sample pages from victorian science and literature

8/6/2019 Sample Pages From Victorian Science and Literature

1/27

213

WILLIAM SAMUEL LILLY

VS THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY

William Samuel Lilly, Mateialim an Mality, Fortnightly Review (Nvembe1886), pp. 5757, 578, 5813, 58990.

Tma Heny Huxley Science an Mal, Fortnightly Review (Decembe 1886),pp. 78992, 796, 798, 8002.

William Samuel Lilly, Te Pvince Phyic,Fortnightly Review (Febuay 1887),pp. 2789, 2812, 2835, 2878, 2923.

Tee thee extact m an exchange between the yung Cathlic wite anbaite William Samuel Lilly (18401919) an the ageing Bullg TmaHuxley (182595) that tk place in the page Fortnightly Review between1886 an 1887. Even thugh it wa me twenty-fve yea ince Huxley ha ft

ventue int the cut an thut eening phyical cience m thelgicalattack, he elihe the pptunity t have ne me uting a the champin ean ve upetitin. Te act that Lilly wa a uppte the Cathlicthelgian Jhn Heny Newman mae thi all the me appealing t Huxley.At take wa nt nly the avance cientifc natualim an the mateialimthat Lilly thught wa attenant upn it, but, an n a me penal level, Lilly

wa nt the ft man with thelgical cmmitment t cat apein n theunepinning Huxley wn penal mality.

In Mateialim an Mality Lilly ientife the main uce the menmateialit ctine that he wihe t expe. Inee, the ean he elt uch fn-ge-pinting wa neceay i becaue the wt the pepetat enie that

they wee mateialit at all: William Kingn Cli epuiate it iectly,while Huxley an Hebet Spence elibeately cave ut a geat expane the agntic unknwn. Lilly wa nt le by what he clealy aw a little methan aplgetic. Pitivim, Deteminim, an much that pae cuent aAgnticim ae mee vaietie Mateialim; ublimate expein it, pe-hap, but tue expein (belw, p. 217). Huxley, he pint ut, ha eclaethat cnciune i a unctin nevu matte (belw, p. 218), an what


2/27

214 Victorian Science and Literature: Volume 1

wa thi but a cnein that cientifc mateialim wa engage in the gaualbanihment piit m the univee? Even Spence, wh wa well knwn hi exaltatin the Unknwn an Unknwable, mae the peitence cehi ne mula (belw, p. 219). Between them they ha mae the univeenaught but a enele mechanim (belw, p. 219).

Even the ul man, by light mateialit philphy, ha becme in thew the phyicit Jhn ynall meely a petical eneing phenmenathat ha a yet eite explanatin.1 Lilly wa cncene nt nly becaue heaw the inuence mateialim pevaing thughut the cience, but becaueit wa peaing thugh all apect Weten cultue, m the fctin mile

Zla, t plitic, a well a the fne at: All that the atit nw uually aim at, helament, i t cpy exactly, t epuce (belw, p. 220). Mateialim quenchethe light the intellect. What hpe wa thee mal man in uch a

wl? ue enugh, he cnclue, Huxley wa etemine that mality han neceay bae in the eligin that he wa cmplicit in unemining, but,Lilly pint ut, Huxley wn mal cmmitment ha gwn ut a theiticil. What hpe might thee be utue geneatin? Mality, in PeHuxley, I can well believe, i tng enugh t hl it wn, he wte, But willit be tng enugh in Pe Huxley geat-ganchilen? (belw, p. 221)

Huxley Science an Mal appeae in the ubequent vlume in epne.Althugh he cul nt anwe Cli, wh ha ie at a tagically yung age,n wul he anwe Spence, wh wa neve ht w when it came t

ecibing hi wn philphy, Huxley cul nt accept what he tk t be thece Lilly agument. Inee, nt nly i he think the agument eneu,but that it pemie wee entiely ill-une. He tk Lilly agument t be builtupn thee maj elate claim: that Cli, Spence an himel put aie (1) a unveifable, eveything which the ene cannt veiy; (2) eveything beynthe bun phyical cience; (3) eveything which cannt be bught int alabaty an ealt with chemically (belw, p. 223). On each thee pint hegive the thuneing epne I ay N. Huxley eute the ft thee, uggetingin the pce that Lilly i imply ignant the meth an aim cientifcenquiy, nt t mentin guilty illgical thinking. Illutating hi pint with hichaacteitically cautic wit, he pint ut that he cul quite eaily entetain theiea that Lilly wa victim a patent an enmu miunetaning withut

being able t veiy the ame thugh any hi fve ene (belw, p. 223). In ame eiu vein he pint ut that while he i a fm believe a, he claim, aeall men cience, in the univeal valiity the law cauatin, thi univealityi equally beyn the each the ene t pve. Te ecn Lilly chage,Huxley eject a imilaly abu, an lit a numbe example t illutate thatit i impbable anyne t hl the view that Lilly ha acibe t him anhi ellw. Te tate aptue awe that Huxley himel cnee t having elt


3/27

William Samuel Lilly vs Tomas Henry Huxley 215

when he ft encuntee the im eligiu glm the tpical et (belw,p. 225) wul till peit, n matte what phyical cience might eveal abut theplace. Huxley min, aethetic, beauty an wne ae beyn the bun phyical cience (belw, p. 225). Regaing Lilly thi pint, Huxley eman whethe Lilly thught that he gave n ceence, n ught n unetaningm hity, m mathematic, m phillgy? Nne thee fel cul beubject t chemical analyi, an yet wee clealy yieling t enquiy an, inee,ha been cental t the libeal at eucatinal pgamme that Huxley ha beenavancing bth in pen an in pint yea.

Huxley ge n in thi extact t een hi agntic pitin athe

than agance, a thin hiel atheim, he ague intea that hi view nthe matte ae but a humble tetament t the ecgnitin that thee ae mequetin upn which it i nt pible t peak with any meaue cetainty imply becaue they ae beyn the ken inuctive inquiy. Tee quetin,he ugget, ae the battle gun thelgy an philphy. Fa m immalactin temming m the pea inuctive cience, it i t the hity theetw inul ite (belw, p. 227) thelgy an philphy that ne hullk t ee a iatibe immality. Rathe, thee i a me wiepea ene cial uty an a geate ene jutice, cial bligatin an mutual help inthi Englan u than in any me pei civilizatin (belw, p. 228).

While, accing t Huxley, philphy an thelgy ha pawne ielvableipute an cnict, the Cineella phyical cience ha at leat pven quite

ucceul in putting inne n the table. An, while nt peuming t peak nthe geat unknwable t which they evte thei enegie,

She ee the e which pevae the eeming ie the wl; the geat ama evlutin, with it ull hae pity an te, but al abunant with gnean beauty an he lean, in he heat heat, the len, that the unatin mality i t have ne, nce an all, with lying; t give up petening t believethat which thee i n evience, an epeating unintelligible ppitin abutthing beyn the pibilitie knwlege. (belw, p. 228)

O cue, Huxley mtivatin wa al t en the u lwe-claplitical aicalim that wa aciate with mateialit view g cience aneputatin equie epectability.

Te Pvince Phyic gave Lilly the fnal w in thi exchange, an init he epeat hi chage that Huxley wa inee ne the emt teache the mateialit cee, an that what he ha tate in Science an Malnly uneline thi act athe than being aequate eutatin. He ejin that

while Huxley might ecy the chage mateialim n the bai that thee weephenmena uch a aethetic an wne that cul nt be explaine withinthe ame ene expeience, thi wa t mi the pint (Huxley neve eem


4/27


ully t have appeciate the implicatin Chale Dawin 1871Descent oMan). Huxley wa cetainly cmmitte t the iea that cnciune wa nme than a puct the bain which, a Lilly wa quick t pint ut, he ha

peviuly cmmitte himel t in pint. I thi wa the cae, then it mut llwthat jut uch qualitie a aethetic an wne wee n me that puct the bain an nthing me. What wa thi line eaning i nt mateial-im? I thi wa nt Huxley intentin he wa cetainly guilty, Lilly cntinue, having le a geat many hi tuent int the mateialitic lugh epn,neve t emege m it (belw, p. 230). In epne Lilly een hi belie thatthee i a ignifcant ieence between living mucle an eh an the muclean eh the ea. What wa thi ieence i nt beyn the ken ciencet ecibe the exitence an immateial vital pinciple in ht, piit(belw, p. 232). He cnclue that I cetainly cannt allw that animal lie, cn-tituting cetain tate cnciune, i ue t a mateial ganim in whichnthing immateial eie. I thi immateial t be calle piit? Why nt?(belw, p. 232).

