Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: May 21, 2025
Hertwig then is decidedly of opinion that Darwinism entirely fails in the individual case because in its application the basis of experience vanishes. Indeed, according to him, phylogeny is not at all capable of direct scientific investigation.
But in these writings his main argument is that of his concluding chapter: the spontaneous adaptiveness of the organism, which nullifies all contingent theories to explain the purposiveness in ontogeny and phylogeny.
In turning from the embryology to the phylogeny of man from the development of the individual to that of the species we must bear in mind the direct causal connection that exists between these two main branches of the science of human evolution.
We may now, therefore, approach our proper task, and reconstruct the phylogeny of man in its chief lines with the aid of this evidence of comparative anatomy and ontogeny. In this the reader will soon see the immense importance of the direct application of the biogenetic law.
Thus through the innumerable symbols supplied by environment the distance ceptors drive this or that animal according to the type of brain pattern and the particular state of threshold which has been developed in that animal by its phylogenetic and ontogenetic experiences. The brain pattern depends upon his phylogeny, the state of threshold upon his ontogeny.
It is “a certain historical fact.” The proofs of it are those already mentioned. What is especially Haeckelian is the “fundamental biogenetic law,” “ontogeny resembles phylogeny,” that is to say, in development, especially in embryonic development, the individual recapitulates the history of the race.
But before we enter upon the work it will be useful to make a few general observations that are necessary to understand the processes aright. We must say a few words with regard to the period in which the human race was evolved from the animal kingdom. The first thought that occurs to one in this connection is the vast difference between the duration of man's ontogeny and phylogeny.
Under the guidance of the biogenetic law, and on the basis of the evidence we have obtained, we now turn to the interesting task of determining the series of man's animal ancestors. Phylogeny us a whole is an inductive science.
It is true that this Monistic conception is rejected with horror by most men, and the Dualistic idea, which denies the inseparable connection of brain and mind, and regards body and soul as two totally different things, is still popular. But how can we reconcile this view with the known facts of evolution? It meets with difficulties equally great and insuperable in embryology and in phylogeny.
Then Science is more ignorant than the children at any village school. CONRAD. Of course if you think it more scientific to say that what we are discussing is not Adam and Eve and Eden, but the phylogeny of the blastoderm SAVVY. You neednt swear, Nunk. I can call Genesis Phylogenesis.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking