iv GENEKAL PHYSIOLOGY OF NEKVOUS SYSTEM 191 



less often with that of Cajal, more rarely still with those of 

 Bethe and of Bielschowsky." 



It is curious and instructive to note that while for Eamon 

 y Cajal (1908) the results obtained by his method and its 

 modifications afford a positive proof of the neurone theory since 

 he has never been able to convince himself of the existence of 

 anastomosing intercellular fibrils for Golgi (1910) none of the 

 data adduced in regard to the anatomical structure of the nervous 

 system offer a definite proof either of the theory of independent 

 cell-units (neurones), or of the unitary fibrillary theory. 



Nevertheless, from the present state of our knowledge, Golgi 

 rejects the view according to which the nerve-cell is deposed, 

 and the chief functional value attributed to the fibrils. " I 

 should feel as though I were breaking faith if I faltered in 

 my firm conviction that the nerve-cells are the central organs 

 of the specific psychical and sensory activities which we ascribe to 

 the nervous system, provided we admit that they too come under 

 the concept that is valid for the whole of the cell theory, viz. 

 that the nerve-cells, while endowed with a certain autonomy, 

 are more or less dependent on their anatomical and functional 

 inter-relations. It is hardly necessary to point out that this 

 statement does not entirely exclude the participation in psychical 

 and sensory actions of all the other factors that enter into the 

 complex organisation of the nervous system. 



" In regard to the functional mechanism of the nerve elements, 

 far from being able to accept the idea of the independence 

 implied in the concept of the neurone, I can but once more state 

 my conviction that the nerve-cells exhibit collective activity, 

 in the sense that larger or smaller groups of them exert a 

 collective action upon the peripheral organs, through bundles of 

 fibres and through the diffuse nervous network. This concept of 

 course includes that of the analogous opposite action in regard 

 to sensory functions. 



" However much my position may conflict with the view of 

 separate anatomical units, I cannot renounce the idea of a 

 unitary action of the nervous system, nor feel disturbed if this 

 brings me back to the earlier conception of the mode in which 

 the nervous system functions." 



Golgi's views on the functional activity of the central nervous 

 system, which are based on anatomical investigations, and parti- 

 cularly on the existence of a diffuse nervous network, are, how- 

 ever, opposed to the best-established facts of the physiology of the 

 sense organs. They are more particularly at variance with the 

 authentic and easily demonstrated observations of isolated con- 

 duction and perception of tactile sensations at various points 

 of the skin, and of elementary retinal sensations, which we 

 shall discuss in treating of the physiology of these sense organs. 



