Stairs. Entry group. Materials. Doors. Locks. Design

Charles Robert Darwin(1809 - 1882) - English naturalist and traveler, one of the first to realize and clearly demonstrate that all types of living organisms evolve over time from common ancestors. In his theory, the first detailed presentation of which was published in 1859 in the book “The Origin of Species” (full title: “The Origin of Species by natural selection, or the preservation of favored breeds in the struggle for life"), Darwin called natural selection and uncertain variability the main driving force of evolution.

The existence of evolution was recognized by most scientists during Darwin's lifetime, while his theory of natural selection as the main explanation of evolution became generally accepted only in the 30s of the 20th century. Darwin's ideas and discoveries, as revised, form the foundation of the modern synthetic theory of evolution and form the basis of biology as providing a logical explanation for biodiversity.

Essence evolutionary doctrine consists of the following basic provisions:

1. All types of living beings inhabiting the Earth were never created by anyone.

2. Having arisen naturally, organic forms were slowly and gradually transformed and improved in accordance with environmental conditions.

3. The transformation of species in nature is based on such properties of organisms as heredity and variability, as well as natural selection that constantly occurs in nature. Natural selection occurs through complex interactions of organisms with each other and with factors inanimate nature; Darwin called this relationship the struggle for existence.

4. The result of evolution is the adaptability of organisms to their living conditions and the diversity of species in nature.

In 1831, after graduating from university, Darwin set out as a naturalist on a voyage around the world on a Royal Navy expedition ship. The journey lasted almost five years (Fig. 1). He spends most of his time on the shore, studying geology and collecting natural history collections. Having compared the found remains of plants and animals with modern ones, Charles Darwin made an assumption about the historical, evolutionary relationship.

On the Galapagos Islands, he found species of lizards, turtles, and birds found nowhere else. The Galapagos Islands are islands of volcanic origin, so Charles Darwin suggested that these animals came to them from the mainland and gradually changed. In Australia, he became interested in marsupials and oviparous animals, which became extinct in other parts globe. So gradually the scientist’s conviction in the variability of species grew stronger. After returning from his trip, Darwin worked hard for 20 years to create the doctrine of evolution and collected additional facts about the development of new breeds of animals and plant varieties in agriculture.

He considered artificial selection as a unique model of natural selection. Based on the material collected during the trip and proving the validity of his theory, as well as on scientific achievements(geology, chemistry, paleontology, comparative anatomy, etc.) and, above all, in the field of selection, Darwin for the first time began to consider evolutionary transformations not in individual organisms, but in species.

Rice. 1 Voyage on the Beagle (1831-1836)

Darwin was directly influenced in the process of creating the concept by Lyell and Malthuss with his geometric progression of numbers from the demographic work “An Essay on the Law of Population” (1798). In this work, Malthus hypothesized that humanity is multiplying many times faster compared to increasing food supplies. While the human population increases geometrically, food supplies, according to the author, can only increase arithmetically. Malthus's work prompted Darwin to think about possible paths of evolution.

A huge number of facts speak in favor of the theory of the evolution of organisms. But Darwin understood that it was not enough just to show the existence of evolution. In collecting evidence, he worked primarily empirically. Darwin went further by developing a hypothesis that revealed the mechanism of the evolutionary process. In the very formulation of the hypothesis, Darwin as a scientist showed a truly creative approach.

1 . Darwin's first assumption was that the number of animals of each species tends to increase exponentially from generation to generation.

2. Darwin then proposed that although the number of organisms tends to increase, the number of individuals of a given species actually remains the same.

These two assumptions led Darwin to the conclusion that there must be a struggle for existence among all species of living beings. Why? If each next generation produces more descendants than the previous one, and if the number of individuals remains unchanged in the species, then, apparently, there is a struggle in nature for food, water, light and other factors environment. Some organisms survive this struggle, while others die .

Darwin identified three forms of struggle for existence: intraspecific, interspecific and combating unfavorable environmental factors. The most acute intraspecific struggle is between individuals of the same species due to the same food needs and living conditions, for example, the struggle between moose feeding on the bark of trees and shrubs.

Interspecific- between individuals different types: between wolves and deer (predator - prey), between moose and hares (competition for food). Exposure of organisms to unfavorable conditions, such as drought, severe frosts, is also an example of the struggle for existence. The survival or death of individuals in the struggle for existence are the results, consequences of its manifestation.

Charles Darwin, in contrast to J. Lamarck, drew attention to the fact that although any Living being changes throughout life, but individuals of the same species are born different.

3. Darwin's next assumption was that every species is inherently variable. Variability is the property of all organisms to acquire new characteristics. In other words, individuals of the same species differ from each other, even in the offspring of one pair of parents there are no identical individuals. He rejected, as untenable, the idea of ​​“exercising” or “non-exercising” organs and turned to the facts of the breeding of new breeds of animals and varieties of plants by people - to artificial selection.

Darwin distinguished between definite (group) and indefinite (individual) variability. A certain variability manifests itself in the entire group of living organisms in a similar way - if the entire herd of cows is well fed, then their milk yield and milk fat content will all increase, but no more than the maximum possible for a given breed. Group variability will not be inherited.

