Evolution, Old & New: Or, the Theories of Buffon, Dr. Erasmus Darwin and Lamarck,; as compared with that of Charles DarwinButler, Samuel
Philosophy
Evolution, Old & New: Or, the Theories of Buffon, Dr. Erasmus Darwin and Lamarck,; as compared with that of Charles Darwin
Butler, Samuel
Evolution (Biology) -- History
"I conceive the primordium or rudiment of the embryon as secreted from
the blood of the parent to consist of a simple living filament as a
muscular fibre; which I suppose to be an extremity of a nerve of
locomotion, as a fibre of the retina is an extremity of a nerve of
sensation; as, for instance, one of the fibrils which compose the mouth
of an absorbent vessel. I suppose this living filament of whatever form
it may be, whether sphere, cube, or cylinder, to be endued with the
capability of being excited into action by certain kinds of stimulus. By
the stimulus of the surrounding fluid in which it is received from the
male it may bend into a ring, and thus form the beginning of a tube.
Such moving filaments and such rings are described by those who have
attended to microscopic animalculae. This living ring may now embrace or
absorb a nutritive particle of the fluid in which it swims; and by
drawing it into its pores, or joining it by compression to its
extremities, may increase its own length or crassitude, and by degrees
the living ring may become a living tube.
"With this new organization, or accretion of parts, new kinds of
irritability may commence; for so long as there was but one living organ
it could only be supposed to possess irritability; since sensibility may
be conceived to be an extension of the effect of irritability over the
rest of the system. These new kinds of irritability and of sensibility
in consequence of new organization appear from variety of facts in the
more mature animals; thus ... the lungs must be previously formed before
their exertions to obtain fresh air can exist; the throat, or
oesophagus, must be formed previous to the sensation or appetites of
hunger and thirst, one of which seems to reside at the upper end and the
other at the lower end of that canal."[173]
It seems to me Dr. Darwin is wrong in supposing that the organ must have
preceded the power to use it. The organ and its use--the desire to do
and the power to do--have always gone hand in hand, the organism finding
itself able to do more according as it advanced its desires, and
desiring to do more simultaneously with any increase in power, so that
neither appetency nor organism can claim precedence, but power and
desire must be considered as Siamese twins begotten together, conceived
together, born together, and inseparable always from each other. At the
same time they are torn by mutual jealousy; each claims, with some vain
show of reason, to have been the elder brother; each intrigues
incessantly from the beginning to the end of time to prevent the other
from outstripping him; each is in turn successful, but each is doomed to
death with the extinction of the other.
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