The reason of the discrepancies between instinct and function in man is
given by the natural history of his development. We know that man has
within him original sin—his long atavism. He has sprung, according to
the transformists, from a simian stock. He is a cousin, the successful
relation, of a type of antinomorphic monkeys, the chimpanzees. He
has “arrived,” they have remained undeveloped. Probably he had a
common ancestor with them, some dryopithecan of an extinct species.
From that type sprang a new type already on the way to progress, the
_Pithecanthropus erectus_. Finally, the anthropoid ancestor became
one fine day the father of a scion, clearly superior to himself, a
miraculously gifted being, man. Here, then, is no sign of the slow
evolution and gradual progress, which is the doctrine held at present
by Transformists. The Dutch botanist De Vries has shown us, in fact,
that nature does leap: _natura facit saltus_. There would thus be
crises, as it were, in the life of species. At certain critical epochs
considerable differences of a specific value appear in their offspring.
It is at one of these critical periods in the simian life that man
has appeared as the phenomenal child of an anthropoid. He was born
with a brain and an intellect superior to those of his humble parents;
and on the other hand, he has inherited from them an organization
which is only inadequately adapted to the new conditions of existence
created by the development of his sensitiveness and his brain power.
This intellect is not proportioned to his organization, which has not
developed at the same rate; it protests against the discordances which
adaptation has not yet had time to efface. But it will efface them in
the future.
§ 4. THE INSTINCT OF LIFE AND THE INSTINCT OF DEATH.
The greatest discrepancy of this kind is the knowledge of inevitable
death without the instinct which makes it longed for.
There are immortal animals. Man is not of the number. He belongs,
like all highly organized beings, to the class of beings which have
an end. They die from accident or from disease. They perish in the
struggle with other animals, or with microbes, or with external
conditions. There are certainly very few, if there are any, which die a
really natural death. And so it is with man. We see old men gradually
declining who appear to doze gently off into the last sleep, and become
extinguished without disease, like a lamp whose oil is exhausted. But
this is in most cases only apparently so. Besides the fact that the old
age to which they seemed to succumb is really a disease, a generalized
sclerosis, autopsy always reveals some lesion more or less directly
responsible for the fatal issue.
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