44 B. G. Wilder on the Morphological 
Art. V.—On the Morphological value and relations of the Human 1 
: Hand ; by Burr G. Witper, S.B., M.D 7 
[Abstract of a paper read before the National Academy of Sciences, Aug. 8, 1866] : 
THE morphological relations of the human hand are of three 
kin D 
Ist, Its special homology with the terminal segment of the an- 
terior extremity in other vertebrates, 
2d, Its general homology as a part of the skeleton; which 
be fully enunciated only after a decision as to the morphological 
relations of the scapular arch of which it is an appendage. 
d, Its polar homologies with the rapt es aera parts on the 
hat with @ 
propositions. 
1. The extreme diversity and confliction of opinion* as to 
the morphological relations of the human hand are chiefly d 
to an over-estimate of its morphological value. 
is misappreciation of the morphological value of t 
hand is due to a non-recognition of the distinctions between 
two principles, morphology and teleology. 
_ 3. Morphology is the law of internal form, of plan, of esse 
tial structure. ‘Teleology is the law of special function which 
determines size, shape and general appearance. 2 
_ 4 Homology is morphological identity; analogy is teleolog- 
ical resemblance: and neither relation necessarily implies 
posal ad 
_,5. Morphology treats of unity of type: teleo treats 
aaa ey ot yp te 
, 5. Morphology alone would be law without liberty, which 
logy alone would be liberty without law, which 
despotism ; tel 
is anarchy. 
_ 1. Morphology is conservative and tends toward centraliza- 
tion; teleology is radical and tends toward diffusion. 
8. The two principles may be traced in all structures, but the 
one is often more prominent than the other. 
ith certain important qualifications it may be said th 
the clearest manifestations of morphology are to be observed 
_,* Some idea of this diversity of opinion 1 . 
