Darwin, and After Darwin, Volume 2 of 3: Post-Darwinian Questions: Heredity and UtilityRomanes, George John
Science
Darwin, and After Darwin, Volume 2 of 3: Post-Darwinian Questions: Heredity and Utility
Romanes, George John
Evolution (Biology); Heredity
[134] It may be observed that this distinction was not propounded by
Mr. Wallace--nor, so far as I am aware, by anybody else--until
he joined issue with me on the subject of specific characters.
Whether he has always held this important distinction between
specific and generic characters, I know not; but, as
originally enunciated, his doctrine of utility as universal
was subject to no such limitation: it was stated
unconditionally, as applying to all taxonomic divisions
indifferently. The words have already been quoted on page 180;
and, if the reader will turn to them, he may further observe
that, prior to our discussion, Mr. Wallace made no allowance
for the principle of correlation, which, as we have seen,
furnishes so convenient a loop-hole of escape in cases where
even the argument from our ignorance of possible utility
appears absurd. In his latest work, however, he is much less
sweeping in his statements. He limits his doctrine to the case
of "specific characters" alone, and even with regard to them
makes unlimited drafts upon the principle of correlation.
On what then do Mr. Wallace and his followers rely for their great
distinction between specific and all other characters in respect of
utility? This is the final and fundamental question which I must leave
these naturalists themselves to answer; for my whole contention is, that
it is unanswerable. But although I am satisfied that they have nothing
on which to base their generalization, it seems worth while to conclude
by showing yet one further point. And this is, that these naturalists
themselves, as soon as they quit merely abstract assertions and come to
deal with actual facts, contradict their own generalization. It is worth
while to show this by means of a few quotations, that we may perceive
how impossible it is for them to sustain their generalization in the
domain of fact.
As it is desirable to be brief, I will confine myself to quoting from
Mr. Wallace.
"Colour may be looked upon as a necessary result of the highly
complex chemical constitution of animal tissues and fluids. The
blood, the bile, the bones, the fat, and other tissues have
characteristic, and often brilliant colours, which we cannot
suppose to have been determined for any special purpose as colours,
since they are usually concealed. The external organs and
integuments, would, by the same general laws, naturally give rise
to a greater variety of colour[135]."
[135] _Darwinism_, p. 297.
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