FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235  
236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   >>   >|  
ll after he had completed his 'Philosophie Anatomique,' and except through lectures delivered orally to the museum and the faculty, it was not published till 1828; nor again in the work then published do we find his theory in its neatest expression and fullest development." Isidore Geoffroy St. Hilaire tells us in a note that the work referred to as first putting his father's views before the public in a printed form, was a report to the Academy of Sciences on a memoir by M. Roulin; but that before this report some indications of them are to be found in a paper on the Gavials, published in 1825. Their best rendering, however, and fullest development is in several memoirs, published in succession, between the years 1828 and 1837. "This doctrine," he continues, "is diametrically opposed to that of Cuvier, and is not entirely the same as Lamarck's. Geoffroy St. Hilaire refutes the one, he restrains and corrects the other. Cuvier, according to him, sums up against the facts, while Lamarck goes further than they will bear him out. Essentially however on questions of this nature he is a follower of Lamarck, and took pleasure on several occasions in describing himself as the disciple of his illustrious _confrere_."[323] I have been unable to detect any substantial difference of opinion between Geoffroy St. Hilaire and Lamarck, except that the first maintained that a line must be drawn somewhere--and did not draw it--while the latter said that no line could be drawn, and therefore drew none. Mr. Darwin is quite correct in saying that Geoffroy St. Hilaire "relied chiefly on the conditions of life, or the 'monde ambiant,' as the cause of change." But this is only Lamarck over again, for though Lamarck attributes variation directly to change of habits in the creature, he is almost wearisome in his insistence on the fact that the habit will not change, unless the conditions of life also do so. With both writers then it is change in the relative positions of the exterior circumstances, and of the organism, which results in variation, and finally in specific modification. Here is another sketch of Etienne Geoffroy, also by his son Isidore. In 1795, while Lamarck was still a believer in immutability, Etienne Geoffroy St. Hilaire "had ventured to say that species might well be 'degenerations from a single type,'" but, though he never lost sight of the question, he waited more than a quarter of a century before passing from me
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235  
236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
Lamarck
 

Geoffroy

 
Hilaire
 

published

 
change
 

report

 

Etienne

 
variation
 

Cuvier

 

conditions


development
 

fullest

 

Isidore

 

Philosophie

 

Anatomique

 
directly
 

insistence

 
wearisome
 
completed
 

habits


creature

 

attributes

 

lectures

 

relied

 

chiefly

 

correct

 

Darwin

 

ambiant

 

writers

 

degenerations


single
 

species

 

immutability

 
ventured
 

quarter

 

century

 

passing

 

waited

 
question
 
believer

exterior

 

circumstances

 
organism
 

positions

 

relative

 

delivered

 

results

 

finally

 

sketch

 

specific