﻿THE 
  UNIQUENESS 
  OF 
  LIFE 
  l4<5 
  

  

  Secondly, 
  there 
  is 
  a 
  sense 
  in 
  which 
  all 
  biologists 
  may 
  

   be 
  called 
  vitalists, 
  inasmuch 
  as 
  no 
  one 
  can 
  pretend 
  that 
  the 
  

   mechanical 
  re-description 
  of 
  vital 
  phenomena 
  has 
  as 
  yet 
  gone 
  

   very 
  far. 
  Professor 
  Bateson 
  writes 
  : 
  " 
  If 
  those 
  who 
  proclaim 
  

   a 
  vitalistic 
  faith 
  intend 
  thereby 
  to 
  affirm 
  that 
  in 
  the 
  processes 
  

   by 
  which 
  growth 
  and 
  division 
  are 
  effected 
  in 
  the 
  body, 
  a 
  part 
  

   is 
  played 
  by 
  an 
  orderly 
  force 
  which 
  we 
  cannot 
  now 
  translate 
  

   into 
  terms 
  of 
  any 
  known 
  mechanics, 
  what 
  observant 
  man 
  is 
  

   not 
  a 
  vitalist?" 
  (1913, 
  p. 
  80). 
  

  

  We 
  must 
  distinguish 
  between 
  a 
  negative 
  and 
  a 
  positive 
  

   vitalism. 
  When 
  we 
  assert 
  that 
  no 
  vital 
  activity 
  in 
  i'ts 
  ob- 
  

   served 
  totality 
  has 
  ever 
  been 
  completely 
  described 
  in 
  mechan- 
  

   ical 
  terms, 
  as 
  one 
  might 
  describe 
  the 
  movement 
  of 
  a 
  glacier 
  

   or 
  the 
  spread 
  of 
  a 
  conflagration, 
  we 
  are 
  making 
  a 
  scientific 
  

   statement 
  which 
  we 
  believe 
  to 
  be 
  accurate 
  at 
  the 
  present 
  

   time 
  (1919). 
  That 
  it 
  will 
  hold 
  true 
  a 
  hundred 
  or 
  a 
  thou- 
  

   sand 
  years 
  hence 
  does 
  not 
  follow 
  from 
  the 
  evidence 
  sub- 
  

   mitted, 
  for 
  we 
  do 
  not 
  know 
  what 
  changes 
  are 
  still 
  to 
  be 
  

   made 
  in 
  the 
  concepts 
  of 
  chemistry 
  and 
  physics, 
  or 
  what 
  dis- 
  

   coveries 
  will 
  reward 
  inquiry 
  into, 
  for 
  instance, 
  the 
  physiology 
  

   of 
  correlation. 
  It 
  may 
  be 
  that 
  a 
  mechanistic 
  formulation 
  

   of 
  the 
  essential 
  activities 
  of 
  organisms 
  is 
  quite 
  impossible, 
  

   but 
  that 
  could 
  not 
  be 
  legitimately 
  inferred 
  from 
  the 
  argu- 
  

   ments 
  we 
  used. 
  These 
  went 
  to 
  show 
  that 
  the 
  description 
  

   of 
  vital 
  occurrences 
  in 
  terms 
  of 
  present-day 
  chemistry 
  and 
  

   physics 
  does 
  not 
  adequately 
  express 
  the 
  connection 
  of 
  the 
  

   sequences, 
  still 
  less 
  their 
  correlation. 
  We 
  can 
  speak 
  only 
  

   about 
  the 
  chemistry 
  and 
  physics 
  that 
  we 
  know. 
  Sufficient 
  

   unto 
  the 
  day 
  is 
  the 
  mechanism 
  thereof. 
  The 
  formula 
  of 
  chem- 
  

   istry 
  and 
  physics 
  prove 
  inadequate, 
  and 
  in 
  part 
  irrelevant. 
  

   If 
  we 
  go 
  on 
  to 
  say 
  that 
  they 
  are 
  inadequate 
  because 
  the 
  

   organism 
  has 
  a 
  monopoly 
  of 
  a 
  peculiar 
  kind 
  of 
  energy, 
  or 
  

  

  