INTRODUCTION 



" Grant a simple archetypal creature like the mudfish or Lepidosiren, with the five senses 

 and some vestiges of mind, and I believe natural selection will account for the production 

 of every vertebrate animal." Darwin to Lyell in 1859. 



One of Gauguin's best-known paintings portrays a group of human 

 figures, some standing, some reclining, all in an attitude of melancholy 

 thoughtfulness. The picture might well serve as an illustration of 

 Tennyson's "Lotus Eaters." The painter, however, has entitled it 

 "Where do we come from? Where are we now? Where are we going?" 

 These persistent problems interest the biologist also as well as the poet and 

 artist. "The question of questions," says the elder Huxley, " the problem 

 which underlies all others and is more deeply interesting than any other, is 

 the ascertainment of the place which man occupies in nature and of his 

 relations to the universe of things." 



The answer is to be found, if it is to be found at all, through scientific 

 methods of investigation and these seem to point inevitably to some 

 form of evolution. Evolution is the scientific theory that organisms 

 have arisen in nature by "continuous progressive change according to 

 certain laws and by means of resident forces." The theory assumes the 

 mutability of species, their blood relationship to one another, and their 

 origin in accordance with natural law by means of resident factors. For 

 its factual support evolutionists appeal to circumstantial evidence. 

 Geological evidence provides the strongest argument for evolution. For 

 the evidence from the rocks demonstrates that the earth has existed for 

 many millions of years, and that during this time the bodies of organisms 

 have progressively changed, so as to resemble, more and more, the forms 

 now living. 



Many objections have been raised against the evolution theory, most 

 of them based upon misunderstanding. A few of these may be mentioned. 

 First, it is asserted that the foundations of the theory are weak, since it 

 depends upon circumstantial evidence. In reply to this objection it may 

 be pointed out that there is no more trustworthy evidence than circum- 

 stantial. Courts have found that eye witnesses are notoriously unreliable. 



It is sometimes asked how it happens, if there has been evolution, 

 that there are any lower animals left. " Why haven't all monkeys turned 

 into men? " This supposed difficulty is evidently based upon the assump- 



