PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECTS OF EVOLUTION 



because of the unfolding of something already present in 

 matter.3 Does this mean that the distinctions between inanimate 

 nature, animate nature, and man are only gradual and not 

 essential? Are we not forced to a monistic conception of man? 

 No, we are not, for to state an analogy does not mean to state 

 a similarity. Let us elucidate this point. 



To begin with, it should be recalled that the main philos- 

 ophical problems connected with the dispute around vitalism, 

 evolution, and the unity of man find their origin in the way 

 we define such pair of terms as non-living and living, matter 

 and spirit. The tendency exists to define them in a mutually 

 exclusive way. Consequently, spiritual means non-material, 

 material means non-spiritual; they are contradictory terms 

 like non-living and living. This way of defining is the result 

 of our schematizing way of thinking. We have to correct this 

 way as we have done above, but human knowledge being 

 what it is, we are never able to correct our schematizing way 

 of thinking in such a manner that we are beyond any sche- 

 matization. The only manner of correction open to us is to 

 counterbalance one way of schematizing by another. 



Consequently, when we speak of a gradual unfolding of 

 material being to characterize the status of animate nature 

 and of man, we should not forget that this way of speaking 

 is schematic too. In order to understand nature we must use 

 both ways of schematizing, the one that speaks of gradual 

 unfolding and the other that speaks of the addition of entirely 

 new factors. For nature itself shows us both aspects. On the 

 one hand, it shows graduations and never sharp distinctions. 

 The biologist hesitates whether a virus should be considered 

 as living or as non-living, and he can find no clear-cut distinc- 

 tion between vegetative and sensitive life. By the same token 

 human babies do not show much of intellectual life, they are 

 just young animals. On the other hand, the fact that abio- 

 genesis and macro-evolution, if possible at all, do not belong 

 to the normal course of events in nature clearly indicates 

 what important and essential thresholds must be crossed by 

 the transition from non-living to living matter and by the 



^ The difficulties to define life confirm this thesis. Whatever definition 

 we choose, non-living structures can always be found which more or 

 less answer the definition. 



74 



