous conception, each +new term in the series embracing all the attributes of the preceding, +and differing only by addition; and if thought is possible only on this +condition; it necessarily follows that the material representation of +this thought must present physical forms similarly related, so that, +leaving out of view the intellectual genesis of this relation, the +observer might conclude that these forms compose a series evolved from a +primordial cell in accordance with an organic law. But such we find to +be the universal law of intellectual procedure: this apparent +development or evolution must, therefore, be the condition of the +communication of such intellectual process, and the physical terms are +brought into this relation by the fact that they symbolize the logical +process. If the material symbols of thought were unrelated physically, +the thoughts thus expressed would also be unrelated and independent. But +such a supposition readers Science impossible, for its one aim is to +find the _same_ in the _different_. If there be no _same_, there can be +no science: if there be no _different_, there can be no science. Thought +proceeds by adding the _different_ to the _same_ in an endless series, +and this addition of the _different_ to the _same_ expressed in concrete +forms is what is called evolution. If no evolution were apparent in +Nature, there could be no Science; for those steps which to the +naturalist indicate evolution, being only the physical expression--the +formulation--of the logical process, afford the means by which the +student reaches the highest generalization. If these steps be wanting, +he cannot proceed. + +Admitting then to its fullest extent the fact that, judged from a purely +physical point of view, all organic forms seem to have been derived each +from its immediate predecessor, by a mere functional impulse; and +admitting that science is possible upon no other condition; we claim +that these material forms are brought into such relation by intellectual +evolution, and not by physical genesis; they represent an evolution of +Thought and not an evolution of Matter. We know from consciousness that +this process of evolution is the method of our thinking. We know also +that the divine thought can be rendered intelligible to us upon no other +hypothesis than that which supposes it to be governed by the laws which +control human thought. Translating the physical symbols which we see +about us, and which present this appearance of evolution, we infer that +this is the method according to which the divine mind proceeded. Science +will not materially err in its physical results, if it adopt the +hypothesis of physical evolution, but it must confine its attention to +physics; it is only as we attempt higher generalizations that the +insufficiency of the hypothesis becomes manifest in its failure to +satisfy the conditions of the problem as presented to philosophy. + +FOOTNOTES: + +[1] This, of course, does not absolutely determine the order of organic +creation; as in the case of the syllogism the conclusion or either +premise may be the proposition first enunciated, the order of expression +being determined by circumstances. + +[2] Compare the demonstrations of Geometry. + +[3] As in the case of man after the death of the body. + + + + + +End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Philosophy of Evolution, by +Stephen H. Carpenter + +*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE PHILOSOPHY OF EVOLUTION *** + +***** This file should be named 30743.txt or 30743.zip ***** +This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: + http://www.gutenberg.org/3/0/7/4/30743/ + +Produced by David Edwards, Martin Pettit and the Online +Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This +book was produced from scanned images of public domain +material from the Google Print project.) + + +Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions +will be renamed. + +Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no +one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation +(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without +permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, +set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to +copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to +protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project +Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you +charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you +do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the +rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose +such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and +research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do +practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is +subject to the trademark license, especially commercial +redistribution. + + + +*** START: FULL LICENSE *** + +THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE +PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK + +To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free +distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work +(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project +Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project +Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at +http://gutenberg.org/license). + + +Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic works + +1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to +and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property +(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all +the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy +all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. +If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the +terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or +entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. + +1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be +used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who +agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few +things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works +even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See +paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement +and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. See paragraph 1.E below. + +1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" +or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the +collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an +individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are +located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from +copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative +works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg +are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project +Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by +freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of +this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with +the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by +keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project +Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. + +1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern +what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in +a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check +the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement +before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or +creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project +Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning +the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United +States. + +1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: + +1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate +access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently +whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the +phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project +Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, +copied or distributed: + +This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with +almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or +re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included +with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org + +1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived +from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is +posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied +and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees +or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work +with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the +work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 +through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the +Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or +1.E.9. + +1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted +with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution +must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional +terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked +to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the +permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. + +1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this +work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. + +1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this +electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without +prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with +active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project +Gutenberg-tm License. + +1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, +compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any +word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or +distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than +"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version +posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), +you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a +copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon +request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other +form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm +License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. + +1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, +performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works +unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. + +1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing +access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided +that + +- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from + the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method + you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is + owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he + has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the + Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments + must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you + prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax + returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and + sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the + address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to + the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." + +- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies + you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he + does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm + License. You must require such a user to return or + destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium + and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of + Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any + money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the + electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days + of receipt of the work. + +- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free + distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. + +1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm +electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set +forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from +both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael +Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the +Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. + +1.F. + +1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable +effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread +public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm +collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain +"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or +corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual +property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a +computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by +your equipment. + +1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right +of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project +Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project +Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all +liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal +fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT +LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE +PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE +TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE +LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR +INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH +DAMAGE. + +1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a +defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can +receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a +written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you +received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with +your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with +the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a +refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity +providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to +receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy +is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further +opportunities to fix the problem. + +1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth +in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER +WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO +WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. + +1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied +warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. +If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the +law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be +interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by +the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any +provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. + +1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the +trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone +providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance +with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, +promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, +harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, +that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do +or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm +work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any +Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. + + +Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm + +Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of +electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers +including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists +because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from +people in all walks of life. + +Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the +assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's +goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will +remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project +Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure +and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. +To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation +and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 +and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. + + +Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive +Foundation + +The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit +501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the +state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal +Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification +number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at +http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent +permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. + +The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. +Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered +throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at +809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email +business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact +information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official +page at http://pglaf.org + +For additional contact information: + Dr. Gregory B. Newby + Chief Executive and Director + gbnewby@pglaf.org + + +Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg +Literary Archive Foundation + +Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide +spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of +increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be +freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest +array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations +($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt +status with the IRS. + +The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating +charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United +States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a +considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up +with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations +where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To +SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any +particular state visit http://pglaf.org + +While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we +have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition +against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who +approach us with offers to donate. + +International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make +any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from +outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. + +Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation +methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other +ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. +To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate + + +Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic +works. + +Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm +concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared +with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project +Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. + + +Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed +editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. +unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily +keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. + + +Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: + + http://www.gutenberg.org + +This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, +including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary +Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to +subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. diff --git a/30743.zip b/30743.zip Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..b6e9e48 --- /dev/null +++ b/30743.zip diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6312041 --- /dev/null +++ b/LICENSE.txt @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements, +metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be +in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES. + +Procedures for determining public domain status are described in +the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org. + +No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in +jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize +this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright +status under the laws that apply to them. diff --git a/README.md b/README.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..52a5393 --- /dev/null +++ b/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,2 @@ +Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for +eBook #30743 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/30743) |