第1章
加入书架 A- A+
点击下载App,搜索"Criticisms on",免费读到尾

  byThomasH。Huxley1。UEBERDIEDARWIN’SCHESCHPFUNGSTHEORIE;EINVORTRAG,VONA。K

  LLIKER。Leipzig,1864。

  2。EXAMINATIONDULIVREDEM。DARWINSURL’ORIGINEDESESPECES。PARP。

  FLOURENS。Paris,1864。

  InthecourseofthepresentyearseveralforeigncommentariesuponMr。

  Darwin’sgreatworkhavemadetheirappearance。Thosewhohaveperusedthatremarkablechapterofthe’AntiquityofMan,’inwhichSirCharlesLyelldrawsaparallelbetweenthedevelopmentofspeciesandthatoflanguages,willbegladtohearthatoneofthemosteminentphilologersofGermany,ProfessorSchleicher,has,independently,publishedamostinstructiveandphilosophicalpamphlet(anexcellentnoticeofwhichistobefoundinthe’Reader’,forFebruary27thofthisyear)supportingsimilarviewswithalltheweightofhisspecialknowledgeandestablishedauthorityasalinguist。ProfessorHaeckel,towhomSchleicheraddresseshimself,previouslytookoccasion,inhissplendidmonographonthe’Radiolaria’*,toexpresshishighappreciationof,andgeneralconcordancewith,Mr。Darwin’sviews。

  [footnote]*’DieRadiolarien:eineMonographie’,p。231。

  Butthemostelaboratecriticismsofthe’OriginofSpecies’whichhaveappearedaretwoworksofverywidelydifferentmerit,theonebyProfessorKolliker,thewell—knownanatomistandhistologistofWurzburg;theotherbyM。Flourens,PerpetualSecretaryoftheFrenchAcademyofSciences。

  ProfessorKolliker’scriticalessay’UpontheDarwinianTheory’is,likeallthatproceedsfromthepenofthatthoughtfulandaccomplishedwriter,worthyofthemostcarefulconsideration。ItcomprisesabriefbutclearsketchofDarwin’sviews,followedbyanenumerationoftheleadingdifficultiesinthewayoftheiracceptance;difficultieswhichwouldappeartobeinsurmountabletoProfessorKolliker,inasmuchasheproposestoreplaceMr。Darwin’sTheorybyonewhichhetermsthe’TheoryofHeterogeneousGeneration。’Weshallproceedtoconsiderfirstthedestructive,andsecondly,theconstructiveportionoftheessay。

  WeregrettofindourselvescompelledtodissentverywidelyfrommanyofProfessorKolliker’sremarks;andfromnonemorethoroughlythanfromthoseinwhichheseekstodefinewhatwemaytermthephilosophicalpositionofDarwinism。

  \"Darwin,\"saysProfessorKolliker,\"is,inthefullestsenseoftheword,aTeleologist。Hesaysquitedistinctly(FirstEdition,pp。199,200)thateveryparticularinthestructureofananimalhasbeencreatedforitsbenefit,andheregardsthewholeseriesofanimalformsonlyfromthispointofview。\"

  Andagain:

  \"7。TheteleologicalgeneralconceptionadoptedbyDarwinisamistakenone。

  \"Varietiesariseirrespectivelyofthenotionofpurpose,orofutility,accordingtogenerallawsofNature,andmaybeeitheruseful,orhurtful,orindifferent。

  \"Theassumptionthatanorganismexistsonlyonaccountofsomedefiniteendinview,andrepresentssomethingmorethantheincorporationofageneralidea,orlaw,impliesaone—sidedconceptionoftheuniverse。

  Assuredly,everyorganhas,andeveryorganismfulfils,itsend,butitspurposeisnottheconditionofitsexistence。Everyorganismisalsosufficientlyperfectforthepurposeitserves,andinthat,atleast,itisuselesstoseekforacauseofitsimprovement。\"

  Itissingularhowdifferentlyoneandthesamebookwillimpressdifferentminds。Thatwhichstruckthepresentwritermostforciblyonhisfirstperusalofthe’OriginofSpecies’wastheconvictionthatTeleology,ascommonlyunderstood,hadreceiveditsdeathblowatMr。

  Darwin’shands。Fortheteleologicalargumentrunsthus:anorganororganism(A)ispreciselyfittedtoperformafunctionorpurpose(B);

  thereforeitwasspeciallyconstructedtoperformthatfunction。InPaley’sfamousillustration,theadaptationofallthepartsofthewatchtothefunction,orpurpose,ofshowingthetime,isheldtobeevidencethatthewatchwasspeciallycontrivedtothatend;ontheground,thattheonlycauseweknowof,competenttoproducesuchaneffectasawatchwhichshallkeeptime,isacontrivingintelligenceadaptingthemeansdirectlytothatend。

