CHAPTER 2 



PREFORMATION OR NEW FORMATION? 



The clash of the two mutually incompatible points of 

 view on the development of the organism: preformation, or the 

 doctrine of preexistence; and epigenesis, or the doctrine of 

 new formation, can be traced far back in history. Epigenetic 

 opinions had been stated by Aristotle, who knew well from 

 his own observations on the developing chick embryo, that 

 the organs of the latter appear not all at once, but in 

 determined succession. He criticized what came, apparently 

 from the authors of the "Hippocratic collection," who stated 

 that all parts of the embryo appear simultaneously. (8) 



Aristotle's ideas possess epigenetic and materialistic 

 contents. However, Aristotle's epigenetic opinions and his 

 materialism, as is known, were inconsistent. His fluctuations 

 between materialism and idealism, about which V. I. Lenin 

 wrote, appear in his opinions about development, and the 

 materialistic idea contradicts his opinion that all epigenesis 

 is an idealistic doctrine. This latter erronerous view also 

 appears throughout the works of the founder of recent 

 epigenesis, K. F. Wolff. 



The epigenetic point of view on vertebrate development 

 was also stated distinctly by W Gilliam) Harvey (1651) i n his 

 book "On the Origin of Animals." He, to a significant extent, 

 followed Aristotle. Harvey, like Aristotle, accepted epigenesis 

 for the perfect animals, while the imperfect animals, in his 

 opinion, originated from mold. Harvey differentiated three 

 distinct modes of generation and development of animals : 

 epigenesis, metamorphosis, and spontaneous generation, the 

 last two ways, according to Harvey, inherent in insects. 



1. See [Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov) Lenin, FILOSOFSKIE 

 TETRAD I (Philosophical notebooks) (Gospolitizdat, 

 1947), pp. 263 - 270. 



35 



