Likenesses ; or, Philosophical Anatomy 253 



limal in different ways — as it follows up different lines of 

 thought. 



These perceived relations, though subjective as relations, 

 have nevertheless an objective foundation in real parts, or 

 conditions of parts, of real wholes, and it is their correspond- 

 ence with such objective foundations which gives to ideal 

 relations whatever truth they may possess. To detect the 

 most hidden laws of unity underlying the differences pre- 

 sented by animal structure, is the work of 'Philosophical 

 Anatomy.' 



Speculative and creative minds, imbued with natural 

 knowledge, have pursued with avidity this kind of inquiry. 

 While more ordinary minds have been content with observ- 

 ing the facts of animal structure, nobler minds have ever 

 tried to solve the problems of the ' how ' and the ' why.' 



An inquiry of this kind into the nature of the skeleton is 

 the anatomical question which has specially occupied Goethe, 

 Oken, Spix, Carus, De Blainville, Geoffroy St.-Hilaire, and 

 Owen. It may not be uninteresting to consider whether the 

 attempt to solve such problems is, as so many persons have 

 come to believe, an altogether vain one, and if it does not 

 appear to be a vain pursuit, then to inquire what is the 

 nature of the answer which reason and observation combme 

 to furnish. 



By a singular coincidence, the casual finding of the 

 mutilated skull of a Ruminant helped to evolve, independ- 

 ently, from the minds of Goethe and of Oken, full and 

 distinct conceptions of a new theory of the bony framework 

 of the head. Each of these thinkers conceived the idea that 

 the skull, instead of being (as had been universally supposed) 

 an altogether peculiar structure, was in reality similar in 

 composition to the backbone, or spinal column. The back- 

 bone is made up of a series of rings of bone mutually 

 adjusted, called vertebrae. Goethe and Oken conceived that 



