Criticisms on The Origin of Species.docx

Criticisms on The Origin of Species.docx

《Criticisms on The Origin of Species.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Criticisms on The Origin of Species.docx（21页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

CriticismsonTheOriginofSpecies

Criticismson"TheOriginofSpecies"

byThomasH.Huxley

1.UEBERDIEDARWIN'SCHESCHPFUNGSTHEORIE;EINVORTRAG,VONA.K

LLIKER.Leipzig,1864.

2.EXAMINATIONDULIVREDEM.DARWINSURL'ORIGINEDESESPECES.PARP.

FLOURENS.Paris,1864.

InthecourseofthepresentyearseveralforeigncommentariesuponMr.

Darwin'sgreatworkhavemadetheirappearance.Thosewhohaveperused

thatremarkablechapterofthe'AntiquityofMan,'inwhichSirCharles

Lyelldrawsaparallelbetweenthedevelopmentofspeciesandthatof

languages,willbegladtohearthatoneofthemosteminent

philologersofGermany,ProfessorSchleicher,has,independently,

publishedamostinstructiveandphilosophicalpamphlet（anexcellent

noticeofwhichistobefoundinthe'Reader',forFebruary27thof

thisyear）supportingsimilarviewswithalltheweightofhisspecial

knowledgeandestablishedauthorityasalinguist.ProfessorHaeckel,

towhomSchleicheraddresseshimself,previouslytookoccasion,inhis

splendidmonographonthe'Radiolaria'*,toexpresshishigh

appreciationof,andgeneralconcordancewith,Mr.Darwin'sviews.

[footnote]*'DieRadiolarien:

eineMonographie',p.231.

Butthemostelaboratecriticismsofthe'OriginofSpecies'whichhave

appearedaretwoworksofverywidelydifferentmerit,theoneby

ProfessorKolliker,thewell-knownanatomistandhistologistof

Wurzburg;theotherbyM.Flourens,PerpetualSecretaryoftheFrench

AcademyofSciences.

ProfessorKolliker'scriticalessay'UpontheDarwinianTheory'is,like

allthatproceedsfromthepenofthatthoughtfulandaccomplished

writer,worthyofthemostcarefulconsideration.Itcomprisesabrief

butclearsketchofDarwin'sviews,followedbyanenumerationofthe

leadingdifficultiesinthewayoftheiracceptance;difficultieswhich

wouldappeartobeinsurmountabletoProfessorKolliker,inasmuchashe

proposestoreplaceMr.Darwin'sTheorybyonewhichhetermsthe

'TheoryofHeterogeneousGeneration.'Weshallproceedtoconsider

firstthedestructive,andsecondly,theconstructiveportionofthe

essay.

Weregrettofindourselvescompelledtodissentverywidelyfrommany

ofProfessorKolliker'sremarks;andfromnonemorethoroughlythan

fromthoseinwhichheseekstodefinewhatwemaytermthe

philosophicalpositionofDarwinism.

"Darwin,"saysProfessorKolliker,"is,inthefullestsenseofthe

word,aTeleologist.Hesaysquitedistinctly（FirstEdition,pp.199,

200）thateveryparticularinthestructureofananimalhasbeen

createdforitsbenefit,andheregardsthewholeseriesofanimal

formsonlyfromthispointofview."

Andagain:

"7.TheteleologicalgeneralconceptionadoptedbyDarwinisamistaken

one.

"Varietiesariseirrespectivelyofthenotionofpurpose,orof

utility,accordingtogenerallawsofNature,andmaybeeitheruseful,

orhurtful,orindifferent.

"Theassumptionthatanorganismexistsonlyonaccountofsomedefinite

endinview,andrepresentssomethingmorethantheincorporationofa

generalidea,orlaw,impliesaone-sidedconceptionoftheuniverse.

Assuredly,everyorganhas,andeveryorganismfulfils,itsend,but

itspurposeisnottheconditionofitsexistence.Everyorganismis

alsosufficientlyperfectforthepurposeitserves,andinthat,at

least,itisuselesstoseekforacauseofitsimprovement."

Itissingularhowdifferentlyoneandthesamebookwillimpress

differentminds.Thatwhichstruckthepresentwritermostforciblyon

hisfirstperusalofthe'OriginofSpecies'wastheconvictionthat

Teleology,ascommonlyunderstood,hadreceiveditsdeathblowatMr.

Darwin'shands.Fortheteleologicalargumentrunsthus:

anorganor

organism（A）ispreciselyfittedtoperformafunctionorpurpose（B）;

thereforeitwasspeciallyconstructedtoperformthatfunction.In

Paley'sfamousillustration,theadaptationofallthepartsofthe

watchtothefunction,orpurpose,ofshowingthetime,isheldtobe

evidencethatthewatchwasspeciallycontrivedtothatend;onthe

ground,thattheonlycauseweknowof,competenttoproducesuchan

effectasawatchwhichshallkeeptime,isacontrivingintelligence

adaptingthemeansdirectlytothatend.

