The cause of the changes described is the action of certain new habits on a living growing structure of the mammalian body.
The effect is the change connected with the preceding change of habit.
The result is the changed direction of hair, in other words, new patterns, left when the new habits have been produced, and have been long enough in operation.
The reason for the unchanges observed in many instances is the primitive force of the normal direction of growth of the hair.
The proof of the thesis is that the changes described in the hair—the evidence—is inconsistent with an alternative assertion.
To Some Critics.
It may save time and trouble if replies are given in anticipation to certain classes of critics. I refer of course to those who are well-informed in their branch of knowledge.
To those of high authority and learning, those who ride on white asses and that sit in judgment, who may seek to throw the case into chancery, saying, “This will never do, it contradicts current biological opinion.” I can only meekly reply that current or orthodox opinion is frequently wrong, or (shall I say) seldom right, and that the history of human thought is strewn with examples which may justify my impertinent reply.
To another who says, “I daresay you are right in your claim, but there are too many metaphors,” I would suggest that, so long as metaphors are not used as arguments, the more metaphors—within limits—the clearer the meaning of the statement.