ON THE VITALISTIC VIEW OF NATURE. 399 



tlic laboratory, and how tlie living organism could 

 be analysed into a complex of separate apparatus or 

 machines, acting on intelligible mechanical ami i)hysical 

 principles — was a radical change of the conception of 

 vital force and tlic vital i)iinci])le. It ceased in the . „ ^o- 



' ' Innueiicc of 



opinion of many to be opposed to other non-living forces, g^r^"^"' 

 as it was with Bichat ; according to otlieis it was non- 

 existent, or at all events useless ; others again reduced 

 it to a purely regulative function, or e\'en a meie 

 idea. A popular })hilosophy founded upon the unknown 

 principle of matter, and tlic c(|ually unknown and 

 even less clear princi])le of force, pronmlgated the 

 notion that science had succeeded in banishing all 

 spiritual entities, and was able to explain everything on 

 purely mechanical principles. Vitalism and animism 21. 



^ •' ^ ^ Mechanism. 



were at an end ; there only remained mechanism and 

 materialism. It is well to note that none of the great 

 men to whom we are indebted for the real extension of 

 our knowledge of Inological phemonena favo\ucd or 

 embraced this view. The reasons which ke^tt tlunn 

 from drawing what seemed to some the inevitable con- 

 sequences of their discoveries were manifold. 



As I stated before, there are two ways of approaching 

 the problems of nature, and two interests by which our 

 researches can be guided. The one is the abstract 

 mathematical method, which begins with the sunplest 

 definable and measurable elementary processes, and tries 

 to i nutate the complicated phenomena of nature by more 

 and more intricate combinations of these elemeiitaiv pro- 

 cesses. The other is the more concrete method inspired 

 by practical interests. The mechanical, i)hysical, and 



