Wenly lituan

7-24-37

PREFACE.

IT

T may be well at the outset clearly to define the position taken in the following work. The author believes that the process of Organic Evolution has taken place, but he does not believe that Natural Selection has been the means by which that result has been brought about. If any reader is of opinion that Organic Evolution and Natural Selection are synonymous terms, he is recommended at the outset to turn to the first chapter of the Third Book, in which it is attempted to show that Natural Selection is not identical with Organic Evolution.

In the second place, the reader is warned against the idea that any selection in nature can properly be called Natural Selection. Natural Selection is a very complex term. It is based on the analogy supposed to exist between the process of artificial selection and a process which is supposed to take place in nature. In Natural Selection the struggle for existence is supposed to be the selecting power, and it works by life and death; it secures the survival of the fittest, and hence it is based upon the principle of utility. It selects from those variations which are necessarily associated with sexual reproduction. It asks only for small variations, and it undertakes that the slight favourable variations shall survive. In this way it now produces the transmutation of species, and in a far-off past it was the only or

principal agent of Organic Evolution. The object of this work is to show that Natural Selection, thus defined, has no place in the world of nature; that if it did exist, other factors of evolution would anticipate its action in the transmutation of species now going on; and last, but not least, that we have no definite proof of its action in the early stages of Organic Evolution.

In the third place it may be remarked that this discussion is simply confined to the endeavour to discover what the actual order of nature is. That should be the object of every one who seeks to discover the truth, whether he be a scientific man or a theologian. Whatever order is proved to exist, must be accepted by the scientific man as the system of nature, and beyond that point physical science cannot go. But the theologian is left at liberty to give his reasons for believing that this order of nature is the method of God. in a work like this, to avoid as far as possible all argument based on theological considerations. The stage at which the discussion of this question has now arrived, justifies us in doing so; although, even now, we have to deal sometimes with objections which arose when the debate was largely dominated by theological considerations.

Hence it is most desirable,

It is often said, or implied, that a man who is not a scientific expert has no right to venture into the regions of biological controversy, and he is sometimes characterised as "a more or less acute paper philosopher." I venture to think that such a man, if he be only acute enough, may still have his role in the world of science. With the exception of a few universal geniuses who are ready to discuss, and express authoritative opinions on, all possible topics, the necessity of a subdivision of labour has been felt in the scientific world no less than in the economical world.

Sir W. J. Dawson, speaking as the President of the British Association, at Birmingham, said :

"It is impossible for any man to keep pace with the progress of more than one limited branch of science, and it is equally impossible to find an audience of scientific men of whom anything more than a mere fraction can be expected to take an interest in any one subject."

And as in the region of experiment and observation each man may set himself to cultivate his own department, why may not some men devote themselves to the discussion of theories to that branch of science which consists in putting the right interpretation on the phenomena which have been observed and chronicled? When Mr. Galton, in considering a certain problem, referred to a mathematician to work the result from certain elements that were supplied, he took for granted the ability of the mathematician within his own sphere, and did not depreciate his part of the work because he was not an expert in physical or biological science.

But perhaps it will be said that it is impossible that the man who is not an expert in a particular branch, should understand anything about it. Nevertheless, in the address just quoted, Sir W. J. Dawson goes on to express a hope that the specialist can make himself understood:

"There is, however, some consolation in the knowledge that a speaker who is sufficiently simple for those who are advanced specialists in other departments will, of necessity, be also sufficiently. simple to be understood by the general public who are specialists in nothing."

And indeed it would be strange if the proof of principles or the statement of definite and special facts could not be made intelligible, and could not be submitted to the judgment of the general public. The command to every thinker, who is not a specialist-Go to a specialist-Go to a biological