FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185  
186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   >>   >|  
of age. In this treatise he inquires into the origin of compounds and of minerals; also he conceived that all the rocks as well as all chemical compounds and minerals originated from organic life. These inquiries were reiterated in his "Memoirs on Physics and Natural History," which appeared in 1797, when he was fifty-three years old. The atmosphere of philosophic France, as well as of England and Germany in the eighteenth century, was charged with inquiries into the origin of things material, though more especially of things immaterial. It was a period of energetic thinking. Whether Lamarck had read the works of these philosophers or not we have no means of knowing. Buffon, we know, was influenced by Leibnitz. Did Buffon's guarded suggestions have no influence on the young Lamarck? He enjoyed his friendship and patronage in early life, frequenting his house, and was for a time the travelling companion of Buffon's son. It should seem most natural that he would have been personally influenced by his great predecessor, but we see no indubitable trace of such influence in his writings. Lamarckism is not Buffonism. It comprises in the main quite a different, more varied and comprehensive set of factors.[158] Was Lamarck influenced by the biological writings of Haller, Bonnet, or by the philosophic views of Condillac, whose _Essai sur l'Origine des Connaissances humaines_ appeared in 1786; or of Condorcet, whom he must personally have known, and whose _Esquisse d'un Tableau historique des Progres de l'Esprit humain_ was published in 1794?[159] In one case only in Lamarck's works do we find reference to these thinkers. Was Lamarck, as the result of his botanical studies from 1768 to 1793, and being puzzled, as systematic botanists are, by the variations of the more plastic species of plants, led to deny the fixity of species? We have been unable to find any indications of a change of views in his botanical writings, though his papers are prefaced by philosophical reflections. It would indeed be interesting to know what led Lamarck to change his views. Without any explanation as to the reason from his own pen, we are led to suppose that his studies on the invertebrates, his perception of the gradations in the animal scale from monad to man, together with his inherent propensity to inquire into the origin of things, also his studies on fossils, as well as the broadening nature of his zooelogical investigations and
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   161   162   163   164   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177   178   179   180   181   182   183   184   185  
186   187   188   189   190   191   192   193   194   195   196   197   198   199   200   201   202   203   204   205   206   207   208   209   210   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Lamarck
 

things

 

Buffon

 
studies
 
influenced
 
writings
 

origin

 

botanical

 

species

 

change


influence
 
personally
 

appeared

 

inquiries

 

compounds

 

minerals

 

philosophic

 

Connaissances

 

thinkers

 

humaines


reference
 

conceived

 

result

 
Origine
 

puzzled

 
systematic
 
botanists
 

Tableau

 

historique

 

Esquisse


Progres

 

inquires

 
published
 
Esprit
 

humain

 
Condorcet
 

plastic

 

gradations

 

animal

 

perception


invertebrates

 

suppose

 
nature
 

zooelogical

 
investigations
 
broadening
 

fossils

 

inherent

 
propensity
 

inquire