| → religion." 1861 1866 1869 |
| religion." A celebrated author and divine has written to me that "he has gradually learnt to see that it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that 1872 |
|
| ↑ 1 blocks not present in 1859 1860 1861 1866 1869; present in 1872 |
| He created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that He required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of His laws."
|
|
| → until recently did nearly 1869 1872 |
| have 1859 1860 1861 1866 |
|
| → reject this view of 1869 |
| rejected this view of 1859 1860 1861 1866 |
| disbelieve in 1872 |
|
|
notwithstanding that Leibnitz formerly accused Newton of introducing "occult qualities and miracles into philosophy."
I see no good reason why the views given in this volume should shock the religious feelings of any one. It is satisfactory, as showing how transient such impressions are, to remember that the greatest discovery ever made by man, namely, the law of the attraction of gravity, was also attacked by Leibnitz, "as subversive of
and inferentially of
→religion." A celebrated author and divine has written to me that "he has gradually learnt to see that it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that He created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that He required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of His laws." ↑
Why, it may be asked,
→until recently did nearly
the most eminent living naturalists and geologists
→reject this view of
the mutability of
It cannot be asserted that organic beings in a state of nature are subject to no variation; it cannot be proved that the amount of variation in the course of long ages is a limited quantity; no clear distinction has been, or can be, drawn between species and well-marked varieties. It cannot be maintained that species when intercrossed are invariably sterile, and varieties invariably fertile; or that sterility is a special endowment and sign of creation. The belief that species were immutable productions was almost unavoidable as long as the history of the world was thought to be of short duration; and now that we have acquired some idea of the lapse of time, we are too apt to assume, without proof, that the geological record is so perfect that it would have afforded us plain evidence of the mutation of species, if they had undergone mutation.
|
