MODERN BIOLOGY 5x1 



the theory of evolution, had been suspected by the conservatives and looked 

 upon as a socially dangerous hypothesis, the truth of which, moreover, 

 could be disputed on the grounds of the plastidule theory and similar ideas 

 contained in it. The exchange of ideas on Darwinism became in these cir- 

 cumstances more and more lively; round Haeckel there gathered a crowd 

 of young naturalists who preached the new doctrine with enthusiasm. 

 Among them may be named A. Brehm, the author of the universally known 

 work Animal Life, F. von Hellwald, known as a geographical writer, 

 G. Jager, famous for his curious hygienic theory, and others. Since the uni- 

 versities were mostly closed to them, they carried on their agitation by means 

 of popular lectures and polemical writings, in which they expounded their 

 views, willingly associating their natural-scientific radicalism with a po- 

 litical radicalism, and with this party the old radicals Vogt and Biichner 

 associated themselves. But the new theory claimed also politically con- 

 servative adherents, as, for instance, Du Bois-Reymond; he had, it is true, 

 embraced Darwinism with enthusiasm and had declared that its appearance 

 had freed biology from all explanations of the vexed problems of final- 

 ity, but at the same time he had expressed disapproval of "Haeckelism." 

 In his above-mentioned lecture on the limitations of our knowledge of 

 nature he had uttered a warning against belief in a possibility of definitely 

 solving the riddles of nature and life. Haeckel, who, it will be remembered, 

 had nevertheless himself admitted the limitation of man's capacity for 

 knowledge, became enraged at the word " ignorabimus,'' in which he scented 

 political reaction. The foreword to his Anthropogenie is directed against it 

 and treats the expression entirely politically. The situation became still more 

 tense some years later, when the Prussian Government was engaged in draft- 

 ing a new educational law, the provisions of w^hich were bound to affect the 

 future of science in Germany. Then Haeckel came forward at a scientific 

 meeting at Munich in 1877 with an address on the relation of the evolution 

 theory to science in general. In it he presented his old theories, including 

 the plastidule hypothesis, and expressed the assurance in connexion with 

 them that biology, as conceived evolutionally, is not an exact, but a his- 

 torical and philosophical, science, and as such aimed at uniting natural- 

 scientific research with the psychical sciences and thus forming the basis 

 for a uniform view of life, which would gradually reconstruct the whole 

 of human existence on general humanitarian lines, and which should there- 

 fore constitute the foundations of all education. 



Virchow opposes Haeckel 

 This proposal was opposed by Virchow in a speech in which he points out 

 all that is hypothetical and unproved in Darwinism, and on these grounds 

 he uttered a warning against incorporating it in a scheme of school educa- 

 tion, for such a program should only concern itself with indisputable proofs. 



