The Catholic bulletin. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1911-1995, 1922-04-15
BY SIR BERTRAM WINDLE.
F. r. S., LII. D., Sc. d,

r. n. 81, LII. d., sc. ID.
When Charles the Second, that
royal wag, founded the Royal Society,
he asked the learned men who cOnsti-
tuted it to tell him why the addition
of dead fish to, water caused no in
crease in weight whilst the addition
of live one did. After they had
pondered over this matter for a long
time and come to no conclusion and
admitted that fact, the King who
never said foolish thing" asked,
HHad you not better see whether
thugs are as l said?" OF course, the
whole thing was hoax and there
is no such difference as the king sug-
gested.
l have often thought of this tale
wnen reading the various comments
On Darwinis:n which have appeared
IN the columns of the daily press and
from which l seem to gather that the
subject in question has just been dis
covered by large section of the pub,
lie and that, just when, as very dis
tinguished American man of science,
the late Professor Dwight, said in
-911, "Darwinism is fast losing caste
among men of science" 1t, nay be
worth while to consider this matter
briefly and first of all to indicate
the undoubted fact that what many
people suppose to be Darwinism is
not that, whatever it is.
The French academy, when, drawing
up its Dictionary, is said to have
consulted Cuvier as to the definition
OF Il crab as "a red fish which walks
la edwards" His reply was that the
definition was admirable but for the
fact that the crab was not fish; was
not red in color; and did not walk
backward. The statement for exam.
pie that Darwin said that mans great
great and so-pn-grandfather was a
monkey is about as accurate as the
definition above.
Real and False "Darwinism."
Darwins work must be divided if
one is to form an estimate of it.
First of all there are purely scienti-
fic papers for specialists which are
of great importance but quite unin-
telligible to ordinary readers and ont
of our inquiry here. Secondly, there
are delightful and fascinating volumes
of Investigations like the Voyage of
the Beagle" and the books on Earth
worms, Coral Islands and the Fertili-
cation of Flowers. There is little or,
no controversy as to these, which are
generally unread by, and probably un-
known to, the vast majority of the
people who prate most volubly about
Darwinism. l am often tempted to
wonder whether they have ever read
the works of the third class otherwise
than in the extracts given in the in
Vulnerable little land often mislead-
ing) books which are constantly ap-
pearing on the subject. These books
of the third class like the Origin"
and the Descent of Man." besides
admiral BILE collections of facts, do con-
tain much philosophical matter which
has been in the past the subject of
a good deal of controversy.
Facts and philosophy. Let us hear
what a very distinguished man of
science, a biologist, too, says about
them from the presidential chair of
the British Association for the Ad.
of Science in the year of
the outbreak of the war:
I'VE go to Darwin for his incom.
parable collection of facts. We would
fain emulate his scholarship, his
width and his power of exposition,
but to us he speaks no more with
authority. We read his
scheme of evolution as we would those
of Lucretius or Lamarck, delighting
in their simplicity and courage"
Almost contemptuous- certainly-
condescending praise. The author of
the remark has not altered his opin.
ion in the years which have gone by,
for he is the same Professor BatesOn
whose utterances at the recent meet
ing of the American Association in
Toronto have been so widely quoted
over North America One more quota
ton from very distinguished bioIo-
gist and philosopher-very rare COM
bination-Professor Driesch Oar.
he says, explained how, by
throwing stones, one could build
houses of typical STYLE" in other
words, that 1T claimed to show how
purposely constructed
could arise by absolute chance"-ef-
forts which he obviously regards as
ridiculous. Lastly, let us consider a
1uotation from The Literary Supple
ment of The London Times in 1905
which, after describing the various
parties in the desperate struggle over
ends by saying that all
claim to represent Science, 1.-THE one
and only vice-regent of truth" but |
that while they have all united i'm |
1enouncing theologians for their con-
flicts, lit would puzzle them to point
TO a theological battlefield exhibiting
more uncertainty, obscurity, dissen-
sion, assumption and fallacy than their |
own. For the plain truth Is that, |
though some agree in this or that, |
there is not single point in which all |
agree; battling for evolution. they
have torn it to pieces; nothing is left,
aothing at all on their own showing