100 THE HISTORY OF CREATION. 
CHAPTER V. 
THEORY OF DEVELOPMENT ACCORDING TO KANT 
AND LAMARCK. 
Kant’s Dualistic Biology.—His Conception of the Origin of Inorganic: 
Nature by Mechanical Causes, of Organic Nature by Causes acting for a 
Definite Purpose.—Contradiction of this Conception with his leaning 
towards the Theory of Descent.—Kant’s Genealogical Theory of 
Development.— Its Limitation by his Teleology.— Comparison of 
Genealogical Biology with Comparative Philology.—Views in favour of 
the Theory of Descent entertained by Leopold Buch, Bar, Schleiden, 
Unger, Schaafhausen, Victor Carus, Biichner. — French Nature-. 
philosophy. — Lamarck’s Philosophie Zoologique. — Lamarck’s Monistic: 
(mechanical) System of Nature.—His Views of the Inter-action of the 
Two Organic Formative Tendencies of Inheritance and Adaptation.— 
Lamarck’s Conception of Man’s Development from Ape-like Mammals, — 
Geoffroy St. Hilaire’s, Naudin’s, and Lecoq’s Defence of the Theory of 
Descent.—English Nature-philosophy.—Views in favour of the Theory 
of Descent, entertained by Erasmus Darwin, W. Herbert, Grant, Freke,. 
Herbert Spencer, Hooker, Huxley.—The Double Merit of Charles 
Darwin. 
THE teleological view of nature, which explains the phe- 
nomena of the organic world by the action of a personal 
Creator acting for a definite purpose, necessarily leads, when 
carried to its extreme consequences, either to utterly unten- 
able contradictions, or to a twofold (dualistic) conception 
of nature, which most directly contradicts the unity and 
simplicity of the supreme laws which are everywhere 
perceptible. The philosophers who embrace teleology must. 
