THE SPECIES 263 



One association splits up into several. The first, it is 

 true, included a greater number of differences within it ; but 

 it was no more firmly knit together than those which arose 

 from it ; if it had been, it would have been able to hold 

 together the greater wealth of variety. 



If we try to represent graphically this splitting off of new 

 species, we get the familiar picture of the genealogical tree. 

 Since the species-associations are constructed in conformity 

 with plan, we may see in the genealogical tree the representa- 

 tion of a living phenomenon. 



It is obvious that, by mere splitting off, no higher com- ^ 

 plexity can be created. Higher complexity in no way owes 

 its origin to the appearance of new species, but to that of new 

 individuals. When the complexity of the individuals within 

 a species increases, there comes a moment, it would seem, 

 when the bond no longer suffices, and races begin to branch 

 off, which ultimately become independent. 



The inquiry as to increase in complexity, therefore, 

 must be directed, not to the species, but to the individual 

 organism. 



THE IDEA OF EVOLUTION 



The enthusiasm with which Darwinians advocate the idea 

 of evolution has something absurd in it ; and this is not 

 merely because their view of the world, essentially based as 

 it is on physics and chemistry; cannot create the idea of 

 evolution out of these sciences, which are fundamentally 

 opposed to any evolution whatsoever. It is also, and chiefly, 

 because the word " evolution " expresses just the opposite 

 of what it is intended to mean. 



" Evolutio," or unfolding, clearly means that the form- 

 ing of folds becomes less and less. But " evolution " is used 

 to express the increase in complexity observed in the realm 

 of living things, beginning with the simple amoeba and going 



'/ 



