Jean-Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet, Chevalier de Lamarck. On classification and evolution. Extracts from: Philosophie zoologique, ou exposition des. Results 1 – 50 of 92 philosophie Zoologique ou exposition des considérations relatives à l’histoire naturelle des animaux, à la diversité de leur organisation et. Donor challenge: Your generous donation will be matched 2-to-1 right now. Your $5 becomes $15! Dear Internet Archive Supporter,. I ask only.
|Published (Last):||21 May 2017|
|PDF File Size:||8.62 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||8.23 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Philosophie Zoologique – Wikipedia
Philosophie Zoologique “Zoological Philosophy, or Exposition with Regard to the Natural Zoologiqu of Animals” is an book by the French naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarckin which he outlines his pre-Darwinian theory of evolutionpart of which is now known as Lamarckism.
In the book, Lamarck named two supposed laws that would enable animal species to acquire characteristics under the influence of the environment. The first law stated that use or disuse would cause body structures to grow or shrink over the generations.
Pphilosophie second law asserted that such changes would be inherited. Those conditions together imply that species continuously change by adaptation to their environments, forming a branching series of evolutionary paths.
Lamarck was largely ignored by the major French zoologist Cuvierbut he attracted much more interest abroad. The book was read carefully, but its thesis rejected, by nineteenth century scientists including the geologist Charles Lyell and the comparative anatomist Thomas Henry Huxley. Darwin acknowledged Lamarck as an important zoologist, and his theory a forerunner of Darwin’s evolution by natural selection. He became known for his work on the taxonomy of the invertebratesespecially of molluscs.
However, he is mainly remembered for the philosoophie that now bears his name, Lamarckismand in particular his view that the environment called by Lamarck the conditions of life phillsophie rise to permanent, inheritedevolutionary changes in animals. In the Philosophie ZoologiqueLamarck proposed that species could acquire new characteristics from influences in their environment, in two rules that he named as laws.
His first law stated that use or disuse of a body’s structures would cause them to grow or shrink in the course of several generations. His second law held that any changes made in this way would be inherited. Together, Lamarck’s laws imply the steady adaptation of animals to their environments. He gave names to a number of vestigial structures in the book, among them ” Olivier ‘s Spalaxwhich lives underground like the zologique, and is apparently exposed to daylight even less than the mole, has altogether lost the use of sight: Lamarck described speciation as follows: He argued that gaps between differing kinds of animals resulted from the extinction of intermediate forms: Lamarck proposed the transmutation of species “transformisme”but did not believe that all living things shared a common ancestor.
Rather he believed that simple forms of life were created continuously by spontaneous generation. He also believed that an innate life forcewhich he sometimes described as a nervous fluid, drove species to become more complex over timeadvancing up a linear ladder of complexity similar to the mediaeval great chain of being.
Page numbers are given in parentheses. De l’influence des Circonstances sur les actions et les habitudes des Animaux, et de celle phliosophie actions et des habitudes de ces Corps vivans, comme causes qui modifient leur organisation et leurs parties De l’Ordre naturel des Animaux et de la disposition qu’il faut donner a leur distribution generale pour la rendre conforme a l’ordre meme de la nature Considerations sur les Causes physiques de la Vie, les conditions qu’elle exige pour exister, la force excitatrice de ses mouvemens, les facultes qu’elle donne aux corps qui la possedent, et les resultats de son existence dans les corps Comparison des Corps inorganiques avec les Corps vivans, suivie d’un Parallele entre les Animaux et les Vegetaux De la Vie, de ce qui la constitue, et des Conditions essentielles a son existence dans un corps Du tissu phliosophie, considere comme la gangue dans laquelle toute organisation a ete formee Lamarck’s evolutionary theory made little immediate impact on his fellow zoologists, or on the public at philosopbie time.
The historian of science Richard Burkhardt argues that this was because Lamarck was convinced his views would be poorly received, and made little effort to present his theory persuasively. In the French-speaking world in his lifetime, Lamarck and his theories were rejected by the major zoologists of the day, including Cuvier.
However, he made more of an impact outside France and after his death, where phllosophie scientists such as Ernst HaeckelCharles Lyell and Darwin himself recognised him as a major zoologist, with theories that presaged Darwinian evolution. In —, Charles Lyell, in his Principles of Geologycarefully summarised Lamarck’s theory in about 6 pages, with cross-references lamatck the Philosophie Zoologique and then roundly criticised it.
Lyell begins by noting that Lamarck gives no examples at all of the development of any philoophie new function “the philosphie of some entirely new sense, faculty, or organ” but only proves that the “dimensions and strength” of some parts can be increased or decreased.
Lyell says that with this “disregard to the strict rules of induction” Lamarck “resorts to fictions”. Lyell goes on, assuming for the sake of argument that Lamarck was right about the creation of new organs, that Lamarck’s theory would mean that instead of the nature and philosophoe of an animal giving rise to its lamack, its behaviour would determine .
Thus ottersbeaverswaterfowlturtlesand frogswere not made web-footed in order that they might swim; but their wants having attracted them to the water in search of prey, they stretched out the toes of their feet to strike the water and move rapidly along its surface. By the repeated stretching of their toes, the skin which united them at the base, acquired a habit of extension, until, in the course of time, the broad membranes which now connect their extremities were formed.
Lyell similarly criticises the way Lamarck supposed the antelope and gazelle acquired “light agile forms” able to run swiftly; or the “camelopard” giraffe became “gifted zoollogique a long flexible neck”. Lamarckism was popularised in the English-speaking world by the speculative Vestiges of the Natural History of Creationpublished anonymously by Robert Chambers in In Philoso;hie Henry Huxleythe comparative anatomist known as “Darwin’s Bulldog” for his energetic advocacy of Darwinian evolution,  wrote that.
With respect to the Philosophie Zoologiqueit is no reproach to Lamarck to say that the discussion of the Species question in that work, whatever might be said for it inwas miserably below the level of the knowledge of half a century almarck.
Lamarck: Philosophie zoologique
In that interval of time the elucidation of the structure of philosophi lower animals and plants had given rise to wholly new conceptions of their relations; histology and embryologyin the philosphie sense, had been created; physiology had been reconstituted; the facts of distribution, lzmarck and geographical, had been prodigiously multiplied and reduced to order.
To any biologist whose studies had carried him beyond mere species-mongering inone-half of Lamarck’s arguments were obsolete and the other philsophie erroneous, or defective, in virtue of omitting to deal with the various classes of evidence which had been brought to light since his time.
Moreover his one suggestion as to the cause of the philosophif modification of species—effort excited by change of conditions—was, on the face of it, inapplicable to the whole vegetable world. I do not think that any impartial judge who reads the Philosophie Zoologique now, and who afterwards takes up Lyell’s trenchant and effectual criticism published as far back aswill be disposed to allot to Lamarck a much higher place in the establishment of biological evolution than that which Bacon assigns to himself in relation to physical science generally,—buccinator tantum.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. It is from Bacon’s De Augmentis Scientiarum. Retrieved 31 December Cambridge Readings in the Literature of Science: Lamarck, the Founder of Evolution. The History of an Idea. University of California Press.
The Remarkable History of Scientific Theory. Journal of the History of Biology. University of Chicago Press. Works of Francis Bacon.
Germ lamarci of disease Central dogma of molecular biology Darwinism Great chain of being Hierarchy of life Lamarckism One gene—one enzyme hypothesis Protocell RNA world hypothesis Sequence hypothesis Spontaneous generation.
Stephen Jay Gould W.
Philosophie zoologique. vol. 1
Title page of first edition, Museum d’Histoire Naturelle Jardin des Plantes.