226 Theories Treating of Inheritance 



It seems to us quite superfluous to expose any further 

 here the pure verbality of such an explanation without 

 any real content. Neither shall we go more closely into 

 the objection, which is apparent on the very surface, that 

 physiological units identical throughout the whole or- 

 ganism cannot form muscles here, bones there, nerves 

 elsewhere, all of which represent special tissues with 

 totally different physical, chemical and vital properties. 



We limit ourselves rather to noting that, according to 

 this, the inheritability of even quantitative and partial 

 modifications, for example the transmission of the merely 

 greater development of a tissue or an organ already ex- 

 isting, must be attributed to a uniform, qualitative change 

 of all the physiologic units of the organism. And not- 

 withstanding that, the properties of each group of these 

 units, not excepting the group constituting the tissue 

 which has undergone a simple increase in mass, must re- 

 main identically the same as they were before. 



Let us consider the case which Spencer himself quotes 

 and regards as one of the examples of the inheritance of 

 acquired characters, namely, the increase in size or 

 greater development of the great toe as well as the 

 diminution or regression of the little toe, as a result of 

 the fact that our ape-like ancestors gave up life in the 

 trees for life on the surface of the ground. 172 



Is it possible that so very local a morphologic change 

 has transformed qualitatively the physiological units of 

 the entire organism? And apart from the fact that the 

 change is limited to a certain very small part of the body, 

 it must yet be borne in mind that one has to do here with 

 no new quality nor with any new material introduced 



172 Spencer : A Rejoinder to Prof. Weismann. London, Williams 

 and Norgate. 1893. P. 3ff- 



