58 Dat'wuiy and after Darwin, 



gained which will finally settle the question one 

 way or the other. 



Meanwhile, however, we must be content with the 

 evidence as it stands ; and this will lead us to the 

 second division of our subject. That is to say, having 

 now dealt with the antecedent, or merely logical, 

 state of the question, we have next to consider what 

 actual, or biological, evidence there is at present 

 available on either side of it. Thus far. neither side 

 in the debate has any advantage over the other. On 

 grounds of general reasoning alone they both have 

 to rely on more or less dogmatic assumptions. For 

 it is equally an unreasoned statement of opinion 

 whether we allege that all the phenomena of organic 

 evolution can be. or can not be, explained by the 

 theory of natural selection alone. We are at present 

 much too ignorant touching the causes of organic 

 evolution to indulge in dogmatism of this kind ; 

 and if the question is to be referred for its answer 

 to authority, it would appear that, both in respect 

 of number and weight, opinions on the side of having 

 provisionally to retain the Lamarckian factors are 

 more authoritative than those />er contra ^ . 



Turning then to the question of fact, with which 

 the following chapters are concerned, I will conclude 

 this preliminary one with a few words on the method 

 of discussion to be adopted. 



First I will give the evidence in favour of Lamarck- 

 ianism ; this will occupy the next two chapters. 



' For a fair and careful statement of the present balance of authoritative 

 opinion upon the question, see H. F. Osborn, American Naturalist, 

 i8qj. pp. 537-67. 