Nte1. In hi Peiential Ae elivee bee the Bimingham an Milan Intitute,

Octbe 1 1877, ynall ha tate I yu ae cntent t make yu ul a petic en-eing a phenmenn which eue the yke inay phyical law, I, ne,

wul nt bject t thi execie ieality. Fortnightly Review(1 Nvembe 1877), p.607.


5/27

217

William Samuel Lilly, Materialism and Morality ,Fortnightly Review (November 1886), pp. 5757,

578, 5813, 58990.

Words ae gwn ale that I am lth t pve ean with them, ay Vilain welfh Night.1 Te aying cntantly cme t my min in ealing with the

philphical cntveie the peent ay. Rigu efnitin, caeul anal-yi, pecie claifcatin, ae n lnge in avu. It i an age le thinking,an le witing; ile w, evant t hallw l.2 Neve, pehap,

wa thee an age in which the tae the phit, whe buine it i t makethe we ean appea the bette,3 wa caie n ucceully. Neve wathee an age in which a wite wh eel that he i a teache, nthing,4 hageate nee well-cniee an accuate language. Hence it i that in the

pape which I have m time t time cntibute t thiReview I have ught,bee enteing upn my agument, t tate clealy the ene in which I emplymy pincipal tem. Mt neceay i it that I hul thi in epect ucha w a Mateialim. Tee ae the wh wul etict it t a ctine whichi nw iceite highe min. What we knw living ce, the eal

ppetie bie, ha mae an en the l ntin matte euce meelyt liity an extenin. Ou bette acquaintance with the phyilgy theene gan ha been atal t the enim which Pe Cli5 cntemptu-uly call the ca Mateialim the avage.6 It linge, inee, in the lweintellectual egin. Nay, me, it i till wiely hel thee. Il y a e mt quilaut tue ence.7 An thi i ne them. My peent pint, hweve, i thatthi cae an vulga they i by n mean the nly m Mateialim. N

i it the m une which Mateialim i mt ptently wking in the wljut nw. Te me ubtle ctine which have aien upn the uin the lmateialitic hypthei ae, in all eential, ientical with it. Pitivim,8 Dete-minim, an much that pae cuent a Agnticim,9 ae mee vaietie Mateialim; ublimate expein it, pehap, but tue expein, havingin them the t the matte. Nw hee I am cnciu a i culty. I it ai,ne may be ake, t impe the name Mateialit upn the wh, me


6/27


le enegetically, epuiate it? I think it i ai, an, me, that it i a uty, i thename tuly ecibe them. ake, example, the late M. Cli. A we have

jut een, he eject emphatically the cue Mateialim the avage, but nlyt ubtitute a Mateialim which i, inee, me efne, but which i al, ait eem t me, me iatinal. Hi / bigaphe, M. Feeick Pllck,10 claimthat hi view i, in tuth, iealitic mnim, a vey ubtle m iealim,11 an

pint ut that hi cnceptin the ultimate eality i min, nt min a weknw it in the cmplex m thught an eeling, but the imple element which thught an eeling ae built up.12 Well, cue, Mateialim aectt be mnitic,13 it eek t explain the whle univee in tem matte. But

hw i M. Cli mnim iealitic? Te element which even the impleteeling i a cmplex he call min-tu.14 Matte, he tell u, i the mentalpictue which min i the thing epeente. Rean, intelligence, an vli-tin ae ppetie a cmplex, which i mae up element, themelve ntatinal, nt intelligent, nt cnciu.15 I it pible, M. Pllck himel being

juge, t call thi ctine iealim? Ti min-tu, which, we ae tl, i thething-in-itel, which a mving mlecule ganic matte pee a mall

piece, an which, when matte take the cmplex m a living human bain,take the m a human cnciune, having intelligence an vlitin16 hw i it pible t accunt thi min-tu a anything but matte? Again,cnie the teaching Pe Huxley. With whateve hetical namenthe may gil it, what i it pactical utcme but Mateialim? I am well awae

hi pinin that the quetin whethe thee i eally anything anthpm-phic, even in man natue,17 will eve emain an pen ne. I nt le ight hi ecgnitin the neceity cheihing the nblet an mt human man emtin by whip, the mt pat the ilent t, at the alta the Unknwn an Unknwable.18 But, n the the han, I emembe hi pi-tive eclaatin that cnciune i a unctin nevu matte, when thatnevu matte ha attaine a cetain egee ganiatin.19 I emembe, t,hi cnfent anticipatin that we hall ne late aive at a mechanicalequivalent cnciune, jut a we have aive at a mechanical equivalent heat.20 An I nt get that ingulaly pweul paage in hiLay Sermons 21 wh that ha nce ea it can get it? in which he ence what he eemthe geat tuth, that the pge cience ha in all age meant, an nw me

than eve mean, the extenin the pvince what we call matte an cau-atin, an the cncmitant gaual banihment, m all egin humanthught, what we call piit an pntaneity; that a uely a evey utuegw ut the pat an peent, will the phyilgy the utue gauallyexten the ealm matte an law until it i cextenive with knwlege, witheeling, with actin.22 Once me. Let u tun t a teache me wiely inu-ential, pehap, than even M. Huxley. I mean M. Hebet Spence.23 He, t,


7/27

Lilly, Materialism and Morality 219

ecgnie an unknwn an unknwable pwe withut beginning / en intime.24 He tell u expely in hi Psychology25that cnciune cannt be ame mvement, an that i we mut che between thee tw me being, a the geneative an pimitive me, it wul be the ft, an nt thelat, which he wul che. Tee aying cetainly nt un like Mateial-im. I think, hweve, that i we clely examine hi witing, we hall fn the

peitence ce hi ne mula. With that he will bing yu lie ut the nn-living; mality ut the unethical; the piitual ut the phyical.Te peitence ce! I tut it will nt eem t exhibit an unappeciativene,

which I am a m eeling, the high gi an unweaie el-evtin thi

eminent man, i I ay that he ha alway appeae t me t belng t a cla thinke aptly ecibe in ne Vltaie lette: e gen qui e mettent, anacn, an la place e Dieu: qui veulent ce le mne avec la pale.26 But thiauttheim i eally Mateialim in iguie. I all being, all me an m exitence, ae but tanmatin ce, beying nly mechanical law, thelaw mvement an that i what M. Spence ctine amunt t, i theei any meaning in w what i the univee but a enele mechanim?

But my peent inquiy i nt i the teaching, whethe the late M. Cli, M. Huxley, M. Hebet Spence, i tue, but what that teaching eally i. An

my cntentin i that all thee thee gie men, whm I elect a type a ht le amu wite wiely inuential n Englih thught, mut in tictnebe eckne a Mateialit. All thee , in eect, expe the entie man by mat-te, hi intellectual an mal being a well a hi cpal ame. All thee , ineect, etict u knwlege t the phenmenal univee, which cnciu-ne an will ae, them, tuitu neceay puct.

I cnie, then, that i we uvey the highe thught Eupe, a a whle, wemut fn it lagely given ve t Mateialim. An i we tun t the me ppulaliteatue, in which i the tuet expein ciety, the ame tale i unle.

