Baer "did not throw out the baby with the bathwater, and 

 while discussing the false path into which Naturphilosophie 

 had been enticed, he recognized it as a source for a deeper 

 understanding of nature. "8 



For the proof of this statement, Stolzle referred to 

 the following view by Baer which he stated in his earliest 

 theoretical writing, "Zwei Worte uber den jetzigen Zustand 

 der Naturgeschichte": "In spite of the giddiness experienced 

 by the nature-philosophers, the world nevertheless must move 

 with inevitability in itself, because this takes place in 

 reality. With this, frequently and not very seriously, they 

 made merry, exclaiming: 'We shall only hold on to the earth 

 more strongly, then our heads will not whirl.* It seems to 

 us, on the contrary, that all the significant progress in 

 science is inevitably accompanied by fever, and during fever 

 there are frequently dreams and apparitions. The experienced 

 doctor is sometimes satisfied with the course of fever in his 

 patient if he notices in it the preparation for a crisis, "9 



6... rejecting the possibility of his development from any 

 of the other living species of monkeys. In addition 

 to strictly scientific reasons from the field of com- 

 parative anatomy and comparative psychology, there 

 are also appeals to common sense, hindering, in Baer's 

 opinion, recognition of an animal origin for man. In 

 discussions concerning the evolution of the organic 

 world and especially the origin of man, Baer undoubtedly 

 did not overcome the religious faction, and was even 

 inclined to renounce his partial recognition of the 

 idea of evolution, which he had stated many years 

 before this. 



7. Stolzle, KARL ERNST VON BAER, p. 36. 



8. Ibid ., p. 39. 



9. Baer, "Zwei Worte," p. 4G. 



492 



