Wallace, whilst insisting that the range of observed and measured variation was much larger in proportion to the size of the organisms or parts of organism affected than was generally believed, leaned to the Darwinian view in excluding from the normal factors in the origin of species variations of the extremer ranges of magnitude.
It protests against contemporary industrial selfishness, and against the organization of industry on the Darwinian principle of struggle for existence.
It is suggested that even in the absence of modification produced by any possible Darwinian or Lamarckian factors, that even in a neutral environment, divergent evolution of some kind would have occurred.
It is held 1 that the Darwinian doctrine of selection of fortuitous congenital variations is sufficient to account for all cases, that the Lamarckian hypothesis of transmission cf acquired characters is not supported by experimental evidence, and that the latter should therefore be dismissed.
There remains open a wide field for inquiry as to the precise relations between selection and variation on the one hand, and their products, specific differences and adaptive structures, but the advance of knowledge has supplied no alternative to the Darwinian principles.
Those have found little favour who brought to the debate only formal criticisms or amplifications of the Darwinian arguments, or re-marshallings of the Darwinian facts, however ably conducted.
The very cases which are advanced as only to be explained on the Lamarckian assumption are found on examination and experiment to be better explained, or only to be explained, by the Darwinian principle.
The great work that is going on is the simplification of the facts to be explained by grouping them under empirical laws; and the most general statement relating to these that can yet be made is that no single one of these laws has as yet shown signs of taking rank as a vera causa comparable with the Darwinian principle of natural selection.
Not only did Planck oppose the idealism of his confreres; his views were, in another aspect, directly antagonistic to the Darwinian theory of descent, which he specifically attacked in Wahrheit and Flachheit des Darwinismus (Ndrdlingen, 1872).
The alarm was greater, as theology was still unreconciled with the Darwinian theory; and Clifford was regarded as a dangerous champion of the antispiritual tendencies then imputed to modern science.