4. Heredity is the property of all organisms to preserve and transmit characteristics from parents to offspring. Changes that are inherited from parents are called hereditary variability. Darwin showed that indefinite (individual) variability of organisms is inherited and can become the beginning of a new breed or variety if it is useful to man. Having transferred these data to wild species, Darwin noted that only those changes that are beneficial to the species for successful competition can be preserved in nature. The giraffe acquired a long neck not at all because he constantly stretched it, reaching for branches tall trees but simply because species endowed with very long necks could find food above those branches that had already been eaten by their shorter-necked brethren, and as a consequence they could survive in times of famine. .

Darwin's book was published in 1859 " The Origin of Species by Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Breeds in the Struggle for Life,” in which he explained the mechanism of the evolutionary process. Constantly thinking about the driving causes of the evolutionary process, Charles Darwin came to the most important idea for the entire theory. Natural selection is the main driving force of evolution .

The process as a result of which individuals survive and leave offspring with hereditary changes that are useful under given conditions, i.e. survival and successful production of offspring by the fittest organisms. Based on facts, Charles Darwin was able to prove that natural selection is the driving factor in the evolutionary process in nature, and artificial selection plays an equally important role in the creation of animal breeds and plant varieties.

Darwin also formulated the principle of divergence of characters, which is very important for understanding the process of formation of new species. As a result of natural selection, forms arise that differ from the original species and are adapted to specific environmental conditions. Over time, divergence leads to the appearance of large differences in initially slightly different forms. As a result, they develop differences in many ways. Over a long period of time, this accumulates a large number of differences, that new species arise. This is what ensures the diversity of species on our planet

Charles Darwin's merit in science lies not in the fact that he proved the existence of evolution, but in the fact that he explained how it could occur, i.e. proposed a natural mechanism that ensures evolution and improvement of living organisms, and proved that this mechanism exists and works.

Charles Darwin

On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life

Introduction

While traveling on Her Majesty's ship Beagle as a naturalist, I was struck by certain facts concerning the distribution of organic beings in South America and the geological relations between the former and modern inhabitants of this continent. These facts, as will be seen in the succeeding chapters of this book, seem to illuminate to some extent the origin of species—that mystery of mysteries, in the words of one of our greatest philosophers. On my return home in 1837, I came to the idea that perhaps something could be done to resolve this question by patiently collecting and pondering all sorts of facts having some connection with it. After five years of labor, I allowed myself some general reflections on this subject and jotted them down in the form of short notes; I expanded this sketch in 1844 into a general outline of those conclusions that then seemed probable to me; from that time until the present day I have pursued this subject persistently. I hope you will forgive me for these purely personal details, since I present them to show that I was not hasty in my conclusions.

My work is now (1858) almost finished; but since it will take me many more years to complete it, and my health is far from flourishing, I have been persuaded to publish this summary. What particularly induced me to do this was that Mr. Wallace, now studying the natural history of the Malay Archipelago, had arrived at almost exactly the same conclusions as I had arrived at on the question of the origin of species. In 1858 he sent me an article on this subject with a request that it be forwarded to Sir Charles Lyell, who forwarded it to the Linnean Society; it is published in the third volume of the journal of this Society. Sir C. Lyell and Dr. Hooker, who knew about my work - the latter had read my essay of 1844 - did me the honor of advising me to publish, along with Mr. Wallace's excellent article, short excerpts from my manuscript.

The summary now published is necessarily imperfect. I cannot cite here references or point to authorities in support of this or that position; I hope the reader will rely on my accuracy. No doubt errors have crept into my work, although I have always taken care to trust only good authorities. I can only state here the general conclusions I have arrived at, illustrating them with only a few facts; but I hope that in most cases they will be sufficient. No one is more aware than I of the need to present later in full detail the facts and references on which my conclusions are based, and I hope to do this in the future in my work. I am very well aware that there is almost not a single position in this book in relation to which it would be impossible to present facts that, apparently, lead to conclusions directly opposite to mine. A satisfactory result can only be obtained after a full presentation and assessment of the facts and arguments for and against each issue, and this, of course, is impossible here.

I very much regret that lack of space deprives me of the pleasure of expressing my gratitude for the generous assistance given to me by many naturalists, some even unknown to me personally. I cannot, however, fail to express how deeply I am indebted to Dr. Hooker, who has helped me in every possible way with his vast knowledge and clear judgment during the last fifteen years.

It is therefore of the utmost importance to obtain a clear understanding of the means of modification and co-adaptation. At the beginning of my research it seemed probable to me that a careful study of domesticated animals and cultivated plants would present best opportunity to understand this unclear problem. And I was not mistaken; in this, as in all other perplexing cases, I have invariably found that our knowledge of variation in domestication, however incomplete, always serves as the best and surest clue. I may allow myself to express my conviction of the exceptional value of such investigations, although they have generally been neglected by naturalists.

