ever, they seemed to be attracting more attention. "There 

 is no doubt, that a number of Darwinian views, which are 

 still prevalent to-day, have sunk to the level of untenable 

 myths. True, the main doctrine of Darwin — the origin of 

 new species from existing ones — is incontestably estab- 

 lished, but apart from this even some very fundamental 

 principles, which the master thought he discerned in the 

 development of organisms, can scarcely be any longer 

 maintained." 



It may be well to remark here, that this was not really 

 Darwin's main doctrine, for it already existed before his 

 time (Lamarck, Geoffroy St. Hilaire). Darwin's main doc- 

 trine is the explanation of the origin of species by natural 

 selection operating through the struggle for existence. 

 It is therefore the old error repeated; Darwinism is con- 

 founded with the doctrine of Descent, of which it is merely 

 one form. It is not our intention to derogate in the least 

 from Darwin's merit, which consists in the fact that he 

 gained general recognition for the doctrine of Descent; 

 but that was not his main work. He wished above all to 

 explain the How of Descent; this is his doctrine, and this 

 doctrine we attack and declare to be on the point of ex- 

 piring. 



Grottewitz very frankly continues: "The difHculty 

 with the Darwinian doctrines consists in the fact that they 

 are incapable of being strictly and irrefutably demonstrated. 

 The origin of one species from another, the conservation of 

 useful forms, the existence of countless intermediary links, 



119 



