DISCUSSION 149 



/ cannot explain it,&quot; and thereupon he straightway 

 becomes what is called a vitalist. 



The opinion expressed by von Hansemann on 

 vitalism and the vitalists is injurious to no 

 one but the critic himself. Scientists such as 

 Driesch, von Bunge, Reinke, etc., have certainly 

 advanced the interests of science by their 

 vitalism, far more than von Hansemann has 

 done by his antivitalism. Because he does 

 not understand vitalism, it does not follow that 

 vitalism is nonsense. 



The vitalist maintains that there is a principle 

 of living force underlying all the vital processes. 

 He is unable to say what this &quot;living-force&quot; principle 

 is, and so he has recourse to the transcendental, thus 

 rendering it impossible for him to carry on any 

 investigations in natural science, for such investiga 

 tions, as Helmholtz showed, postulated that the 

 questions propounded should be theoretically 

 capable of solution. As soon as any one adopts the 

 vitalistic standpoint, the question ceases to be 

 theoretically capable of solution. 



Von Hansemann here simply assumes as 

 self-evident, that a theoretical solution of pro 

 blems in natural science must necessarily be a 

 purely mechanical solution. But as, according 

 to the vitalists, the phenomena of life are not 



