Part 1
Produced by Marilynda Fraser-Cunliffe, Christine Aldridge and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
Transcriber's Notes:
This text uses UTF-8 (unicode) file encoding. If the apostrophes and quotation marks in this paragraph appear as garbage, you may have an incompatible browser or unavailable fonts. First, make sure that your browser’s “character set” or “file encoding” is set to Unicode (UTF-8). You may also need to change the default font.
Passages in italics are surrounded by _underscores_. " " bold are surrounded by =equal signs=. " " bold Gothic Fonts are surrounded by +plus signs+.
This volume contains the October 1901 Publisher's Catalogue, however the catalogue is not listed in the regular Table of Contents. The Catalogue follows the final Chapter.
Other Transcriber Notes appear at the end of this e-text.
THE CHURCHMAN'S LIBRARY EDITED BY J. H. BURN, B.D.
EVOLUTION
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | | | THE CHURCHMAN'S LIBRARY | | | | EDITED BY | | JOHN HENRY BURN, B.D. | | _Examining Chaplain to the Lord Bishop of Aberdeen._ | | | | THE BEGINNINGS OF ENGLISH CHRISTIANITY. By W. E. COLLINS, | | M.A., Professor of Ecclesiastical History, King's | | College, London. Crown 8vo, _3s. 6d._ [_Ready._ | | | | THE CHURCH AND THE SACRAMENTS. By E. T. GREEN, M.A., | | Professor of Hebrew and Theology at St. David's College, | | Lampeter. | | | | THE CHURCHMAN'S PRIMER. By G. HARFORD-BATTERSBY, M.A. | | | | THE CHURCHMAN'S DAY BOOK. By J. H. BURN, B.D. | | | | THE ANGLICAN CHURCH IN THE COLONIES AND MISSION FIELD. By | | ALLAN B. WEBB, D.D., Assistant Bishop to the Bishop of | | Brechin. | | | | HISTORY OF THE PAPACY. By J. P. WHITNEY, M.A. | | | | OUR CONTROVERSY WITH ROME. By J. M. DANSON, D.D. | | | | THE WORKMANSHIP OF THE PRAYER BOOK. By JOHN DOWDEN, D.D., | | Bishop of Edinburgh. Crown 8vo, _3s. 6d._ [_Ready._ | | | | A POPULAR INTRODUCTION TO THE OLD TESTAMENT. By ANGUS M. | | MACKAY, B.A. | | | | A POPULAR INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT. By J. H. | | SHEPHERD, M.A. | | | | THE HEBREW PROPHET. By L. W. BATTEN, Ph.D. | | | | AN INTRODUCTION TO TEXTUAL CRITICISM. By A. M. KNIGHT, | | M.A., Fellow and Dean of Gonville and Caius College, | | Camb. | | | | SOME OLD TESTAMENT PROBLEMS. By JOHN P. PETERS, D.D., | | D.Sc. | | | | SOME NEW TESTAMENT PROBLEMS. By ARTHUR WRIGHT, M.A., | | Fellow and Tutor of Queens' College, Cambridge. Crown | | 8vo, _6s._ [_Ready._ | | | | BIBLE REVISION. By J. J. S. PEROWNE, D.D., Bishop of | | Worcester. | | | | DEVOTIONAL ANALYSIS OF THE PAULINE EPISTLES. By JOHN GOTT, | | D.D., Bishop of Truro. | | | | PREACHING. By FREDERIC RELTON, A.K.C. | | | | ENGLISH HYMNS AND HYMN TUNES. By H. C. SHUTTLEWORTH, M.A., | | Professor of Pastoral and Liturgical Theology, King's | | College, London. | | | | THE WITNESS OF ARCHÆOLOGY. By C. J. BALL, M.A., Chaplain | | of Lincoln's Inn. | | | | ENGLISH ECCLESIOLOGY. By J. N. COMPER. | | | | CONFIRMATION. By H. T. KINGDON, D.D., Bishop of | | Fredericton. | | | | INSPIRATION. By Canon BENHAM, D.D. | | | | MIRACLES. By THOMAS B. STRONG, B.D., Student of Christ | | Church, Oxford. | | | | PROVIDENCE AND PRAYER. By V. H. STANTON, D.D., Ely | | Professor of Divinity, Cambridge. | | | | EVOLUTION. By FRANK B. JEVONS, M.A., D.Litt., Principal of | | Bishop Hatfield's Hall, Durham. Crown 8vo, _3s. 6d._ | | | | THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN HERE AND HEREAFTER. By Canon | | WINTERBOTHAM, M.A., B.Sc., LL.B. Cr. 8vo, _3s. 6d._ | | [_Ready._ | | | | THE GREAT WORLD RELIGIONS FROM A CHRISTIAN STANDPOINT. By | | H. E. J. BEVAN, M.A., Gresham Professor of Divinity. | | | | COMPARATIVE RELIGION. By J. A. MACCULLOCK. | | | | ENGLISH ECCLESIASTICAL LAW. By W. DIGBY THURNAM. | | | +------------------------------------------------------------------+
EVOLUTION
BY FRANK B. JEVONS, M.A., D.LITT. PRINCIPAL OF BISHOP HATFIELD'S HALL, DURHAM