What a ptent i that lage an eve-gwing chl natualitic fctin which M. Zla27 i the hnue an ppeu chie, an which i eagelyea, an lagely imitate, thughut the civilie wl! ute mtaphy-ique mpuvante28 that mate tell u. Hi wk, he claim, ae cnceive inthe tue cientifc piit. Matte i him the nly eality, an in it hnuhe aie pan like the hiek a hyna at icveing that the univee i allactually cain.29 But it i nt meely in the liteatue the etic pain, an


8/27


the genetic impule, that the mak the beat i plainly viible. Hw manya gave wite u ay ha acquie a eputatin iginality imply upnthe tength a antatic phyical teminlgy! Intea intellect, he peak nevu cente; intea lie, the play cellula activitie; intea mental enegy, ceebal eethim. An hi eae, piquing themelve n theiitut eveything utie the phee what they call act, / will wne

with a lih ace paie.30 In tuth evey banch intellectual activity beawitne t the avance Mateialim in the ppula min; t the ying ut the l piitual an ieal type. Tu, in plitic, we ee the minatin thebute ce numbe, majitie tl by hea, becming almt eveywhee

an accmplihe act. Te intinct an pain the mae, wh ae littleme than matte in mtin, ae accepte a the upeme law, in the place jutice an vitue, ean an eligin. At, t, ha bwe he ace heat the Mateialitic yke. It ha been well emake that in the pictue thel mate yu have nt meely a natual cene, but the ul the painte whlke upn it. Tat attibute ul i peciely what ha been teaily yingut m men at, a the phyical cience have me an me impe theiway upn u way thinking an u habit lie. Te tue unctin theatit, a the metaphyician, i t eek the ean an eence thing. But

while t the philphe thi ean an eence ae eveale in a pinciple, in ageneal cnceptin, t the atit they ae eveale in a cncete m, a inivi-ual beauty. Bth ae eeke ae tuth; but the beautiul i the plenu the

tue, an the ene beauty i the light the intellect. Mateialim quenchethat light. All that the atit nw uually aim at, i t cpy exactly, t epucephenmena. An hee, inee, he attain me meaue ucce, epecially ithe phenmena be the lupanaian31 e. Well ha M. Rukin pnuncethe at u wn time t be a p ty, petty vile. 32 Pehap it ptait aeit mt valuable achievement. But thei value i athe hitical than atitic;they tell thei wn tale abut the men an wmen the age. What that tale i,a itinguihe Fench painte33 nt lng ag pinte ut. Tey ae the abtactan bie chnicle, he beve, in which i witten the piitual hity ucentuy. Duing the ft hal it, the neck i thwn back, the hea i uptunetwa heaven, a i in quet me ieal viin. A we aw twa u wnay the neck cntact, the hea ink neae the hule, a thugh by the

intinctive mvement a bull gatheing himel up the cmbat. It i becauethe battle lie ha becme me intene, becaue the min i cncentateupn the mateial inteet the wl. Te habit thught cuiu veifca-tin a law Dawin34 ha tanme the phyical habit. A mt elicatean enitive intellect t whm Bitih Philitinim, with it cetitue e mau-

vai gt,35 ha lagely pai the hmage it cntumely an cn nte theame act in hi wn way. Te ubtitutin the law ea matte thelaw the mal natue, the ubjectin the ul t thing, cae lhmme


9/27

Lilly, Materialism and Morality 221

piituel, penalie lhmme36 i, a Amiel37 icene, the minant ten-ency the time. It appea t me that i yu uvey the civilie wl yu /fn eveywhee the ame tken. Eveywhee I nte the pactical tiumph that eath-t-eath philphy which will ee nthing beyn expeience, whichhut the appach cience t all that cannt be weighe an meaue.Eveywhee liteatue an at ae ling themelve in the mt vulga enuu-ne. Lk thughut Eupe, an what, in evey cunty, ae the geat majity the eucate clae, wh give the tne t the et? Sceptic in eligin, ubt-e in ethic, given ve t inutialim, an t the exact cience which minitet it, epecting nthing but accmplihe act an palpable ce, with neveme enitive than thei heat, eeking t ean the platitue exitence by ame le vluptuu theticim, a me le puient henim. Such aethe men thi new age. Te intellectual atmphee i chage with Mateial-im: an beathe that atmphee we mut, whethe we will n.

Nw the quetin which I wul invite my eae t pne i, What, inuch an age, i the ppect bee u a ega the ethical cnceptin upn

which ciety ha a yet exite? Can they live in thi blighte ai? An, withutthem, what will becme the mal lie mankin?

Tee ae eminent pen, I am well awae, t whm thee cncluin will be

extemely itateul. Wite, whe name alne u ce t etablih a claimupn u epectul attentin, icue t u inepenent mality. Pe- Huxley, a I emembe, mewhee ptet with chaacteitic vehemence, I

will nt a mment amit that mality i nt tng enugh t hl it wn.38Ae all, hweve, the vital quetin i nt what thi accmplihe phyicit willamit, but what, m the natue the cae, i likely t happen. N ubt Pe- Huxley, emancipate m belie in angel piit, till guie himel by theame ethical ule a bee. I nt myel knw anything the ealy hity thi illutiu man. But I uppe that, like the et u, he wa bught upupn the Catechim. At all event, I am quite ue that he i the puct manygeneatin Chitian pgenit. What M. Renan happily call the mal ap the l belie la ve male e la vieille cyance 39 till cue thugh

hi piitual being. Hi Mateialim take ceit vitue pinging m quiteanthe uce: Miatuque nva ne et nn ua pma.40 He knw, a bet-te than I , the inuence heeity an envinment upn chaacte. / Hei well awae hw eeply te in the pat ae the ethical pinciple wheebyhuman lie i till lagely gvene, even amng mateialit. Te quetin i, can

yu upt the pinciple, an expect them t uih upn a quite ieentil? Mality, in Pe Huxley, I can well believe, i tng enugh t hlit wn. But will it be tng enugh in Pe Huxley geat-ganchilen?


10/27


11/27

223

Thomas Henry Huxley Science and Morals,

Fortnightly Review (December 1886), pp. 78992,

796, 798, 8002.

Ae the manne a meival iputant, M. Lilly pt up thee thee, which,a he cnceive, emby the chie heeie ppagate by the late Pe Cli-,1 M. Hebet Spence,2 an myel. He ay that we agee (1) in puttingaie, a unveifable, eveything which the ene cannt veiy; (2) eveythingbeyn the bun phyical cience; (3) eveything which cannt be bughtint a labaty an ealt with chemically (p. 578).3

My lamente yung ien Cli, weetet natue thugh keenet iputant, i ut each u little cntveie, but hi wk peak him,an the wh un may ea a eutatin M. Lilly aetin in them. M.Hebet Spence, hithet, ha hwn n lack eithe ability inclinatint peak himel; an it wul be a upeuity, nt t ay an impetinence,n my pat t take up the cugel him. But, myel, i my knwlege my wn cnciune may be aume t be aequate (an I make nt the leat

petenin t acquaintance with what ge n in my Unbewutein),4 I maybe pemitte t beve that the ft ppitin appea t me t be nt tue;that the ecn i in the ame cae; an that, i thee be gaatin in untue-ne, the thi i mntuly untue that it hve n the vege abuity,even i it e nt actually une in that lgical limb. Tu, t all thee the-e, I eply in apppiate ahin, Nego I ay N; an I pcee t tate thegun that negatin, which the ppietie nt pemit me t make quite emphatic a I cul eie.

Let me begin with the ft aetin, that I put aie, a unveifable, evey-thing which the ene cannt veiy. Can uch a tatement a thi be eiulymae in epect any human being? But I am nt appinte aplgit man-kin in geneal; an cnfning my bevatin t myel, I beg leave t pint utthat, at thi peent mment, I entetain an unhakable cnvictin that M. Lillyi the victim a patent an enmu miunetaning, an that I have ntthe lightet intentin putting that cnvictin aie becaue I cannt veiy


12/27


it eithe by tuch, tate, mell, heaing, ight, which (in the abence any tace telepathic aculty) make up the ttality my ene.