  Suppose,however,thatanyonehadbeenabletoshowthatthewatchhadnotbeenmadedirectlybyanyperson,butthatitwastheresultofthemodificationofanotherwatchwhichkepttimebutpoorly;andthatthisagainhadproceededfromastructurewhichcouldhardlybecalledawatchatall——seeingthatithadnofiguresonthedialandthehandswererudimentary;andthatgoingbackandbackintimewecameatlasttoarevolvingbarrelastheearliesttraceablerudimentofthewholefabric。Andimaginethatithadbeenpossibletoshowthatallthesechangeshadresulted,first,fromatendencyofthestructuretovaryindefinitely;andsecondly,fromsomethinginthesurroundingworldwhichhelpedallvariationsinthedirectionofanaccuratetime—keeper,andcheckedallthoseinotherdirections;thenitisobviousthattheforceofPaley’sargumentwouldbegone。Foritwouldbedemonstratedthatanapparatusthoroughlywelladaptedtoaparticularpurposemightbetheresultofamethodoftrialanderrorworkedbyunintelligentagents,aswellasofthedirectapplicationofthemeansappropriatetothatend,byanintelligentagent。

  Nowitappearstousthatwhatwehavehere,forillustration’ssake,supposedtobedonewiththewatch,isexactlywhattheestablishmentofDarwin’sTheorywilldofortheorganicworld。Forthenotionthateveryorganismhasbeencreatedasitisandlaunchedstraightatapurpose,Mr。Darwinsubstitutestheconceptionofsomethingwhichmayfairlybetermedamethodoftrialanderror。Organismsvaryincessantly;ofthesevariationsthefewmeetwithsurroundingconditionswhichsuitthemandthrive;themanyareunsuitedandbecomeextinguished。

  AccordingtoTeleology,eachorganismislikeariflebulletfiredstraightatamark;accordingtoDarwin,organismsarelikegrapeshotofwhichonehitssomethingandtherestfallwide。

  Fortheteleologistanorganismexistsbecauseitwasmadefortheconditionsinwhichitisfound;fortheDarwiniananorganismexistsbecause,outofmanyofitskind,itistheonlyonewhichhasbeenabletopersistintheconditionsinwhichitisfound。

  Teleologyimpliesthattheorgansofeveryorganismareperfectandcannotbeimproved;theDarwiniantheorysimplyaffirmsthattheyworkwellenoughtoenabletheorganismtoholditsownagainstsuchcompetitorsasithasmetwith,butadmitsthepossibilityofindefiniteimprovement。Butanexamplemaybringintoclearerlighttheprofoundoppositionbetweentheordinaryteleological,andtheDarwinian,conception。

  Catscatchmice,smallbirdsandthelike,verywell。Teleologytellsusthattheydosobecausetheywereexpresslyconstructedforsodoing——thattheyareperfectmousingapparatuses,soperfectandsodelicatelyadjustedthatnooneoftheirorganscouldbealtered,withoutthechangeinvolvingthealterationofalltherest。Darwinismaffirmsonthecontrary,thattherewasnoexpressconstructionconcernedinthematter;butthatamongthemultitudinousvariationsoftheFelinestock,manyofwhichdiedoutfromwantofpowertoresistopposinginfluences,some,thecats,werebetterfittedtocatchmicethanothers,whencetheythroveandpersisted,inproportiontotheadvantageovertheirfellowsthusofferedtothem。

  Farfromimaginingthatcatsexist’inorder’tocatchmicewell,Darwinismsupposesthatcatsexist’because’theycatchmicewell——mousingbeingnottheend,butthecondition,oftheirexistence。Andifthecattypehaslongpersistedasweknowit,theinterpretationofthefactuponDarwinianprincipleswouldbe,notthatthecatshaveremainedinvariable,butthatsuchvarietiesashaveincessantlyoccurredhavebeen,onthewhole,lessfittedtogetonintheworldthantheexistingstock。

  Ifweapprehendthespiritofthe’OriginofSpecies’rightly,then,nothingcanbemoreentirelyandabsolutelyopposedtoTeleology,asitiscommonlyunderstood,thantheDarwinianTheory。Sofarfrombeinga\"Teleologistinthefullestsenseoftheword,\"wewoulddenythatheisaTeleologistintheordinarysenseatall;andweshouldsaythat,apartfromhismeritsasanaturalist,hehasrenderedamostremarkableservicetophilosophicalthoughtbyenablingthestudentofNaturetorecognise,totheirfullestextent,thoseadaptationstopurposewhicharesostrikingintheorganicworld,andwhichTeleologyhasdonegoodserviceinkeepingbeforeourminds,withoutbeingfalsetothefundamentalprinciplesofascientificconceptionoftheuniverse。TheapparentlydivergingteachingsoftheTeleologistandoftheMorphologistarereconciledbytheDarwinianhypothesis。

  Butleavingourownimpressionsofthe’OriginofSpecies,’andturningtothosepassagesespeciallycitedbyProfessorKolliker,wecannotadmitthattheybeartheinterpretationheputsuponthem。Darwin,ifwereadhimrightly,does’not’affirmthateverydetailinthestructureofananimalhasbeencreatedforitsbenefit。Hiswordsare(p。199):——

  \"Theforegoingremarksleadmetosayafewwordsontheprotestlatelymadebysomenaturalistsagainsttheutilitariandoctrinethateverydetailofstructurehasbeenproducedforthegoodofitspossessor。

  Theybelievethatverymanystructureshavebeencreatedforbeautyintheeyesofman,orformerevariety。Thisdoctrine,iftrue,wouldbeabsolutelyfataltomytheory——yetIfullyadmitthatmanystructuresareofnodirectusetotheirpossessor。\"

