The Foundations of the Origin of Species: Two Essays written in 1842 and 1844Darwin, Charles
Philosophy
The Foundations of the Origin of Species: Two Essays written in 1842 and 1844
Darwin, Charles
Evolution (Biology); Natural selection
{497} In the _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 454, vi. p. 625, the author in
referring to semi-monstrous variations adds "But I doubt whether
any of these cases throw light on the origin of rudimentary organs
in a state of nature." In 1844 he was clearly more inclined to an
opposite opinion.
{498} _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 454, vi. p. 625.
{499} See _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 454, vi. p. 625. The author there
discusses monstrosities in relation to rudimentary organs, and
comes to the conclusion that disuse is of more importance, giving
as a reason his doubt "whether species under nature ever undergo
abrupt changes." It seems to me that in the _Origin_ he gives more
weight to the "Lamarckian factor" than he did in 1844. Huxley took
the opposite view, see the Introduction.
{500} _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 455, vi. p. 627.
_Abortion from gradual disuse._
There seems to be some probability that continued disuse of any part or
organ, and the selection of individuals with such parts slightly less
developed, would in the course of ages produce in organic beings under
domesticity races with such parts abortive. We have every reason to
believe that every part and organ in an individual becomes fully
developed only with exercise of its functions; that it becomes developed
in a somewhat lesser degree with less exercise; and if forcibly
precluded from all action, such part will often become atrophied. Every
peculiarity, let it be remembered, tends, especially where both parents
have it, to be inherited. The less power of flight in the common duck
compared with the wild, must be partly attributed to disuse{501} during
successive generations, and as the wing is properly adapted to flight,
we must consider our domestic duck in the first stage towards the state
of the Apteryx, in which the wings are so curiously abortive. Some
naturalists have attributed (and possibly with truth) the falling ears
so characteristic of most domestic dogs, some rabbits, oxen, cats,
goats, horses, &c., &c., as the effects of the lesser use of the muscles
of these flexible parts during successive generations of inactive life;
and muscles, which cannot perform their functions, must be considered
verging towards abortion. In flowers, again, we see the gradual abortion
during successive seedlings (though this is more properly a conversion)
of stamens into imperfect petals, and finally into perfect petals. When
the eye is blinded in early life the optic nerve sometimes becomes
atrophied; may we not believe that where this organ, as is the case with
the subterranean mole-like Tuco-tuco <_Ctenomys_>{502}, is frequently
impaired and lost, that in the course of generations the whole organ
might become abortive, as it normally is in some burrowing quadrupeds
having nearly similar habits with the Tuco-tuco?
{501} _Origin_, Ed. i. p. 11, vi. p. 13, where drooping-ears of
domestic animals are also given.
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