essays on life, art and science-第23章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


as　any　other　mechanical　appliances　interact　on　and　help　the
invention　that　first　hit　upon　them；　but　reason　or　thought；　for　the
most　part；　flies　along　over　the　heads　of　words；　working　its　own
mysterious　way　in　paths　that　are　beyond　our　ken；　though　whether　some
of　our　departmental　personalities　are　as　unconscious　of　what　is
passing；　as　that　central　government　is　which　we　alone　dub　with　the
name　of　〃we〃　or　〃us；〃　is　a　point　on　which　I　will　not　now　touch。

I　cannot　think；　then；　that　Professor　Max　Muller's　contention　that
thought　and　language　are　identicaland　he　has　repeatedly　affirmed
thiswill　ever　be　generally　accepted。　　Thought　is　no　more　identical
with　language　than　feeling　is　identical　with　the　nervous　system。
True；　we　can　no　more　feel　without　a　nervous　system　than　we　can
discern　certain　minute　organisms　without　a　microscope。　　Destroy　the
nervous　system；　and　we　destroy　feeling。　　Destroy　the　microscope；　and
we　can　no　longer　see　the　animalcules；　but　our　sight　of　the
animalcules　is　not　the　microscope；　though　it　is　effectuated　by　means
of　the　microscope；　and　our　feeling　is　not　the　nervous　system；　though
the　nervous　system　is　the　instrument　that　enables　us　to　feel。

The　nervous　system　is　a　device　which　living　beings　have　gradually
perfectedI　believe　I　may　say　quite　trulythrough　the　will　and
power　which　they　have　derived　from　a　fountain…head；　the　existence　of
which　we　can　infer；　but　which　we　can　never　apprehend。　　By　the　help
of　this　device；　and　in　proportion　as　they　have　perfected　it；　living
beings　feel　ever　with　greater　definiteness；　and　hence　formulate
their　feelings　in　thought　with　more　and　more　precision。　　The　higher
evolution　of　thought　has　reacted　on　the　nervous　system；　and　the
consequent　higher　evolution　of　the　nervous　system　has　again　reacted
upon　thought。　　These　things　are　as　power　and　desire；　or　supply　and
demand；　each　one　of　which　is　continually　outstripping；　and　being　in
turn　outstripped　by　the　other；　but；　in　spite　of　their　close
connection　and　interaction；　power　is　not　desire；　nor　demand　supply。
Language　is　a　device　evolved　sometimes　by　leaps　and　bounds；　and
sometimes　exceedingly　slowly；　whereby　we　help　ourselves　alike　to
greater　ease；　precision；　and　complexity　of　thought；　and　also　to　more
convenient　interchange　of　thought　among　ourselves。　　Thought　found
rude　expression；　which　gradually　among　other　forms　assumed　that　of
words。　　These　reacted　upon　thought；　and　thought　again　on　them；　but
thought　is　no　more　identical　with　words　than　words　are　with　the
separate　letters　of　which　they　are　composed。

To　sum　up；　then；　and　to　conclude。　　I　would　ask　you　to　see　the
connection　between　words　and　ideas；　as　in　the　first　instance
arbitrary。　　No　doubt　in　some　cases　an　imitation　of　the　cry　of　some
bird　or　wild　beast　would　suggest　the　name　that　should　be　attached　to
it；　occasionally　the　sound　of　an　operation　such　as　grinding　may　have
influenced　the　choice　of　the　letters　g；　r；　as　the　root　of　many　words
that　denote　a　grinding；　grating；　grasping；　crushing；　action；　but　I
understand　that　the　number　of　words　due　to　direct　imitation　is
comparatively　few　in　number；　and　that　they　have　been　mainly　coined
as　the　result　of　connections　so　far…fetched　and　fanciful　as　to
amount　practically　to　no　connection　at　all。　　Once　chosen；　however；
they　were　adhered　to　for　a　considerable　time　among　the　dwellers　in
any　given　place；　so　as　to　become　acknowledged　as　the　vulgar　tongue；
and　raise　readily　in　the　mind　of　the　inhabitants　of　that　place　the
ideas　with　which　they　had　been　artificially　associated。