  Andaftersundryillustrationsandqualifications,heconcludes(p。

  200):——

  \"Henceeverydetailofstructureineverylivingcreature(makingsomelittleallowanceforthedirectactionofphysicalconditions)maybeviewedeitherashavingbeenofspecialusetosomeancestralform,orasbeingnowofspecialusetothedescendantsofthisform——eitherdirectly,orindirectly,throughthecomplexlawsofgrowth。\"

  Butitisonethingtosay,Darwinically,thateverydetailobservedinananimal’sstructureisofusetoit,orhasbeenofusetoitsancestors;andquiteanothertoaffirm,teleologically,thateverydetailofananimal’sstructurehasbeencreatedforitsbenefit。Ontheformerhypothesis,forexample,theteethofthefoetalBalaenahaveameaning;onthelatter,none。Sofarasweareaware,thereisnotaphraseinthe’OriginofSpecies’,inconsistentwithProfessorKolliker’sposition,that\"varietiesariseirrespectivelyofthenotionofpurpose,orofutility,accordingtogenerallawsofNature,andmaybeeitheruseful,orhurtful,orindifferent。\"

  Onthecontrary,Mr。Darwinwrites(SummaryofChap。V。):——

  \"Ourignoranceofthelawsofvariationisprofound。Notinonecaseoutofahundredcanwepretendtoassignanyreasonwhythisorthatpartvariesmoreorlessfromthesamepartintheparents……Theexternalconditionsoflife,asclimateandfood,etc。,seemtohaveinducedsomeslightmodifications。Habit,inproducingconstitutionaldifferences,anduse,instrengthening,anddisuse,inweakeninganddiminishingorgans,seemtohavebeenmorepotentintheireffects。\"

  Andfinally,asiftopreventallpossiblemisconception,Mr。DarwinconcludeshisChapteronVariationwiththesepregnantwords:——

  \"Whateverthecausemaybeofeachslightdifferenceintheoffspringfromtheirparents——andacauseforeachmustexist——itisthesteadyaccumulation,throughnaturalselectionofsuchdifferences,whenbeneficialtotheindividual,thatgivesrisetoallthemoreimportantmodificationsofstructurewhichtheinnumerablebeingsonthefaceoftheearthareenabledtostrugglewitheachother,andthebestadaptedtosurvive。\"

  Wehavedweltatlengthuponthissubject,becauseofitsgreatgeneralimportance,andbecausewebelievethatProfessorKolliker’scriticismsonthisheadarebaseduponamisapprehensionofMr。Darwin’sviews——substantiallytheyappeartoustocoincidewithhisown。TheotherobjectionswhichProfessorKollikerenumeratesanddiscussesarethefollowing*:——

  [footnote]*SpacewillnotallowustogiveProfessorKolliker’sargumentsindetail;ourreaderswillfindafullandaccurateversionoftheminthe’Reader’forAugust13thand20th,1864。

  \"1。Notransitionalformsbetweenexistingspeciesareknown;andknownvarieties,whetherselectedorspontaneous,nevergosofarastoestablishnewspecies。\"

  TothisProfessorKollikerappearstoattachsomeweight。Hemakesthesuggestionthattheshort—facedtumblerpigeonmaybeapathologicalproduct。

  \"2。Notransitionalformsofanimalsaremetwithamongtheorganicremainsofearlierepochs。\"

  Uponthis,ProfessorKollikerremarksthattheabsenceoftransitionalformsinthefossilworld,thoughnotnecessarilyfataltoDarwin’sviews,weakenshiscase。

  \"3。Thestruggleforexistencedoesnottakeplace。\"

  Tothisobjection,urgedbyPelzeln,Kolliker,veryjustly,attachesnoweight。

  \"4。Atendencyoforganismstogiverisetousefulvarieties,andanaturalselection,donotexist。

  \"Thevarietieswhicharefoundariseinconsequenceofmanifoldexternalinfluences,anditisnotobviouswhytheyall,orpartially,shouldbeparticularlyuseful。Eachanimalsufficesforitsownends,isperfectofitskind,andneedsnofurtherdevelopment。Should,however,avarietybeusefulandevenmaintainitself,thereisnoobviousreasonwhyitshouldchangeanyfurther。ThewholeconceptionoftheimperfectionoforganismsandthenecessityoftheirbecomingperfectedisplainlytheweakestsideofDarwin’sTheory,anda’pisaller’(Nothbehelf)becauseDarwincouldthinkofnootherprinciplebywhichtoexplainthemetamorphoseswhich,asIalsobelieve,haveoccurred。\"

  HereagainwemustventuretodissentcompletelyfromProfessorKolliker’sconceptionofMr。Darwin’shypothesis。Itappearstoustobeoneofthemanypeculiarmeritsofthathypothesisthatitinvolvesnobeliefinanecessaryandcontinualprogressoforganisms。

  Again,Mr。Darwin,ifwereadhimaright,assumesnospecialtendencyoforganismstogiverisetousefulvarieties,andknowsnothingofneedsofdevelopment,ornecessityofperfection。Whathesaysis,insubstance:Allorganismsvary。Itisinthehighestdegreeimprobablethatanygivenvarietyshouldhaveexactlythesamerelationstosurroundingconditionsastheparentstock。Inthatcaseitiseitherbetterfitted(whenthevariationmaybecalleduseful),orworsefitted,tocopewiththem。Ifbetter,itwilltendtosupplanttheparentstock;ifworse,itwilltendtobeextinguishedbytheparentstock。