METHUEN & CO. 36 ESSEX STREET, W.C. LONDON 1900
PREFACE
The object of this volume is to raise the question: if we accept the Theory of Evolution as true in science, how should it modify the thought and action of a man who wishes to do his best in this world? The question is necessary because we find that different and inconsistent conclusions on the point have been reached by men speaking in the name of science and speaking with authority. These differences are due not to anything in science, but to certain extra-scientific assumptions. To test the worth of such assumptions is the work of philosophy; and this volume is accordingly an essay in philosophy. Science is but organised common sense. Science and Religion both claim to deal with realities. The realism of common sense, therefore, the form of philosophy to which both seem to point, is that which is set forth here.
CONTENTS
PAGE
I. OPTIMISM 1
II. ILLUSION 14
III. PESSIMISM 24
IV. IDEALISM 38
V. THE REAL 60
VI. EVOLUTION AS THE REDISTRIBUTION OF MATTER AND MOTION 72
VII. NECESSITY 100
VIII. INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE 138
IX. CONSEQUENCES 152
X. THE CHESS-BOARD 163
XI. THE COMMON FAITH OF MANKIND 184
XII. PROGRESS 203
XIII. EVOLUTION AS PURPOSE 238
XIV. CONCLUSION 273
APPENDIX. ON BISHOP BERKELEY'S IDEALISM 289
INDEX 297
EVOLUTION
I.
OPTIMISM
Innumerable writers at the end of the nineteenth century have reviewed the changes which in the last fifty years have come over the civilised world. The record indeed is admitted on all hands to be marvellous. Steam, electricity, machinery, and all the practical inventions of applied science have added enormously to the material wealth, comfort, and luxury of mankind. Intellectually, the bounds of pure science have been vastly enlarged; and the blessings of education have been extended to the poorest members of the community. Philanthropic and religious activity manifests itself in a thousand different organisations. We are never tired of repeating, that changes which in the first half of the century would have been pronounced impossible and incredible, at the end of the century are accomplished facts.
But amongst all these changes one is almost universally overlooked, and that the most characteristic, the most remarkable, and the most important: the face of civilisation has come to be illumined by hope. Great as is the progress of the last fifty years, we count it as nothing compared with that which is in store for us. To the discoveries of science it is felt that no bounds can be set; what a day may bring forth in the way of the extension of man's control over the forces of Nature, what secrets of Nature the chemist in his laboratory may light upon at any moment, no man can surmise, but everyone is confident that things will be discovered as marvellous to us now as the telegraph and telephone to our predecessors of the pre-scientific age. In the treatment of political and social questions the same deep-seated conviction prevails that progress can and will be made: the conditions and causes of poverty can be ascertained by patient study, and when ascertained can be dealt with. The laws of physical health and cleanliness have not refused to reveal themselves, nor are moral health and cleanliness without their laws. In fine, if the best energy of the age is everywhere devoted to the increase of knowledge, the advancement of morality, and the diffusion of comfort, it is because everywhere there is hope. In the social as in the individual organism hope raises the tide of life, increases vitality, and stimulates the system. Hence this general discharge throughout the nervous system of society, manifesting itself in the vigour and energy with which all schemes for improvement are taken up and carried out. That discoveries will be made and progress effected is as certain as that gold is to be found in a goldfield; the only practical question is, By whom? Who is to be the lucky man?
