That is to say, the environment selects some kinds of variations among
the many that are exhibited, and this is, of course, the essential
feature of the hypothesis of the transmutation of species by means of
natural selection of variable characters. Organisms enter the world
differently endowed with the power of acting on the medium in which
they live, or on the environment consisting of their fellow-organisms.
Those that are most favourably endowed live longest and have a more
numerous progeny than those that are less favourably endowed, and
they transmit this favourable endowment to their offspring. Among
the progeny of the progeny there may be some in which the favourable
variation is still more favourable than it was when it first appeared.
Thus the variations which are selected increase in amount. Elimination
of the weakest occurs. The idea is eminently clear and simple, and
possesses a great degree of generality: it is self-evident, says
Driesch, meaning that it cannot be refuted, for it was certainly not
clearly obvious to the naturalists before Darwin and Wallace. But,
unless we choose to be dogmatic, we can hardly claim that it is an
all-sufficient cause for the evolutionary process, and it is useless
to attempt to minimise the difficulties of the hypothesis. It is not
easy to make it account for the origin of instincts or tropisms, or for
restitutions and regenerations of lost parts, or for the appearance
of the first non-functional rudiments of organs which later become
functional and useful. It is, indeed, possible to devise plausible
hypotheses accounting for all these things in terms of natural
selection, but each such subsidiary hypothesis loads the original one
and weakens it to that extent.
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