882 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. VIII. No. 208. 



ciples of ' philosophers ' who, in modest 

 earnestness, undertake to formulate the 

 scientific knowledge of their day often be- 

 come bolder than their teachers, and, grow- 

 ing arrogant and reckless with success, find 

 at last that they have sold their birthright 

 in nature for what proves, when examined, 

 to be no better than a mess of pottage. 



The evidence that living matter is con- 

 tinuous, from beginning to end, is so con- 

 clusive that it convinces all who know its 

 value. All living things are one by birth, 

 and the sj'stem of living natui-e is, historic- 

 ally, a unit, a consistent whole — not a col- 

 lection of isolated and independent species. 

 How does it happen, then, that at every 

 point in its history we find it divided into 

 detached groups, separated by gaps and 

 characterized by fitness? Why is the sys- 

 tem of living nature such that we cannot 

 picture it as a circle, spreading in all direc- 

 tions from a common center, and growing 

 wider around its whole circumference? 

 Why is it such that it is more exactly 

 represented by a number of growing radii, 

 independent at their outer ends. 



This is the problem which Darwin under- 

 took to solve, hy showing that it results 

 from extermination according to a standard 

 of fitness. How does the Lamarckian meet 

 it? Sometimes by denying the existence of 

 fitness. Sometimes by asserting, even in the 

 same breath, that fitness is universal and 

 necessary, and that there is no real problem. 



He asserts that it is the outcome or ex- 

 pression of a deeper principle of necessary 

 progress or evolution, which must result in 

 fitness. The tendency to regard natural se- 

 lection as more or less unnecessary and su- 

 perfluous, which is so characteristic of our 

 day, seems to grow out of reverence fcJr the 

 all-sufficiency of the philosophy of evolu- 

 tion, and pious belief that the history of 

 living things flows out of this philosopy as 

 a necessarj^ truth or axiom. 



" The inheritance of characters acquired 



during the life of the individual is an indis- 

 pensable axiom of the monistic doctrine of 

 evolution."* 



The writer yields to no one in admiration 

 of the doctrine of evolution. So far as it is 

 a scientific generalization from our knowl- 

 edge of nature, it is one of the greatest 

 triumphs of the human mind, rivalled only 

 by its reciprocal, the doctrine of dissolution. 



Experience seems to show, very clearly, 

 that our system of nature is, on the whole, 

 moving towards what commends itself to 

 our minds as evolution, or progress to 

 greater and greater perfection. While there 

 is just as much evidence that each step in 

 evolution is also a step toward dissolution, 

 we have the same rational ground for ex- 

 pecting that this movement will continue, 

 without any sudden radical change, that 

 we have for other expectations which we 

 base on knowledge of nature. 



So far as the doctrine of evolution is based 

 on knowledge, it is not only a part, but one 

 of the most valuable and suggestive parts 

 of the system of science, for the scientific 

 law of evolution is part of science; but the 

 philosophy of evolution is held by many as 

 a creed, superior to and able to direct sci- 

 ence. As men of science, we, like Huxley, 

 have ' nothing to say to any philosophy of 

 evolution,' except so far as it stands in the 

 way of scientific progress. 



We are sometimes told that while the 

 other idols of which Bacon warned us are 

 still worshipped, the idols of the theater 

 have been deserted, and their temples aban- 

 doned ; although he himself laj'^s peculiar 

 stress on their persistency. 



" Lastly, there are idols which have crept 

 into men's minds from the various dogmas of 

 particularsystems of philosophy, * * * and 

 these we denominate idols of the theater. 

 For we regard all the systems of philosophy 

 hitherto received or imagined as so many 

 plays brought out and performed, creating 



*Haeckel, 'Monism,' p. 96. 



