Our interest is in the moral fruits of religious and philosophical ideas rather than in their perfect consistency, but it may be noted in passing that philosophically competent scientists and scientifically competent philosophers arrive at conclusions to-day which are in closer accord with a naïve theism than with the monism of absolute idealism. They do not of course picture a God who is outside of the world and at work upon it as a potter upon his clay; but they do justice to both the purpose and the limitation of purpose in the creative process. Professor Hobhouse writes: “The evolutionary process can best be understood as the effect of a purpose slowly working itself out under limiting conditions which it brings successively under control.... This would mean not that reality is spiritual or the creation of an unconditioned mind ... but that there is a spiritual element integral to the structure and movement of reality and that evolution is the process by which this principle makes itself master of the residual conditions which at first dominate its life and thwart its efforts.”[24] It may be a natural overbelief and an inevitable anthropomorphism if religion attributes all the characteristics of personality to the purpose, “the spiritual element integral to the structure and movement of reality.” But if a place for freedom and purpose in the cosmic order, however conditioned, is discovered the essential affirmation of religious faith is metaphysically verified. The values of personality are related to cosmic facts. Professor Alfred Whitehead defines God as that in reality which is not concrete but the principle of every concrete actuality. He makes the telling observation that while a dynamic view of reality may dispense with God as the prime mover it must substitute for Aristotle’s prime mover a principle of limitation and concretion, since the dynamic nature of reality does not account for the various forms in which it is made concrete.[25] In other words the faith of religion in both the transcendence and immanence of God is given a new metaphysical validation. His unchangeableness is “his self-consistency in relation to all change”; but this does not justify the deterministic conclusion of a “complete self-consistency of the temporal world.” The reality of God and the reality of evil as a positive force are thus both accepted.