Again, I may ventue t amie the clea an vigu Englih in whichM. Lilly embie hi view; but the uce that amiatin e nt lie inanything which my fve ene enable me t icve in the page hi aticle,an which an ang-utang might be jut a acutely enible. N, it lie in anappeciatin liteay m an lgical tuctue by thetic an intellectual/ acultie which ae nt ene, an which ae nt unequently aly wanting

whee the ene ae in ull vigu. My p elatin may beat me in the matte enatin; but I am quite cnfent that, when tyle an yllgim ae t be

ealt with, he i nwhee.I thee i anything in the wl which I fmly believe in, it i the univeal valiity the law cauatin; but that univeality cannt be pve by anyamunt expeience, let alne that which cme t u thugh the ene. An,

when an et vlitin change the cuent my thught, when an ieacall up anthe aciate iea, I have nt the lightet ubt that the pcet which the ft the phenmena, in each cae, i ue tan in the elatin caue t the ecn. Yet the attempt t veiy thi belie by enatin wul behee lunacy. Nw I am quite ue that M. Lilly e nt ubt my anity; an thenly altenative eem t be the amiin that hi ft ppitin i eneu.

Te ecn thei chage me with putting aie a unveifable eveythingbeyn the bun phyical cience. Again, I ay N. Nby, I imagine, will

ceit me with a eie t limit the empie phyical cience, but I eally eelbun t cne that a geat many vey amilia an, at the ame time, extemelyimptant phenmena lie quite beyn it legitimate limit. I cannt cnceive, example, hw the phenmena cnciune, a uch an apat m the

phyical pce by which they ae calle int exitence, ae t be bught withinthe bun phyical cience. ake the implet pible example, the eeling ene. Phyical cience tell u that it cmmnly aie a a cnequence mlecula change ppagate m the eye t a cetain pat the ubtance the bain, when vibatin the luminieu ethe5 a cetain chaacte allupn the etina. Let u uppe the pce phyical analyi puhe athat ne cul view the lat link thi chain mlecule, watch thei mve-ment a i they wee billia ball, weigh them, meaue them, an knw all that

i phyically knwable abut them. Well, even in that cae, we hul be jut aa m being able t inclue the eulting phenmenn cnciune, theeeling ene, within the bun phyical cience, a we ae at peent.It wul emain a unlike the phenmena we knw une the name mattean mtin a it i nw. I thee i any plain tuth upn which I have mae it mybuine t init ve an ve again it i thi an whethe it i a tuth nt,my initence upn it leave nt a haw jutifcatin M. Lilly aetin.


13/27

Huxley, Science and Morals 225

But I ak in thi cae al, hw i it cnceivable that any man, in pein all hi natual acultie, hul hl uch an pinin? I nt uppe thatI am exceptinally enwe becaue I have all / my lie enjye a keen pecep-tin the beauty ee u by natue an by at. Nw phyical cience mayan pbably will, me ay, enable u pteity t et th the exact phyicalcncmitant an cnitin the tange aptue beauty. But, i eve thatay aive, the aptue will emain, jut a it i nw, utie an beyn the

phyical wl; an, even in the mental wl, mething upe-ae t meeenatin. I nt wih t cw unuly ve my humble cuin the ang, butin the thetic pvince, a in that the intellect, I am aai he i nwhee. Iubt nt he wul etect a uit amit a wilene leave whee I cul eenthing; but I am tleably cnfent that he ha neve been awetuck, a I havebeen, by the im eligiu glm, a a temple evte t the eathg, thetpical et which he inhabit. Yet I ubt nt that u p lng-ame anht-legge ien, a he it meitatively munching hi uian uit, ha me-thing behin that a Scatic ace hi, which i uttely beyn the bun phyical cience. Phyical cience may knw all abut hi clutching the uitan munching it an igeting it, an hw the phyical titillatin hi palatei tanmitte t me miccpic cell the gey matte hi bain. But theeeling weetne an atiactin which, a mment, hang ut theiignal light in hi melanchly eye, ae a uttely utie the bun phyica i the fne enzy a human hapit.

De M. Lilly eally believe that, putting me aie, thee i any man withthe eeling muic in him wh ibelieve in the eality the elight which heeive m it, becaue that elight lie utie the bun phyical cience,nt le than utie the egin the mee ene heaing? But, it may be, thathe inclue muic, painting, an culptue une the hea phyical cience,an in that cae I can nly eget I am unable t llw him in hi ennblement my avuite puuit.

Te thi thei un that I put aie a unveifable eveything which can-nt be bught int a labaty an ealt with chemically; an, nce me, Iay N. Ti wnu allegatin i n nvelty; it ha nt unequently eacheme m that egin whee gentle ( ungentle) ulne en hl uncheckeway the pulpit. But I mavel t fn that a wite M. Lilly intelligencean g aith i willing t athe uch a watel. I I am t eal with the thingeiuly, I fn myel met by ne the tw hn a ilemma. Eithe memeaning, a unknwn t uage a t the ictinaie, attache t labaty anchemical, the ppitin i (what am I t ay in my e nee a gentle an

yet apppiate w?) well unhitical.De M. Lilly uppe that I put aie a unveifable all the tuth

mathematic, phillgy, hity? An, i I nt, / will he have the geatgne t ay hw the binmial theem i t be ealt with chemically, even in


14/27


the bet appinte labaty; whee the balance an cucible ae kept bywhich the vaiu theie the natue the Baque language may be tete; what eagent will extact the tuth m any given Hity Rme, an leavethe e behin a a eiual calx?6

I eally cannt anwe thee quetin, an unle M. Lilly can, I think hewul well heeae t think me than twice bee attibuting uch pe-pteu ntin t hi ellw-men, wh, ae all, a a leane cunel ai, aevetebate animal.

Te whle thing peplexe me much; an I am ue thee mut be an explana-tin which will leave M. Lilly eputatin cmmn ene an ai ealinguntuche. Can it be I put thi wa quite tentatively that M. Lilly i

the victim a cnuin, cmmn enugh amng thughtle peple, an intwhich he ha allen unawae? Obviuly, it i ne thing t ay that the lgicalmeth phyical cience ae univeal applicability, an quite anthe ta m that all ubject thught lie within the pvince phyical cience. Ihave en eclae my cnvictin that thee i nly ne meth by which intel-lectual tuth can be eache, whethe the ubject-matte invetigatin belngt the wl phyic t the wl cnciune; an ne the agu-ment in avu the ue phyical cience a an intument eucatin whichI have enet ue i that, in my pinin, it execie yung min in the appe-ciatin inuctive evience bette than any the tuy. But while I epeat mycnvictin that the phyical cience pbably unih the bet an mt eailyappeciable illutatin the ne an iniviible me acetaining tuth by

the ue ean, I beg leave t a that I have neve thught uggeting thatthe banche knwlege may nt a the ame icipline; an auely Ihave neve given the lightet gun the attibutin t me the iiculucntentin that thee i nthing tue utie the bun phyical cience.

leably ealy in lie, I icvee that ne the unpanable in, in theeye mt peple, i a man t peume t g abut unlabelle. Te wlega uch a pen a the plice an unmuzzle g, nt une ppe cn-tl. I cul fn n label that wul uit me, , in my eie t ange myelan be epectable, I invente ne; an, a the chie thing I wa ue wa thatI i nt knw a geat many thing that the it an the ite abut me p-ee t be amilia with, I calle myel an Agntic. Suely n enminatincul be me met me apppiate; an I cannt imagine why I hulbe evey nw an then hale ut my euge an eclae metime t be aMateialit, metime an Atheit, metime a Pitivit;7 an metime, alaan alack, a cwaly eactinay Obcuantit.


15/27

Huxley, Science and Morals 227

Te gwth cience, nt meely phyical cience, but all cience, meanthe emntatin e an natual cauatin amng phenmena whichha nt peviuly been bught une the cnceptin. Nby wh iacquainte with the pge cientifc thinking in evey epatment human knwlege, in the cue the lat tw centuie, will be ipe teny that immene pvince have been ae t the ealm cience; tubt, that the next tw centuie will be witnee a vatly geate annexa-tin. Me paticulaly in the egin the phyilgy the nevu ytem, iit jutifable t cnclue m the pge that ha been mae in analying theelatin between mateial an pychical phenmena, that vat uthe avance

will be mae; an that, ne late, all the -calle pntaneu peatin the min will have, nt nly thei elatin t ne anthe, but thei elatint phyical phenmena, cnnecte in natual eie caue an eect, tictlyefne. In the w, while, at peent, we knw nly the neae miety thechain caue an eect, by which the phenmena we call mateial give ie tthe which we call mental; heeae, we hall get t the uthe en the eie.

