ON EVOLUTION

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 673, 27 May 1929, Page 8

ON EVOLUTION

THE CONTROVERSY CONTINUES The controversy on Evolution con. tinucs. We publish below two letters on the subject. The first, and long© v, is from Mr. Norman Burton, who, referring again to Professor Sperrin-Johnson's address, writes as follows: Sir.— In a recent issue of The Sun you were kind enough to publish a letter from me . commenting on Professor Sperrin-Johnson’s address on Evolution to the Rotary Club. The professor laid special stress on the recapitulation argument- lie asserted that the human embryo in its development recapitulates the important steps in the life history of the race to which it belongs. He gave no hint that some experts deny this alleged recapitulation, and that others assert that its significance and extent have been much exaggerated. In a lecture recently delivered at the Victoria Institute, Dr. A. Rcndle Short declared that a study of embryology introduces us to difficulties, as well as supports, for the theory of animal ancestry. He expressed the opinion that the conclusions of some biologists were not so difficult to reconcile with the Genesis narrative as were the teachings of Darwin, Huxley and Haeckel. Personally, I am not worrying about the reconciliation of Genesis and Evolution, and I do not desire to emphasise Dr. Short's statement. But I do wish. to draw attention to the comments of Professor J. A. Thomson, a scientist of outstanding eminence, and a thor-ough-going Evolutionist, Professor Thomson refers to Dr. Short's remarks as “useful criticism of the popular idea that man detailedly mo pun intended) climbs up his own genealogical tree in the course of his embryonic development.” Professor Thomson goes on to say: “Through the impetuosity of overzealous expositors of Evolutionism the idea has become widespread that individual development is a condensed, yet precise, recapitulation of racial evolution. But this is an exaggerated and in part misleading statement of the fact that in the individual differentiation of organs there is a tendency to retread the path followed by ancestral forms.”

Professor Thomson proceeds: “The so-called recapitulation is usually no more than a general parallelism, and the resemblances are between embryonic stages, not between the embryo of a higher and the adult of a lower type. There are all sorts of condensations and short cuts; many peculiarities of young stages are adaptive to particular circumstances of development and have not the slightest recapitulatory significances; and finally, such general recapitulation as there is, has to be considered alongside of the not less important fact specificity, which means that the organism is itself and no other from first to last.”

In applying the theory of Evolution to man, our experts should be careful to point out the differences as well as the similarities between man ar-d his mammalian ancestors. There is something unique about man. A recent authority states that physically the human organism is one with the rest of mammalian life; but spiritually and mentally man is a new creation. Man's emergence makes a wonderful mutation, a great leap forward, an abrupt transition in intellectual, moral and spiritual capacity. Whatever be man’s ancestry, he stands apart from the animal world. Professor Osborn states that “Evolution is a continuous creation of life fitted to a continuously changing world.’* This brings us to the doctrines of creative and emergent Evolution, and I must not now attempt to discuss that aspect of the problem. It is only fair to say that in his address to the Rotary Club. Professor Sperrin-Johnson could dee! with his big subject only in a broad and general way. He did not have time to go into details. But it must be admitted that there is a great difference of opinion among experts as regards factors and methods of Evolution. Something like a temporary deadlock has been reached. These facts should be frankly admitted. But in spite of all the difficulties and disagreements, the overwhelming majority of modern scientists are unshakably convinced that plans and animals and men have c-ome to be what they are by a process of evolution. NORMAN BURTON.