The gas laws state that the pressure of a gas kept at constant volume
increases in a particular way with increase of temperature. Now the
pressure of a confined gas depends on the rate at which its particles
bombard the walls in which they are contained, and the speed at which
they are travelling. In a gas whose temperature is raised, many
particles will, at any given moment, be travelling more slowly than the
average rate when it was cooler, many even which had been travelling
fast may now be travelling slowly. None the less, the average speed of
all the particles is greater; and this and nothing else is what with
perfect justification we sum up as our _law_.
In biological evolution, some organisms degenerate, some remain
stationary, but the average of certain properties, and more especially
their upper level, increases; and this tendency for certain properties
to become more marked, this and nothing else, is what we sum up and
generalize, again with perfect justification, as the law of biological
progress.
The mechanism of biological progress demands a word: for it is
noticeable that a mere fact, however well attested, makes a very
different kind of impression from a fact explained and brought into
relation with the rest of our knowledge. The impression is either less
powerful; or else, an explanation being sought for, an erroneous one is
found. It was Darwin’s great merit that, not content with the piling up
of evidence in favour of the reality of Evolution, he at the same time
advanced a theory which made it at least possible to understand how
Evolution could have come to pass as a natural process. The effect was
multiplicative on men’s minds, not merely additive, for facts are too
bulky to be lugged about conveniently except on wheels of theory.
The fact of biological progress has struck many observers. Some have
been content to believe that the single magic formula of “Natural
Selection” would explain it adequately and without further trouble,
forgetting that there must be at least some points of difference
between a natural selection producing a degenerate type and natural
selection leading to progress. Some biologists have lumped it,
together with all other evolutionary processes which seem to show
us a development along predetermined lines, under the head of
_orthogenesis_--the (hypothetical!) tendency of organisms to unfold
just one type of hidden potentiality. Bergson has been particularly
struck with it: refuses to allow that it can have anything to do with
Natural Selection or any determinist process, and ascribes it to his
_élan vital_.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account