Tu, t cme, at lat, t the eally imptant pat all thi icuin, i thebelie in a G i eential t mality, phyical cience e n btacle theet;i the belie in immtality i eential t mality, phyical cience ha n me

t ay againt the pbability that ctine than the mt inay expeienceha, an it eectually cle the muth the wh peten t eute it / bybjectin euce m meely phyical ata. Finally, i the belie in the uncau-ene vlitin i eential t mality, the tuent phyical cience ha nme t ay againt that abuity than the lgical philphe thelgian.Phyical cience, I epeat, i nt invent eteminim, an the eteminiticctine wul tan n jut a fm a unatin a it e i thee wee n

phyical cience. Let any ne wh ubt thi ea Jnathan Ewa,8 wheemntatin ae eive whlly m philphy an thelgy.

Tu, when M. Lilly, like anthe Slmn Eagle, ge abut pclaimingWe t thi wicke city,9 an enuncing phyical cience a the evil geniu

men ay mthe mateialim, an atalim, an all t the cn-emnable im I ventue t beg him t lay the blame n the ight hule;, at leat, t put in the ck, alng with Science, the inul ite he,Philphy an Telg y, wh, being much le, hul have knwn bettethan the p Cineella the chl an univeitie ve which they have lng minate. N ubt men ciety i ieae enugh; but then it ent ie m le civiliatin in that epect. Scietie men ae ement-ing mae, an a bee ha what the Geman call Obehee an Untehee,10 evey ciety that ha exite ha ha it cum at the tp an it eg at the


16/27


bttm; an I ubt i any the age aith ha le cum le eg, even hwe a pptinally geate quantity un whleme tu in the

vat. I think it wul puzzle M. Lilly, any ne ele, t auce cnvincing evi-ence that, at any pei the wl hity, thee wa a me wiepeaene cial uty, a geate ene jutice, the bligatin mutualhelp, than in thi Englan u. Ah! but, ay M. Lilly, thee ae all puct u Chitian inheitance; when Chitian gma vanih vitue will iap-

pea t, an the ancetal ape an tige will have ull play. But thee ae a gmany peple wh think it bviu that Chitianity al inheite a g ealm Paganim an m Juaim, an that, i the Stic an the Jew evkethei bequet, the mal ppety Chitianity wul ealie vey little. An, imality ha uvive the tipping eveal et clthe which have beenun t ft baly, why hul it nt be able t get n vey well in the light anhany gament which Science i eay t pvie?

But thi by the way. I the ieae ciety cnit in the weakne itaith in the exitence the G the thelgian, in a utue tate, an inuncaue vlitin, the inicatin, a the ct ay, i t uppe Telgyan Philphy, whe bickeing abut thing which they knw nthinghave been the pime caue an cntinual utenance that evil cepticim whichi the Nemei meling with the unknwable. /

Cineella i metly cnciu he ignance thee high matte. Shelight the fe, weep the hue, an pvie the inne; an i ewae by

being tl that he i a bae ceatue, evte t lw an mateial inteet. But,in he gaet, he ha aiy viin ut the ken the pai hew wh aequaelling wntai. She ee the e which pevae the eeming ie the wl; the geat ama evlutin, with it ull hae pity an te,but al with abunant gne an beauty, unll itel bee he eye; anhe lean, in he heat heat, the len, that the unatin mality it have ne, nce an all, with lying; t give up petening t believe that which thee i n evience, an epeating unintelligible ppitin abutthing beyn the pibilitie knwlege.

She knw that the aety mality lie neithe in the aptin thi that philphical peculatin, thi that thelgical cee, but in a eal anliving belie in that fxe e natue which en cial iganiatin upn

the tack immality, a uely a it en phyical ieae ae phyical te-pae. An that fm an lively aith it i he high miin t be the piete.


17/27

229

William Samuel Lilly, The Province of Physics,Fortnightly Review (February 1887), pp. 2789,2812, 2835, 2878, 2923.

Nw the main pint at iue between Pe Huxley an myel i, whetheI am ight in eckning him amng teache Mateialim. He ptet thati he may tut hi wn knwlege hi wn thught, thi i an e theft magnitue.* But uely the quetin i nt abut Pe Huxley wnknwlege / hi wn thught. It i a t the bviu meaning an pacti-cal cnequence the w t which he ha cmmitte himel in pint, an

which he i nt in the leat ipe t etact. I, a I believe when I wte mypapeMaterialism and Morality, an a I till believe ae the mt caeul tuy Pe Huxley citicim upn it, thee ae amng the w many tate-ment which cmmit him t the ctine, that i enugh my vinicatin,

enugh the explanatin which Pe Huxley eek m me. Shul itappea that the Pe, in the an pehap cntiguu tatement, ha cm-mitte himel t Iealim, the quetin might then aie whethe he hel bthctine imultaneuly in uccein. But I ubmit it wul be n agumentagaint hi having, by ce tem, uenee t Mateialim, that he haneve, in hi wn min, intene t , that he ha bee aewa

peache Iealim. Rathe it wul illutate what ha been well pinte utby a ecent vey clea-heae wite, wh, like myel, geatly amie PeHuxley high gi: It i jut becaue cience ha pivate pinin it wn,

jut becaue it cnvictin the elativity knwlege, jut becaue theieitible agument Iealim, that it get int a mule. It ha cially t

pe Realim, an cvetly t ecgnie Iealim. It then et abut lving

the pblem thei ecnciliatin, by tating it in tem which ae applicablet the ft nly. Pe Huxley, in hi Lay Sermon n the Phyical Bai Lie, ppe t lea hi heae thugh the teity vital phenmena tthe mateialitic lugh, an then t pint ut the path exticatin. My cn-

* P. 788. Cke. Creeds o the Day, vl. ii., p. 200. Lay Sermons, p. 139 (fh eitin).


18/27


tentin i that a lage numbe hi tuent I believe the vat majity anthei name i legin, ae le by him int the mateialitic lugh neve t emegem it. Sme elicacy iciminatin, nt cmmnly un in the aveageeae t-ay, i equie in e t ealie that Pe Huxley mateial-itic language i eally meant t be nt me than metaphical; that it implienly wking hypthee, which nee nt in the leat be tuth act.

An nw a t Pe Huxley Mateialim. In the ft place I beve that

I cannt quite accept hi efnitin the tem. It uit hi agument, unque-tinably; but it i t naw. He ay Mateialim amunt t thi: Tat theei nthing in thi univee but matte an ce; an that all the phenomenao nature are explicable by deduction om the properties assignable to these two

actors.* I eject the ecn hal thi efnitin the w which I haveput in italic a unneceay an a incect. A Mateialit may ay, I canntexplain the pce by which cetain puct matte an ce cme abut,but I maintain that they ae puct thee tw act nly, an nt a thiieent m them. Many pehap mt Mateialit wul gant that theycannt unetan hw mlecula actin puce thught; but all the ame,they cnten that thee i n caue thught except matte. Pe Huxleyknw that jut a well a I , an pbably much bette. O cue the vitue

the aving claue in hi efnitin i plain enugh. He agee with the Mateialita t theact igin. Mateial change ae the caue pychical phenmena.But i yu ay, Dea me; that un uncmmnly like Mateialim, he tunun inignantly an exclaim, Nego I ay N: the ppietie nt pemitme t make the negatin quite emphatic a I cul eie; I neve ai I culexplain hw they ae the caue: I cannt cnceive hw the phenmena cn-ciune ae t be bught within the bun phyical cience, an th.He gant that tate cnciune ae bught int exitence by mleculachange. Yet, all that, yu mut nt ay that he teache Mateialim, becauehe cannt explain the pce. Why, wh can explain the pce by which lightbecme heat, heat becme electicity? An wh i theeby hinee maeting that heat, light, an electicity ae in thei natue phyical, nt py-

chical? It i a quetin the natue thing, nt explaining the pce bywhich ne puce anthe. I, in act, mlecula change puce tate cnciune, be the pce what it may lng a it e nt bing in a newnn-phyical caue we ae neceaily lane in Mateialim. Nw with all p-

* P. 793. P. 797. P. 78990.


