to have shown me that here was the place for experiment. I ought to have scorned the notion that the _Labellum_ was thus placed _for no good purpose_. I neglected this plain guide, and for a long time completely failed to understand the flower" (p. 262).[274] [Footnote 273: Carpenter's "Principles of Comparative Physiology," p. 723.] [Footnote 274: Edinburgh Review, October, 1862; article, "The Supernatural."] So that the assumption of final causes has not, as Bacon affirms, "led men astray" and "prejudiced further discovery;" on the contrary, it has had a large share in every discovery in anatomy and physiology, zoology and botany. The use of every organ has been discovered by starting from the assumption _that it must have some use_. The belief in a creative purpose led Harvey to discover the circulation of the blood. He says: "When I took notice that the valves in the veins of so many parts of the body were so placed that they gave a free passage to the blood towards the heart, but opposed the passage of the venal blood the contrary way, I was incited to imagine that so provident a cause as Nature has not placed so many valves _without design_, and no design seemed more probable than the circulation of the blood."[275] The wonderful discoveries in Zoology which have immortalized the name of Cuvier were made under the guidance of this principle. He proceeds on the supposition not only that animal forms have _some_ plan, _some_ purpose, but that they have an intelligible plan, a discoverable purpose. At the outset of his "_Règne Animal_" he says: "Zoology has a principle of reasoning which is peculiar to it, and which it employs to advantage on many occasions; that is, the principle of the conditions of existence, commonly called final causes."[276] The application of this principle enabled him to understand and arrange the structures of animals with astonishing clearness and completeness of order; and to restore the forms of extinct animals which are found in the rocks, in a manner which excited universal admiration, and has commanded universal assent. Indeed, as Professor Whewell remarks, at the conclusion of his "History of the Inductive Sciences," "those who have been discoverers in science have generally had minds, the disposition of which was to believe in an _intelligent Maker_ of the universe, and that the scientific speculations which produced an opposite tendency were generally those which, though they might deal familiarly with known physical truths, and conjecture boldly with regard to unknown, do not add to the number of solid generalizations."[277] [Footnote 275: "History of Inductive Science," vol. ii. p. 449.] [Footnote 276: "History of Inductive Science," vol. ii. p. 2, Eng. ed.] [Footnote 277: Ibid., vol. ii. p. 491. A list of the "great discoverers" is given in his "Astronomy and Physics," bk. iii. ch. v.] CHAPTER VII. THE UNKNOWN GOD (_continued_). IS GOD COGNIZABLE BY REASON? (_continued_).