176 SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE ORGANISM 



same manner as they did that of the first Intensities can 

 be actually measured only in very few cases, in all other 

 cases they are imaginary and subsidiary. All reasoning 

 proceeds in a circle here. If, for instance, nothing is happen- 

 ing in a system of chemical compounds or of different states 

 of aggregation, we say that " equilibrium " exists ; if anything 

 happens then there were " diversities of potentials." But 

 all this is known only post factum ; in other words, the 

 potentials and their diversities are created only after we 

 know what happens, and in what amount. And the leading 

 principle of such creations is always the aprioristic convic- 

 tion that there must have been diversities of intensities 

 in order that anything could happen. 



ft. THE PRINCIPLE OF BECOMING IN ITS RELATION TO 



ENTELECHY 



Let us now study the relation of vital phenomena to 

 the true second aprioristic principle of energetics ; the 

 third empirical principle is to enter into our discussions 

 only occasionally. Empirical as it is, it of course offers 

 no special ontological problem with regard to entelechy. 



That an " equilibrium ' of some sort must have been 

 disturbed if, for instance, a process of regeneration is going 

 on, is absolutely self-evident, and does not throw any light 

 on the problem whatever. To say " there is no equilibrium," 

 and to say " there is happening," are identical phrases 

 in the logical sense. Strange to say, there have been 

 certain biological authors * who have thought they were 



1 The word "equilibrium" has been misused in biology in the most 

 terrible manner, especially by certain physiologists (Verworu, Jensen, etc.). 



