human eye and the long neck of the giraffe are alike due to the
accumulation of variations that are mainly functional, and hence
practical; according to Charles Darwin they are alike due to the
accumulation of variations that are accidental, fortuitous,
spontaneous, that is to say, mainly cannot be reduced to any known
general principle. According to Charles Darwin "the preservation of
favoured," or lucky, "races" is by far the most important means of
modification; according to Erasmus Darwin effort non sibi res sed se
rebus subjungere is unquestionably the most potent means; roughly,
therefore, there is no better or fairer way of putting the matter,
than to say that Charles Darwin is the apostle of luck, and his
grandfather, and Lamarck, of cunning.

It should be observed also that the distinction between the organism
and its surroundings--on which both systems are founded--is one that
cannot be so universally drawn as we find it convenient to allege.
There is a debatable ground of considerable extent on which RES and
ME, ego and non ego, luck and cunning, necessity and freewill, meet
and pass into one another as night and day, or life and death. No
one can draw a sharp line between ego and non ego, nor indeed any
sharp line between any classes of phenomena. Every part of the ego
is non ego qua organ or tool in use, and much of the non ego runs up
into the ego and is inseparably united with it; still there is
enough that it is obviously most convenient to call ego, and enough
that it is no less obviously most convenient to call non ego, as
there is enough obvious day and obvious night, or obvious luck and
obvious cunning, to make us think it advisable to keep separate
accounts for each.

I will say more on this head in a following chapter; in this present