Geology Reference
In-Depth Information
In reverse, then, perfection becomes an argument against history—a denial,
at least, of its importance, sometimes of its very existence. The historical
antecedents of any optimal state become irrelevant either because the system
now stands in perfect, timeless balance or, in the stronger version, because
different stages never existed, and wisdom made perfection from the start.
In this sense, Hutton's strongest argument against history flows necessarily
from his passionate conviction about the perfection of his world machine; no
other theme so pervades his works, or so underlies his insistent comparison
of earthly time with celestial machinery. How can a historical narrative of
change be relevant to a perfectly working machine fulfilling its ordained
purpose from its inception?
The basic components of narrative are, to Hutton, the very definitions of
imperfection: the punctuation of time by peculiar and random large-scale
events; and, particularly, a lack of cyclicity defined as any kind of directional
change—for if things improve in time, then the world machine was not made
perfect, and if they decline, then the earth is not perfect now. In comparing
himself with Burnet and other exponents of geological history as decline
from an original perfection, Hutton defends optimality as the greatest virtue
of his world machine: "In discovering the nature and constitution of this
earth ... there is no occasion for having recourse to any unnatural supposition
of evil, to any destructive accident in nature, or to the agency of any
preternatural cause, in explaining that which actually appears" (1788, 285).
It would be irrational, Hutton argues, to defend the optimal constancy of
ecological balance between plants and animals (a proven fact in Hutton's
view), and then to argue that their earthly substrate is wasting away to
destruction: "To acknowledge the perfection of those systems of plants and
animals perpetuating their species, and to suppose the system of this earth on
which they must depend, to be imperfect, and in time to perish, would be to
reason inconsistently or absurdly" (1795, I, 285).
In a striking example of their differences, Hutton echoes Burnet's words (see
page 42) in stating that people have a deep and un-
Search WWH ::
Custom Search