As　regards　our　being　able　to　think　and　reason　without　words；　the
Duke　of　Argyll　has　put　the　matter　as　soundly　as　I　have　yet　seen　it
stated。　　〃It　seems　to　me；〃　he　wrote；　〃quite　certain　that　we　can　and
do　constantly　think　of　things　without　thinking　of　any　sound　or　word
as　designating　them。　　Language　seems　to　me　to　be　necessary　for　the
progress　of　thought；　but　not　at　all　for　the　mere　act　of　thinking。
It　is　a　product　of　thought；　an　expression　of　it；　a　vehicle　for　the
communication　of　it；　and　an　embodiment　which　is　essential　to　its
growth　and　continuity；　but　it　seems　to　me　altogether　erroneous　to
regard　it　as　an　inseparable　part　of　cogitation。〃

The　following　passages；　again；　are　quoted　from　Sir　William　Hamilton
in　Professor　Max　Muller's　own　book；　with　so　much　approval　as　to　lead
one　to　suppose　that　the　differences　between　himself　and　his
opponents　are　in　reality　less　than　he　believes　them　to　be：…

〃Language；〃　says　Sir　W。　Hamilton；　〃is　the　attribution　of　signs　to
our　cognitions　of　things。　　But　as　a　cognition　must　have　already　been
there　before　it　could　receive　a　sign；　consequently　that　knowledge
which　is　denoted　by　the　formation　and　application　of　a　word　must
have　preceded　the　symbol　that　denotes　it。　　A　sign；　however；　is
necessary　to　give　stability　to　our　intellectual　progressto
establish　each　step　in　our　advance　as　a　new　starting…point　for　our
advance　to　another　beyond。　　A　country　may　be　overrun　by　an　armed
host；　but　it　is　only　conquered　by　the　establishment　of　fortresses。
Words　are　the　fortresses　of　thought。　　They　enable　us　to　realise　our
dominion　over　what　we　have　already　overrun　in　thought；　to　make　every
intellectual　conquest　the　base　of　operations　for　others　still
beyond。〃

〃This；〃　says　Professor　Max　Muller；　〃is　a　most　happy　illustration；〃
and　he　proceeds　to　quote　the　following；　also　from　Sir　William
Hamilton；　which　he　declares　to　be　even　happier　still。

〃You　have　all　heard；〃　says　Sir　William　Hamilton；　〃of　the　process　of
tunnelling　through　a　sandbank。　　In　this　operation　it　is　impossible
to　succeed　unless　every　foot；　nay；　almost　every　inch　of　our　progress
be　secured　by　an　arch　of　masonry　before　we　attempt　the　excavation　of
another。　　Now　language　is　to　the　mind　precisely　what　the　arch　is　to
the　tunnel。　　The　power　of　thinking　and　the　power　of　excavation　are
not　dependent　on　the　words　in　the　one　case　or　on　the　mason…work　in
the　other；　but　without　these　subsidiaries　neither　could　be　carried
on　beyond　its　rudimentary　commencement。　　Though；　therefore；　we　allow
that　every　movement　forward　in　language　must　be　determined　by　an
antecedent　movement　forward　in　thought；　still；　unless　thought　be
accompanied　at　each　point　of　its　evolutions　by　a　corresponding
evolution　of　language；　its　further　development　is　arrested。〃

Man　has　evolved　an　articulate　language；　whereas　the　lower　animals
seem　to　be　without　one。　　Man；　therefore；　has　far　outstripped　them　in
reasoning　faculty　as　well　as　in　power　of　expression。　　This；　however；
does　not　bar　the　communications　which　the　lower　animals　make　to　one
another　from　possessing　all　the　essential　characteristics　of
language；　and　as　a　matter　of　fact；　wherever　we　can　follow　them　we
find　such　communications　effectuated　by　the　aid　of　arbitrary　symbols
covenanted　upon　by　the　living　beings　that　wish　to　communicate；　and
persistently　associated　with　certain　corresponding　feelings；　states
of　mind；　or　material　objects。　　Human　language　is　nothing　more　than
this　in　principle；　however　much　further　the　principle　has　been
carried　in　our　own　case　than　in　that　of　the　lower　animals。

This　being　admitted；　we　should　infer　that　the　thought　or　reason　on
which　the　language　of　men　and　animals　is　alike　founded　differs　as
between　men　and　brutes　in　degree　but　not　in　kind。　　More　than　this
cannot　be　claimed　on　behalf　of　the　lower　animals；　even　by　their　most
enthusiastic　admirer。



