,s, 



si 



SU 

 CO 



.1. 



Introductory 25 



We may preface a slight expansion of our dogmatic 

 formula by asking the question, "How is it that the prin- 

 ciple, embodied in such phrases as the 'Organism as a whole' 

 so confidently used by eminent investigators, should be so 

 distrusted by most biologists as to give it little influence on 

 biological conceptions?" The proximate reply is that for 

 most biologists the notion is too vague and general to be 

 of high and permanent worth. One statement of this de- 

 preciatory estimate is that to take the organism in its en- 

 tirety is to take it. unanaly/.ed : and this, so such a view 

 holds, is superficial and contrary to the whole purpose and 

 spirit of modern research. To analyze complexes of natural 

 phenomena, that is to reduce them to their elements is, ac- 

 cording to this view, exactly what makes science science. 

 Scientific knowledge in biology as in all other fields, is ana- 

 lytic knowledge^; and conversely, analytic knowledge not 

 only is science, but (at least so says full-fledged elemental- 

 ism) is the whole of science. Our undertaking will require 

 to combat, incidentally but yet vigorously, this view. 

 Stated positively, while assuming as science always does as- 

 sume, the validity of analytic knowledge of nature, we shall 



ntend that synthetic knowledge of nature is not only valid 

 also, but that it is as foundat iona] and essential a part 

 of science as is analytic knowledge. Furthermore we shall 

 touch briefly, but as we believe very fundamentally, the 

 question of the nature of synthetic knowledge itself. 



In accordance with tliis general statement of purpose, 

 I hope to be able to clear the conception of the "organism" 

 taken alive and whole, of the vagueness that has hitherto 

 enveloped it and make it as clear, as serviceable, and as in- 

 dispensable to science as are "foot" or "head" or "brain," 

 or '"eye" or "muscle" or "cell" or "ovum" or "nucleus" 

 or "chromosome" or "nucleo-proteid"" 1 or "ptyalin" or any 

 other fully accredited and uneseapable biological entity. 

 Let me state the case from a slightly different angle, attach- 



