darwin and modern science-第47节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


n　earlier　years；　and　especially　during　his　splendid　period　of　activity　at　Wurzburg　（1848…1856）；　he　had　been　a　consistent　free…thinker；　and　had　in　a　number　of　able　articles　（collected　in　his　〃Gesammelte　Abhandlungen〃）　（〃Gesammelte　Abhandlungen　zur　wissenschaftlichen　Medizin〃；　Berlin；　1856。）　upheld　the　unity　of　human　nature；　the　inseparability　of　body　and　spirit。　　In　later　years　at　Berlin；　where　he　was　more　occupied　with　political　work　and　sociology　（especially　after　1866）；　he　abandoned　the　positive　monistic　position　for　one　of　agnosticism　and　scepticism；　and　made　concessions　to　the　dualistic　dogma　of　a　spiritual　world　apart　from　the　material　frame。

In　the　course　of　a　Scientific　Congress　at　Munich　in　1877　the　conflict　of　these　antithetic　views　of　nature　came　into　sharp　relief。　　At　this　memorable　Congress　I　had　undertaken　to　deliver　the　first　address　（September　18th）　on　the　subject　of　〃Modern　evolution　in　relation　to　the　whole　of　science。〃　　I　maintained　that　Darwin's　theory　not　only　solved　the　great　problem　of　the　origin　of　species；　but　that　its　implications；　especially　in　regard　to　the　nature　of　man；　threw　considerable　light　on　the　whole　of　science；　and　on　anthropology　in　particular。　　The　discovery　of　the　real　origin　of　man　by　evolution　from　a　long　series　of　mammal　ancestors　threw　light　on　his　place　in　nature　in　every　aspect；　as　Huxley　had　already　shown　in　his　excellent　lectures　of　1863。　　Just　as　all　the　organs　and　tissues　of　the　human　body　had　originated　from　those　of　the　nearest　related　mammals；　certain　ape…like　forms；　so　we　were　bound　to　conclude　that　his　mental　qualities　also　had　been　derived　from　those　of　his　extinct　primate　ancestor。

This　monistic　view　of　the　origin　and　nature　of　man；　which　is　now　admitted　by　nearly　all　who　have　the　requisite　acquaintance　with　biology；　and　approach　the　subject　without　prejudice；　encountered　a　sharp　opposition　at　that　time。　　The　opposition　found　its　strongest　expression　in　an　address　that　Virchow　delivered　at　Munich　four　days　afterwards　（September　22nd）；　on　〃The　freedom　of　science　in　the　modern　State。〃　　He　spoke　of　the　theory　of　evolution　as　an　unproved　hypothesis；　and　declared　that　it　ought　not　to　be　taught　in　the　schools；　because　it　was　dangerous　to　the　State。　　〃We　must　not；〃　he　said；　〃teach　that　man　has　descended　from　the　ape　or　any　other　animal。〃　　When　Darwin；　usually　so　lenient　in　his　judgment；　read　the　English　translation　of　Virchow's　speech；　he　expressed　his　disapproval　in　strong　terms。　　But　the　great　authority　that　Virchow　hadan　authority　well　founded　in　pathology　and　sociologyand　his　prestige　as　President　of　the　German　Anthropological　Society；　had　the　effect　of　preventing　any　member　of　the　Society　from　raising　serious　opposition　to　him　for　thirty　years。　　Numbers　of　journals　and　treatises　repeated　his　dogmatic　statement：　　〃It　is　quite　certain　that　man　has　descended　neither　from　the　ape　nor　from　any　other　animal。〃　　In　this　he　persisted　till　his　death　in　1902。　　Since　that　time　the　whole　position　of　German　anthropology　has　changed。　　The　question　is　no　longer　whether　man　was　created　by　a　distinct　supernatural　act　or　evolved　from　other　mammals；　but　to　which　line　of　the　animal　hierarchy　we　must　look　for　the　actual　series　of　ancestors。　　The　interested　reader　will　find　an　account　of　this　〃battle　of　Munich〃　（1877）　in　my　three　Berlin　lectures　（April；　1905）　（〃Der　Kampf　um　die　Entwickelungs…Gedanken〃。　　（English　translation；　〃Last　Words　on　Evolution〃；　London；　1906。）

The　main　points　in　our　genealogical　tree　were　clearly　recognised　by　Darwin　in　the　sixth　chapter　of　the　〃Descent　of　Man〃。　　Lowly　organised　fishes；　like　the　lancelet　（Amphioxus）；　are　descended　from　lower　invertebrates　resembling　the　larvae　of　an　existing　Tunicate　（Appendicularia）。　　From　these　primitive　fishes　were　evolved　higher　fishes　of　the　ganoid　type　and　others　of　the　type　of　Lepidosiren　（Dipneusta）。　　It　is　a　very　small　step　from　these　to　the　Amphibia：

〃In　the　class　of　mammals　the　steps　are　not　difficult　to　conceive　which　led　from　the　ancient　Monotremata　to　the　ancient　Marsupials；　and　from　these　to　the　early　progenitors　of　the　placental　mammals。　　We　may　thus　ascend　to　the　Lemuridae；　and　the　interval　is　not　very　wide　from　these　to　the　Simiadae。　　The　Simiadae　then　branched　off　into　two　great　stems；　the　New　World　and　Old　World　monkeys；　and　from　the　latter；　at　a　remote　period；　Man；　the　wonder　and　glory　of　the　Universe；　proceeded。〃　　（〃Descent　of　Man〃　（Popular　Edition）；　page　255。）

