Part XV

2

3

4 Darwin was a keen man

5 and his contribution to science

6 and affairs in general

7 was vast.

8 If he had lived fifty years more,—avoiding enmeshment with academic royal societies,—he would not have made the fortuitous mistake

9 of citing his law to cover all life

10 or all phases of its articulation.

11 Thus also Newton

12 in his ‘‘first law of motion’’

13 made seemingly inconsequential concession

14 to the economic ‘‘security’’ theory

15 by imputing absolute ‘‘rest’’

16 to dynamic inertia,

17 thereby falsely certifying

18 ‘‘security’’

19 as a state or condition

20 attainable by

21 the quick

22 as well as the dead.

23 Both Darwin and Newton were partially right. Though it is very probable that they said to themselves ‘‘So what the hell if we allow a little play on words to the temporal power and glory names are dead stuff anyway.’’

24 At any rate, they were right, so far as their laws applied to the integral mechanics of human beings, that is in an empirical sense —certainly within all the world as admittedly developed, observed, and booked up to their time.

25 What they lacked essentially were the concepts of ‘‘relativity’’ and of the ‘‘h’’ constant,—the infinitely inevitable random element,— either of which concepts would have rendered absolute ‘‘law’’ making scientifically impossible, and which strangely enough were implicit if not evident in Newton’s calculus development and in Pascal’s ‘‘probabilities.’’

26 Both the concepts of relativity and random element were increment thoughts payable to science in the 20th century for science’s original devout investment and faithful interest reinvestments in Industrialization.

27 Rich indeed is that cosmic increment for it certifies not only infinite mystery and eventual perfection; but also eternal room for fun; essential tolerance for error; importance of romance, beauty, and nonsense, as well as of nobility in righteous perseverance and in stem sincerity at appropriate moments.

28 And last but not least science thereby certifies,—by these essential concepts,—room a plenty for all with automatic raison d’etre vindication by either positive or negative relative progression incitation through the very existence of each and every unique characteristic which if not clearly justified in the moment’s requirements are wisely included

29 against inevitable necessity.

30 Any one character killed off here, will pop up there until realization of its integral function.