ABSTRACT
The observation in classical times of hillside deposits of marine fossils has been taken as implying early recognition of the evolution of terrestrial life. While recognizing in the evolutionary process the presence of variations which seem “in the ignorance to arise spontaneously,” Darwin shared with Locke—and various contemporary “naturalists”—the view that these variations are so imperceptible as to justify the traditional canon of Natura non facit saltum. “Revolution” as a concept crops up in sociological, political, historical, and economic theory alike. The political sphere—where “revolution” abounds in theory and history alike—recognizes the primacy of “power” or force. We have suggested that “evolution” represents growth within the parameters of an existing system so as to actualize that system’s capabilities, whereas “revolution” represents a transformation so fundamental as to rupture the systemic framework and quantize to a new level of equilibration.