Based on these considerations, I devote Chapter I of this summary Variations in Domestication. We will thus be convinced that hereditary modification on a large scale is at least possible, and we will also learn that it is equally or more important how great is the power of man in cumulating, by his Selection, successive weak variations. I will then come to the variability of species in a state of nature; but, unfortunately, I will be forced to touch upon this question only in the briefest terms, since its proper presentation would require long lists of facts. We will, however, be able to discuss what conditions are most favorable to variation. The next chapter will consider the Struggle for Existence between all organic beings throughout the world, which inevitably follows from the geometric progression of the growth of their numbers. This is the doctrine of Malthus, extended to both kingdoms - animals and plants. Since many more individuals of each species are born than can survive, and since, consequently, the struggle for existence often arises, it follows that every creature which, in the complex and often changing conditions of its life, varies even slightly to its advantage direction will have a greater chance of survival and will thus be subject to natural selection. By the strict principle of heredity, the selected variety will tend to reproduce in its new and modified form.

This fundamental question of Natural Selection will be discussed in detail in Chapter IV; and we shall then see how Natural Selection almost inevitably causes the Extinction of many less perfect forms life and leads to what I called Divergence of the Character. In the next chapter I will discuss the complex and little-known laws of variation. In the next five chapters the most obvious and most significant difficulties encountered by the theory will be analyzed, namely: first, the difficulties of transitions, that is, how a simple being or a simple organ can be transformed and improved into a highly developed being or into a complexly constructed organ; secondly, the question of Instinct, or the mental faculties of animals; thirdly, Hybridization, or sterility, when crossing species and fertility when crossing varieties; fourthly, the incompleteness of the Geological Chronicle. In Chapter XI I will consider the geological sequence of organic beings in time; in XII and XIII - their geographical distribution in space; in XIV - their classification or mutual relationship both in the adult and in the embryonic state. IN last chapter I will present a brief summary of what has been presented throughout the work and a few concluding remarks.

In interior design Photo used: Ian Campbell / Istockphoto / Thinkstock / Getty Images

Charles Darwin (1854 photo)

A Brief Sketch of Darwin's Life

K. A. Timiryazev

“My name is Charles Darwin. I was born in 1809, studied, circumnavigation- and studied again.” This is how the great scientist answered the annoying publisher who was trying to get biographical information from him. Fortunately, the life of this man, who amazed and fascinated everyone with his almost incredible modesty, has been preserved in more abundant documentary information in the Autobiography published after his death (intended exclusively for the family) and five volumes of correspondence carefully collected and published by his son Francis and the professor Seward. On the basis of these sources, using, if possible, the words of the author himself, a short, beautifully illustrated biographical sketch was compiled on the occasion of the Cambridge celebration of his memory, which was distributed to all visitors and, it seems, did not go to print. This short biography, supplemented here and there, formed the basis of the proposed essay.

Darwin was born on February 12, 1809 in Shrewsbury, in a house that still stands and is picturesquely located on the banks of the Severn. His grandfather was known as a scientist, physician, poet and one of the early evolutionists. Darwin spoke of his father as “the most smart person“as he knew,” his qualities were distinguished by an amazingly sophisticated ability to observe and an ardent sympathy for people, “which I have never encountered in anyone.”

At school, Charles, by his own account, learned absolutely nothing, but he himself amused himself by reading and chemical experiments, for which he received the nickname "Gas". In later years, when questioned by his cousin, the famous statistician Galton, he gave the following answer to the question: “Did school develop in you the ability of observation or hinder its development?” - “I prevented it because it was classical.” To the question: “Did the school present any merit”? – the answer was even more succinct: “None.” And in general conclusion: “I believe that everything valuable that I acquired was self-taught.”

At the age of sixteen he was already with his elder brother at the University of Edinburgh, where he attended lectures at the Faculty of Medicine. Two years later he moved to the University of Cambridge, where, at the request of his father, he transferred to the theological faculty. He was seriously interested only in the “Natural Theology” of the famous Paley (which went through nineteen editions) 1
What was the content of this theology and why it made such a strong impression on Darwin can be judged by the following fact: around the same time, when compiling a zoological museum in Oxford, they were guided by the idea that it could serve as a visual aid for the study of Paley's book.

Three people had an undoubted influence on him: they were Henslow, Sedgwick and Yuel. The first as a botanist and, apparently, as a highly moral person; Darwin also owed it to him for what, by his own admission, “made everything else in my life possible,” that is, a trip around the world on the Beagle. If with Henslow he made excursions through the neighboring marshes of which Cambridge is proud, then with Sedgwick he climbed the uninhabited mountains of Wales and learned the ability to make geological exploration of unexplored places, which was especially useful to him on his journey. Finally, about Ewell (an astronomer and author of the famous “History of the Inductive Sciences”), he said that he was one of those two people he met in his life who amazed him with the fascination of their conversation in scientific topics. Nevertheless, he considered the time he spent in Cambridge almost lost, although “in general, the most fun of his life.” happy life" He was only interested in collecting beetles.

His real school was a five-year (from 1831 to 1836) circumnavigation. When he left, he took with him the just published first volume of Lyell's Principles of Geology. Providing Darwin with this book, Henslow advised him to use its rich content, but not to dwell on the too bold ideas of the geological reformer. Darwin followed the advice, did it only the other way around - he did not stop, but went ahead much further than his teacher, as Lyell always gratefully acknowledged.