  If(asishardlyconceivable)thenewvarietyissoperfectlyadaptedtotheconditionsthatnoimprovementuponitispossible,——itwillpersist,because,thoughitdoesnotceasetovary,thevarietieswillbeinferiortoitself。

  If,asismoreprobable,thenewvarietyisbynomeansperfectlyadaptedtoitsconditions,butonlyfairlywelladaptedtothem,itwillpersist,solongasnoneofthevarietieswhichitthrowsoffarebetteradaptedthanitself。

  Ontheotherhand,assoonasitvariesinausefulway,i。e。whenthevariationissuchastoadaptitmoreperfectlytoitsconditions,thefreshvarietywilltendtosupplanttheformer。

  SofarfromagradualprogresstowardsperfectionforminganynecessarypartoftheDarwiniancreed,itappearstousthatitisperfectlyconsistentwithindefinitepersistenceinoneestate,orwithagradualretrogression。Suppose,forexample,areturnoftheglacialepochandaspreadofpolarclimatalconditionsoverthewholeglobe。Theoperationofnaturalselectionunderthesecircumstanceswouldtend,onthewhole,totheweedingoutofthehigherorganismsandthecherishingofthelowerformsoflife。CryptogamicvegetationwouldhavetheadvantageoverPhanerogamic;HydrozoaoverCorals;CrustaceaoverInsecta,andAmphipodaandIsopodaoverthehigherCrustacea;

  CetaceansandSealsoverthePrimates;thecivilizationoftheEsquimauxoverthatoftheEuropean。

  \"5。Pelzelnhasalsoobjectedthatifthelaterorganismshaveproceededfromtheearlier,thewholedevelopmentalseries,fromthesimplesttothehighest,couldnotnowexist;insuchacasethesimplerorganismsmusthavedisappeared。\"

  TothisProfessorKollikerreplies,withperfectjustice,thattheconclusiondrawnbyPelzelndoesnotreallyfollowfromDarwin’spremisses,andthat,ifwetakethefactsofPalaeontologyastheystand,theyrathersupportthanopposeDarwin’stheory。

  \"6。GreatweightmustbeattachedtotheobjectionbroughtforwardbyHuxley,otherwiseawarmsupporterofDarwin’shypothesis,thatweknowofnovarietieswhicharesterilewithoneanother,asistheruleamongsharplydistinguishedanimalforms。

  \"IfDarwinisright,itmustbedemonstratedthatformsmaybeproducedbyselection,which,likethepresentsharplydistinguishedanimalforms,areinfertile,whencoupledwithoneanother,andthishasnotbeendone。\"

  Theweightofthisobjectionisobvious;butourignoranceoftheconditionsoffertilityandsterility,thewantofcarefullyconductedexperimentsextendingoverlongseriesofyears,andthestrangeanomaliespresentedbytheresultsofthecross—fertilizationofmanyplants,shouldall,asMr。Darwinhasurged,betakenintoaccountinconsideringit。

  Theseventhobjectionisthatwehavealreadydiscussed(’supra’,p。

  178)。

  Theeighthandlaststandsasfollows:——

  \"8。ThedevelopmentaltheoryofDarwinisnotneededtoenableustounderstandtheregularharmoniousprogressofthecompleteseriesoforganicformsfromthesimplertothemoreperfect。

  \"TheexistenceofgenerallawsofNatureexplainsthisharmony,evenifweassumethatallbeingshavearisenseparatelyandindependentofoneanother。Darwinforgetsthatinorganicnature,inwhichtherecanbenothoughtofgeneticconnexionofforms,exhibitsthesameregularplan,thesameharmony,astheorganicworld;andthat,tociteonlyoneexample,thereisasmuchanaturalsystemofmineralsasofplantsandanimals。\"

  WedonotfeelquitesurethatweseizeProfessorKolliker’smeaninghere,butheappearstosuggestthattheobservationofthegeneralorderandharmonywhichpervadeinorganicnature,wouldleadustoanticipateasimilarorderandharmonyintheorganicworld。Andthisisnodoubttrue,butitbynomeansfollowsthattheparticularorderandharmonyobservedamongthemshouldbethatwhichwesee。Surelythestripesofdunhorses,andtheteethofthefoetal’Balaena’,arenotexplainedbythe\"existenceofgenerallawsofNature。\"Mr。

  Darwinendeavourstoexplaintheexactorderoforganicnaturewhichexists;notthemerefactthatthereissomeorder。

  Andwithregardtotheexistenceofanaturalsystemofminerals;theobviousreplyisthattheremaybeanaturalclassificationofanyobjects——ofstonesonasea—beach,orofworksofart;anaturalclassificationbeingsimplyanassemblageofobjectsingroups,soastoexpresstheirmostimportantandfundamentalresemblancesanddifferences。NodoubtMr。Darwinbelievesthatthoseresemblancesanddifferencesuponwhichournaturalsystemsorclassificationsofanimalsandplantsarebased,areresemblancesanddifferenceswhichhavebeenproducedgenetically,butwecandiscovernoreasonforsupposingthathedeniestheexistenceofnaturalclassificationsofotherkinds。

  And,afterall,isitquitesocertainthatageneticrelationmaynotunderlietheclassificationofminerals?Theinorganicworldhasnotalwaysbeenwhatweseeit。Ithascertainlyhaditsmetamorphoses,and,veryprobably,along\"Entwickelungsgeschichte\"outofanebularblastema。Whoknowshowfarthatamountoflikenessamongsetsofminerals,invirtueofwhichtheyarenowgroupedintofamiliesandorders,maynotbetheexpressionofthecommonconditionstowhichthatparticularpatchofnebulousfog,whichmayhavebeenconstitutedbytheiratoms,andofwhichtheymaybe,inthestrictestsense,thedescendants,wassubjected?

