CHANGES IN SCIENTIFIC OPINION 15 



of terminology, between Professor Moore and other 

 neo-vitalists and the schoolmen who taught, in their 

 own language, which few men of science think it 

 worth their while to try to understand, that the 

 vital principle (or, if you will, for we will not 

 quarrel over terminology, the " biotic energy ") is 

 a simple principle which is entirely dependent upon 

 the organism, or, as again they put it, is completely 

 immersed in the body. That it should have been 

 called a corporeal soul is again a matter of ter- 

 minology. Let it be noted that this view is a wholly 

 different one from that which looked upon the soul 

 or vital principle as a kind of little super-man 

 existent in some part of the body, as Descartes 

 supposed it existed in the pineal gland. So far as 

 the present writer is capable of understanding the 

 views of Professor Moore and others who hold like 

 opinions with him, there is no real difference, no 

 difference at all but one of terminology between 

 him and older writers or at lekst some of the 

 older writers on the vitalistic question. 



At least this may be said, that all alike proclaim 

 that in living bodies there is something else present 

 in addition to what is found existing in non-living 

 bodies, and that " something over " is whatever we 

 call it the vital principle as defined by the school- 

 men from whom quotation has been made. 



