42 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



mode of handling it, that set the tide of his influence wrong beyond his 

 power of righting. 



For one thing, Darwin was unfortunate in the title chosen for his 

 foundation book. " The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selec- 

 tion, or the Preservation of Favored Eaces in the Struggle for Life " is 

 the title in full. A little reflection discovers ambiguity in this. Is the 

 author concerned primarily with the origin of species or with a 'par- 

 ticular way of accounting for their origin? One piece of internal evi- 

 dence of a general character is to the effect that the second alternative 

 is the true one. The explanatory hypothesis is treated first and occupies 

 fully half the work, while the observed proofs of origin by natural 

 modification are given second place. Why did not Darwin present his 

 proofs of evolution first and his hypothesis second, thus making his title 

 and order of treatment correspond ? The fact is he wavered as to where 

 the emphasis should be laid touching the relative importance of the 

 two objects he tells us he had in view in writing the " Origin." This 

 wavering he never to the end of his life was able to fully correct. 



We can point out specifically how this equivocal meaning of the 



title has operated to make Darwin a natural selectionist in a sense that 



he himself resisted. One biologist, a particularly strong pro-natural 



selectionist, has written : 



This title is of interest, as has been pointed out by Professor E. Ray 

 Lankester, in relation to the controversy upon the exact meaning of the word 

 " Darwinism." Some writers have argued that the term " Darwinism " includes 

 the whole of the causes of evolution accepted by Darwin — the supposed in- 

 herited effects of use and disuse and the direct influence of environment, which 

 find a subordinate place in the " Origin," as well as natural selection, which is 

 the real subject of the book and which is fully defined in the title. It would 

 seem appropriate to use the term " Darwinism " as Wallace uses it, to indicate 

 the causes of evolution which were suggested by Darwin himself, excluding 

 those supposed causes which had been previously brought forward by earlier 

 writers, and especially by Lamarck. 6 (Italics mine.) 



The large conception that " Darwinism " might be " evolutionism " 

 has no place in this author's mind, so it would seem from this statement. 

 Darwinism according to such a view must have sole reference to certain 

 specified causes of evolution instead of evolution itself through any and 

 all causes that may be behind it. The power of mental bias to lead men 

 unconsciously wrong is not often more strikingly illustrated than in 

 this; for here it goes to the extent of making professed followers and 

 admirers of Darwin do him grave injustice. What meaning can Dar- 

 winians who thus circumscribe " Darwinism " put into such of their 

 prophet's language as this? 



I may be permitted to say, as some excuse, that I had two distinct objects 

 in view, firstly, to show that species had not been separately created, and 

 secondly, that natural selection had been the chief agent of change, though 



"Poulton, "Charles Darwin," p. 99. 