  Itwillbeobviousfromwhathaspreceded,thatwedonotagreewithProfessorKollikerinthinkingtheobjectionswhichhebringsforwardsoweightyastobefataltoDarwin’sview。Butevenifthecasewereotherwise,weshouldbeunabletoacceptthe\"TheoryofHeterogeneousGeneration\"whichisofferedasasubstitute。Thattheoryisthusstated:——

  \"Thefundamentalconceptionofthishypothesisis,that,undertheinfluenceofagenerallawofdevelopment,thegermsoforganismsproduceothersdifferentfromthemselves。Thismighthappen(1)bythefecundatedovapassing,inthecourseoftheirdevelopment,underparticularcircumstances,intohigherforms;(2)bytheprimitiveandlaterorganismsproducingotherorganismswithoutfecundation,outofgermsoreggs(Parthenogenesis)。\"

  Infavourofthishypothesis,ProfessorKollikeradducesthewell—knownfactsofAgamogenesis,or\"alternategeneration\";theextremedissimilarityofthemalesandfemalesofmanyanimals;andofthemales,females,andneutersofthoseinsectswhichliveincolonies:

  andhedefinesitsrelationstotheDarwiniantheoryasfollows:——

  \"ItisobviousthatmyhypothesisisapparentlyverysimilartoDarwin’s,inasmuchasIalsoconsiderthatthevariousformsofanimalshaveproceededdirectlyfromoneanother。Myhypothesisofthecreationoforganismsbyheterogeneousgeneration,however,isdistinguishedveryessentiallyfromDarwin’sbytheentireabsenceoftheprincipleofusefulvariationsandtheirnaturalselection:andmyfundamentalconceptionisthis,thatagreatplanofdevelopmentliesatthefoundationoftheoriginofthewholeorganicworld,impellingthesimplerformstomoreandmorecomplexdevelopments。Howthislawoperates,whatinfluencesdeterminethedevelopmentoftheeggsandgerms,andimpelthemtoassumeconstantlynewforms,Inaturallycannotpretendtosay;butIcanatleastadducethegreatanalogyofthealternationofgenerations。Ifa’Bipinnaria’,a’Brachialaria’,a’Pluteus’,iscompetenttoproducetheEchinoderm,whichissowidelydifferentfromit;ifahydroidpolypecanproducethehigherMedusa;

  ifthevermiformTrematode’nurse’candevelopwithinitselftheveryunlike’Cercaria’,itwillnotappearimpossiblethattheegg,orciliatedembryo,ofasponge,foronce,underspecialconditions,mightbecomeahydroidpolype,ortheembryoofaMedusa,anEchinoderm。\"

  Itisobvious,fromtheseextracts,thatProfessorKolliker’shypothesisisbaseduponthesupposedexistenceofacloseanalogybetweenthephenomenaofAgamogenesisandtheproductionofnewspeciesfrompre—existingones。Butistheanalogyarealone?Wethinkthatitisnot,and,bythehypothesis,cannotbe。

  ForwhatarethephenomenaofAgamogenesis,statedgenerally?Animpregnatedeggdevelopsintoanasexualform,A;thisgivesrise,asexually,toasecondformorforms,B,moreorlessdifferentfromA。Bmaymultiplyasexuallyagain;inthesimplercases,however,itdoesnot,but,acquiringsexualcharacters,producesimpregnatedeggsfromwhenceA,oncemore,arises。

  NocaseofAgamogenesisisknowninwhich,’whenAdifferswidelyfromB’,itisitselfcapableofsexualpropagation。NocasewhateverisknowninwhichtheprogenyofB,bysexualgeneration,isotherthanareproductionofA。

  ButifthisbeatruestatementofthenatureoftheprocessofAgamogenesis,howcanitenableustocomprehendtheproductionofnewspeciesfromalreadyexistingones?LetussupposeHyaenastohaveprecededDogs,andtohaveproducedthelatterinthisway。ThentheHyenawillrepresentA,andtheDog,B。ThefirstdifficultythatpresentsitselfisthattheHyenamustbeasexual,ortheprocesswillbewhollywithoutanalogyintheworldofAgamogenesis。Butpassingoverthisdifficulty,andsupposingamaleandfemaleDogtobeproducedatthesametimefromtheHyaenastock,theprogenyofthepair,iftheanalogyofthesimplerkindsofAgamogenesis*istobefollowed,shouldbealitter,notofpuppies,butofyoungHyenas。FortheAgamogeneticseriesisalways,aswehaveseen,A:B:A:B,etc。;

  whereas,fortheproductionofanewspecies,theseriesmustbeA:B:

  B:B,etc。Theproductionofnewspecies,orgenera,istheextremepermanentdivergencefromtheprimitivestock。AllknownAgamogeneticprocesses,ontheotherhand,endinacompletereturntotheprimitivestock。HowthenistheproductionofnewspeciestoberenderedintelligiblebytheanalogyofAgamogenesis?

