X9X THE HISTORY OF BIOLOGY 



to lay down rules having no exceptions. And when he quotes Nees von 

 Esenbeck's above-mentioned comparison between natural objects and the 

 points of the compass, he does so with the — certainly mild — reservation 

 that "this method of philosophizing is beautiful but obscure." On the other 

 hand, he can hit upon such eccentric ideas as that the human hands may 

 represent leaves between which the head sits like a bud; and the metamor- 

 phosis theory likewise leads to a number of extremely bold comparisons 

 between the stages of development in plants and animals. But there is observ- 

 able throughout a keenness of observation in points of detail which proves 

 that the teachings and example of Linnsus had not lost their influence in 

 his own country. The second section, on vegetable biology, treats of the 

 manifestations of life in plants and is on the whole more exact than the 

 former section. 



Another important representative of natural philosophy in Scandinavia 

 was Israel Hwasser (1790-1860). He was the son of a priest at Alvkarleby, 

 and after being educated at home he matriculated at Upsala, where in 1812. 

 he took the degree of doctor of medicine. Five years later he became pro- 

 fessor of medicine at the academy of Abo, where he exercised considerable 

 influence. The medical education there, which had fallen into decline, was 

 improved by him in regard to both the number of students and the standard 

 of the knowledge imparted, while he himself succeeded in gathering about 

 him friends and pupils who took part in his idealistic labours. In 1830 he 

 applied for and obtained a professorship in Upsala, where he afterwards 

 worked until his death. The reason for his transfer was that he wished to 

 counteract the scheme just then being proposed for removing the medical 

 school to the Carolinian Institute in Stockholm, which, he argued, was at 

 variance with the principle of the connexion of ideas in scientific education. 

 But he maintained his interest in Finland throughout his life. He was in 

 everything an ideally minded personality who in speech and writing as well 

 as in private company was a zealous supporter of patriotism, loyalty, and 

 clean morals and in this respect exerted great influence on the young people 

 in the University. His scientific activities he desired also to place entirely 

 at the service of moral ideals. He was, it is true, a natural philosopher, but 

 he did not approve Schelling's speculations, especially the attempt to con- 

 struct nature out of an idea; on this attempt he passes the weighty, and on 

 the whole correct, judgment: "It was a scientific extravagance pushed to 

 extremes, which in the minds of some of those who took part in it seemed 

 to have been fostered and supported by a pride nearly akin to madness." 

 On the other hand, he was a great admirer of Sydenham and still more so 

 of the French anatomist Bichat, who will be described later on. His whole 

 conception of life in nature is characterized by his deeply ethical aims. He 

 is dissatisfied with those who, starting from the lower, would try to under- 



