7A Proceedings of Indiana Academy of Science. 
That the points in the argument for war are not overdrawn as here 
formulated might easily be shown by quotations from many German 
writers. From eminent as well as from humble sources might be drawn 
proof that this point of view is part of the mental fabric of that nation. 
Many articles are available to show that the above propositions rep- 
resent the average opinion of the dominant classes, while from Prussian 
sources come utterances that make the version here given seem woefully 
understated. Actual quotations here, however, appear unnecessary in 
view of the many statements in newspapers, magazines and authoritive 
publications of the years since the war began which depict plainly the 
German attitude. 
The purpose of this discussion is to show that when critically exam- 
ined this argument is not in every respect biologically sound. Indeed 
the points in the argument are only half truths, and as such can not 
be used as a basis from which to draw general conclusions. Not only 
is the biology of the present time set against war as an instrument of 
racial progress, but recent investigations go to show that, in some of 
its aspects at least, war tends to retard the development of the nations 
which pursue it. Biology has said nothing for which it merits the taint 
left upon it by this false argument. To grant the fallacious premises 
is possible only upon misinterpretation of the facts and teachings of 
nature. 
Of the points advanced in the supposed biological argument for war, 
the first is the all importance of the factor of natural selection in evo- 
lution. Evidence for and against this view is familiar to all biologists 
and needs only be mentioned here. In Darwin’s theory of evolution, 
natural selection was indeed the chief factor by which progressive de- 
velopment was thought to be accomplished; but he admitted that there 
might also be other factors of importance. Natural selection depends 
upon the usefulness of the character under consideration; that is, in 
the struggle for existence it is the character which is most useful, which 
is best fitted to the environment wherein the struggle is conducted, that 
is preserved. Darwin supposed that, as the small variations accumu- 
lated, they gradually fitted the individual possessing them more and 
more to its surroundings, and thus were passed to the next generations. 
Even the most minute, the continuous variations were to be interpreted 
thus. Discontinuous variations, by which offspring markedly different 
in some particular character are produced, were recognized occasionally 
to occur in nature, but they were thought to be rare and therefore 
insignificant. Darwin also recognized that his factor fails to account 
for the perpetuation of minute variations until they are sufficiently 
developed to be of importance to the organism. Natural selection with- 
cut doubt plays its part in the case of a useful character. The white 
coat of the polar bear renders that animal inconspicuous on the snow 
