E. von Hartmann in his _Philosophie des Unbewussten_ (1868) and in his valuable essay on _Wahrheit und Irrtum im Darwinismus_ (1874) criticised Darwinism in a most suggestive manner from the vitalistic standpoint. He drew attention to the importance of active adaptation, the necessity for assuming definite and correlated variability, and to the evidence for the existence of an immanent, purposive, but unconscious principle of evolution, active as well in phylogenetic as in individual development. In France H. Milne-Edwards[365] stated the problem thus:--"In the present state of science, ought we to attribute to modifications dependent on the action of known external agents the differences in the organic types manifested by the animals distributed over the surface of the globe either at the present day, or in past geological ages? Or must the origin of types transmissible by heredity be attributed to causes of another order, to forces whose effects are not apparent in the present state of things, to a creative power independent of the general properties of organisable matter such as we know them to-day?" (p. 426) He concluded that the action of environment, direct or indirect, was insufficient to account for the diversity of organic forms, and rejected Darwin's theory completely. He thought it likely that the successive faunas which palaeontology discloses have originated from one another by descent. But he thought that the process by which they evolved should rightly be called "creation." The word was of course not to be taken in a crude sense. When the zoologist speaks of the "creation" of a new species, "he in no way means that the latter has arisen from the dust, rather than from a pre-existing animal whose mode of organisation was different; he merely means that the known properties of matter, whether inert or organic, are insufficient to bring about such a result, and that the intervention of a hidden cause, of a power of some higher order, seems to him necessary" (p. 429). The criticism of Darwinism exercised by the older currents of thought remained on the whole without influence. It was under the direct inspiration of the Darwinian theory that morphology developed during the next quarter of a century. [333] Radl, _loc. cit._, i., p. 71. [334] _Kritik der Urtheilskraft_, 1790. [335] Eng. Trans. by J. H. Bernard, p. 337, London, 1892. [336] H. F. Osborn, _From the Greeks to Darwin_, p. 145, New York and London, 1894. [337] See Meckel, _supra_, p. 93; _cf._ Tiedemann, _Zoologie_, p. 65, 1808. "Even as each individual organism transforms itself, so the whole animal kingdom is to be thought of as an organism in course of metamorphosis." Also p. 73 of the same book. [338] Chapters vii. and ix.