Online Read Free Novel
  • Home
  • Romance & Love
  • Fantasy
  • Science Fiction
  • Mystery & Detective
  • Thrillers & Crime
  • Actions & Adventure
  • History & Fiction
  • Horror
  • Western
  • Humor

    The Origin of Species

    Page 23
    Prev Next

    good or injury of another; though it may well produce parts, organs, and

      excretions highly useful or even indispensable, or highly injurious to

      another species, but in all cases at the same time useful to the owner.

      Natural selection in each well-stocked country, must act chiefly through

      the competition of the inhabitants one with another, and consequently will

      produce perfection, or strength in the battle for life, only according to

      the standard of that country. Hence the inhabitants of one country,

      generally the smaller one, will often yield, as we see they do yield, to

      the inhabitants of another and generally larger country. For in the larger

      country there will have existed more individuals, and more diversified

      forms, and the competition will have been severer, and thus the standard of

      perfection will have been rendered higher. Natural selection will not

      necessarily produce absolute perfection; nor, as far as we can judge by our

      limited faculties, can absolute perfection be everywhere found.

      On the theory of natural selection we can clearly understand the full

      meaning of that old canon in natural history, 'Natura non facit saltum.'

      This canon, if we look only to the present inhabitants of the world, is not

      strictly correct, but if we include all those of past times, it must by my

      theory be strictly true.

      It is generally acknowledged that all organic beings have been formed on

      two great laws--Unity of Type, and the Conditions of Existence. By unity

      of type is meant that fundamental agreement in structure, which we see in

      organic beings of the same class, and which is quite independent of their

      habits of life. On my theory, unity of type is explained by unity of

      descent. The expression of conditions of existence, so often insisted on

      by the illustrious Cuvier, is fully embraced by the principle of natural

      selection. For natural selection acts by either now adapting the varying

      parts of each being to its organic and inorganic conditions of life; or by

      having adapted them during long-past periods of time: the adaptations

      being aided in some cases by use and disuse, being slightly affected by the

      direct action of the external conditions of life, and being in all cases

      subjected to the several laws of growth. Hence, in fact, the law of the

      Conditions of Existence is the higher law; as it includes, through the

      inheritance of former adaptations, that of Unity of Type.

      Chapter VII

      Instinct

      Instincts comparable with habits, but different in their origin --

      Instincts graduated -- Aphides and ants -- Instincts variable -- Domestic

      instincts, their origin -- Natural instincts of the cuckoo, ostrich, and

      parasitic bees -- Slave-making ants -- Hive-bee, its cell-making instinct -

      - Difficulties on the theory of the Natural Selection of instincts --

      Neuter or sterile insects -- Summary.

      The subject of instinct might have been worked into the previous chapters;

      but I have thought that it would be more convenient to treat the subject

      separately, especially as so wonderful an instinct as that of the hive-bee

      making its cells will probably have occurred to many readers, as a

      difficulty sufficient to overthrow my whole theory. I must premise, that I

      have nothing to do with the origin of the primary mental powers, any more

      than I have with that of life itself. We are concerned only with the

      diversities of instinct and of the other mental qualities of animals within

      the same class.

      I will not attempt any definition of instinct. It would be easy to show

      that several distinct mental actions are commonly embraced by this term;

      but every one understands what is meant, when it is said that instinct

      impels the cuckoo to migrate and to lay her eggs in other birds' nests. An

      action, which we ourselves should require experience to enable us to

      perform, when performed by an animal, more especially by a very young one,

      without any experience, and when performed by many individuals in the same

      way, without their knowing for what purpose it is performed, is usually

      said to be instinctive. But I could show that none of these characters of

      instinct are universal. A little dose, as Pierre Huber expresses it, of

      judgment or reason, often comes into play, even in animals very low in the

      scale of nature.

      Frederick Cuvier and several of the older metaphysicians have compared

      instinct with habit. This comparison gives, I think, a remarkably accurate

      notion of the frame of mind under which an instinctive action is performed,

      but not of its origin. How unconsciously many habitual actions are

      performed, indeed not rarely in direct opposition to our conscious will!