THE　DEADLOCK　IN　DARWINISM　｛20｝PART　I



It　will　be　readily　admitted　that　of　all　living　writers　Mr。　Alfred
Russel　Wallace　is　the　one　the　peculiar　turn　of　whose　mind　best　fits
him　to　write　on　the　subject　of　natural　selection；　or　the
accumulation　of　fortunate　but　accidental　variations　through　descent
and　the　struggle　for　existence。　　His　mind　in　all　its　more　essential
characteristics　closely　resembles　that　of　the　late　Mr。　Charles
Darwin　himself；　and　it　is　no　doubt　due　to　this　fact　that　he　and　Mr。
Darwin　elaborated　their　famous　theory　at　the　same　time；　and
independently　of　one　another。　　I　shall　have　occasion　in　the　course
of　the　following　article　to　show　how　misled　and　misleading　both
these　distinguished　men　have　been；　in　spite　of　their　unquestionable
familiarity　with　the　whole　range　of　animal　and　vegetable　phenomena。
I　believe　it　will　be　more　respectful　to　both　of　them　to　do　this　in
the　most　out…spoken　way。　　I　believe　their　work　to　have　been　as
mischievous　as　it　has　been　valuable；　and　as　valuable　as　it　has　been
mischievous；　and　higher；　whether　praise　or　blame；　I　know　not　how　to
give。　　Nevertheless　I　would　in　the　outset；　and　with　the　utmost
sincerity；　admit　concerning　Messrs。　Wallace　and　Darwin　that　neither
can　be　held　as　the　more　profound　and　conscientious　thinker；　neither
can　be　put　forward　as　the　more　ready　to　acknowledge　obligation　to
the　great　writers　on　evolution　who　had　preceded　him；　or　to　place　his
own　developments　in　closer　and　more　conspicuous　historical
connection　with　earlier　thought　upon　the　subject；　neither　is　the
more　ready　to　welcome　criticism　and　to　state　his　opponent's　case　in
the　most　pointed　and　telling　way　in　which　it　can　be　put；　neither　is
the　more　quick　to　encourage　new　truth；　neither　is　the　more　genial；
generous　adversary；　or　has　the　profounder　horror　of　anything　even
approaching　literary　or　scientific　want　of　candour；　both　display　the
same　inimitable　power　of　putting　their　opinions　forward　in　the　way
that　shall　best　ensure　their　acceptance；　both　are　equally　unrivalled
in　the　tact　that　tells　them　when　silence　will　be　golden；　and　when　on
the　other　hand　a　whole　volume　of　facts　may　be　advantageously　brought
forward。　　Less　than　the　foregoing　tribute　both　to　Messrs。　Darwin　and
Wallace　I　will　not；　and　more　I　cannot　pay。

Let　us　now　turn　to　the　most　authoritative　exponent　of　latter…day
evolutionI　mean　to　Mr。　Wallace；　whose　work；　entitled　〃Darwinism；〃
though　it　should　have　been　entitled　〃Wallaceism；〃　is　still　so　far
Darwinistic　that　it　develops　the　teaching　of　Mr。　Darwin　in　the
direction　given　to　it　by　Mr。　Darwin　himselfso　far；　indeed；　as　this
can　be　ascertained　at　alland　not　in　that　of　Lamarck。　　Mr。　Wallace
tells　us；　on　the　first　page　of　his　preface；　that　he　has　no　intention
of　dealing　even　in　outline　with　the　vast　subject　of　evolution　in
general；　and　has　only　tried　to　give　such　an　account　of　the　theory　of
natural　selection　as　may　facilitate　a　clear　conception　of　Darwin's
work。　　How　far　he　has　succeeded　is　a　point　on　which　opinion　will
probably　be　divided。　　Those　who　find　Mr。　Darwin's　works　clear　will
also　find　no　difficulty　in　understanding　Mr。　Wallace；　those；　on　the
other　hand；　who　find　Mr。　Darwin　puzzling　are　little　likely　to　be
less　puzzled　by　Mr。　Wallace。　　He　continues：…

〃The　objections　now　made　to　Darwin's　theory　apply　solely　to　the
particular　means　by　which　the　change　of　species　has　been　brought
about；　not　to　the　fact　of　that　change。〃

But　〃Darwin's　theory〃as　Mr。　Wallace　has　elsewhere　proved　that　he
understandshas　no　reference　〃to　the　fact　of　that　change〃that　is
to　say；　to　the　fact　that　species　have　been　modified　in　course　of
descent　from　other　species。　　This　is　no　more　Mr。　Darwin's　theory
than　it　is　the　reader's　or　my　own。　　Darwin's　theory　is　concerned
only　with　〃the　particular　means　by　which　the　change　of　species　h