¹ Darwin, C., The Descent of Descent (1871), with an introduction by Tyler Bonner, John and May, Robert M. (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), 5Google Scholar.

² Wallace, A. R., Natural Selection and Tropical Nature (London: Macmillan and Co., 1891), 419.Google Scholar

³ Monod, J., ‘On the Molecular Theory of Evolution’, in Ridley, M. (ed.), Evolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997), 389.Google Scholar

⁴ Mayr, E., What Evolution Is (“Basic Books, 2001), 9Google Scholar; Mayr, E., ‘Darwin's Influence on Modern Thought’, Scientific American (07 2000), 67–71Google Scholar.

⁵ Gould, S. J., The Structure of Evolutionary Theory (Cambridge, Mass./London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2002), 46Google Scholar; BiAchner, L., Sechs Vorlesungen ilber die Darwin'sche Theorie von der Verwandlung der Arten (Leipzig: Theodor Thomas, 1868), 267Google Scholar.

⁶ Quoted from Dawkins, R., The Blind Watchmaker (Penguin Books, 1988), 4–5Google Scholar.

⁷ Huxley, T. H.: ‘Criticisms of the Origin of Species’ (1864), in Collected Essays Vol. II (London: Macmillan, 1907), 83–4Google Scholar. On the evolution of the eye, see Nilsson, Dan-E./Pelger, S., ‘A pessimistic estimate of the time required for an eye to evolve’, in Ridley, M., Evolution (op. cit. note 3), 299Google Scholar; Mayr, E.Evolution (op. cit. note 4), 205Google Scholar.

⁸ Darwin, C., The Origin of Species, edited with an introduction by Burrow, J. Y. (Penguin Books, 1968), 173.Google Scholar

⁹ Weinert, F., The Scientist as Philosopher (Berlin/Heidelberg/New York: Springer, 2004), Ch. 5.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Haeckel, E., The Riddle of the Universe (London: Watts & Co., 1929), 285 (translation of Die Weltrdtsel, 1899).Google Scholar

¹¹ Huxley, T. H., ‘Geological Contemporaneity’ (1862), in Collected Essays VIII (London: Macmillan, 1910), 288.Google Scholar

¹² Huxley, T. H., ‘Evolution and Ethics’ (1894), in Collected Essays IX (London: Macmillan, 1911), 6.Google Scholar

¹³ Darwin, C., Origin (op. cit. note 8), 318.Google Scholar

¹⁴ de La Mettrie, J. O., L'Homme Machine (1747) (Paris: Editions Mille et Une Nuits, 2000), 68, 49.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Lamarck, J. B., Philosophic Zoologique (1809), translated with an introduction by Elliot, Hugh (New York/London: Hafner, 1963)Google Scholar, Pt. II, Introduction.

¹⁶ op. cit. note 15.

¹⁷ See Lyell, C., The Geological Evidences of the Antiquity of Man (London: Murray, 1863)Google Scholar, Ch. XX, where Lyell discusses theories of progressive modification and transmutation with respect to man.

¹⁸ Darwin, Origin (op. cit. note 8), 458. The evolutionist, materialist explanation was fiercely resisted in some quarters. But the literature of the period from 1859 to 1871 also testifies to numerous cases of instant conversion to the Darwinian cause. In order of national impact, Darwinism had its greatest effect in England and Germany, its least in France. And some of the most advanced men of science, like E. Haeckel and T. H. Huxley, lent their intellectual support to the evolutionary theory. This observation throws some welcomed doubt on Max Planck's oftenquoted comment that a revolutionary idea gains acceptance in science not because of the conviction but the death of its critics. See Planck, Max, ‘Ursprung und Auswirkung wissenschaftlicher Ideen’, in Vorträge und Erinnerungen, (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1965), 275Google Scholar. This is as little true of the early reception of Darwinism as it is of the early reception of the Special theory of relativity.

¹⁹ Huxley, T. H., Man's Place in Nature (1863) (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1959), 125Google Scholar; reprinted in Collected Essavs VII (London: Macmillan, 1910), 77–156Google Scholar; see also Collected Essays II (op. cit. note 7), 151: ‘There is nothing in man's physical structure to interfere with his having been evolved from an ape.’Google Scholar

²⁰ Haeckel, E., Nature 18 (1878), 509.Google Scholar

²¹ Haeckel, , Riddle (op. cit. note 10), 69.Google Scholar

²² Huxley, T. H., Man's Place in Nature (op. cit. note 10), 125.Google Scholar

²³ Darwin, , Descent (op. cit. note 1), Pt. I, 213Google Scholar. But this terminology was so little fixed that the idea of branching also appears in Lamarck, J.B., Zoological Philosophy (op. cit. note 15), 37Google Scholar: “I do not mean that existin animals form a very simple series, regularly graded throughout; but I do mean that they form a branching series iserie rameuse), irregularly graded and free from discontinuity, or at least once free from it.” For Lamarck this branching is the unavoidable result of environmental interferences with the ideal, necessary progressive evolution of the tree of life. For Darwin, branching is a contingent event.

²⁴ Wallace, A. R., ‘The Limits of Natural Selection as Applied to Man’ (1870), in Natural Selection (op. cit. note 2), 204.Google ScholarPubMed

²⁵ C. Darwin, Descent (op. cit. note 1), Part I, Ch. IV; Origin (op. cit. note 8), Ch. V; Gould, S. J., The Panda's Thumb (Penguin Books, 1987), 50Google Scholar; Crombie, A. C., Styles of Scientific Thinking in the European Tradition (London: Duckworth, 1994), Vol. III, 1759Google Scholar.

²⁶ On the question to which extent man's aesthetic, moral and religious sense can be explained in evolutionary terms, especially in the light of evolutionary psychology, see O'Hear, A., Beyond Evolution (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999)Google Scholar. In Invariances (Cambridge, Mass./London: The Belknap Press at Harvard University Press, 2001)Google Scholar, Ch. 5, Robert Nozick provides an evolutionary account of the genealogy of morality.

²⁷ Haeckel, , Riddle (op. cit. note 10), 12, 199–200.Google Scholar

²⁸ Wendorff, R., Zeit und Kultur (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 31985), 403Google Scholar; Darwin, Descent (op. cit. note 1), Chapter XXI; Huxley, T. H., ‘Ethics and Evolution’ (op. cit. note 12), 1–45Google Scholar; Buchner, L., Sechs Vorlesungen (op. cit. note 5), 210, 253–6Google Scholar.

²⁹ op. cit. note 9, Ch. 2.