DAR WIN. 



237 



old passage in Aristotle of the two alternatives in 

 our views of Nature. Darwin's standpoint was 

 different from either; by 'chance variations' he 

 refers to those occurring under unknown laws, not 

 under the ' blind fortuity ' of Empedocles, nor under 

 the 'progressive principle ' of Aristotle. He found 

 no evidence for an internal perfecting principle. 

 In connection with the first edition of the Orient. 

 Tie wrote: "The so-called improvement of our 

 short-horn cattle, pigeons, etc., does not presuppose 

 or require any aboriginal ' power of adaptation,' 

 or ' principle of improvement.' If I have a second 

 •edition, I will reiterate ' Natural Selection,' and as 

 a general consequence, ' Natural Improvement.' " 



He mistakenly attributed to Lamarck the view 

 held by the author of the Vestiges, when he disavowed 

 holding " the Lamarckian or Vestigian doctrine of 

 ■* necessary progression,' that is, of progression inde- 

 pendent of conditions." This is further shown in 

 his correspondence concerning Nageli. (/-{/t' (^^^^^ 

 Letters, Vol. III., p. 49, letter to Victor Carus, 1S66) : 

 *' I am, however, far from agreeing with him tliat 

 the acquisition of certain characters whicli appear 

 to be of no service to plants, offers any great diffi- 

 culty, or affords a proof of some innate tendency 

 in plants towards perfection."^ This standpoint 



1 Nageli, a distinguished German botanist, believed that he found in his 

 studies of the Evolution of plants, proofs of the existence of an internal 

 perfecting principle in life, by which, independently of all outside agencies, 

 the Plant Kingdom is constantly tending to a higher degree of perfection. 

 These views were published in 1865. Somewhat similar views have been 

 advanced by Baer, KoUiker, and others. 



