RELATION TO OTHER SCIENCES 135 



Pathology stands in close relation not only with that group of 

 physical sciences which treat of life-processes and living organisms 

 but also with the exact physical sciences. To these also many 

 bridges lead, over which the connecting links flow in both directions, 

 pathology giving as well as receiving. A separation of pathology 

 from the other sciences could therefore only be made by force, for 

 pathology forms an integral part of the science of life, biology. I do 

 not consider it just, therefore, that in this Congress, bacteriology, 

 which draws its greatest importance from that part which belongs 

 to pathology, which is thus, principally, a part of pathology, has 

 been placed by itself in Division C, "Physical Sciences" (Natur- 

 wissenschaft} , and pathology in Division E, "Useful or Utilitarian 

 Sciences." Is bacteriology not an eminently useful science? Has it 

 not found the most widespread use in medical practice? Have not 

 other branches of pathology, and especially pathologic anatomy, 

 been reproached because it has done little for the prevention and 

 treatment of disease, while bacteriology has done much in this 

 direction? Yet bacteriology is put under physical sciences and 

 pathologic anatomy with the rest of pathology among the utilitarian 

 sciences! On what grounds can we consider human pathology as 

 a different sort of science from the pathology of plants? If we class 

 plant pathology with plant morphology and physiology as a part 

 of biology (as is right), one must do the same for human pathology 

 and place the biologic sciences in the closest relation with human 

 anatomy and physiology. Human pathology is as much natural 

 science and a separate branch of biology as is phytopathology, and 

 pathology is no more a utilitarian science than normal anatomy and 

 physiology. Is medical activity conceivable without anatomy and 

 physiology? As little as without pathology! Has pathology only 

 importance through its relation to practical medicine? Not at all. 

 Pathologists also prosecute their scientific studies without regard 

 as to whether their work will be of immediate practical value or not. 

 They also follow the inner motive toward knowledge and truth. 

 They wish to satisfy that desire for increased knowledge which is 

 in every human breast, to share in disclosing the secrets of nature. 

 If the acquisitions of pathology have had a greater and more im- 

 mediate effect on medical treatment than those of anatomy and 

 physiology, that does not alter its scientific quality in the least; 

 that they were also useful has never injured other sciences or 

 lessened their scientific value. No one will value chemic and physical 

 sciences less because they have been the basis of the wonderful 

 advance in technic and industry, as displayed to the wondering 

 eyes in this exposition. Pathology rejoices in its relation to practical 

 medicine and would neither miss nor lessen it, for as physics and 

 chemistry constantly receive from practice stimulus to new en- 



