and natural sciences. But they should not be considered 

 satisfactory, and hence they may represent falsification 

 (123), The latter is correct, in particular, in relation 

 to R. Stolzle, professor of philosophy at Wurzburg, who 

 wrote a vast work in 1897 under the title KARL -ERNST 

 VON BAER AND HIS WORLD-VIEW. 2 From the beginning 

 Stolzle stated that in his book he would judge Baer from 

 a theistic-Christian standpoint; he lamented that this 

 point of view, especially in the natural-scientific and 

 philosophical circles of his day, was generally ridiculed 

 as being absolutely unscientific, and either regarded as 

 an anachronism or simply disregarded. 3 Stolzle praised 

 Baer for his world-view and unconditionally set him up 

 against evolution, teleology and idealism. However, at 

 the same time he remarks, apparently indignantly, upon 

 the "errors" of the great scientist concerning Baer's 

 sharp opinions against creationism. Stolzle wrote, for 

 example, of the "barely respectable polemics of Baer 

 against the idea of a creator" and cited his ironical 

 discussion of the origin of new classes of animals on the 

 earth: "I do not want to trouble Our Lord with this 

 'creation of new classes,' for if he wishes to throw down 

 from the sky a new class of animals on earth, then they 

 must, due to the quick motion of the earth— four miles 

 per second! and this is not a joke — shatter into dust. 

 Our Lord, therefore, must come down to the earth and 

 arrest its velocity; only then can he create new living 

 creatures. "4 



Actually, in the concluding chapter of his book, 

 Stolzle "absolved" Baer for all his "inconsistencies" and 

 for all his "errors," assuming that Baer "at the end turned 

 to faith in the ever-living God; probably this may confirm 



2. R. Stolzle, KARL ERNST VON BAER UND SEINE 

 WELTANSCHAUUNG (Regensburg, 1897), xi + 687 pp. 



3. Ibid. , p. 5. Haake, in his work on Baer (W. Haake, 

 KARL ERNST VON BAER (Klassiker der Naturwissen- 

 schaften) (Leipzig, 1905), 175 pp.), also extolled 

 Baer for his supposedly high evaluation of the 

 religious need of man. 



4. stolzle, KARL ERNST VON BAER, p. 167. 



490 



