Abstract
I DO not propose to extend the discussion on this subject beyond the present communication, but I cannot refrain from calling attention to the remarkable discrepancy in the position taken by Dr. Romanes in his last letter (April 23, p. 582), and that in his former communication (March 26, p. 489), in which he says:—“I do not … hold myself responsible for enunciating Mr. Herbert Spencer's argument, which the quotation sets forth. I merely reproduced it from him as an argument which appeared to me valid on the side of ‘use inheritance.’ For not only did Darwin himself invoke the aid of such inheritance in regard to this identical case … &c.” If words have any meaning, this implies that Dr. Romanes agrees with Darwin in regarding this case as one in which “use inheritance” played a part. Now, after I have endeavoured to show that this supposed case of co-adaptation can be explained without the aid of “use inheritance” at all, Dr. Romanes says that there is no difference of opinion on this point between us. I can only say that I am very glad to learn this admission on his part, but why did he quote the argument from Herbert Spencer as “valid on the side of ‘use inheritance,’” if he did not believe it to be a case of true co-adaptation?
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
MELDOLA, R. Co-adaptation. Nature 44, 7 (1891). https://doi.org/10.1038/044007a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/044007a0
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.