  [footnote]*If,onthecontrary,wefollowtheanalogyofthemorecomplexformsofAgamogenesis,suchasthatexhibitedbysome’Trematoda’andbythe’Aphides’,theHyaenamustproduce,asexually,abroodofasexualDogs,fromwhichothersexlessDogsmustproceed。Attheendofacertainnumberoftermsoftheseries,theDogswouldacquiresexesandgenerateyoung;buttheseyoungwouldbe,notDogs,butHyaenas。Infact,wehave’demonstrated’,inAgamogeneticphenomena,thatinevitablerecurrencetotheoriginaltype,whichis’asserted’tobetrueofvariationsingeneral,byMr。Darwin’sopponents;andwhich,iftheassertioncouldbechangedintoademonstrationwould,infact,befataltohishypothesis。

  TheotheralternativeputbyProfessorKolliker——thepassageoffecundatedovainthecourseoftheirdevelopmentintohigherforms——would,ifitoccurred,bemerelyanextremecaseofvariationintheDarwiniansense,greaterindegreethan,butperfectlysimilarinkindto,thatwhichoccurredwhenthewell—knownAnconRamwasdevelopedfromanordinaryEwe’sovum。IndeedwehavealwaysthoughtthatMr。Darwinhasunnecessarilyhamperedhimselfbyadheringsostrictlytohisfavourite\"Naturanonfacitsaltum。\"Wegreatlysuspectthatshedoesmakeconsiderablejumpsinthewayofvariationnowandthen,andthatthesesaltationsgiverisetosomeofthegapswhichappeartoexistintheseriesofknownforms。

  StronglyandfreelyaswehaveventuredtodisagreewithProfessorKolliker,wehavealwaysdonesowithregret,andwetrustwithoutviolatingthatrespectwhichisdue,notonlytohisscientificeminenceandtothecarefulstudywhichhehasdevotedtothesubject,buttotheperfectfairnessofhisargumentation,andthegenerousappreciationoftheworthofMr。Darwin’slabourswhichhealwaysdisplays。ItwouldbesatisfactorytobeabletosayasmuchforM。

  Flourens。

  ButthePerpetualSecretaryoftheFrenchAcademyofSciencesdealswithMr。DarwinasthefirstNapoleonwouldhavetreatedan\"ideologue;\"

  andwhiledisplayingapainfulweaknessoflogicandshallownessofinformation,assumesatoneofauthority,whichalwaystouchesupontheludicrous,andsometimespassesthelimitsofgoodbreeding。

  Forexample(p。56):——

  \"M。Darwincontinue:’Aucunedistinctionabsoluen’aeteetnepoutetreetablieentrelesesp_cesetlesvarietes。’Jevousaidejaditquevousvoustrompiez;unedistinctionabsolueseparelesvarietesd’aveclesespeces。\"

  \"Jevousaidejadit;moi,M。leSecretaireperpetueldel’AcademiedesSciences:etvous\"’Quin’etesrien,PasmemeAcademicien;’

  whatdoyoumeanbyassertingthecontrary?\"BeingdevoidoftheblessingsofanAcademyinEngland,weareunaccustomedtoseeourablestmentreatedinthisfashion,evenbya\"PerpetualSecretary。\"

  Oragain,consideringthatifthereisanyonequalityofMr。Darwin’sworktowhichfriendsandfoeshavealikebornewitness,itishiscandourandfairnessinadmittinganddiscussingobjections,whatistobethoughtofM。Flourens’assertion,that\"M。Darwinnecitequelesauteursquipartagentsesopinions。\"(P。

  40。)

  Oncemore(p。65):——

  \"Enfinl’ouvragedeM。Darwinaparu。Onnepeutqu’etrefrappedutalentdel’auteur。Maisqued’ideesobscures,qued’ideesfausses!

  Queljargonmetaphysiquejetemalaproposdansl’histoirenaturelle,quitombedanslegalimatiasdesqu’ellesortdesideesclaires,desideesjustes!Quellangagepretentieuxetvide!Quellespersonificationspuerilesetsurannees!Olucidite!Osoliditedel’espritFrancais,quedevenez—vous?\"

  \"Obscureideas,\"\"metaphysicaljargon,\"\"pretentiousandemptylanguage,\"\"puerileandsuperannuatedpersonifications。\"Mr。DarwinhasmanyandhotopponentsonthissideoftheChannelandinGermany,butwedonotrecollecttohavefoundpreciselythesesinsinthelongcatalogueofthosehithertolaidtohischarge。Itisworthwhile,therefore,toexamineintothesediscoverieseffectedsolelybytheaidofthe\"lucidityandsolidity\"ofthemindofM。Flourens。

  AccordingtoM。Flourens,Mr。Darwin’sgreaterroristhathehaspersonifiedNature(p。10),andfurtherthathehas\"imaginedanaturalselection:heimaginesafterwardsthatthispowerofselection(pouvoird’_lire)whichhegivestoNatureissimilartothepowerofman。Thesetwosuppositionsadmitted,nothingstopshim:

  heplayswithNatureashelikes,andmakesherdoallhepleases。\"

