HOW THINGS BEGAN

New Zealand Listener, Volume 22, Issue 555, 10 February 1950, Page 5

HOW THINGS BEGAN

Sir-Mr. Prior in his latest letter speaks of "the strength of the theory of evolution." Actually, there are’ dozens of theories of evolution, but since’ he is so concerned -to establish the existence of ‘transitional forms between major groups or organisms, it seems fair to infer that he is defending some theory of gradual evolution, and I shall accordingly understand the. term in that sense. Such a theory logically requires a vast number of transitional forms, as Darwin admitted. These forms are missing from the fossil record, and’ even if there were one or two among living types the theory would still be, left, high and dry. Mr. Prior will need a lot more than Peripatus to refute my generalisation that "biologists accept the existence of such groups as fishes, arthropods, birds, without question, and they have no doubt about which of these groups a given organism is to be assigned to." Peripatus is, of course, the best example Mr. Prior can cite, But Peripatus is not a transitional form, for there is no teal doubt about where ‘Peripatus belongs:. Mr. Prior himself says as much. "No biologist,’ he writes, "now classifies Peripatus as an Annelid." On the other hand, to quote Mr, Prior again, "in most modern text-books it is placed in the phylum Arthropoda." Why "most?" Can he quote one modern text-book that does not place Peripatus in that phylum? Adam Sedgwick settled the classification of Peripatus about sixty years ago. "There can be no doubt," he wrote, "that Peripatus is an © Arthropod." Parker and Halswell,.on whom. Mr, Prior relies, contradict themselves, for on the one hand ‘they declare that "Arthropods are characterised by the universal absence of cilia," and on the other they admit that Peripatus has cilia and classify it among the Arthropoda. According to Moseley, "the legs in advanced embryos show a distinct division into five joints by transverse constrictions,’ but in the adults this jointing is much obscured," _ Mr. Prior is guilty of, onntistes, 4 in suggesting that "A.A.N." demanded that the theory of evolution be proved with the same cogency as a theorem, in mathematics. "A.A.N" spoke of logic, but I find no reference in his letter to mathematics. If Mr. Prior can indicate any such reference, I shall be glad to have. it. "A.A.N." made the perfectly valid point that there must be something scientifically wrong with a theory which has to fix its attention on a few doubtful cases (and not so doubtful, either!) and ignores the fact that the organic world can be classified into a system of well-defined types. Scientific theories: may not be strictly demonstrable, and all, are. liable to correction, as Mr. Prior says. Sometimes, too, they are scrapped. If the theory of gradual evolution were no more than a scientific theory, it would have been’ scrapped long ago, for it is as plainly contrary to fact as the system of Ptolemy. But it is an integral part of a philosophical: creed, and if the theory is scrapped, that creed will have to be reexamined, And few of us are. willing to face that task.

G. H.

DUGGAN

S.

M.

(Greenmeadows).

Sir,-To my mind, Father Duggan is mistaken when he uses "A is A" as a type of proposition. There is no proposition of the type "A is A"; and to suggest that it’s contradictoty is nonsense omits the fact of its own nonsense.g@May I continue? If various creatures are

polyphilogenetically derived, as Father Duggan seeks to prove, it may be right that a Supramundane Cause is needed to make a hen lay an egg. I don’t know. Together with Bertrand Russell, "I do not. believe that philosophy can either prove or disprove the truth of religious dogmas." Like him, and Albert Einstein, I am content, in my mind, with mystery. I am satisfied if my own observations and explanations have the status of appearances, and make no claim for their infallibility. At the same time, I am not willing to deny the use of intelligence, or admit that I "might as well be a cow or a cabbage," when I give to my "is" no more meaning than "seems to be." I admit the regress; I will admit, if necessary, the truth of contradictory propositions. After all, we learn mostly by induction, and this, I agree with Russell, is not a process of logic. If I find that a thing. is a horse, and is not a horse, to use Father Duggan’s example, I do not say that thought is therefore impossible. I do, however, realise, as Chesterton did, the insanity of a merely rational attitude. I do not look to logic for my metaphysics; to confuse logical validity with truth would, to my mind, be as silly as to confuse hygiene with health. My God is unknown, mysterious and undefined, and I cannot, therefore, quarrel, on logical grounds, with Father Duggan, when he writes: "Although the primary object of the Divine knowledge is God Himself, in knowing Himself God knows the creative decree that confers existence on particular things, and knows particular things in this decree." I shall not even bring against him the charge of advocacy which Samuel Butler brought against clergymen. At the same time, since St, -Thomas Aquinas is not for me princeps philosophorum et magister meus, I am not satisfied to regard God as Thought thinking about Itself. Cyril Joad, who rather reluctantly, I think, believes in this Deity, calls It impersonal. I am not content with the epistemological approach to God, though I think that it is a stage which must be passed through. The pity of it is that this stage should be permitted to establish one’s belief, either in theism or in atheism. I should hate to entrust to my own petty brain the whole decision of my faith. I agree with Willi Hollitscher that our beliefs and attitudes are more socio-psychological than logical, and with Sigmund Freud that our unconscious mind conditions our conscious thinking. I think, with. McDougall, that there is a human instinct of awe and reverence. In conclusion, Sir, I shall anticipate a charge of trivialisation, and state that I regard philosophy and religion as worth while in themselves, for the joy of thinking, and for the relief of worship. I would also thank Father Duggan for the stimulus which he has given to thought in New Zealand.

ROBERT

MOUAT

(Christchurch),

Sir,-Replying to A. Stenberg’s criticism directed at me, there is small room for reasonable discussion between perfervid fundamentalists and those who, appreciating possible moral elements in the Biblical story, are unable to accept it as true in fact. From the physical, mental and spiritual angles man is a yery. unsatisfactory job of — special ‘creative work, Seen as an evolved and still. evolving creature, man commands our wonder, admiration, and some hope.

If he fell and must be redeemed, the plan of redemption seems to have failed. It failed in Palestine when those whom Christ was allegedly sent to redeem caused Him to be crucified. It failed when His death was declared to have destroyed the power of evil, for the world today contains more evil than, it ever did before, All religions bear witness to = 3 unquenchable urge to reach out into’ infinity in the hope of grasping enduring reality. The man-made Christian religion is linked with very ancient Persian, Egyptian, Jewish, Greek and Roman pagan beliefs, some residues of which are embedded in it blended with the spiritual element in the reputed gospel of Christ. It has been a tremendous power for good. It has also been the mainspring of. ruthless slaughter, ‘black and devilish cruelties done by religious fanatics upon one another. Vested priésthoods thrive upon the fears and hopes of the primitive being who lurks in the subconscious of even the most cultivated of us, Vested priesthoods ‘have been, and still are, obstacles to the full development of freedom for the human mind and spirit. "Opinions may differ as to whether man is today any nearer to solving the mystery of life than he was when he first began to think and set up his varied and astonishing deities. I think he is nearer the possibility of making for himself a life far nobler than anything he has hitherto had; provided he is prepared to throw off the shackles of dogma and superstition and make the best of what he knows about himself and the world he lives in.

J. MALTON

MURRAY

(Oamaru).