19/27

Lilly, Te Province o Physics 231

ible eeence Pe Huxley knwlege hi tate cnciune,I mut tick t my text that thi vey Mateialim i cntaine in, an llw bytictet euctin m, hi pinte / tatement.

Once me, Pe Huxley maintain that cnciune, in cetain mat any ate, i a ceebal unctin.* Te tatement i me guae than ne

which wa put wa by him me yea ag in quelling M. Dawin cit-ic.1 He then cntene that a / electic ce an light wave ae expein

mlecula change, cnciune i, in the ame ene, an expein themlecula change which take place in that nevu matte which i the gan cnciune. S in witing in thi Review in Nvembe, 1874, he lai it wnthat the cnciune bute wul appea t be elate t the mechanim thei bie, imply a a cllateal puct it wking. 2 An it i quite cleam the whle the pape in which thee w ccu that he e nt allw any ieence in thi matte between men an the bute, a t which I quiteagee with him. I nt knw the pecie bject value the limiting w

which he nw ue: in cetain m, at any ate. I take it that we may aily ceithim with the ppitin, which, inee, he appea t gant, that cnciunei a unctin the bain. An what e he mean by unctin? He eplie, Wecall unctin that eect, eie eect, which eult m the activity an

gan. Vey well. We will take that efnitin. An nw let u g a tep athe. Pe Huxley the whle man, except hi by, cnit tate cnciune. S much i clea. talk a penality which uneliethe tate, exit in them, appea t him a etun t an eete mythlgy.**Cnciune i the man, a th a he i man an nt mee ea matte.Teee it i n exaggeatin t ay that n thi they the bain make theman that man i the eult bain, a ceebal unctin. An what i thebain except a little gey matte in a cetain egee cmplexity? Shall we betl that cnciune i imply the puct the activity a mateial gan,an at the ame time be bien, une pain the tnget anathema whichthe ppietie pemit, t call thi ctine Mateialim? What i Mateialimi thi i nt? Nay, nay, ay Pe Huxley, nt at; in that ene, we ae all

Mateialit. We ae all agee that cnciune i a unctin matte, an

* P. 796. Contemporary Review, vl. xviii. p. 465. Science and Morals, p. 796. P. 797. Lay Sermons, p. 327.** Science and Morals, p. 796.


20/27


that paticula tenet mut be given up a a mak Mateialim.* An he imagi-ne me t meet hi paallel, awn m the puctin mucula mtin, bycnceing that n phyilgit, hweve piitual hi leaning, eam up-

ping that imple enatin equie a piit thei puctin. PeHuxley mut pan me. Tat wul nt at all be my way ejining. What

phyilgit hl I am nt jut nw cncene t acetain. But pychlgital eal with imple enatin, an I am quite ue that I am nt the le u-

viv the chl which peceive a ieence between ea an living mucle,which attibute the tate cnciune calle pain t living an / nt t eamucle, an which, theee, a m in living mucle the exitence an imma-

teial vital pinciple in ht, piit, the abence which it i that makeea mucle, an ene pain impible in uch. Senatin, hweve imple,appea t me t be nt a phyical act, nt a neve act, but a mental act.PacePe Huxley, we have nt yet quite ne with that whlly upeuu fc-tin. Still le have pychlgit cncee that a fctin it i. I cetainly canntallw that animal lie, cntituting cetain tate cnciune, i ue t amateial ganim in which nthing immateial eie. I thi immateial t becalle piit? Why nt?

Meve it mut nt be gtten that Pe Huxley, wh itinguihe

the mment between phyical cience an all cience, ha witten elewhee, Ithee i ne thing clea abut the pge men cience, it i the tenencyt euce all cientifc pblem, except the which ae puely mathematical,t quetin mlecula phyic that i t ay, t the attactin, epulin,mtin, an cinatin the ultimate paticle matte. Let him bea

with me i I ak him whethe mental pblem pblem cnciune ae cientifc nt? I they ae, then the clea tenency men cience appve, a i maniet, by Pe Huxley i t euce them t pblem mlecula phyic, which, tuly, i it cul be ne, wul make the empie matte an ce univeal. N i thee any the way banihing piit anpntaneity m human thught. But t take the the altenative, will Pe-

Huxley ay that pblem cnciune ae nt cientifc? In vaiu pat hi pape in the Decembe Fortnightly he init, with inignant emphai,that he e nt peten t bing the phenmena cnciune within thebun phyical cience. Teee, it wul eem they ae nt cientifc at

* P. 797. P. 797. Lay Sermons, p. 166.


21/27


all; a he ha tl u, in w jut nw qute, it i the tenency mencience t bing allcientifc pblem within the bun. Gant them nt tbe cientifc, an hw will the pvince matte an ce be mae t incluethem? In n way; an then thee will be a limit t the extenin that pv-ince: it will neve becme cnteminu with all egin human thught. It

wul be like the liing a g i Pe Huxley wul tell u which theeging altenative he ppe t een. I pychlgy a cience? I it euc-ible t mlecula phyic? I nt uch a euctin tantamunt t Mateialim? Ievey pblem, tancenental an the, t be lve by the meth phyicalcience? O ae thee egin human thught whee phyic cannt fn an

entance? F i thee be, in uch we may fn m piit nay, pehap, even pntaneity. At any ate, univeal / cauatin, eucible t the pulling anpuhing the fnal paticle matte, will have t be given up, Mateialim, which thi ctine i the expein, mut be accepte.

Pe Huxley, hweve, ientife the gwth cience with the exten-in natual cauatin, an he ully acquiece in the tenency t euce allcientifc pblem t the mlecula phyic. I it miepeenting him, then the wite, I mean, nt the inne cnciune the iniviual man t aetthat he put aie a unveifable eveything which cannt, by me pce the, be veife by the ene? Again, it i hi pinin that a uely a eveyutue gw ut pat an peent, will the phyilgy the utue gau-ally exten the ealm matte an law, until it i cextenive with knwlege,

with eeling, with actin.* It appea, then, that t exten the ealm mattean law i ne an the ame thing. Matte, law, e, univeal cauatin tay ne i t imply the et. But it i the ene which eal with matte. I thee inthing beyn matte, thee i nthing which the ene cannt veiy, nth-ing beyn the bun phyical cience, nthing which cannt be bughtint a labaty an ealt with chemically. I the pblem cnciune lieune the juiictin phyical cience, ipso acto they ae ubject t the lawan tet mlecula phyic. Hw i it miepeenting Pe Huxley tebit him with the cncluin hi wn pemie?

Te Cee Science. Te elatin cience t mal. Emplying the temphyic, a le pen t ambiguity, I am hee bught back t what I ai at thebeginning, that phyic, a uch, i nt cnveant with mal, neithe a mn enie eligin, an can theee have n cee in ega t eithe. We nt talk the eligin the ene heaing, n it ieligin; uch

* Lay Sermons, p. 142.


