The Origin of Species

Home > Science > The Origin of Species > Page 23
The Origin of Species Page 23

by Charles Darwin

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