      yet they may be modified by the will or reason. Habits easily become

      associated with other habits, and with certain periods of time and states

      of the body. When once acquired, they often remain constant throughout

      life. Several other points of resemblance between instincts and habits

      could be pointed out. As in repeating a well-known song, so in instincts,

      one action follows another by a sort of rhythm; if a person be interrupted

      in a song, or in repeating anything by rote, he is generally forced to go

      back to recover the habitual train of thought: so P. Huber found it was

      with a caterpillar, which makes a very complicated hammock; for if he took

      a caterpillar which had completed its hammock up to, say, the sixth stage

      of construction, and put it into a hammock completed up only to the third

      stage, the caterpillar simply re-performed the fourth, fifth, and sixth

      stages of construction. If, however, a caterpillar were taken out of a

      hammock made up, for instance, to the third stage, and were put into one

      finished up to the sixth stage, so that much of its work was already done

      for it, far from feeling the benefit of this, it was much embarrassed, and,

      in order to complete its hammock, seemed forced to start from the third

      stage, where it had left off, and thus tried to complete the already

      finished work. If we suppose any habitual action to become inherited--and

      I think it can be shown that this does sometimes happen--then the

      resemblance between what originally was a habit and an instinct becomes so

      close as not to be distinguished. If Mozart, instead of playing the

      pianoforte at three years old with wonderfully little practice, had played

      a tune with no practice at all, be might truly be said to have done so

      instinctively. But it would be the most serious error to suppose that the

      greater number of instincts have been acquired by habit in one generation,

      and then transmitted by inheritance to succeeding generations. It can be

      clearly shown that the most wonderful instincts with which we are

      acquainted, namely, those of the hive-bee and of many ants, could not

      possibly have been thus acquired.

      It will be universally admitted that instincts are as important as

      corporeal structure for the welfare of each species, under its present

      conditions of life. Under changed conditions of life, it is at least

      possible that slight modifications of instinct might be profitable to a

      species; and i
    f it can be shown that instincts do vary ever so little, then

      I can see no difficulty in natural selection preserving and continually

      accumulating variations of instinct to any extent that may be profitable.

      It is thus, as I believe, that all the most complex and wonderful instincts

      have originated. As modifications of corporeal structure arise from, and

      are increased by, use or habit, and are diminished or lost by disuse, so I

      do not doubt it has been with instincts. But I believe that the effects of

      habit are of quite subordinate importance to the effects of the natural

      selection of what may be called accidental variations of instincts;--that

      is of variations produced by the same unknown causes which produce slight

      deviations of bodily structure.

      No complex instinct can possibly be produced through natural selection,

      except by the slow and gradual accumulation of numerous, slight, yet

      profitable, variations. Hence, as in the case of corporeal structures, we

      ought to find in nature, not the actual transitional gradations by which

      each complex instinct has been acquired--for these could be found only in

      the lineal ancestors of each species--but we ought to find in the

      collateral lines of descent some evidence of such gradations; or we ought

      at least to be able to show that gradations of some kind are possible; and

      this we certainly can do. I have been surprised to find, making allowance

      for the instincts of animals having been but little observed except in

      Europe and North America, and for no instinct being known amongst extinct

      species, how very generally gradations, leading to the most complex

      instincts, can be discovered. The canon of 'Natura non facit saltum'

      applies with almost equal force to instincts as to bodily organs. Changes

      of instinct may sometimes be facilitated by the same species having

      different instincts at different periods of life, or at different seasons

      of the year, or when placed under different circumstances, &c.; in which

      case either one or the other instinct might be preserved by natural

      selection. And such instances of diversity of instinct in the same species

      can be shown to occur in nature.

      Again as in the case of corporeal structure, and conformably with my

      theory, the instinct of each species is good for itself, but has never, as

      far as we can judge, been produced for the exclusive good of others. One

      of the strongest instances of an animal apparently performing an action for

      the sole good of another, with which I am acquainted, is that of aphides

      voluntarily yielding their sweet excretion to ants: that they do so

      voluntarily, the following facts show. I removed all the ants from a group

      of about a dozen aphides on a dock-plant, and prevented their attendance

      during several hours. After this interval, I felt sure that the aphides

      would want to excrete. I watched them for some time through a lens, but

      not one excreted; I then tickled and stroked them with a hair in the same

      manner, as well as I could, as the ants do with their antennae; but not one

      excreted. Afterwards I allowed an ant to visit them, and it immediately

      seemed, by its eager way of running about, to be well aware what a rich

      flock it had discovered; it then began to play with its antennae on the

      abdomen first of one aphis and then of another; and each aphis, as soon as

      it felt the antennae, immediately lifted up its abdomen and excreted a

      limpid drop of sweet juice, which was eagerly devoured by the ant. Even

      the quite young aphides behaved in this manner, showing that the action was

      instinctive, and not the result of experience. But as the excretion is

      extremely viscid, it is probably a convenience to the aphides to have it

      removed; and therefore probably the aphides do not instinctively excrete

      for the sole good of the ants. Although I do not believe that any animal

      in the world performs an action for the exclusive good of another of a

      distinct species, yet each species tries to take advantage of the instincts

      of others, as each takes advantage of the weaker bodily structure of

      others. So again, in some few cases, certain instincts cannot be

      considered as absolutely perfect; but as details on this and other such

      points are not indispensable, they may be here passed over.

      As some degree of variation in instincts under a state of nature, and the

      inheritance of such variations, are indispensable for the action of natural

      selection, as many instances as possible ought to have been here given; but

      want of space prevents me. I can only assert, that instincts certainly do

      vary--for instance, the migratory instinct, both in extent and direction,

      and in its total loss. So it is with the nests of birds, which vary partly

      in dependence on the situations chosen, and on the nature and temperature

      of the country inhabited, but often from causes wholly unknown to us:

      Audubon has given several remarkable cases of differences in nests of the

      same species in the northern and southern United States. Fear of any

      particular enemy is certainly an instinctive quality, as may be seen in

      nestling birds, though it is strengthened by experience, and by the sight

      of fear of the same enemy in other animals. But fear of man is slowly

      acquired, as I have elsewhere shown, by various animals inhabiting desert

      islands; and we may see an instance of this, even in England, in the

      greater wildness of all our large birds than of our small birds; for the

      large birds have been most persecuted by man. We may safely attribute the

      greater wildness of our large birds to this cause; for in uninhabited

      islands large birds are not more fearful than small; and the magpie, so

      wary in England, is tame in Norway, as is the hooded crow in Egypt.