Four facts struck him the most and at the same time had the greatest influence on all his future activities. Firstly, a gradual change in organic forms as one moves from north to south along the eastern and from south to north along the western coast of South America. Secondly, the similarities between the fossil and modern fauna of the same country. And thirdly, the similarities and differences between the inhabitants of the individual islands of the Galapagos archipelago, both among themselves and with the inhabitants of the neighboring continent. The fourth, undoubtedly deep, impression taken from this journey, which was reflected much later in his attitude to the question of the origin of man, was the first impression made on him by the natives of Tierra del Fuego; his memory was expressed in the famous words that it was easier for him to come to terms with the idea of ​​a distant kinship with a monkey than with the thought of a close descent from people like those whom he saw during his first landing on Tierra del Fuego.

A year after returning to England (in 1837), he began his first notebook, in which he wrote down everything related to the question of the origin of species. From the very first time he grasps the task from all sides, as can be seen even from one page of this notebook. But only two years later, in 1839, a guiding thread to this labyrinth of although consonant, but still incomprehensible evidence in favor of the unity of origin of all organic beings is revealed to him. Reading Malthus’s book and close acquaintance with practice lead him to the conclusion about the existence of “natural selection,” i.e., the process of eliminating everything that disagrees with it, pre-established, harmonious, expedient, as theologians and teleologists put it, useful, adapted, what will this fundamental feature of the organism be called from now on? A brief outline of the whole theory, sketched out in 1842 (on thirty-five pages) and first printed and distributed as a gift to all the scientists gathered to honor Darwin at Cambridge this year, leaves no doubt that twenty years before the appearance of the Origin species" the main idea of ​​this work was already fully formed in the author’s head, and some provisions resulted in the same form in which they later became known to the whole world 2
This finally eliminates any doubt about his priority over Wallace, who at that time was a twenty-year-old land surveyor.

And yet it took these twenty years to bring into a system that colossal justifying material, without which he considered his theory insufficiently substantiated. However, two circumstances prevented him from fully concentrating on the main work of his life. Firstly, processing of the enormous material brought from the trip and special research in geology and zoology. Among the first, the monograph “On coral islands", forcing Lyell to abandon his previous theories. Zoological research on barnacles, living and fossil, consumed even more time. This work, in his own opinion and in the opinion of his competent friends, was a practical school for a real acquaintance with what a species is. “More than once,” he writes himself, “I combined several forms into one type with its varieties, then I divided it into several types, repeating this operation until, with a curse, I was convinced of its complete futility.” This difficult, harsh school brought upon him the ridicule of Bulwer, who portrayed him in one of his novels as an eccentric who spends decades studying some shells. More widely known than these special works, the “Journal of the Voyage on the Beagle” brought him, which attracted Humboldt’s attention and because of its light, accessible form which became one of the favorite works of the travel-reading English public.

Another and even more important obstacle that prevented him from moving faster in his main job, the whole plan of which he had completely prepared, was a constant incurable illness, which was the result of overwork from strenuous activities in the first years after returning from the trip. For the rest of his life, three hours of diligent study was enough to leave him in a state of complete exhaustion for the rest of the day. “No one except my mother,” Francis Darwin writes in his memoirs, “can imagine the extent of the suffering he experienced and his amazing patience. She carefully protected him from everything that could cause him the slightest trouble, not missing anything that could save him from unnecessary fatigue and help him bear the burden of a constant painful state.”

In the same 1842, he moved from London to a village in Kent, from where he wrote: “My life goes on like a wound clock, I am finally attached to the point where it is destined to end.” These gloomy thoughts, inspired by a constant illness, reached the point that he left a will, in which he asked his wife to take care of the publication of the manuscript, which from thirty-five pages (1842) grew to two hundred and thirty pages, entrusting this concern to his to the best friend- To Hooker. Fortunately, his premonitions deceived him - there were still forty years of an amazing active life ahead, crowned with unprecedented glory.

In 1856, at Lyell's insistence, he began his main work, conceived in a size three times larger than the final form of the Origin of Species. In 1858 he received the famous letter from Wallace, which resulted in the submission of both Darwin's and Wallace's papers to the Linnean Society by Hooker and Lyell.

A year later, on November 24, 1859, his book “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Selected Breeds in the Struggle for Life” was published. The entire publication sold out in one day.

The following year, 1860, at a meeting of the British Association in Oxford, a famous clash in the history of evolutionary teaching took place between opponents and defenders of Darwin, which ended, thanks to Huxley, in a brilliant victory for the latter. But nevertheless, according to the same writer, “an ecumenical council of scientists would undoubtedly condemn us with an overwhelming majority.”

In 1870, he wrote that there was no branch of natural science that would not be affected by the influence of “The Origin of Species,” and less than twenty years later he could declare “that if it were not for documentary evidence, he would have thought that his memory is cheating on him, so drastic is the change in public opinion"in favor of Darwin's views.

