Luck, or Cunning, as the Main Means of Organic ModificationButler, Samuel
Philosophy
Luck, or Cunning, as the Main Means of Organic Modification
Butler, Samuel
Evolution; Natural selection
Let us take the eye as a somewhat crucial example. It is a
seeing-machine, or thing to see with. So is a telescope; the telescope
in its highest development is a secular accumulation of cunning,
sometimes small, sometimes great; sometimes applied to this detail of the
instrument, and sometimes to that. It is an admirable example of design;
nevertheless, as I said in “Evolution Old and New,” he who made the first
rude telescope had probably no idea of any more perfect form of the
instrument than the one he had himself invented. Indeed, if he had, he
would have carried his idea out in practice. He would have been unable
to conceive such an instrument as Lord Rosse’s; the design, therefore, at
present evidenced by the telescope was not design all on the part of one
and the same person. Nor yet was it unmixed with chance; many a detail
has been doubtless due to an accident or coincidence which was forthwith
seized and made the best of. Luck there always has been and always will
be, until all brains are opened, and all connections made known, but luck
turned to account becomes design; there is, indeed, if things are driven
home, little other design than this. The telescope, therefore, is an
instrument designed in all its parts for the purpose of seeing, and, take
it all round, designed with singular skill.
Looking at the eye, we are at first tempted to think that it must be the
telescope over again, only more so; we are tempted to see it as something
which has grown up little by little from small beginnings, as the result
of effort well applied and handed down from generation to generation,
till, in the vastly greater time during which the eye has been developing
as compared with the telescope, a vastly more astonishing result has been
arrived at. We may indeed be tempted to think this, but, according to
Mr. Darwin, we should be wrong. Design had a great deal to do with the
telescope, but it had nothing or hardly anything whatever to do with the
eye. The telescope owes its development to cunning, the eye to luck,
which, it would seem, is so far more cunning than cunning that one does
not quite understand why there should be any cunning at all. The main
means of developing the eye was, according to Mr. Darwin, not use as
varying circumstances might direct with consequent slow increase of power
and an occasional happy flight of genius, but natural selection. Natural
selection, according to him, though not the sole, is still the most
important means of its development and modification. {81a} What, then,
is natural selection?
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