Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 2.djvu/675

Rh, framed to account for a certain set of facts, its remarkable success in explaining them invests it with a high degree of probability.

It was admitted that the theory had encountered some apparent difficulties—some want of coincidences—the most serious one being the retrograde direction of revolution of the satellites of Uranus. It was shown that this anomaly might be reconciled with the Nebular Hypothesis during the first stages of planet-formation.

But, it has been asked, may not these coincident phenomena be explained by other means than the Nebular Hypothesis? May they not be arrangements instituted by the Creator, for the purpose of giving perpetuity to our solar system, and making the planets suitable habitations for organized beings? And do we not transgress the legitimate domain of scientific research in attempting their explanation?

In reply to this, it was urged that such a view implies a total misconception of the doctrine of final causes. In such inquiries, "we are not to assume that we know the object of the Creator's design, and put this assumed purpose in the place of a physical cause." In these provinces of speculation, the principle of final causes is no longer the basis and guide, but the sequel and result of our physical reasonings. . . . As physical science advances, final causes do not disappear. The principle of design changes its mode of application, but loses none of its force; it is merely transferred from the region of facts to that of laws." We do not consider the sun as less intended to warm and vivify the tribes of plants and animals, because we find evidences that the earth and other planets were developed in the vast periods of past ages, from a common nebulous mass! We are rather, by the discovery of so general a law, led into a scene of wider design—of deeper contrivance—of more comprehensive adjustments. "The object of such views is not to lead to physical truth, but to connect such truth—obtained by its proper processes and methods—with our views of God—the Master of the universe."

But even admitting this application of the principle of final causes, it was shown that the conditions of stability of the solar system, and its adaptability to living beings, are totally insufficient to account for all the observed coincidences. There are many other phenomena in the arrangements of our system, which have no relations to these ends or purposes. It was shown that there are no less than seven sets of phenomena, of which the principle of final causes affords, as far as we can see, no explanation.

The Nebular Hypothesis not only accounts for and coördinates all the arrangements of the solar system, but the conditions of stability and adaptability to living beings are simple consequences of its mode of genesis! Does not the cheering doctrine of final causes—of design and purpose—become strengthened and invigorated by leading us to a view so comprehensive? "How simple the means—how multiform the