506 F. H. PIKE 
But, if the rigid conceptions of the segmental system are to be 
substantiated and shock in all its pristine vigor is to remain with 
us, then must it be conceded that von Monakow has been pur- 
suing a mirage and that the inferences from the great amount of 
fact collected in his volume are largely untrue. This I am loath 
to admit, since my own interpretations of experimental findings 
would be swept away with it. I may repeat that it is necessary 
to choose between the hypothesis of spinal shock and the seg- 
mental theory, on the one hand, and the theory of cerebral 
localization, on the other. The adherent of the theory of cere- 
bral localization need not be unduly troubled by misgivings as to 
the security of his position until it has been shown beyond mere 
assumption that the things supposed to occur in shock actually 
do occur. So far as the experimental evidence goes at present, 
it is against Goltz’s position rather than in favor of it. What- 
ever objections I may urge against von Monakow’s position are 
to be regarded as constructive rather than destructive. Neither 
of us doubts the transient effect of shock nor the general truth 
of cerebral localization. I believe that the available evidence 
justifies a stricter view, a more rigid localization than the one 
he has propounded in his volume. 
The doctrine of cerebral localization must be regarded as 
established, and the hypothesis of shock as Goltz formulated it 
must be discarded. Not only has there been no direct proof of 
the hypothesis of shock, but there is experimental proof of the 
main tenets of the theory of cerebral localization. There must 
be a corresponding revision of many of the chapters in our texts 
of physiology as they stand today. 
The establishment of the theory of cerebral localization will 
bring us a step nearer to the realization of the prophetic vision of 
Magendie (’16b), which has been obscured for so many decades 
by the mass of detail accumulated by anatomists and experi- 
mentalists alike, both of whom have so. far failed to accept the 
interpretation of the great French experimentalist. 
One means by the term brain (cerveau), the organ which fills the 
cavity of the cranium and that of the spinal canal. To facilitate the 
study, the anatomists have divided it into three parts, the cei veau 