To us who have witnessed the advance which has given rise to this universal hope, the hope itself seems so reasonable and so justifiable that we are apt to overlook the fact that it is without parallel in the history of mankind. Never, of course, has any generation of men imagined its own lot perfect; all have had their ideals, and all have believed their ideals to be true. But whereas we place the realisation of our ideals in the future, all previous generations have placed it in the past: the Golden Age till now has always been regarded as the starting-point of man's history, not its goal. All races have looked back with pride upon a heroic past; all mythologies tell of the better and brighter lot that was in the beginning man's; all poets sing of the brave days of old; all fairy tales begin with "once upon a time." The historians of Greece and Rome discovered no progress in the history of their countries, but only degeneration from the patriotism and simplicity of earlier times, or at best a series of changes making its round like the circle of the year's seasons. The philosophers of Greece are mainly occupied, when they deal with sociological questions, with the causes of corruption and decay of constitutions; and, if they frame ideal constitutions, they intend them to be final; they do not imagine them to have any possibility of growth. In modern times the same tendency has been equally manifest. Political revolutions have always aimed, not at introducing a new, but at restoring an old state of things: the actors in the French Revolution even dressed and posed as ancient Greeks and Romans. In philosophy, civilisation, as being artificial, has been regarded as a degeneration from a "natural" state of man which was at once primitive and perfect.
In the individual, optimism may be dismissed as a mere mood, or as a tendency to cheerfulness not based on any rational estimate either of the future or of the past. But when a whole generation of men, when, indeed, the whole civilised world, looks to the future, not with careless levity, but with the calm assurance of confidence in the progress that is and is to be, we cannot dismiss its optimism offhand. Astonishing as it is, that the world as it grows older should grow more hopeful, there are good reasons for the fact.
The child's estimates of distance, magnitude, and importance differ from those of the adult. The estimates, however, persist in memory, and we have all discovered, on revisiting familiar scenes of childhood, how exaggerated our childish estimates were when compared with the actual facts. It is this exaggeration of memory, this illusion of the mind's eye, that psychologically is the foundation of the tendency to idealise the past. To us as children the exploits of our elders were marvellous in our eyes; and they remain as marvels in the memory, as marvels, however, which, as all marvels do, belong to the past. The past becomes the wonderland in which were performed the great deeds, not only of our fathers' time, but of the old times before them. The past becomes the poet's treasury, from which he produces things new and old--the abiding-place of all things good and great and beautiful which are not, but ought to be, and therefore once were.
To measure progress, as indeed to measure any movement and determine its rate and direction, some fixed points are necessary. As long, therefore, as there is no contemporaneous record of events, fixed in writing, there is no possibility of checking the _laudator temporis acti_ and of reducing the unconscious exaggerations of his memory to their due proportions. But even if there were, in the lowest stages of culture the rate of progress is too slow to be perceptible at the time. In the beginning man is at the mercy of his environment: it is only when he has learnt to modify it to his needs that progress begins to move. And by the time that man has passed from savagery to barbarism, and has emerged from barbarism to civilisation, the conviction that the present and the actual are things of naught as compared with the ideal past, is too intimately inwrought with his religion, his mythology, his philosophy, and the accepted history of his race and its heroic origin to allow him to see facts as they are, or to divine the true trend of human affairs. Further, there is a very practical reason for his looking with suspicion and not with confidence on social changes. It is only as the result of a long course of slow evolution that society has attained to a condition of fairly stable equilibrium. In the beginning society may be compared to a man hanging on for bare life, with a precarious foothold, to the face of a sheer cliff: when the least movement may prove fatal, all movement is dreaded. Thus the characteristic of all early societies is that they are impeded by "the cake of custom" and rigid with the immobility of conservatism.
