May, 1922 common misgonceptions of evolution 179 



The notion seems to be prevalent that the proof of evolu- 

 tion hangs on the proof of the method of the origin of species. 

 Now, it happens that the exact cause of the origin of species is 

 still in doubt. This, however, is a comparatively small matter 

 and the law of evolution does not depend upon its solution at 

 all. We have abundant proof that multitudes of species have 

 originated and some of these have been traced through the 

 process of change, even if we do not know what caused the 

 change. Would anyone deny the fact that chickens hatch out 

 of hen's eggs, because the biologist does not pretend to know 

 all the processes involved in the development of the embryo? 



It would be extremely interesting to know the causes of the 

 origin of species, but it is not necessary to the fact of evolution. 

 The origin of species in the past is an incontrovertable fact, 

 even if we do not know how they originate. Similarly, organic 

 evolution is an incontrovertable fact, though we may not know 

 all the processes concerned. 



In recent years it has often been stated that "Darwinism is 

 discredited" and the average person takes this statement to 

 mean that evolution is discredited, for most people cannot seem 

 to get through their heads the fact that Dariuinism and evolution 

 are not synonymous. To what extent Darwinism is discredited, 

 however, depends entirely upon what we mean by the term 

 "Darwinism." Darwin's great contribution was establishing 

 the fact of evolution, than which no greater contribution has 

 ever been made to the fields of science and philosophy. 



There is no thought in the minds of scientists of any possi- 

 bility of controverting evolution, any more than they would 

 deny the Newtonian law of gravitation or the Copernican 

 cosmology. If, however, we merely mean by Darwinism, the 

 same reliance on natural selection of fortuitous variations as the 

 method of origination of new species, which Darwin placed upon 

 it, then we may admit that there are many honest doubters as 

 to the method of evolution as stated by Darwin. 



However, it is clear that the non-scientific public does not 

 distinguish between the fact of organic evolution and Darwin's 

 explanation of its cause. So, indiscriminating propagandists, 

 opposed to evolution, fix upon the discussion of Darwin's 

 proposed method and overlook entirely the fact which all scientists 

 are agreed upon. 



