178 AMPHISBAENA 



cisely describable structures, and of the specific functions which 

 very often could be clearly assigned to them. Take the en- 

 zymes . . . 



o: 



I will take them. But who did the assigning? You isolate a 

 protein, you ask it a very limited number of questions by bringing 

 it together with a few substances. If it happens to react with one 

 or the other, you call them "substrates" and you proceed to 

 assign a specific function to this particular protein. Did you 

 notice the man that passed us a moment ago? He limped; and 

 you would rightly say that this was because he had one shorter 

 leg. But how could I refute someone who claimed that this man 

 had one leg too short in order to limp? You say that this enzyme 

 is present in the cell, in order to perform this reaction. Hie 

 Rhodus, hie salta! But maybe this is not Rhodes or maybe he 

 does not jump, or maybe he jumps somewhere else. How sure 

 can you be, for instance, that all the various phosphatases that 

 can be fished out of a cell mush really act as such in the living 

 cell, that this is their "function"? Ours — and yours — still is a 

 post mortem science; we are forced to destroy the overriding, the 

 overpowering category of life. 



y: 

 Don't tell me you are a vitalist. 



o: 



Of course, not. But a discussion between us about the meaning 

 of life would be stupid: I am too rigid and you are too flexible. 

 All I can say is: Life is what's lost in the test tube. Better tell me 

 what you think about what I said concerning the assigning of 

 functions. 



y: 

 I think there are such enzymes and such. Many have the functions 

 that we have given them, others may not be called upon to act 