In　these　few　lines　Darwin　clearly　indicated　the　way　in　which　we　were　to　conceive　our　ancestral　series　within　the　vertebrates。　　It　is　fully　confirmed　by　all　the　arguments　of　comparative　anatomy　and　embryology；　of　palaeontology　and　physiology；　and　all　the　research　of　the　subsequent　forty　years　has　gone　to　establish　it。　　The　deep　interest　in　geology　which　Darwin　maintained　throughout　his　life　and　his　complete　knowledge　of　palaeontology　enabled　him　to　grasp　the　fundamental　importance　of　the　palaeontological　record　more　clearly　than　anthropologists　and　zoologists　usually　do。

There　has　been　much　debate　in　subsequent　decades　whether　Darwin　himself　maintained　that　man　was　descended　from　the　ape；　and　many　writers　have　sought　to　deny　it。　　But　the　lines　I　have　quoted　verbatim　from　the　conclusion　of　the　sixth　chapter　of　the　〃Descent　of　Man〃　（1871）　leave　no　doubt　that　he　was　as　firmly　convinced　of　it　as　was　his　great　precursor　Jean　Lamarck　in　1809。　　Moreover；　Darwin　adds；　with　particular　explicitness；　in　the　〃general　summary　and　conclusion〃　（chapter　XXI。）　of　that　standard　work　（〃Descent　of　Man〃；　page　930。）：

〃By　considering　the　embryological　structure　of　manthe　homologies　which　he　presents　with　the　lower　animals；the　rudiments　which　he　retains；and　the　reversions　to　which　he　is　liable；　we　can　partly　recall　in　imagination　the　former　condition　of　our　early　progenitors；　and　can　approximately　place　them　in　their　proper　place　in　the　zoological　series。　　We　thus　learn　that　man　is　descended　from　a　hairy；　tailed　quadruped；　probably　arboreal　in　its　habits；　and　an　inhabitant　of　the　Old　World。　　This　creature；　if　its　whole　structure　had　been　examined　by　a　naturalist；　would　have　been　classed　amongst　the　Quadrumana；　as　surely　as　the　still　more　ancient　progenitor　of　the　Old　and　New　World　monkeys。〃

These　clear　and　definite　lines　leave　no　doubt　that　Darwinso　critical　and　cautious　in　regard　to　important　conclusionswas　quite　as　firmly　convinced　of　the　descent　of　man　from　the　apes　（the　Catarrhinae；　in　particular）　as　Lamarck　was　in　1809　and　Huxley　in　1863。

It　is　to　be　noted　particularly　that；　in　these　and　other　observations　on　the　subject；　Darwin　decidedly　assumes　the　monophyletic　origin　of　the　mammals；　including　man。　　It　is　my　own　conviction　that　this　is　of　the　greatest　importance。　　A　number　of　difficult　questions　in　regard　to　the　development　of　man；　in　respect　of　anatomy；　physiology；　psychology；　and　embryology；　are　easily　settled　if　we　do　not　merely　extend　our　progonotaxis　to　our　nearest　relatives；　the　anthropoid　apes　and　the　tailed　monkeys　from　which　these　have　descended；　but　go　further　back　and　find　an　ancestor　in　the　group　of　the　Lemuridae；　and　still　further　back　to　the　Marsupials　and　Monotremata。　　The　essential　identity　of　all　the　Mammals　in　point　of　anatomical　structure　and　embryonic　developmentin　spite　of　their　astonishing　differences　in　external　appearance　and　habits　of　lifeis　so　palpably　significant　that　modern　zoologists　are　agreed　in　the　hypothesis　that　they　have　all　sprung　from　a　common　root；　and　that　this　root　may　be　sought　in　the　earlier　Palaeozoic　Amphibia。

The　fundamental　importance　of　this　comparative　morphology　of　the　Mammals；　as　a　sound　basis　of　scientific　anthropology；　was　recognised　just　before　the　beginning　of　the　nineteenth　century；　when　Lamarck　first　emphasised　（1794）　the　division　of　the　animal　kingdom　into　Vertebrates　and　Invertebrates。　　Even　thirteen　years　earlier　（1781）；　when　Goethe　made　a　close　study　of　the　mammal　skeleton　in　the　Anatomical　Institute　at　Jena；　he　was　intensely　interested　to　find　that　the　composition　of　the　skull　was　the　same　in　man　as　in　the　other　mammals。　　His　discovery　of　the　os　intermaxillare　in　man　（1784）；　which　was　contradicted　by　most　of　the　anatomists　of　the　time；　and　his　ingenious　〃vertebral　theory　of　the　skull；〃　were　the　splendid　fruit　of　his　morphological　studies。　　They　remind　us　how　Germany's　greatest　philosopher　and　poet　was　for　many　years　ardently　absorbed　in　the　comparative　anatomy　of　man　and　the　mammals；　and　how　he　divined　that　their　wonderful　identity　in　structure　was　no　mere　superficial　resemblance；　but　pointed　to　a　deep　internal　connection。　　In　my　〃Generelle　Morphologie〃　（1866）；　in　which　I　published　the　first　attempts　to　construct　phylogenetic　trees；　I　have　given　a　number　of　remarkable　theses　of　Goethe；　which　may　be　called　〃phyletic　prophecies。〃　　They　justify　us　in　regarding　him　as　a　precursor　of　Darwin。

In　the　ensuing　forty　years　I　have　made　many　conscientious　efforts　to　penetrate　further　along　that　line　of　anthropological　research　that　was　opened　up　by　Goethe；　Lamarck；　and　Darwin。　　I　have　brought　together　the　many　valuable　results　that　have　constantly　been　reached　in　comparative　anatomy；　physiology；　ontogeny；　and　palaeontology；　and　maintained　the　effort　to　reform　the　classification　of　animals　and　plants　in　an　evol