THE PAST EVOLUTION OF MAN 91 



but between man and the ape, now extinct, from 

 which man and the extant anthropoids may claim 

 common descent. 



Already we have devoted some little space to the 

 consideration of the factors which may possibly go 

 some way towards explaining the causes which led 

 to the vast superiority of one descendant of this 

 extinct ape over all his other descendants. Of this 

 most attractive subject too little is known for me to 

 return to it here. But we may properly state the two 

 extremes of opinion on this matter. At one pole 

 is the view to which — as involving a fallacy of very 

 great importance — we must return, that there is a 

 law of progress, and that man has developed from the 

 ape in virtue thereof. At the other pole is the view 

 that man, instead of being the inevitable superior 

 descendant of lower animals, is a mere " fluke" or 

 " sport " of the ape — that all kinds of variations 

 occur in animal species, and that, as it chanced, 

 there occurred an exceptionally intelligent variation 

 in some species of ape many ages ago — of which 

 " sport " — to use the gardeners' term— man is the 

 present representative. This view, which must 

 surely be regarded as unphilosophical in the ex- 

 treme, is expressed by Professor Metchnikoff in his 

 work, recently translated into English by Dr. 

 Chalmers Mitchell, under the title " The Nature of 

 Man." On analysis this idea is seen to deny the 

 fundamental conception of science, that causation 

 is universal, that law rules all. In point of fact, 

 heredity and variation are " governed by law " — to 

 use a convenient if somewhat too metaphorical phrase 