      That the general disposition of individuals of the same species, born in a

      state of nature, is extremely diversified, can be shown by a multitude of

      facts. Several cases also, could be given, of occasional and strange

      habits in certain species, which might, if advantageous to the species,

      give rise, through natural selection, to quite new instincts. But I am

      well aware that these general statements, without facts given in detail,

      can produce but a feeble effect on the reader's mind. I can only repeat my

      assurance, that I do not speak without good evidence.

      The possibility, or even probability, of inherited variations of instinct

      in a state of nature will be strengthened by briefly considering a few

      cases under domestication. We shall thus also be enabled to see the

      respective parts which habit and the selection of so-called accidental

      variations have played in modifying the mental qualities of our domestic

      animals. A number of curious and authentic instances could be given of the

      inheritance of all shades of disposition and tastes, and likewise of the

      oddest tricks, associated with certain frames of mind or periods of time.

      But let us look to the familiar case of the several breeds of dogs: it

      cannot be doubted that young pointers (I have myself seen a striking

      instance) will sometimes point and even back other dogs the very first time

      that they are taken out; retriev
    ing is certainly in some degree inherited

      by retrievers; and a tendency to run round, instead of at, a flock of

      sheep, by shepherd-dogs. I cannot see that these actions, performed

      without experience by the young, and in nearly the same manner by each

      individual, performed with eager delight by each breed, and without the end

      being known,--for the young pointer can no more know that he points to aid

      his master, than the white butterfly knows why she lays her eggs on the

      leaf of the cabbage,--I cannot see that these actions differ essentially

      from true instincts. If we were to see one kind of wolf, when young and

      without any training, as soon as it scented its prey, stand motionless like

      a statue, and then slowly crawl forward with a peculiar gait; and another

      kind of wolf rushing round, instead of at, a herd of deer, and driving them

      to a distant point, we should assuredly call these actions instinctive.

      Domestic instincts, as they may be called, are certainly far less fixed or

      invariable than natural instincts; but they have been acted on by far less

      rigorous selection, and have been transmitted for an incomparably shorter

      period, under less fixed conditions of life.

      How strongly these domestic instincts, habits, and dispositions are

      inherited, and how curiously they become mingled, is well shown when

      different breeds of dogs are crossed. Thus it is known that a cross with a

      bull-dog has affected for many generations the courage and obstinacy of

      greyhounds; and a cross with a greyhound has given to a whole family of

      shepherd-dogs a tendency to hunt hares. These domestic instincts, when

      thus tested by crossing, resemble natural instincts, which in a like manner

      become curiously blended together, and for a long period exhibit traces of

      the instincts of either parent: for example, Le Roy describes a dog, whose

      great-grandfather was a wolf, and this dog showed a trace of its wild

      parentage only in one way, by not coming in a straight line to his master

      when called.

      Domestic instincts are sometimes spoken of as actions which have become

      inherited solely from long-continued and compulsory habit, but this, I

      think, is not true. No one would ever have thought of teaching, or

      probably could have taught, the tumbler-pigeon to tumble,--an action which,

      as I have witnessed, is performed by young birds, that have never seen a

      pigeon tumble. We may believe that some one pigeon showed a slight

      tendency to this strange habit, and that the long-continued selection of

      the best individuals in successive generations made tumblers what they now

      are; and near Glasgow there are house-tumblers, as I hear from Mr. Brent,

      which cannot fly eighteen inches high without going head over heels. It

      may be doubted whether any one would have thought of training a dog to

      point, had not some one dog naturally shown a tendency in this line; and

      this is known occasionally to happen, as I once saw in a pure terrier.

      When the first tendency was once displayed, methodical selection and the

      inherited effects of compulsory training in each successive generation

      would soon complete the work; and unconscious selection is still at work,

      as each man tries to procure, without intending to improve the breed, dogs

      which will stand and hunt best. On the other hand, habit alone in some

      cases has sufficed; no animal is more difficult to tame than the young of

      the wild rabbit; scarcely any animal is tamer than the young of the tame

      rabbit; but I do not suppose that domestic rabbits have ever been selected

      for tameness; and I presume that we must attribute the whole of the

      inherited change from extreme wildness to extreme tameness, simply to habit

      and long-continued close confinement.

      Natural instincts are lost under domestication: a remarkable instance of

      this is seen in those breeds of fowls which very rarely or never become

      'broody,' that is, never wish to sit on their eggs. Familiarity alone

     


    Prev Next
Online Read Free Novel Copyright 2016 - 2026