Edition followed publication, and in 1868 the two-volume “Change in Domesticated Animals and Cultivated Plants” appeared, this most complete and deeply thought-out body of knowledge on the phenomena of variability and heredity, these two foundations of natural selection. It may be said that the noise made by some of the later theories (of mutation, heterogenesis, and Mendelism) is chiefly due to the ignorance of the new generation of naturalists as to the contents of that marvelous work which probably absorbed most of the time that elapsed between the first outline of the theory and the publication of the Origin of Species. "and for the decade that followed.

In 1871, his “The Descent of Man” appeared, which served as a signal for a new outburst of indignation by bigots and reactionaries of all shades against the author, although, as he rightly notes, already in “The Origin of Species” he quite definitely expressed his view on this burning question “for so that no honest person can reproach him for hiding his real views.”

Here is a review of this book by the German professor Schwalbe in the book “Darwin and Modern Science” published on the occasion of honoring the memory of Darwin in Cambridge: “Darwin’s work on the origin of man has not yet been surpassed by anyone; the more we immerse ourselves in the study of the similarities in the structure of man and apes, the more our path is illuminated by the clear light emitted by his calm, judicious research, based on such a mass of material collected by him that no one has accumulated either before or after him. Darwin's glory will forever be associated with the study, free from any prejudice, of this question of questions - the origin of the human race."

These three main works contain the foundations of the entire theory. The first contains the doctrine of natural selection and evidence of its agreement with everything that we know about the organic world; the second gives an exhaustive analysis, later for his time, of our information about the two basic properties of all organisms on which the possibility of natural selection is based; the third represents a test of the doctrine on the basis of its application to the most difficult limiting case - to man with his aesthetic, mental and moral development.

One chapter of the book about man has grown into a whole separate volume - “The Expression of Feelings in Man and Animals,” one of the most ingenious developments of his general teaching about the unity of all living things on such seemingly insignificant facts as facial expressions, etc., for different mental movements.

A small sketch on the psyche of a newborn gave rise to a whole series of imitations, and German authors often quite unfairly attribute the first step in this field to the researcher Preyer.

After this, Darwin's attention turned to the other pole of the organic world - to the plant - in order to show the applicability of his teaching to creatures deprived of that conscious volitional activity to which Lamarck attributed (in animals) main role. His botanical works, where for the first time he had to move from the field of descriptive science to the field of experimental science. Their main idea is to prove the existence of the most complex devices and explain their origin by their usefulness.

This basic idea, which makes one coherent system out of them, is usually lost sight of by biographers when simply listing them.

IN « Insectivorous plants» he showed in a number of plants organs for capturing and digesting animals and proved that this is indeed useful process for the plants that have them. IN "Movements and habits climbing plants», Having shown the widespread distribution of this plant form, he wondered how it could arise so often and independently in the most diverse groups of plants, and answered this with another study - "The ability of plants to move" in which he proved that the phenomenon that catches the eye in climbing plants is, in an imperceptible form, widespread throughout the entire plant kingdom, appearing sharply not only in climbing plants, but also in other phenomena plant life, always useful for the organism that possesses them.

Even more remarkable is a group of monographs dealing with the shape and other features of a flower, which are in connection with the cross-pollination of flowers by insects (“On various devices with the help of which orchids are fertilized by insects”, “Different forms of flowers in plants”, “The action of self-fertilization and cross-fertilization”). The first two reveal the most amazing adaptations of organisms belonging to two different kingdoms of nature, and since such harmony on the basis of the doctrine of natural selection is conceivable only under the condition of mutual benefit (the benefit for insects is obvious, they also feed), the third volume presents a detailed An experimental study proving the benefits of cross-fertilization, since it always results in a more powerful generation.

Thus, for those who, unwilling to accept theoretical basis Darwin's teachings try to divert attention by pointing out the talent of his special works, we have to invariably remind that these were not fragmentary facts scattered throughout the entire field of biology from plants to humans, but facts strictly connected with each other by this particular theory and, therefore, testing and supporting it with an extensive system of research. These biological works gave impetus to incredible activity in this area, and now the literature generated by them amounts to more than one thousand volumes.

Having devoted almost twenty years to preparing himself for his main life task, to developing it, and almost as much to teaching how to use his theory as a tool for studying nature, a powerful mind, which for most of his life had struggled with a weak body, had already began to see new broad horizons in the sense of a deeper experimental study of the main factor that formed the basis of his teaching - the factor of variability. But the forces changed, and he could still only process a witty little study on “Formation of soil humus with the assistance of worms”, success which, judging by its sales, was surpassed even by the success of "The Origin of Species."

He died on 19 April 1882 and is buried next to Newton in Westminster Abbey. His last words were: “I am not at all afraid to die.” And in the final lines of his autobiography, he summed up his life as follows: “As for myself, I am convinced that I did the right thing by devoting my entire life to the persistent service of science. I do not feel any great sin behind me, but I have often regretted that I did not bring more immediate benefit to my fellow men 3
“my fellow creatures” - obviously, Darwin extends the principle of brotherhood not only to man.

In relation to the material world, we can at least admit the following: we can See that phenomena are caused not by individual interventions of the divine power, exerting their influence in each individual case, but by the establishment of general laws.

