1338 
Still I must warn against a possible one-sided interpretation of 
the part that these organs can play in the bringing about of morph- 
ological differences. In the evolution of man this part was, say, 
pre-eminently a retardative one. | have not been able to find any 
indication of an activating influence. But this is not saying that in 
other cases an activating influence may not exist, causing an accent- 
uation in younger forms of characteristics which existed in prin- 
ciple in their ancestors. 
And, to conclude, another question, or rather a problem. I have 
advanced a ground to prove that the developmental rate of man 
has been retarded, a retardation which, by the way, is stronger in 
the male than in the female sex. To this retardation-process he owes 
it, I would observe, that he is born “nudus et inermis”, that, in 
contradistinction to the other mammals, it is only rather a long 
time after his birth, that his consciousness of self awakes, followed 
by the longer infantile, puerile and juvenile phases. 
This is a privilege which man has over other organisms. But — 
would it be overbold to ‘attach to this view the remark, that he 
has had to pay for this privilege with: greater sensitiveness to 
disease-causing influences as a consequence of a weakened capacity 
for resistance? A retardation of the vital processes means a decrease 
of their intensity. A decreased intensity of the vital processes means 
weakening of staying-power; weakening of staying-power means 
increased sensitiveness to noxious influences. And is there any other 
organism to be found, so sensitive to noxious influences, so subject 
to disease as man? With this question I wish to close my contribution. 
