othing but organic resemblances
and disdains the differences of aptitude. By consulting only the bones,
the vertebrae, the hair, the nervures of the wings, the joints of the
antennae, the imagination may build up any sort of genealogical tree
that will fit with our theories of classification, for, when all is
said, the animal, in its widest generalization, is represented by a
digestive tube. With this common factor, the way lies open to every kind
of error. A machine is judged not by this or that train of wheels, but
by the nature of the work accomplished. The monumental roasting-jack of
a waggoners' inn and a Breguet chronometer both have trains of cogwheels
geared in almost a similar fashion. (Louis Breguet (1803-1883), a famous
Parisian watchmaker and physicist.--Translator's Note.) Are we to
class the two mechanisms together? Shall we forget that the one turns a
shoulder of mutton before the hearth, while the other divides time into
seconds?

In the same way, the organic scaffolding is dominated from on high by
the aptitudes of the animal, especially that superior characteristic,
the psychical aptitudes. That the Chimpanzee and the hideous Gorilla
possess close resemblances of structure to our own is obvious. But
let us for a moment consider their aptitudes. What differences, what a
dividing gulf! Without exalting ourselves as high as the famous reed of
which Pascal speaks, that reed which, in its weakness, by the mere
fact that it knows itself to be crushed, is superior to the world that
crushes it, we may at least ask to be shown, somewhere, an animal making
an implement, which will multiply its skill and its strength, or
taking possession of fire, the primordial element of progress. (Blaise
Pascal(1623-1662). The allusion is to a passage in the philosopher's
"Pensees." Pascal describes man as a reed, the weakest thing in nature,
but "a thinking reed."--Translator's Note.) Master of implements and
of fire! These two aptitudes, simple though they be, characterize man
better than the number of his vertebrae and his molars.

You tell us that man, at first a hairy brute, walking on all fours,
has risen on his hind-legs and shed his fur; and you complacently
demonstrate how the elimination of the hairy pelt was effected. Instead
of bolstering up a theory with a handful of fluff gained or lost, it
would perhaps be better to settle how the original brute became the
possessor of implements and fire. Aptitudes are more im