William Whewell's Treatise of Bridgester

“The only definite meaning of the word “natural” is “established,” “fixed,” or “ordered,” for is not natural that which requires or presupposes an intelligent agent who makes it so, that is, is carried out by it constantly or in set time, just like the supernatural or miraculous - something that is realized by him only once"

Joseph Butler "The Analogy of Revealed Religion"

“We conclude, therefore, that not a single person, mistakenly overestimating common sense or misunderstanding moderation, should not think or assert that a man can go too deep in his study or study of the book of the word of God or the book of God's works, theology or philosophy; but let people strive more for endless improvement or success in both.”

Francis Bacon "The Progress of Science"

Historical sketch of the development of views on the origin of species before the appearance of the first edition of this work 4
The translation of “The Origin of Species” (from the 6th English edition) was made by K. A. Timiryazev. M. A. Menzbier, A. P. Pavlov and I. A. Petrovsky. – Note ed.

I will give here a brief outline of the development of views on the origin of species. Until recently, the vast majority of naturalists were convinced that species were something immutable and were created independently of each other. This view has been skillfully supported by many authors. On the other hand, some naturalists believed that species undergo changes and that existing forms of life arose by ordinary generation from forms that previously existed. Without dwelling on the vague hints in this sense found in classical writers 5
Aristotle in his “Physicae Auscultatories” (lib. 2, cap. 8, p. 2), noting that rain does not fall to promote the harvest of grain, just as it does not spoil the grain that is being threshed in the yard, applies the same argument to organisms; he adds (as Claire Grace, who first brought it to my attention, translates this passage): “What is it that hinders nature? various parts bodies be in the same random relationship with each other? For example, the front teeth grow out of necessity - sharp and adapted for tearing food, and the molars - flat, suitable for grinding food, but they were not created for this purpose, and this was a matter of chance. The same applies to other parts that seem to us to be adapted to some purpose. Thus, wherever objects taken together (for example, parts of one whole) appear to us as if they were made for the sake of something, they only survived because, thanks to some internal spontaneous inclination, they turned out to be constructed accordingly; nevertheless, objects that were not built in this way perished and continue to perish.” We see here a glimpse of the future principle of natural selection, but how little Aristotle understood the essence of this principle is evident from his remarks on the formation of teeth.

It must be admitted that the first writer of modern times to discuss this subject in a truly scientific spirit was Buffon. But since his opinions changed greatly in different time and since he did not touch upon the causes or ways of the transformation of species, I need not go into detail here.

Lamarck was the first whose conclusions on this subject attracted much attention. This, justly, famous natural scientist first outlined his views in 1801, he significantly expanded them in 1809, in his “Philosophie Zoologique” and even later, in 1815, in the introduction to his “Hist. Nat. des Animaux sans Vertebres.” In these writings he defends the view that all species, including humans, are descended from other species. He owns great merit: he was the first to draw everyone's attention to the likelihood of the assumption that all changes in the organic world, as well as in the inorganic, occurred on the basis of the laws of nature, and not as a result of miraculous intervention. Lamarck seems to have concluded the gradual change of species from the difficulty experienced in distinguishing species from variety, from the almost insensitive transitions between the representatives of certain groups, and from the analogy with domestic animals and cultivated plants. As for the reasons causing changes, he attributed them partly to the direct influence of the physical conditions of life, partly to crossing between already existing forms, but especially to the exercise or lack of exercise of organs, i.e., the results of habit. To this last factor he apparently attributed all the wonderful adaptations found in nature, such as the long neck of the giraffe, which serves to eat tree branches. But he also believed in the existence of the law of progressive development, and since, by virtue of this law, all living beings strive for improvement, then to explain the existence of the simplest forms at the present time, he assumed that they still appear through spontaneous generation 6
I borrowed the date of Lamarck's first work from Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, who presented in his book (Hist. Nat. Generale, t. II, p. 405, 1859) an excellent historical sketch of views on this subject. In this work one can find a complete outline of Buffon's views. I'm curious what size my grandfather is, Dr. Erasmus Darwin, in his Zoonomia (Vol. I, pp. 500-510), which appeared in 1794, anticipated the views and erroneous foundations of Lamarck's views. According to Isidore Geoffroy, there is no doubt that Goethe was an extreme supporter of similar views, as appears from the introduction to the work, dating back to 1794 and 1795, but published much later: it quite clearly expresses the thought (“Goethe, als Naturforscher” d -ra Karl Meding, p. 34), that in the future the naturalist should be occupied with the question, for example, how cattle acquired their horns, and not what they needed them for. A remarkable example of how similar ideas can arise simultaneously is the fact that Goethe in Germany, Dr. Darwin in England and Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (as we will see) in France came to the same conclusions about the origin of species during 1794-1795 years.

Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, as can be seen from his "Biography", written by his son, already in 1795 suspected that the so-called species are only different deviations from the same type. But it was only in 1828 that he expressed in print his conviction that forms had not remained unchanged since the beginning of the world. Geoffroy apparently saw in the conditions of existence, or "monde ambiant" "the surrounding world", main reason changes. He was cautious in his conclusions and did not assume that existing species continue to change even now, and, as his son adds: “C'est done un probleme a reserver entierement a l'avenir, suppose meme que l'avenir doive avoir prise sur lui” “So, this problem must be left entirely to the future, if “, of course, assume that in the future they will want to do it.”

