358 THE HISTORY OF CREATION. 
remains in detail (like all the pedigrees of animals and 
plants previously discussed) a more or less approximate 
general hypothesis. This however does not affect the 
application of the theory of descent to man. Here, as in 
all investigations on the derivation of organisms, one must 
clearly distinguish between the general theory of descent 
and the special hypotheses of descent. The general theory of 
descent claims full and lasting value, because it is an 
inductive law, based upon all the whole series of biological 
phenomena and their inner causal connection. Every 
special hypothesis of descent, on the other hand, has its 
special value determined by the existing condition of our 
biological knowledge, and by the extent of the objective 
empirical basis upon which we deductively establish this 
particular hypothesis. Hence, all the individual attempts 
to obtain a knowledge of the pedigree of any one group of 
organisms possesses but a temporary and conditional value, 
and any special hypothesis relating to it will become the 
more and more perfect the greater the advance we make in 
the comparative anatomy, ontogeny, and paleontology of 
the group in question. The more, however, we enter into 
genealogical details, and the further we trace the separate 
off-shoots and branches of the pedigree, the more uncertain 
and subjective becomes our special hypothesis of descent on 
account of the incompleteness of our empirical basis. This 
however does no injury to the general theory of descent, 
which remains as the indispensable foundation for really 
profound apprehension of biological phenomena. Accord- 
ingly, there can be no doubt that we can and must, with 
full assurance, regard the derivation of man—in the first 
place, from ape-like forms; further back, from lower 
. went a ree el 