To those who hold that experience mechanically impresses itself upon the mind and so automatically expresses itself as truth, it must appear somewhat strange that mankind should have advanced for thousands of years without knowing that they had progressed; and still more strange that it was not as an induction from experience, but on _a priori_ grounds that they arrived at the conclusion. Yet so it was. The mere contemplation of the rise and fall of empires no more suggested the presence and persistence of a constant tendency to progress than the mountainous wave which threatens to engulf the ship suggests that the sea-level is a scientific truth. But when Darwin established his theory that man was descended from the brute, all was clear: it became certain _a priori_ that the long history and "pre-history" of man must have been one of progress and advance. When the descent of man was established, his ascent came to be studied, and human evolution was seen to be synonymous with progress. Savages were seen to be the nearest existing representatives of primitive man, and there was an end to the idea that the primitive state was perfection. The comparative method, once applied to the study of mankind, was able to set side by side examples of savagery, barbarism, and civilisation, which illustrated every step in the process of the evolution of society, and showed that, though the forms of society may fluctuate as do the waves of the sea, society itself is steady in its advance and progressive in its evolution. This conclusion, which at first was a deduction drawn from the animal descent of man, has now the independent support of an enormous amount of evidence. The existence of a Stone Age, palæolithic and neolithic, of a Bronze Age and an Iron Age, and the succession of those ages in the order named, are established facts of science. That the culture of nomad peoples is lower than that of pastoral tribes; that pastoral tribes advance in culture when they become agricultural; that agriculture, implying settled habits and fixed homes, leads to the foundation of cities and the formation of civic life; that the city-states of the ancient world give way to the nation-states of modern times: are all accepted facts, bridging the apparent chasm between civilisation and savagery, and demonstrating the action of the law of continuity in the evolution of society.
But, it will be observed, all these facts and arguments taken together only prove what has been--not what will be. They show that from a level little higher than the brute man has attained to what he is; but is this enough to guarantee his continuous rise? In other words, have we reached the real source of that universal hope which, as we have said, is characteristic of this stage of man's evolution? The bark of man's destiny hitherto has been wafted by a favouring and a steady gale, and it is natural enough for the unreflecting to take it for granted that the wind will always set from the same happy quarter. But the question will obtrude itself whether we are justified in the presumption.
If man shaped his own course, we might at least say that there was no reason why he should not continue to steer in the same direction as hitherto. But the most remarkable lesson that sociology has to teach us is that the course which he has followed so continuously has not been of his own steering. As we have already seen, man until this present generation has uniformly kept his eyes fixed on the quarter from which, not to which, he has imagined himself to be travelling, and, like a reluctant emigrant, has lamented the increasing distance between him and the happy shore from which he sailed. Or, to change the metaphor, society is an organism. Like all organisms, it starts as a relatively structureless mass; then, in accordance with the principle of the division of labour, different functions come to be performed by different parts; thus special organs are developed for the performance of special functions; division of labour further implies co-operation of the various organs and the development of the necessary means of communication and connection. All this is necessary for that evolution of society which we call progress; and of all these changes in the structure of society but few were ever intentionally planned by man. Mr. Herbert Spencer has familiarised this generation with the idea that the foreseen consequences of any intended change are insignificant as compared with the consequences unforeseen and unintended. Hence the general rule that the structural developments on which the evolution of society depends are but rarely the result of the coercive and conscious changes effected by government: in practically all cases they are the unintended consequences of the spontaneous actions of individuals aiming at something else and unconsciously promoting the evolution of society. So, too, the animal organism is made up of living units, each of which unconsciously performs the part necessary to be played by it, if the organism is to live; and each unit, unconsciously again, even modifies the part it plays, in order to promote the changes which constitute the evolution and the progress of the organism.