Mechanistic biology can suggest no means whereby simultaneously
occurring variations are co-ordinated: let us therefore think of
these variations as occurring independently of each other, and let us
ignore the difficulty of the infrequency of occurrence of suitably
co-ordinated variations. Variations _are_ exhibited by the evolving
organism, and the selection of co-ordinated series is the work of the
environment. But the environment is merely a passive agency, and it
has to confer direction on the innumerable variations presented to it
by the organism, rejecting most but selecting some. Let us think of
the environment, says a critic of Bergson, as a blank wall against
which numerous jets of sand are being projected. The jets scatter
as they approach the wall: each of them represents the variations
displayed by some organ or organ-system of an animal. Let us think of
a pattern drawn on the wall in some kind of adhesive substance: where
the wall is blank the sand would strike, but would fall off again, but
it would adhere to the parts covered by the adhesive paint. The sand
grains strike the wall from all sides, that is, their directions are
un-co-ordinated. The wall is passive, yet a pattern is imprinted upon
it. From passivity and un-co-ordination come symmetry and order.
This argument withstands superficial examination, but to accept it
is truly to be “fooled by a metaphor.” _For what is the pattern on
the wall?_ It is the environment, says the critic. But what is the
environment? Inevitably we think of it as something that makes or
moulds the organism, a way of regarding it that drags after it all
the confusion of thought implied in the above analogy. Clearly the
environment is made by the organism. Its _form_, that is, space,
is only the mode of motion possible to the organism; it is clear
that whether the space perceived by an organism is one-, two-, or
three-dimensional, space depends upon its mode of motion. Its universe
is whatever it can act upon, actually or in contemplation. Atoms and
molecules, planets and suns are its environment because it can in some
measure act upon these bodies, or at least they can be made useful to
it. Chloroform or saccharine, or methyl-blue and all the dye-stuffs
prepared from coal-tar by the chemists, are part of our environment
because we have _made them_. They existed only in potentiality prior to
the development of organic chemistry. They were possible, but man had
to assemble their elements before they became actual. In _making_ them,
he conferred _direction_ on inorganic reactions.
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