INTRODUCTION 



for method — and the pragmatic method completes 

 and enlarges them there. "^^ But there does seem much 

 truth in the criticism that historians of science are 

 singularly lacking in the critical spirit and content 

 themselves with giving a thin, isolated thread of 

 scientific facts and discoveries from the past to the 

 present. As chroniclers, they are usually accurate 

 when dealing with recent events and, until recently, 

 they assumed that past scientific history of a century 

 ago was of little value. Now, it is the fashion for 

 historians, especially of evolution, to develop that 

 subject as an evolution of thought from the earliest 

 times. If Democritus, Empedocles, Aristotle, St. 

 Augustine, but mention the word "change" in con- 

 nection with life they are portrayed as fathers or cor- 

 ner-stones of evolution. And, apparently, little search 

 is made to discover their attitude of mind so as to de- 

 termine in what sense the word was used. To give to 

 opinions and expressions of past writers their modern 

 significance, is generally to falsify history. 



A final word should be given in justification of the 

 fact that I have based my criticism, and have placed 

 most of my emphasis, on the work and ideas of the 

 founders of the evolution theory, Lamarck, Spencer, 

 Darwin, Huxley, Fiske, and Haeckel. Objection will 

 almost certainly be made that, as their work has been 

 superseded or at least revised by modern scientific 

 work, I should criticise the facts and hypotheses of 



^■^ Life and Letters of William James, vol. II, p. 270. 



C 33 3 