22/27


an expein wul be abu. In like manne phyic, which i whlly the ci-ence the ene, abtact m eligin, m mality, an m evey kin knwlege a a the latte i inepenent ene. I ay abtact m,I nt ay eject, epuiate, enie. Phyical cience meely attent it wn buine, an it i n pat it buine t eal with what the lateM. Lewe3 enminate the metempiical. It i nt Agntic, Agnticimimplie a knwlege ne wn ignance; an phyical cience e nt knwthat it i ignant, any me than a mlluc knw that it i nt mal. It i wn-eul hw much ha been mae ut t the pejuice eligin a mality,m the bviu cann lgic that, evey cience having it ppe bject, the

ppe bject phyic e nt inclue G the mal e. Science, allcience, ha n the tength thi been ecibe a htile t metaphyicalpinciple, t belie in a Penal Deity, an t an priori tana ethic.Htile, phyical cience i nt; inieent, it i an ught t be. Pe Hux-ley ak, in what labaty quetin thetic an hitical tuth can betete? In nne, a we bth agee. But it i cuiu that he hul think ae-guaing mality by mean that cience which cannt even attain t the law hitical citicim. He will, pehap, aue me that I mitake him again. Well,I nt mitake in aeting that he cnie phyical cience a bette guaian mality than the pai hew, philphy an thelgy. I will ay whattike me n that pint, an cnclue thi pape, which ha extene abeyn what I ppe t myel when I began t wite it. But whethe ne

agee with Pe Huxley iagee, hi page ae acinating that it ii cult t tea neel away m them.Te mality an act, we mut all uely amit, i nt a phyical quality; it

eie in the mtive, an again in the natue the act; whethe, namely, the lat-te i cnmable t a tana peectin which the min alne appehen.Te utwa eect tw actin may be peciely imila, a when an aainlay hi victim an an executine / hang a cnvicte ciminal. But ne theeact will be ul mue; the the a ighteu minitatin etibutive jutice.

Will Pe Huxley pint ut any cience which i nt a pat philphy thelgy, an i yet cmpetent t iciminate between thee tw act? Whatcan cience a m abut them unle it becme philphy thelg y? Nth-ing whateve. Phyical cience peceive nly that which the ene gap; an the

ene knw nthing jutice injutice. I it by phyic that we knw whencial iganizatin i the cnequence immality? I tw nt. phyicthe ee a Wellingtn4 an a Genghiz Khan5 ae mlecula change, ann me. Phyical cience may peict that i cetain phyical actin take place,cetain phyical tuctue will be injue bken up. But it can neve tell whati the mal quality the phyical actin. Te taint lepy may be cn-tacte by viciu habit, in the execie ublimet el-acifce. But can


23/27


cience inm u whethe Pe Damian,6 in hi eaul pin at Mlkai, hacntacte it becaue he i g becaue he i evil? Teee, I mut a m,that while phyical cience may be, an ught t be, the evant mality, itcan neve, in any ppe ene, be it guaian. Te nly eective guaian mality i eligin, which a it a anctin an a ewa, which incanate itin augut ymblim an utte it in ivine cmman all the they ae, aneve mut be, the vewhelming majity wh cannt lay hl an abtue

philphy, but nee t be taught a chilen. Phyical cience may inee makthe ieence, which in time becme utwa an viible, between the whcultivate mality an the wh tample it une t. But thee it cmpe-tency tp; it pwe intepetatin ae exhaute. What lie at the t the ieence it can neve tell. It ha n mean icening vitue vice, ant intut the age t it guiance wul be like aking ne way a blin giant.Tat he wa a giant wul be n cmpenatin hi want ight; an, i hethught himel all the me at libety becaue he peceive n hinance t hiactin, much the we wul it be the whm he agge alng withhim. I have applie the paable in the pape which Pe Huxley ha citi-cie. Phyical cience, apat m philphy an eligin, i inee a giant, butit i blin. An when it pcee uncientifcally t mulate it ignance inta cee, it i ing it bet nt t ubeve mality, but t uin it.


24/27

Nte t page 21718 283

Lilly, Materialism and Morality

1. Words ae gwn Vila in welh Night: William Shakespeare, welh Night,III.i.245, although the words are spoken by the Clown.

2. ile w, evant t hallw l: rom William Shakespeares 1594 narrative poemTe Rape Lucece, l. 1016.

3. t make the we ean appea the bette: the aim o sophistry, much criticized by Plato.4. a teache, nthing: Every great poet is a teacher. I wish to be considered as a teacher

or as nothing; Wordsworth (see note 3 to On the Application o the erms, above, p.251), as quoted by John Morley (18381923) in his introduction to Te Cmplete Peti-cal Wk William Wwth (London: Macmillan & Co., 1889), p. lix.

5. Pe Cli: William Kingdon Cliord (184579) was an English mathematician

and philosopher, noted here or his work on metaphysics, he was also one o the mostoutspoken o the evolutionary naturalists. Most o his written work was published post-humously.

6. the ca Mateialim the avage: a reerence to Cliords 1877 article or the Cntem-pay Review , Te Ethics o Belie , which was later republished inLectue an Eay the Late William Kingn Cli, FRS, ed. L. Stephen and F. Pollock, 2 vols (London:Macmillan, 1879), quotation vol. 1, p. 33.

7. Il y a e mt quil aut tue ence: there are dead that we must kill again.8. Pitivim: Positivism is the epistemological belie that the methods o science are those

best suited to discerning the processes by which not only physical events but also histori-cal and human events occur. In the nineteenth century it was closely associated with theFrench sociologist Auguste Comte (see the Lewes text on Comte above, pp. 3746), and

was particularly inuential among the small community o Philosophical Radicals whoassociated themselves with John Chapmans Wetminte Review.

9. Agnticim: Tomas Huxley (182595) had coined the term in 1869 to describe hisbelie that there was insu cient evidence to ascertain the existence o a God, but also anacknowledgement that an absence o evidence was not evidence o absence.

10. M. Feeick Pllck: Frederick A. Pollock (18451937), proessor o jurisprudenceat Oxord, was one o Cliords closest riends. Between them, he and Leslie Stephenedited Cliords papers aer his death and wrote the introduction to his 1879 Lectue

an Eay.11. iealitic mnim, a vey ubtle m iealim: see Pollocks introduction to Cliords

Lectue an Eay , vol. 1, p. 39.12. min, nt min ae built up: ibid., vol. 1, p. 50.13. mnitic: monism is the belie that all things, mind as well as matter, are ormed rom, or

can be explained in, like terms.14. even the implet min-tu : Pollocks introduction to Cliord, Lectue an Eay,

vol. 1, p. 50.

15. Matte nt cnciu: rom CliordsLectue an Eay , vol. 2, p. 87.16. a mving mlecule intelligence an vlitin: the quotation is by Cliord rom Pollocks

introduction to hisLectue an Eay , vol. 1, p. 50.17. whethe thee i in man natue: rom Huxleys On the Advisableness o Improv-

ing Natural Knowledge, A Lay Sermon delivered in Martins Hall on Sunday January7th, 1866, subsequently published in theFtnightly Review, Vlume III, Nvembe 15th1865Febuay 1t 1866(London: Chapman & Hall), pp. 62637.

18. the neceity Unknwn an Unknwable: ibid., p. 636.


25/27

284 Nte t page 21820

19. cnciune i a unctin ganizatin: rom Huxleys Mr. Darwins Critics, Cn-tempay Review, 18 (1871), pp. 44376, on p. 464.

20. we hall ne heat: rom Huxleys On Descartes Discourse ouching theMethod o Using Ones Reason Rightly, and o Seeking Scientifc ruth,MacMillan

Magazine, 22 (1870), pp. 6980, later republished in his Lay Semn, Aee, anReview (London: MacMillan & Co., 1870), pp. 32044, quotation on p. 339.

21. Lay Sermons: see note above.22. the geat tuth with actin: rom Huxleys On the Physical Basis o Lie A Lay Sermon

delivered in Edinburgh, on Sunday 8th November, 1868, at the request o the late Rev. James Cranbrook, subsequently published in the Ftnightly Review, n.s. 5 (1868), pp.12945, later republished inLay Semn,pp. 13065, quotation on p. 159.

23. M. Hebet Spence: Herbert Spencer (18201903) was an English sociologist and

classical liberal who became one o the most inuential philosophers o the nineteenthcentury. Over a orty-year period he published a multi-volume Synthetic Philphy in

which he sought to bring all aspects o science, nature and society under a commonrubric. Although he grew up a radical in politics and a dissenter in religion, he grewincreasingly agnostic, reerring only to an unknowable that lay beyond human compre-hension. An ardent advocate o natural progressive development, he coined the phrasethe survival o the fttest in 1864, which Darwin later incorporated into the Oigin Specie rom the 1869 fh edition at the suggestion o Alred Russel Wallace.