Charles Darwin

On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life

Introduction

While traveling on Her Majesty's ship Beagle as a naturalist, I was struck by certain facts concerning the distribution of organic beings in South America and the geological relations between the former and present inhabitants of that continent. These facts, as will be seen in the succeeding chapters of this book, seem to illuminate to some extent the origin of species—that mystery of mysteries, in the words of one of our greatest philosophers. On my return home in 1837, I came to the idea that perhaps something could be done to resolve this question by patiently collecting and pondering all sorts of facts having some connection with it. After five years of labor, I allowed myself some general reflections on this subject and jotted them down in the form of short notes; I expanded this sketch in 1844 into a general outline of those conclusions that then seemed probable to me; from that time until the present day I have pursued this subject persistently. I hope you will forgive me for these purely personal details, since I present them to show that I was not hasty in my conclusions.

My work is now (1858) almost finished; but since it will take me many more years to complete it, and my health is far from flourishing, I have been persuaded to publish this summary. What particularly induced me to do this was that Mr. Wallace, now studying the natural history of the Malay Archipelago, had arrived at almost exactly the same conclusions as I had arrived at on the question of the origin of species. In 1858 he sent me an article on this subject with a request that it be forwarded to Sir Charles Lyell, who forwarded it to the Linnean Society; it is published in the third volume of the journal of this Society. Sir C. Lyell and Dr. Hooker, who knew about my work - the latter had read my essay of 1844 - did me the honor of advising me to publish, along with Mr. Wallace's excellent article, short excerpts from my manuscript.

The summary now published is necessarily imperfect. I cannot cite here references or point to authorities in support of this or that position; I hope the reader will rely on my accuracy. No doubt errors have crept into my work, although I have always taken care to trust only good authorities. I can only state here the general conclusions I have arrived at, illustrating them with only a few facts; but I hope that in most cases they will be sufficient. No one is more aware than I of the need to present later in full detail the facts and references on which my conclusions are based, and I hope to do this in the future in my work. I am very well aware that there is almost not a single position in this book in relation to which it would be impossible to present facts that, apparently, lead to conclusions directly opposite to mine. A satisfactory result can only be obtained after a full presentation and assessment of the facts and arguments for and against each issue, and this, of course, is impossible here.

I very much regret that lack of space deprives me of the pleasure of expressing my gratitude for the generous assistance given to me by many naturalists, some even unknown to me personally. I cannot, however, fail to express how deeply I am indebted to Dr. Hooker, who has helped me in every possible way with his vast knowledge and clear judgment during the last fifteen years.

It is therefore of the utmost importance to obtain a clear understanding of the means of modification and co-adaptation. At the beginning of my investigations it seemed probable to me that a careful study of domesticated animals and cultivated plants would present the best opportunity for understanding this obscure problem. And I was not mistaken; in this, as in all other perplexing cases, I have invariably found that our knowledge of variation in domestication, however imperfect, is always the best and surest clue. I may allow myself to express my conviction of the exceptional value of such investigations, although they have generally been neglected by naturalists.

It is from these considerations that I devote the first chapter of this brief Exposition to Variation under Domestication. We will thus be convinced that hereditary modification on a large scale is at least possible, and we will also learn that it is equally or more important how great is the power of man in cumulating by his Selection of successive weak variations. I will then come to the variability of species in a state of nature; but, unfortunately, I will be forced to touch upon this question only in the briefest terms, since its proper presentation would require long lists of facts. We will, however, be able to discuss what conditions are most favorable to variation. The next chapter will consider the Struggle for Existence between all organic beings throughout the world, which inevitably follows from the geometric progression of the growth of their numbers. This is the doctrine of Malthus, extended to both kingdoms - animals and plants. Since many more individuals of each species are born than can survive, and since, consequently, the struggle for existence often arises, it follows that every creature which, in the complex and often changing conditions of its life, varies even slightly to its advantage direction will have a greater chance of survival and will thus be subject to natural selection. By the strict principle of heredity, the selected variety will tend to reproduce in its new and modified form.

Charles Darwin

On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life

Introduction

While traveling on Her Majesty's ship Beagle as a naturalist, I was struck by certain facts concerning the distribution of organic beings in South America and the geological relations between the former and present inhabitants of that continent. These facts, as will be seen in the succeeding chapters of this book, seem to illuminate to some extent the origin of species—that mystery of mysteries, in the words of one of our greatest philosophers. On my return home in 1837, I came to the idea that perhaps something could be done to resolve this question by patiently collecting and pondering all sorts of facts having some connection with it. After five years of labor, I allowed myself some general reflections on this subject and jotted them down in the form of short notes; I expanded this sketch in 1844 into a general outline of those conclusions that then seemed probable to me; from that time until the present day I have pursued this subject persistently. I hope you will forgive me for these purely personal details, since I present them to show that I was not hasty in my conclusions.

