me controversy on Fyeedom in Science in the Nineteenth Century
;ardsliberalism,and his poli-
ne onwards. Throughout life
A science on one hand (espe-
.･ and in politics on the other.
こer, but a doer, restless in his
?assionate, too, even in some
:st achievement in the Cellu_
blished pathology on a cyt0-
ls from pre-existing cens, in
lJ.比e that of so many bio-
[y at Wtirzburg was no other
both scientist and politician,
of his day the 'advanced'
Ldherents to Darwin,s theory
il and of man in particular.
br al也ough he was no mean
ke many striking discoveries
his skill in expounding the
on he seemed almost like a
〇er as well as a thinker, and
place in nature, but he was
hs writings-especially Die
fan tastic.
⊃k place at the Congress of
runich in September 1877 5
3ublication of The Origin of
:asion to support the theory
rimental proofs were only
:specially in morphology, it
ical'method, since organ-
y of their evolutionary his-
dation was not capable of
its validity was sim血r to
ology, and linguistics.
-the `soul'in animate and
Ⅳed sensitiveness, imaglna-
'Monera'or still simpler
movement･ This was only
lplasm were themselves of
F believe in the existence of
)nwith hydrogen, oxygen,
oduction of a soul, it was
considered these beliefs to
もich, in his view, bound
together practical ideahsm and theoretical realism-whatever that may
have meant.
He now turned to education, the main theme of血is ad血ess･ He opposed
the teaching of mere facts to the young･ Both teacher and pup止would
approach their workwith infinitely moreinterest if they always asked
themselves, 'wie ist das enstanden?, Causes, not simply their results, must
be the subject of study in the schools･ He demanded the teaching of the
evolutionary doctrine in thefields of cosmogeny'geology'biology,anthroI
pology, and linguistics.
Haeckel went on to a direct attack on `church rehgions,, With their
ancient myths about creation, and urged that they should be supplanted by
a Naturreligion based on the 'natural moral law, that evolved from the
social instincts of animals･ The future, he claimed, did not belong to the
kind of theology that wages a fruitless war against thevictorious doctrine
of evolution, but to a religion that takes possession of the doctrine, recog-
nizes it, and utilizes it.
Virchow had recently made knownhis attitude towards the doctrine of
evolution･ 7 He had deplored the tendency tounwarranted generalization
exhibited by the Darwinists, whom he comparedwith the Naturphilosophen
of Oken's school･ He had emphasized the danger of wild hypotheses and
the need for demonstrable facts･ He himself had been prepared to accept
the mutabihty of species even before the pubhcation of the Origin, but he
felt that the younger generation needed to be recalled to prudence.
Virchow had not arrived in Munich when Haeckel gave his address, but
he obtained a copy of it･ He saw at once how Haeckel,s whole outlook
conAicted with his own･ He considered that a further warnlng Was neCeSI
s乱ry lt appears that he had intended to ad血ess the Congress on another
subject, but decided to change his plans and issue a direct chanenge to
Haeckel･ Four days after the latter had spoken he made a remarkable
extemporary speech, which was subsequently published.8 He must have
beeningenial mood･ for his words wereinterrupted no fewer than nine-
teen times by the merriment and approval of his audience , but his pur-
pose Was Serious enough･Asa deputy to the Prussian parliament, he was
an血us lest the nation should lose con丘dence in its scientists, and this
would happen if they abandoned themselves to speculation. Science would
suffer if theories were expounded to the pubhc and subsequently found to
be untrue･ If the doctrine of evolution could be proved, it should be taught
in the schools, even thoughit were bound upwith sociahstic opnlOnS , but
he emphasized how fragmentary humanknOwledge was (･ alles men-
schliche Wissen StHckwerk ist,) and pleaded for humihty (i Das, was mick
ziert, ist eben die Kenntniss meiner Unwissenheit,).
He attacked Haeckel's claim that alュ ideas concerning the spiritual life
should be based on the Plastidulseele･ Untu one could define the properties
of carbon, hydrogen･ oxygen･ and nitrogen in such a way as to show that a
91