第1章

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。