[40] Afterwards reprinted in a modified form, as "Modern Science--a Criticism," in the first edition (1889) of the present book. [41] Elisée Reclus, in his remarkable paper, _La Grande Famille_, points out the wide-reaching _Friendship_, and free alliance for various purposes, of primitive man with the animals, existing long before the so-called "domestication" of the latter. See _Humane Review_, January, 1906. THE NEW MORALITY The tendency of the Evolution Theory, as it penetrates human thought, is to rub out lines--the old lines of formal classification. We no longer now put in a class apart those animals which have horns or cloven hooves, because we find that continuous descent and close kinship weave relations which are not bounded by horns or hooves. And, for a not dissimilar reason, modern thought, based on the theory of evolution, is tending to rub out the hard and fast lines between moral Right and Wrong--the old formal classifications of _actions_ as some in their nature good, and some in their nature bad. The Eastern, or at least Indian, thought and religion rubbed out these lines long ago. Its philosophy indeed was founded on a theory of Evolution--the continuous evolution or emanation of the Many from the One. It could not therefore regard any _class_ of beings or creatures as essentially bad, or any _class_ of actions as essentially wrong, since all sprang from a common Root. The only essential evil was ignorance (_avidya_)--that is, the fact of the being or creature not knowing or perceiving its emanation from, or kinship with, the One--and of course any action done under this condition of _avidya_, however outwardly correct, was essentially wrong; while on the other hand _all_ actions done by beings fully realising and conscious of their union with the One were necessarily right.