284 SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE ORGANISM 



Darwinian dogmatists, while Lamarckism is antimaterialistic 

 by its very nature. 



Now it is very important, I think, to notice that this 

 difference between the two theories is unable to disguise 



o 



one main point which is common to both : and it is to 

 this point, and to this point only, that our chief objections 

 against both these theories converge at present. 



The contingency of the typical organic form is maintained 

 by Darwinism as well as by Lamarckism : both theories, 

 therefore, break down for almost the same reasons. The term 

 " contingency ' can signify very different relations, having 

 but little in common ; but it is sufficient for our present 

 purpose to observe that there may be distinguished roughly 

 two main classes of contingencies, which may provisionally 

 be called the " contingency of being," and the " contingency 

 of occurring." It is with the contingency of being that 

 criticism of Darwinism and Lamarckism of the dogmatic 

 type has to deal. Darwinism dealt with variations occur- 

 ring at random ; the organic form was the result of a 

 fixation of only one kind of such variations, all others 

 being extinguished by selection. In other terms, the specific 

 organised form, as understood by Darwinism, was a unit 

 only to the extent that all its properties related to one and 

 the same body, but for the rest it was a mere aggregation 

 or summation. It may be objected to this statement, that 

 by being inherited in its specificity the Darwinian form 

 proved to be a unit in a higher sense of the word, even 

 in the opinion of dogmatic Darwinians ; and this objection, 

 perhaps, holds good as far as inheritance is concerned. But 

 on the other hand, it must never be forgotten that the 

 word " unit " had quite a vague and empty meaning even 



