The Idaho world. [volume] (Idaho City, Idaho Territory) 1864-1918, 1874-03-19
[From the Stockton Free Press.l
AGASSIZ AND HIS PHILOSOPHY.


field of thought was in the realm of fact rather
than in that of theory which is the peculiar
province of philosophy. Yet the mind is so
constituted that it no sooner puts two or more
real or supposed facts together than it begins
to draw an inference therefrom.\ Talk as men
may about the certainty of scientific deductions,
they are like all other deductions-worthy of
acceptance when definitely proved. and not be-
fore. There is a theory of the existence of
atoms in such relation to each other that they
do not touch, even in the hardest and most
compact substances; and it is supposed that
this theory is necessary as n deduction from
the facts attending the expansion and contrac-
tion of bodies by heat and cold, and the trans.
mission of electricity and light, and other nat
ural forces. 1t may be So or it may not, for
no one has ever yet seen atoms OF the character
named Their existence. in bodies that are
solid, liquid and fluid by turns-and yet wheth-
er in the space of cubic inch or thousand
cubic feet. are still without apparent interspa
ces. and not capable of detection by the most
powerful microscOpe-must ever remain en-
\
tirely hypothetical. and consequently problem
atcal. So in the science of physical hte in
which Professor Agassiz found his peculiar
field of study, thera are facts from which all
thoughtful minds must necessarily draw infer
ences, or in other words, form hypotheses.
Perhaps, before we speak OF his theory, we
should speak of the especial branch of his SCI
entiic studies.
The large increase of knowledge in modern
times has necessitated the dividing up of the
different sciences for the investigation of diff
ferent men, The branch of science chosen by
Agassz was anatomy. To study the physical
structure Of animals, and its laws of Develop
Notwithstanding the forms through which 1t
passes from its enbryotic state to that OF its
perfection Here he found his liie-work, aud
right well did he do it, Hugh Miller tells US
that on one occasion he waited on Professor
Agassiz with some points of scientific inquiry,
and in course of the interview presented him
with single scale OF fish from waters on the
: coast of Scotland There VAS nothing tn an
unpracticed eye, in that scale. that would lead
. to its detection from ten thousand others But
e not so with THIS adept in science. He at once
told the name of fish To which it belonged. de.
scribed its habits, and told where it found its
. home We are almost ready to say that "sucl
knowledge is too powerful for us
d It was impossible for man to pursue snct
studies for long succession OF years without
being led to the consideration of theory that
in some shape. has had disciples for ages, to
4 wit-the theory of Development. The studies
OF Darwin had led to the same point, and uiti
! mated in reconstruction Of the old theory
: and TO it's being ascribed to hlmseit as though
:. he were the original inventor. Indeed. there
u are many who suppose that Darwin Is the au
e. thor of the theory that, by no good right bear
his name Darwin's field of study was In th'
= external lie rather than the internal structure
He watched the habits, while Agassiz dssecte'
,, bones and muscles. OF course both these mel
went beyond the field here indicated, but the
}. we're most proficient there Darwin though
he saw changes which would indicate the pos
n sibty of the development theory. Agassl
s ase thought he saw laws of fxcdness in the lorna
is ton of various species that forever shut o
such hypothesis from the realm of possibilities
he Thus these two great men diverged. and TO
a lowing each his own way, they became head
Of two systems-ench having earnest advocate
- in the scientific world. Of Darwin. we sha
:, only say that his is theory OF AtheisH'-no
that he is an Atheist, or that his theory cannc
\ he rcconciled to the existence OF God; but
= naturally catches all who deny the existence
H. n Supreme Being, for they think they see IN
n way of accounting for the existence OF thing
i'll "a they are, without the aid of Creator
st Agassiz, on the other hand-without accep
'le inc the Genesis of Revelation as at an reliab
-recopnized the necessity of an Infinite Cre'
for He saw in the forms of animal life, tn
~ wisdom of q God who saw the end from til
:. beuinninp, and made his work conform to a
;denl which was first in the conception OF ID
- Creator. as the house is first in the concepto
n of the builder, and whose work was aferwal
y TO make in form what had previously exlste
b in thought. Because two animals are vel
much alike, it by no means follows. in the pl
losopby of Agassiz. that one came from Il
E. other. It only shows that having done q thf
the best way it could be done the first time,
,v.nt on repeatinp it in a similar way. Thu