202 VITALISM AND SCHOLASTICISM 



it is very closely connected with our subject, to 

 a further explanation offered by another vigor- 

 ous opponent of vitalistic views, the very 

 Weismann distinguished writer, Professor Weismann. We 

 have already seen how he attempts to deal with 

 the phenomena of regeneration so unaccountable 

 on the mechanical hypothesis. And we have 

 seen that his method of accounting for them, 

 if taken at its face value, amounts to nothing 

 more than a mere restatement of the problem. 

 Professor Weismann is far too eminent a biolo- 

 gist not to see that all vital phenomena require 

 some explanation, and, as he refuses to be per- 

 suaded by the vitalistic or neo- vitalistic school, 

 he must perforce offer some other explanation. 

 What is it? Let us try to make it plain.* In 

 the first place he says that " the botanist 

 Reinke " (whose views have already been 

 alluded to in these pages) " has recently called 

 attention once again to the fact that machines 

 cannot be directly made up of primary chemico- 

 physical forces or energies, but that, as Lotze 

 said, forces of a superior order are indispensable, 

 which so dispose the fundamental chemico- 

 physical forces that they must act in the way 

 aimed at by the purpose of the machine." 

 Thus in making a watch; gold, steel, jewels, 

 etc., must not only be brought together, but 



* Op. cit., i., 402. 