24. an unknwn en in time: Herbert Spencer, not urther identifed.25. Psychology: reers to Spencers Pinciple Pychlgy, published in two volumes in

1855.26. Vltaie lette avec la pale: Voltaire (16941778) was the pen name o Franois

Marie Arouet, a French Enlightenment thinker, and most prolifc writer. As well as writ-

ing some 2,000 books and pamphlets in his lie, he also wrote some 20,000 letters, manyto some o the most signifcant men and women o his time. He was a staunch advocateo civil liberties and political reorm, and was a noted intellectual inuence upon boththe French and the American revolutions. Te French text translates thus: people whoare not in Gods place, who want to create the world with words.

27. M. Zla: mile Franois Zola (18401902) was a prominent French author. He oundedthe school o literary naturalism that he saw as an experiment in psychology in the same

way that his contemporary in physiology Claude Bernards (181378) work was. Ber-nard he titled his most amous work,An Intuctin t Expeimental Meicine (1865).

28. ute mtaphyique mpuvante: metaphysics terrifes me.29. like the hiek actually cain: attributed to Zola, although not urther identifed.30. wne with a lih ace paie: rom Alexander Pope, An Epistle to Dr. Arbuthnot

(1735), l. 212.31. lupanaian: lascivious.

32. M. Rukin petty vile: Although Ruskin (see note 13 to Dallas, Te Gay Science,above, p. 265) advocated throughout his career or the congruency o art and science, hebecame an outspoken critic o the scientifc naturalism o Darwin, Huxley and yndallrom the 1860s on, and railed against the degrading inuence o philosophical and eco-nomic materialism on the art o his day. Te quotation is rom Ruskins Te Relatinhipbetween Michael Angel an intet. Te Seventh the Cue Lectue n Sculptue

Delivee at Ox, 18701871 (London: Smith, Elder & Co., 1872), pp. 445. Teull sentence reads: But remember, at least, that I have borne witness to you today o the


26/27

Nte t page 22031 285

treasures that we orget, while we amuse ourselves with the poor toys, and the petty, orvile, arts, o our own time.

33. a itinguihe Fench painte: not identifed.34. Dawin: see note 3 to Miller,Ppula Gelgy , above, p. 261.35. cetitue e mauvai gt: certainly o bad taste.36. cae lhmme piituel, penalie lhmme: crush the spiritual lie o man, dehu-

manize the man.37. Amiel: Henri Frdric Amiel (182181) was a Swiss moral philosopher.38. I will nt hl it wn: rom Huxleys Inuence upon Morality o a Decline in Reli-

gious Belie , published inNineteenth Centuy, 1:1 (May 1877), pp. 5369, on p. 539.39. M. Renan vieille cyance : Ernest Renan (182392) was a French philosopher who was

widely inuential during his time. Tought by some to be the very incarnation o mod-

ern ideas, he advocated a progressive politics and philosophy. Te quotation translates:sap the morals o the old belie .40. Miatuque nva ua pma: and marvels at new leaves and ruits not its own.

Huxley, Science and Morals

1. Pe Cli: see note 5 to Lilly, Materialism and Morality, above, p. 283.2. M. Hebet Spence: see note 23 to Lilly, Materialism and Morality, above, p. 284.3. (1) in putting aie (p. 578): Lilly, Materialism and Morality, p. 578 (not reproduced

here).4. Unbewutein: unconscious.5. luminieu ethe: see note 17 to yndall, Scientifc Use o the Imagination, above, p. 274.6. eiual calx: calx is the residue o metal or mineral combustion.7. Pitivit: see note 8 to Lilly, Materialism and Morality, above, p. 283.

8. Jnathan Ewa: Jonathan Edwards (170358) was a prominent and inuentialAmerican intellectual and theologian who write extensively on the metaphysics o theo-logical determinism.

9. Slmn Eagle We t thi wicke city: Solomon Eccles (161383) was a Quaker whowas prosecuted a number o times in the Reormation or acts o civil disobedience relat-ing to worship. He was also celebrated and caricatured in Daniel Deoes semi-fctionalaccount o the plague o 1665,A Junal the Plague Yea. Deoe wrote: I suppose the

world has heard o the amous Solomon Eagle, an enthusiast. He, though not inectedat all but in his head, went about denouncing o judgement upon the city in a rightulmanner, sometimes quite naked, and with a pan o burning charcoal on his head. Whathe said, or pretended, indeed I could not learn (D. Deoe,A Junal the Plague Yea(1722), ed. L. Landa (Oxord: Oxord University Press, 2010), p. 89, see also p. 200).Te quote Woe to this wicked city is attributed to Eccles.

10. Obehee an Untehee: top-ermenting yeast and bottom-ermenting yeast. Teormer is an ale yeast, used to brew ales, porters and stout; it erments at a higher tem-

perature than the bottom-ermenting yeast that will produce a lager or pilsner style obeverage.

Lilly, Te Province o Physics

1. M. Dawin citic: a reerence to Huxleys Mr. Darwins Critics which appeared in theCntempay Review, 18 (1871), pp. 44376. Lilly quotes rom p. 465 in this passage.


27/27

286 Nte t page 23145

2. the cnciune it wking: rom Huxleys On the Hypothesis that Animals areAutomata and its History,Ftnightly Review, 16:95 (November1874), pp. 55580, onp. 575.

3. M. Lewe: see note 35 to Dallas, Te Gay Science, above, p. 267.4. Wellingtn: see note 19 to [Whewell], Speddings Cmplete Eitin the Wk

Bacn, above,p. 256.5. Genghiz Khan: Genghis Khan (11621227) was ounding ruler o the Mongolian

Empire. By his death he had expanded the empire through conquest to include most oEurasia.

6. Pe Damian: Father Damian or Saint Damian (184089) was born Joze De Veuste inBelgium. He dedicated his lie and his religious mission to helping those with leprosy,moving to live with those a icted with the disease who had been quarantined on the

island o Molokai, Hawaii. He eventually contracted the disease, and died in 1889. Hewas beatifed in 1995.

Balour, Te Funatin Belie

1. M. Spence uggetin mulatin in peech: Spencer (see note 23 to Lilly, Materi-alism and Morality, above, p. 284) proposed this theory in his essay Te Origin andFunction o Music,Fae, 56 (1857), pp. 396408. It was reprinted in his Eay: Sci-entifc, Plitical an Speculative the ollowing year.

2. exual electin : Charles Darwin briey described his theory o sexual selection in chapter4 oOn the Oigin Specie (1859), but explained it at length in Te Decent Man, anSelectin in Relatin t Sex(1871). Darwin argued in chapter 19 o that work that vocalmusic had probably originated among the progenitors o human beings in the creationo sounds to attract a mate. Darwin made similar arguments about the origins o instru-

mental music and dance.3. ibilatin: a hissing sound.4. Rueau they: Swiss philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (171278) oered his the-

ory o the origins o music, which also drew on human physiology, emotional expressionand social context, in hisEai u ligine e langue (Eay n the Oigin Language,1781).

5. Ninth Symphny: the fnal symphony, completed in 1824, o the German composer Lud-wig van Beethoven (17701827).

6. Weimann: Te German cell biologist August Weismann (18341914) presented histheory o music in Toughts upon the Musical Sense in Animals and Man (1889), pub-lished in English in Eay upn Heeity, 2 vols (Oxord: Clarendon Press, 1892), vol.2, pp. 3370.

7. Helmhltz claic invetigatin: German mathematical physicist Hermann von Helm-holtz (182194), whose wide-ranging work was well known in Britain, published Die

Lehe vn en nempfnungen al phyilgihche Gunlage ie Teie e Muik(On the Senatin ne a a Phyilgical Bai the Tey Muic) in 1863; it wastranslated into English in 1875.

8. Vltaie pinin Shakepeae: Voltaire (see note 26 to Lilly, Materialism and Moral-ity, above, p. 284) wrote requently over the course o his career on Shakespeare and,though an early admirer o the English playwright, later condemned him or his depar-tures rom the classical unities o time, place and action; the bawdiness o his plays; the

weakness o his poetry and the lack o originality in his plots.

sample pages from victorian science and literature

Documents