94 



gegengesetzten Seiten sicli vervollkommnen, S3 cla3 die Pflfinze sich zuletzt im Baum 

 dnuernd und starr, das Tier im Menschen zur hochsten 'Beweglichkeit und Freiheit 

 sich verherrhcht. 



Here lie clearly seems to liave some idea of the tlieory of descent and he 

 refers also to the divergence of characters. 



BiELSCHOWSKY*, explaining Goethe's idea as to the formation of speciea, 

 opines that, as to the origin of spacies there are two possible theories, one 

 is that all the spacies are created by God separately and indepandently, and 

 the other is that all the species are formed by evolution from one single 

 origin. His thought is, in other words, that the formation of spacies is ex- 

 plainable in two ways, either by the creation theory or by the evolution 

 theory. Aud finally he concludes that, as Goethe undoubtedly did not balieve 

 the creation theory, he must have had in mind the evolution theory. 



My opinion is quite different from that of the above mantioned author. 

 I think that there is, besides the two ways mentioned by Bielschowsky, one 

 more way possible for the formation of species ; that is one which is explain- 

 able by the participation theory to which I have above aUuded. According 

 to this theory, an innumerable number of species of organic beings have 

 existed from the eternal past and will exist to the eternal future ; they unite 

 with or separate from one another, and produce many diiferent organisms by 

 diiferent combinations of the genes ; or they change by themselves, as the 

 genes change. Thus, they come fi-om the eternal past, changing their forms 

 incessantly, and will continue to change forever. 



Goethe's idea is certainly not explainable by the creation theory. It is 

 sometimes, as I have above stated, somewhat conformable to the evolution 

 theory. Yet, the correct explanation of his ideas, according to my opinion, is 

 given by the participation theory. 



Conclusion and Additions, 



Goethe's opinions sometimes change. To interpret them, according to 

 one of his ideas, 'which I believe to be correct, his BloM in the case of 

 vegetable organs, or Urpflanze in the case of plant species, is neither a 



* BlELSCHOWSKY, A. — l.c. p. 437. 



