The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1895-03-07
1Ierpdity.

Herbert spencer new attack upon
Professor Weismann of Freiburg has
given a fresh vogue to that never
wearying problem of biologists, here
dity. Probably no other question has
played so famous a part in the history
of the human race. 1t has passed
through three stages-the social, Which
gave birth to totemism, hierarchy ma
ton, caste and aristocracy; the prac-
teal, which gave rise to fanciers ana
breeders; and the scientific, which is
now the battlefield of biology. The
highest response that man looks for is
the hard sought answer to the fnterro-
gatory: Can acquired character be
inherited? Can we by any amount of
self-culture, however continuous and
persevering, add to the stature, moral
or material, of our offspring and de-
scendants?" To this query Professor
Weismann emphatically and dogmati-
cally replies: No
The acceptance of such dictum is re-
pudiated in the name of all the hopes
and aspirations of humanity. In its
bald reduction, the Weismannian doc
trine means simply that parents can
not by any mental or moral efforts en-
dow their children with congeniat
traits. The son cannot, in other words
begin in nature where his father left
off The scion may inherit his sire's
books, instruments and conditions, but
not his individual acquired character.
Certainly it will not do merely TO OPP
pose this conclusion by the glittering
generality that family traits are pro-
verbal. Ancestral tendencies are not
always revealed: ard the fact is that
pride of family is not one of the least
reliable Of modern social Pigments.
The ground upon which St George
Nivart, the noted Catholic botanist
and biologist, seeks scientifically To
confute the Weismannian doctrine may
be popularity stated in a brief epitome.
Weismann asserts that no acquired
characters can by any possibility be
transmitted TO offsprings; consequent
ly all variations of species are due 10
natural selection" which means an
improved type due to better sexual
combination. He believes that the ORR
ginal vital principle. which In its ma
terial form he terms the gernplasm, Is
alone transmitted from both parents
St. George Mivart declares. on the con
trary. that no such peculiar diferen-
tiations would have been brought
about by simple ancestral origin as the
queer tadpole stages of frog and toad
the CELEBRATING epoch OF efts, or the
sex changes of bees in the egg Nat
ural selection does not account for the
rudimentary first finger on the potto,
the small African lemurcid animal, nor
for the labyrinthodoRs OF the carboni-
ferrous rocks, the teeth or which are
most beautifully complicated FOR no
seeming purpose whatever.
But the Mivartian argument does not
overthrow the WeisuIaunian theory. II
simply casts doubt upon the oFer-eTfl-
phasized Darwinian theory OF natural
selection. The scientific question
overshadows the philosophic problem
altogether too much The inquiry as Il
chiefly affects human morals Is ~h@th-
er or no man can transmit Inherited n
teIligence. Despite the fact that man
has developed new funtions. has ne
developed a new trait? The ola traits
may be wonderfully. blossomed into
new growth. and may be upon the
morn Of a nobler fruitage; but has
mankind today one single addition 20
its brain
Was Shakespeare any greater IN Tin
SELF than Aeschyius. Darwin than AIS
tntie- OF Hegel than Plato Are TIE