Origin of Species Variorum

→ Doctrine 1866 1869

Doctrine , 1872

→ Beauty 1866 1869

Beauty , 1872

→ beauty in the eyes of 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

the sake of beauty, to delight 1872

→ or, as already discussed, for the sake of 1869

or for 1859 1860 1861

or, as already mentioned and discussed, for the sake of 1866

or the Creator (but this latter point is beyond the scope of scientific discussion), or for the sake of 1872

→ variety. 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

variety, a view already discussed. 1872

→ possessors, and may never have been of any use to their progenitors. 1869

possessors. 1859 1860 1861 1866

possessors, and may never have been of any use to their progenitors; but this does not prove that they were formed solely for beauty or variety. 1872

→ as recently remarked, 1869

OMIT 1872

→ correlated variation, and reversion 1869

and the various causes of modifications, lately specified, 1872

→ effects. 1869

effect, probably a great effect, independently of any advantage thus gained. 1872

→ the most 1869

a still more 1872

→ direct 1869

very close and direct 1872

↑ 3 blocks not present in 1869 1872; present in 1859 1860 1861 1866

Physical conditions probably have had some little effect on structure, quite independently of any good thus gained. Correlation of growth has no doubt played a most important part, and a useful modification of one part will often have entailed on other parts diversified changes of no direct use. So again characters which formerly were useful, or which formerly had arisen from correlation of growth, or from other unknown cause, may reappear from the law of reversion, though now of no direct use.

↑ 1 blocks not present in 1866 1869 1872; present in 1859 1860 1861

The effects of sexual selection, when displayed in beauty to charm the females, can be called useful only in rather a forced sense.

→ fore-leg 1860 1861 1866 1869 1872

fore leg of 1859

→ to 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

webbed feet no doubt were as useful to 1872

→ webbed feet no doubt were as useful 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869

OMIT 1872

→ which have been in- herited from some ancient progenitor, were formerly 1869

which have been inherited from a common progenitor, were formerly 1859 1860 1861 1866

were originally developed, on the principle of utility, probably through the reduction 1872

Utilitarian → Doctrine how far true: → Beauty how

acquired .

acquired.

....

The foregoing remarks lead me to say a few words on the protest lately made by some naturalists, against the utilitarian doctrine that every detail of structure has been produced for the good of its possessor. They believe that

very

....

many structures have been created for →beauty in the eyes of

man

man,

→or, as already discussed, for the sake of mere →variety.

This

Such

doctrine,

doctrines,

if true, would be absolutely fatal to my theory.

~~Yet~~

Yet

I fully admit that many structures are

now of

no direct use to their →possessors, and may never have been of any use to their progenitors. No

doubt

doubt,

→as recently remarked, the definite action of changed conditions, →correlated variation, and reversion have all produced

their

→effects. But →the most important consideration is that the chief part of the organisation of every living creature is

~~simply~~

simply

due to inheritance; and consequently, though each

being assuredly

assuredly

is well fitted for its place in nature, many structures

have now

now have

no →direct relation to

present

existing

habits of life. ↑ ↑ Thus, we can hardly believe that the webbed feet of the upland goose or of the frigate-bird are of special use to these birds; we cannot believe that the

same

similar

bones in the arm of the monkey, in the →fore-leg

the

of the

horse, in the wing of the bat, and in the flipper of the seal, are of special use to these animals. We may safely attribute these structures to inheritance. But →to the progenitor of the upland goose and of the frigate-bird, →webbed feet no doubt were as useful as they now are to the most aquatic of

existing

living

birds. So we may believe that the progenitor of the seal

had

did

not

possess a

flipper, but a foot with five toes fitted for walking or grasping; and we may further venture to believe that the several bones in the limbs of the monkey, horse, and bat, →which have been in- herited from some ancient progenitor, were formerly