1. To moral force which characterizes the laborious man, so that the length and difficulties of a useful work do not repel him.
2. To the courage of him who, knowing the danger, exposes himself when he sees that this would be useful.
Wisdom, according to Lamarck, consists in the observance of a certain number of rules or virtues. These we cite in a slightly abridged form.
Love of truth in all things; the need of improving one’s mind; moderation in desires; decorum in all actions; a wise reserve in unessential wants; indulgence, toleration, humanity, good will towards all men; love of the public good and of all that is necessary to our fellows; contempt for weakness; a kind of severity towards one’s self which preserves us from that multitude of artificial wants enslaving those who give up to them; resignation and, if possible, moral impassibility in suffering reverses, injustices, oppression, and losses; respect for order, for public institutions, civil authorities, laws, morality, and religion.
The practice of these maxims and virtues, says Lamarck, characterizes true philosophy.
And it may be added that no one practised these virtues more than Lamarck. Like Cuvier’s, his life was blameless, and though he lived a most retired life, and was not called upon to fill any public station other than his chair of zoölogy at the Jardin des Plantes, we may feel sure that he had the qualities of courage, independence, and patriotism which would have rendered such a career most useful to his country.
As Bourguin eloquently asserts: “Lamarck was the brave man who never deserted a dangerous post, the laborious man who never hesitated to meet any difficulty, the investigating spirit, firm in his convictions, tolerant of the opinions of others, the simple man, moderate in all things, the enemy of weakness, devoted to the public good, imperturbable under the attaints of fortune, of suffering, and of unjust and passionate attacks.”
FOOTNOTES:
[198] Mathias Duval: “Le transformiste français Lamarck,” Bulletin de la Société d’Anthropologie de Paris, xii., 1889, p. 345.