SQ) 43 THE HISTORY OF CREATION. 
their hard-won knowledge of details lies in the general 
results which more comprehensive minds will one day 
derive from them. Ni 
From a general survey of the course of biological develop- 
ment since Linnzus’ time, we can easily see, as Bar has 
pointed out, a continual vacillation between these two ten- 
dencies, at one time a prevalence of the empirical—the 
so-called exact—and then again of the philosophical or 
speculative tendency. Thus at the end of the last century, 
in opposition to Linnzeus’ purely empirical school, a natural- 
philosophical reaction took place, the moving spirits of 
which, Lamarck, Geoffroy. St. Hilaire, Goethe, and Oken, 
endeavoured by their mental work to introduce light and 
order into the chaos of the accumulated empirical raw 
material. In opposition to the many errors and specu- 
lations of these natural philosophers, who went. too far, 
Cuvier then came forward, introducing a second, purely 
empirical period. It reached its most one-sided development 
between the years 1830-1860, and there now followed a 
second philosophical reaction, caused by Darwin’s work. 
Thus during the last ten years, men again have begun to 
endeavour to obtain a knowledge of the general laws of 
nature, to which, after all, all detailed knowledge of experi- 
ence serves only as a foundation, and through which alone 
it acquires its true value. It is through philosophy alone 
that natural knowledge becomes a true science, that is, 
a philosophy of nature. (Gen. Morph. i. 63-108.) 
Jean Lamarck and Wolfgang Goethe stand at the head of 
all the great philosophers of nature who first established a 
theory of organic development, and who are the illustrious 
fellow-workers of Darwin. I turn first to our beloved 
eee) ae 
