FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257  
258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   >>  
denies the existence of natural classifications of other kinds. And, after all, is it quite so certain that a genetic relation may not underlie the classification of minerals? The inorganic world has not always been what we see it. It has certainly had its metamorphoses, and, very probably, a long "Entwickelungsgeschichte" out of a nebular blastema. Who knows how far that amount of likeness among sets of minerals, in virtue of which they are now grouped into families and orders, may not be the expression of the common conditions to which that particular patch of nebulous fog, which may have been constituted by their atoms, and of which they may be, in the strictest sense, the descendants, was subjected? It will be obvious from what has preceded, that we do not agree with Professor Koelliker in thinking the objections which he brings forward so weighty as to be fatal to Darwin's view. But even if the case were otherwise, we should be unable to accept the "Theory of Heterogeneous Generation" which is offered as a substitute. That theory is thus stated:-- "The fundamental conception of this hypothesis is, that, under the influence of a general law of development, the germs of organisms produce others different from themselves. This might happen (1) by the fecundated ova passing, in the course of their development, under particular circumstances, into higher forms; (2) by the primitive and later organisms producing other organisms without fecundation, out of germs or eggs (Parthenogenesis)." In favour of this hypothesis, Professor Koelliker adduces the well-known facts of Agamogenesis, or "alternate generation;" the extreme dissimilarity of the males and females of many animals; and of the males, females, and neuters of those insects which live in colonies: and he defines its relations to the Darwinian theory as follows:-- "It is obvious that my hypothesis is apparently very similar to Darwin's, inasmuch as I also consider that the various forms of animals have proceeded directly from one another. My hypothesis of the creation of organisms by heterogeneous generation, however, is distinguished very essentially from Darwin's by the entire absence of the principle of useful variations and their natural selection; and my fundamental conception is this, that a great plan of development lies at the foundation of the origin of the whole orga
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257  
258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   >>  



Top keywords:

hypothesis

 

organisms

 
development
 

Darwin

 
Professor
 

animals

 

Koelliker

 
theory
 

obvious

 

fundamental


conception

 

natural

 

generation

 
minerals
 

females

 

adduces

 
Parthenogenesis
 

favour

 

happen

 

fecundated


produce
 

passing

 
producing
 
primitive
 

circumstances

 
higher
 

fecundation

 

distinguished

 

essentially

 

entire


absence

 

heterogeneous

 

creation

 
principle
 

foundation

 

origin

 

variations

 

selection

 

directly

 

proceeded


insects

 

colonies

 
neuters
 

Agamogenesis

 

alternate

 

extreme

 

dissimilarity

 

defines

 

relations

 
similar