It is right to say either that heredity
and memory are one and the same thing, or that heredity
is a mode of memory, or that heredity is due to memory,
if it is thereby intended that animals can only grow
in virtue of being able to recollect. Memory
and heredity are the means of preserving experiences,
of building them together, of uniting a mass of often
confused detail into homogeneous and consistent mind
and matter, but they do not originate. The increment
in each generation, at the moment of its being an increment,
has nothing to do with memory or heredity, it is due
to the chances and changes of this mortal state.
Design comes in at the moment that a living being
either feels a want and forecasts for its gratification,
or utilises some waif or stray of accident on the principle,
which underlies all development, that enough is a
little more than what one has. It is the business
of memory and heredity to conserve and to transmit
from one generation to another that which has been
furnished by design, or by accident designedly turned
to account.
It is therefore not right to say,
as some have supposed me to mean, that we can do nothing
which we do not remember to have done before.
We can do nothing very difficult or complicated which
we have not done before, unless as by a tour de force,
once in a way, under exceptionally favourable circumstances,
but our whole conscious life is the performance of
acts either imperfectly remembered or not remembered
at all. There are rain-drops of new experiences
in every life which are not within the hold of our
memory or past experience, and, as each one of these
rain-drops came originally from something outside,
the whole river of our life has in its inception nothing
to do with memory, though it is only through memory
that the rain-drops of new experience can ever unite
to form a full flowing river of variously organised
life and intelligence.
|