  (P。6。)

  AndthisisthewayM。Flourensextinguishesnaturalselection:

  \"Voyonsdoncencoreunefois,cequ’ilpeutyavoirdefondedanscequ’onnommeelectionnaturelle。

  \"L’electionnaturellen’estsousunautrenomquelanature。Pourunetreorganise,lanaturen’estquel’organisation,niplusnimoins。

  \"Ilfaudradoncaussipersonnifierl’organisation,etdirequel’organisationchoisitl’organisation。L’electionnaturelleestcetteformesubstantielledontonjouaitautrefoisavectantdefacilite。

  Aristotedisaitque’Sil’artdebatiretaitdanslebois,cetartagiraitcommelanature。’Alaplacedel’artdebatirM。Darwinmetl’electionnaturelle,etc’esttoutun:l’unn’estpaspluschimeriquequel’autre。\"(P。31。)

  AndthisisreallyallthatM。FlourenscanmakeofNaturalSelection。

  Wehavegiventheoriginal,infearlestatranslationshouldberegardedasatravesty;butwiththeoriginalbeforethereader,wemaytrytoanalysethepassage。\"Foranorganizedbeing,Natureisonlyorganization,neithermorenorless。\"

  Organizedbeingsthenhaveabsolutelynorelationtoinorganicnature:aplantdoesnot,dependonsoilorsunshine,climate,depthintheocean,heightaboveit;thequantityofsalinemattersinwaterhavenoinfluenceuponanimallife;thesubstitutionofcarbonicacidforoxygeninouratmospherewouldhurtnobody!ThattheseareabsurditiesnooneshouldknowbetterthanM。Flourens;buttheyarelogicaldeductionsfromtheassertionjustquoted,andfromthefurtherstatementthatnaturalselectionmeansonlythat\"organizationchoosesandselectsorganization。\"

  Forifitbeonceadmitted(whatnosanemandenies)thatthechancesoflifeofanygivenorganismareincreasedbycertainconditions(A)anddiminishedbytheiropposites(B),thenitismathematicallycertainthatanychangeofconditionsinthedirectionof(A)willexerciseaselectiveinfluenceinfavourofthatorganism,tendingtoitsincreaseandmultiplication,whileanychangeinthedirectionof(B)willexerciseaselectiveinfluenceagainstthatorganism,tendingtoitsdecreaseandextinction。

  Or,ontheotherhand,conditionsremainingthesame,letagivenorganismvary(andnoonedoubtsthattheydovary)intwodirections:

  intooneform(a)betterfittedtocopewiththeseconditionsthantheoriginalstock,andasecond(b)lesswelladaptedtothem。Thenitisnolesscertainthattheconditionsinquestionmustexerciseaselectiveinfluenceinfavourof(a)andagainst(b),sothat(a)willtendtopredominance,and(b)toextirpation。

  ThatM。Flourensshouldbeunabletoperceivethelogicalnecessityofthesesimplearguments,whichlieatthefoundationofallMr。Darwin’sreasoning;thatheshouldconfoundanirrefragabledeductionfromtheobservedrelationsoforganismstotheconditionswhichliearoundthem,withametaphysical\"formesubstantielle,\"orachimericalpersonificationofthepowersofNature,wouldbeincredible,wereitnotthatotherpassagesofhisworkleavenoroomfordoubtuponthesubject。

  \"Onimagineune’electionnaturelle’que,pourplusdemenagement,onmeditetreinconsciente,sanss’apercevoirquelecontre—senslitteralestprecisementla:’electioninconsciente’。\"(P。52。)

  \"J’aidejaditcequ’ilfautpenserde’l’electionnaturelle’。Ou’l’electionnaturelle’n’estrien,ouc’estlanature:maislanaturedouee’d’election’,maislanaturepersonnifiee:derniereerreurduderniersiecle:Lexixefaitplusdepersonnifications。\"(P。53。)

  M。Flourenscannotimagineanunconsciousselection——itisforhimacontradictioninterms。DidM。Flourensevervisitoneoftheprettiestwatering—placesof\"labelleFrance,\"theBaied’Arcachon?Ifso,hewillprobablyhavepassedthroughthedistrictoftheLandes,andwillhavehadanopportunityofobservingtheformationof\"dunes\"

  onagrandscale。Whatarethese\"dunes\"?ThewindsandwavesoftheBayofBiscayhavenotmuchconsciousness,andyettheyhavewithgreatcare\"selected,\"fromamonganinfinityofmassesofsilexofallshapesandsizes,whichhavebeensubmittedtotheiraction,allthegrainsofsandbelowacertainsize,andhaveheapedthembythemselvesoveragreatarea。Thissandhasbeen\"unconsciouslyselected\"fromamidstthegravelinwhichitfirstlaywithasmuchprecisionasifmanhad\"consciouslyselected\"itbytheaidofasieve。PhysicalGeologyisfullofsuchselections——ofthepickingoutofthesoftfromthehard,ofthesolublefromtheinsoluble,ofthefusiblefromtheinfusible,bynaturalagenciestowhichwearecertainlynotinthehabitofascribingconsciousness。

  Butthatwhichwindandseaaretoasandybeach,thesumofinfluences,whichwetermthe\"conditionsofexistence,\"istolivingorganisms。

