TWO EXPLANATIONS OF CLASSIFICATION. 55 



there be a true classification in distinction front a 

 false one. Likeness is always more difficult to 

 explain than unlikeness, although we frequently 

 think the contrary, and that animals should show 

 likeness according to which they may be classified is 

 a fact requiring explanation. Granting that a classi- 

 fication exists, and all of the above-mentioned 

 classes of facts follow as necessary consequences ; 

 still, why should a classification and homologies 

 exist? This is the significant question upon which 

 the argument rests. 



Any thing can be classified. Chairs may be clas- 

 sified into rocking-chairs and stationary chairs ; or 

 into walnut chairs and pine chairs ; or into cane- 

 seated chairs and wooden-seated chairs. Any of 

 these divisions would be classification, and any one 

 would be as true as the others. But a long study of 

 the organic world has shown that its classification is 

 quite different from such artificial divisions. Natu- 

 ralists have everywhere agreed that there is in the 

 organic world a natural classification, a true classifi- 

 cation in distinction from hundreds of false ones 

 which can be made. No such natural classification 

 exists among artificial products nor among minerals, 

 but only in the organic world. Such a classification 

 existing in nature demands explanation. 



Two Explanations of Classification, 



Practically only two explanations have been of- 

 fered toward the solution of this problem. The first 

 is the theory of types held by Cuvier and afterward 

 by Agassiz, and is briefly as follows. The Creator 