Suppose,however,thatanyonehadbeenabletoshowthatthewatchhad

notbeenmadedirectlybyanyperson,butthatitwastheresultof

themodificationofanotherwatchwhichkepttimebutpoorly;andthat

thisagainhadproceededfromastructurewhichcouldhardlybecalled

awatchatall--seeingthatithadnofiguresonthedialandthehands

wererudimentary;andthatgoingbackandbackintimewecameatlast

toarevolvingbarrelastheearliesttraceablerudimentofthewhole

fabric.Andimaginethatithadbeenpossibletoshowthatallthese

changeshadresulted,first,fromatendencyofthestructuretovary

indefinitely;andsecondly,fromsomethinginthesurroundingworld

whichhelpedallvariationsinthedirectionofanaccurate

time-keeper,andcheckedallthoseinotherdirections;thenitis

obviousthattheforceofPaley'sargumentwouldbegone.Foritwould

bedemonstratedthatanapparatusthoroughlywelladaptedtoa

particularpurposemightbetheresultofamethodoftrialanderror

workedbyunintelligentagents,aswellasofthedirectapplicationof

themeansappropriatetothatend,byanintelligentagent.

Nowitappearstousthatwhatwehavehere,forillustration'ssake,

supposedtobedonewiththewatch,isexactlywhattheestablishment

ofDarwin'sTheorywilldofortheorganicworld.Forthenotionthat

everyorganismhasbeencreatedasitisandlaunchedstraightata

purpose,Mr.Darwinsubstitutestheconceptionofsomethingwhichmay

fairlybetermedamethodoftrialanderror.Organismsvary

incessantly;ofthesevariationsthefewmeetwithsurrounding

conditionswhichsuitthemandthrive;themanyareunsuitedandbecome

extinguished.

AccordingtoTeleology,eachorganismislikeariflebulletfired

straightatamark;accordingtoDarwin,organismsarelikegrapeshot

ofwhichonehitssomethingandtherestfallwide.

Fortheteleologistanorganismexistsbecauseitwasmadeforthe

conditionsinwhichitisfound;fortheDarwiniananorganismexists

because,outofmanyofitskind,itistheonlyonewhichhasbeen

abletopersistintheconditionsinwhichitisfound.

Teleologyimpliesthattheorgansofeveryorganismareperfectand

cannotbeimproved;theDarwiniantheorysimplyaffirmsthattheywork

wellenoughtoenabletheorganismtoholditsownagainstsuch

competitorsasithasmetwith,butadmitsthepossibilityof

indefiniteimprovement.Butanexamplemaybringintoclearerlight

theprofoundoppositionbetweentheordinaryteleological,andthe

Darwinian,conception.

Catscatchmice,smallbirdsandthelike,verywell.Teleologytells

usthattheydosobecausetheywereexpresslyconstructedforso

doing--thattheyareperfectmousingapparatuses,soperfectandso

delicatelyadjustedthatnooneoftheirorganscouldbealtered,

withoutthechangeinvolvingthealterationofalltherest.Darwinism

affirmsonthecontrary,thattherewasnoexpressconstruction

concernedinthematter;butthatamongthemultitudinousvariationsof

theFelinestock,manyofwhichdiedoutfromwantofpowertoresist

opposinginfluences,some,thecats,werebetterfittedtocatchmice

thanothers,whencetheythroveandpersisted,inproportiontothe

advantageovertheirfellowsthusofferedtothem.

Farfromimaginingthatcatsexist'inorder'tocatchmicewell,

Darwinismsupposesthatcatsexist'because'theycatchmice

well--mousingbeingnottheend,butthecondition,oftheir

existence.Andifthecattypehaslongpersistedasweknowit,the

interpretationofthefactuponDarwinianprincipleswouldbe,notthat

thecatshaveremainedinvariable,butthatsuchvarietiesashave

incessantlyoccurredhavebeen,onthewhole,lessfittedtogetonin

theworldthantheexistingstock.

Ifweapprehendthespiritofthe'OriginofSpecies'rightly,then,

nothingcanbemoreentirelyandabsolutelyopposedtoTeleology,asit

iscommonlyunderstood,thantheDarwinianTheory.Sofarfrombeinga

"Teleologistinthefullestsenseoftheword,"wewoulddenythathe

isaTeleologistintheordinarysenseatall;andweshouldsaythat,

apartfromhismeritsasanaturalist,hehasrenderedamost

remarkableservicetophilosophicalthoughtbyenablingthestudentof

Naturetorecognise,totheirfullestextent,thoseadaptationsto

purposewhicharesostrikingintheorganicworld,andwhichTeleology

hasdonegoodserviceinkeepingbeforeourminds,withoutbeingfalse

tothefundamentalprinciplesofascientificconceptionofthe

universe.TheapparentlydivergingteachingsoftheTeleologistandof

theMorphologistarereconciledbytheDarwinianhypothesis.

Butleavingourownimpressionsofthe'OriginofSpecies,'andturning

tothosepassagesespeciallycitedbyProfessorKolliker,wecannot

admitthattheybeartheinterpretationheputsuponthem.Darwin,if

wereadhimrightly,does'not'affirmthateverydetailinthe

structureofananimalhasbeencreatedforitsbenefit.Hiswordsare

（p.199）:

--

"Theforegoingremarksleadmetosayafewwordsontheprotestlately

madebysomenaturalistsagainsttheutilitariandoctrinethatevery

detailofstructurehasbeenproducedforthegoodofitspossessor.

Theybelievethatverymanystructureshavebeencreatedforbeautyin

theeyesofman,orformerevariety.Thisdoctrine,iftrue,wouldbe

absolutelyfataltomytheory--yetIfullyadmitthatmanystructures

areofnodirectusetothei