Are the Effects of Use and Disuse Inherited?: An Examination of the View Held by Spencer and DarwinBall, W. P. (William Platt)
Philosophy
Are the Effects of Use and Disuse Inherited?: An Examination of the View Held by Spencer and Darwin
Ball, W. P. (William Platt)
Heredity; Variation (Biology)
These forms of quasi-inheritance are, of course, highly important so far
as the improvement of the race is concerned. So, too, is the fact that
improved or deteriorated habits and thoughts are transmitted by personal
teaching and influence and are cumulative in their effect. But all this
must not be confounded with the inheritance of acquired characters.
Cases of quasi-inheritance may perhaps be most readily distinguished
from cases of true inheritance by the time test. When a modification
acquired in adult life is promptly communicated to the child in early
life or from birth, it may rightly be suspected that the inheritance,
like that of money or title, is not truly congenital, but is extraneous
or even anti-congenital in its nature. Judged by such a standard, the
inherited injuries in Brown-Sequard's guinea-pigs are only exceptional
cases of quasi-inheritance, and are not necessarily indicative of any
general rule affecting true inheritance.
FOOTNOTES:
[54] A very able anatomist of my acquaintance denies the inheritance of
mutilations and injuries, although he strongly believes in the
inheritance of the effects of use and disuse.
[55] _Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication_, i. 467-469.
Lost toes were only seen by Dr. Dupuy in three young out of two hundred.
Obersteiner found that most of the offspring of his epileptic
guinea-pigs were injuriously affected, being weakly, small, paralysed in
one or more limbs, and so forth. Only two were epileptic, and both were
weakly and died early (Weismann's _Essays_, p. 311). A morbid condition
of the spinal cord might affect the hind limbs especially (as in
paraplegia) and might occasionally cause loss of toes in the embryo by
preventing development or by ulceration. Brown-Sequard does not say that
the defective feet were on the same side as in the parents (_Lancet_,
Jan., 1875, pp. 7, 8).
[56] _Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication_, ii. 57.
[57] _Ibid._, ii. 392. Perhaps it might be better to suppose that the
_best_ gemmules were sacrificed in repairing the injured _nerve_, and
hence only inferior substitutes were left to take their place, and could
only imperfectly reproduce the injured part of the nervous system in
offspring.
[58] Hence perhaps Mr. Spencer's error in representing the epileptic
liability as permanent and as coming on _after_ healing (_Factors of
Organic Evolution_, p. 27).
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account