  Theweakaresiftedoutfromthestrong。Afrostynight\"selects\"thehardyplantsinaplantationfromamongthetenderonesaseffectuallyasifitwerethewind,andthey,thesandandpebbles,ofourillustration;or,ontheotherhand,asiftheintelligenceofagardenerhadbeenoperativeincuttingtheweakerorganismsdown。Thethistle,whichhasspreadoverthePampas,tothedestructionofnativeplants,hasbeenmoreeffectually\"selected\"bytheunconsciousoperationofnaturalconditionsthanifathousandagriculturistshadspenttheirtimeinsowingit。

  ItisoneofMr。Darwin’smanygreatservicestoBiologicalsciencethathehasdemonstratedthesignificanceofthesefacts。Hehasshownthat——givenvariationandgivenchangeofconditions——theinevitableresultistheexerciseofsuchaninfluenceuponorganismsthatoneishelpedandanotherisimpeded;onetendstopredominate,anothertodisappear;andthusthelivingworldbearswithinitself,andissurroundedby,impulsestowardsincessantchange。

  Butthetruthsjuststatedareascertainasanyotherphysicallaws,quiteindependentlyofthetruth,orfalsehood,ofthehypothesiswhichMr。Darwinhasbaseduponthem;andthatM。Flourens,missingthesubstanceandgraspingatashadow,shouldbeblindtotheadmirableexpositionofthem,whichMr。Darwinhasgiven,andseenothingtherebuta\"derniereerreurduderniersiecle\"——apersonificationofNature——leadsusindeedtocrywithhim:\"Olucidite!Osoliditedel’espritFrancais,quedevenez—vous?\"

  M。Flourenshas,infact,utterlyfailedtocomprehendthefirstprinciplesofthedoctrinewhichheassailssorudely。Hisobjectionstodetailsareoftheoldsort,sobatteredandhackneyedonthissideoftheChannel,thatnotevenaQuarterlyReviewercouldbeinducedtopickthemupforthepurposeofpeltingMr。Darwinoveragain。WehaveCuvierandthemummies;M。RoulinandthedomesticatedanimalsofAmerica;thedifficultiespresentedbyhybridismandbyPalaeontology;

  Darwinisma’rifacciamento’ofDeMailletandLamarck;Darwinismasystemwithoutacommencement,anditsauthorboundtobelieveinM。

  Pouchet,etc。etc。Howoneknowsitallbyheart,andwithwhatreliefonereadsatp。65——

  \"JelaisseM。Darwin!\"

  ButwecannotleaveM。Flourenswithoutcallingourreaders’attentiontohiswonderfultenthchapter,\"DelaPreexistencedesGermesetdel’Epigenese,\"whichopensthus:——

  \"Spontaneousgenerationisonlyachimaera。Thispointestablished,twohypothesesremain:thatof’pre—existence’andthatof’epigenesis’。Theoneofthesehypotheseshasaslittlefoundationastheother。\"(P。163。)

  \"Thedoctrineof’epigenesis’isderivedfromHarvey:followingbyocularinspectionthedevelopmentofthenewbeingintheWindsordoes,hesaweachpartappearsuccessively,andtakingthemomentof’appearance’forthemomentof’formation’heimagined’epigenesis’。\"

  (P。165。)

  Onthecontrary,saysM。Flourens(p。167),\"Thenewbeingisformedatastroke(’toutd’uncoup’)asawhole,instantaneously;itisnotformedpartbypart,andatdifferenttimes。

  Itisformedatonceatthesingle’individual’momentatwhichtheconjunctionofthemaleandfemaleelementstakesplace。\"

  ItwillbeobservedthatM。Flourensuseslanguagewhichcannotbemistaken。Forhim,thelaboursofvonBaer,ofRathke,ofCoste,andtheircontemporariesandsuccessorsinGermany,France,andEngland,arenon—existent:and,asDarwin\"imagina\"naturalselection,soHarvey\"imagina\"thatdoctrinewhichgiveshimanevengreaterclaimtothevenerationofposteritythanhisbetterknowndiscoveryofthecirculationoftheblood。

  Languagesuchasthatwehavequotedis,infact,sopreposterous,soutterlyincompatiblewithanythingbutabsoluteignoranceofsomeofthebestestablishedfacts,thatweshouldhavepasseditoverinsilencehaditnotappearedtoaffordsomecluetoM。Flourens’

  unhesitating,’apriori’,repudiationofallformsofthedoctrineofprogressivemodificationoflivingbeings。Hewhosemindremainsuninfluencedbyanacquaintancewiththephenomenaofdevelopment,mustindeedlackoneofthechiefmotivestowardstheendeavourtotraceageneticrelationbetweenthedifferentexistingformsoflife。ThosewhoareignorantofGeology,findnodifficultyinbelievingthattheworldwasmadeasitis;andtheshepherd,untutoredinhistory,seesnoreasontoregardthegreenmoundswhichindicatethesiteofaRomancamp,asaughtbutpartandparceloftheprimevalhill—side。SoM。

  Flourens,whobelievesthatembryosareformed\"toutd’uncoup,\"

  naturallyfindsnodifficultyinconceivingthatspeciescameintoexistenceinthesameway。

点击下载App,搜索"Criticisms on",免费读到尾