My work is now (1858) almost finished; but since it will take me many more years to complete it, and my health is far from flourishing, I have been persuaded to publish this summary. What particularly induced me to do this was that Mr. Wallace, now studying the natural history of the Malay Archipelago, had arrived at almost exactly the same conclusions as I had arrived at on the question of the origin of species. In 1858 he sent me an article on this subject with a request that it be forwarded to Sir Charles Lyell, who forwarded it to the Linnean Society; it is published in the third volume of the journal of this Society. Sir C. Lyell and Dr. Hooker, who knew about my work - the latter had read my essay of 1844 - did me the honor of advising me to publish, along with Mr. Wallace's excellent article, short excerpts from my manuscript.

The summary now published is necessarily imperfect. I cannot cite here references or point to authorities in support of this or that position; I hope the reader will rely on my accuracy. No doubt errors have crept into my work, although I have always taken care to trust only good authorities. I can only state here the general conclusions I have arrived at, illustrating them with only a few facts; but I hope that in most cases they will be sufficient. No one is more aware than I of the need to present later in full detail the facts and references on which my conclusions are based, and I hope to do this in the future in my work. I am very well aware that there is almost not a single position in this book in relation to which it would be impossible to present facts that, apparently, lead to conclusions directly opposite to mine. A satisfactory result can only be obtained after a full presentation and assessment of the facts and arguments for and against each issue, and this, of course, is impossible here.

I very much regret that lack of space deprives me of the pleasure of expressing my gratitude for the generous assistance given to me by many naturalists, some even unknown to me personally. I cannot, however, fail to express how deeply I am indebted to Dr. Hooker, who has helped me in every possible way with his vast knowledge and clear judgment during the last fifteen years.

It is therefore of the utmost importance to obtain a clear understanding of the means of modification and co-adaptation. At the beginning of my investigations it seemed probable to me that a careful study of domesticated animals and cultivated plants would present the best opportunity for understanding this obscure problem. And I was not mistaken; in this, as in all other perplexing cases, I have invariably found that our knowledge of variation in domestication, however imperfect, is always the best and surest clue. I may allow myself to express my conviction of the exceptional value of such investigations, although they have generally been neglected by naturalists.

It is from these considerations that I devote the first chapter of this brief Exposition to Variation under Domestication. We will thus be convinced that hereditary modification on a large scale is at least possible, and we will also learn that it is equally or more important how great is the power of man in cumulating by his Selection of successive weak variations. I will then come to the variability of species in a state of nature; but, unfortunately, I will be forced to touch upon this question only in the briefest terms, since its proper presentation would require long lists of facts. We will, however, be able to discuss what conditions are most favorable to variation. The next chapter will consider the Struggle for Existence between all organic beings throughout the world, which inevitably follows from the geometric progression of the growth of their numbers. This is the doctrine of Malthus, extended to both kingdoms - animals and plants. Since many more individuals of each species are born than can survive, and since, consequently, the struggle for existence often arises, it follows that every creature which, in the complex and often changing conditions of its life, varies even slightly to its advantage direction will have a greater chance of survival and will thus be subject to natural selection. By the strict principle of heredity, the selected variety will tend to reproduce in its new and modified form.

This fundamental question of Natural Selection will be discussed in detail in Chapter IV; and we shall then see how Natural Selection almost inevitably causes the Extinction of many less perfect forms of life, and results in what I have called the Divergence of Character. In the next chapter I will discuss the complex and little-known laws of variation. In the next five chapters the most obvious and most significant difficulties encountered by the theory will be analyzed, namely: first, the difficulties of transitions, that is, how a simple being or a simple organ can be transformed and improved into a highly developed being or into a complexly constructed organ; secondly, the question of Instinct, or the mental faculties of animals; thirdly, Hybridization, or sterility, when crossing species and fertility when crossing varieties; fourthly, the incompleteness of the Geological Chronicle. In Chapter XI I will consider the geological sequence of organic beings in time; in XII and XIII - their geographical distribution in space; in XIV - their classification or mutual relationship both in the adult and in the embryonic state. In the final chapter I will present a brief recapitulation of the entire work and a few concluding remarks.

No one will be surprised that in the question of the origin of species and varieties much remains unexplained, if only we realize our deep ignorance in the question of the mutual relations of the many creatures that surround us. Who can explain why one species is widespread and numerous, while another, similar species has a narrow distribution area and is rare. And yet these relations are extremely important, since they determine the present welfare and, I believe, the future success and modification of every inhabitant of the earth. We know even less about the mutual relations of the countless inhabitants of our planet during the past geological epochs of its history. Although much is still incomprehensible and will long remain incomprehensible, I have no doubt, after the most careful study and impartial discussion of which I am capable, that the view until recently shared by the majority of naturalists, and previously shared by me, namely, that each species was created independently of the others - erroneously. I am quite convinced that species are not immutable, and that all species belonging to what we call the same genus are direct descendants of one, mostly extinct, species, just as the recognized varieties of one species - descendants of this species. Moreover, I am convinced that Natural Selection was the most important, but not the only, means of modification.