April 12, 1918] 



SCIENCE 



355 



nicnt of physiology was general in its bearing, 

 to-day we find it incorporated under the med- 

 ical components of the university. Now there 

 is nothing more evident to one who takes the 

 trouble to investigate for himself than that 

 the medical school is distinctly a vocational 

 element, participating seriously in the modem 

 " Zweckmiissigkeit " or teleology which is in- 

 sinuating itself more and more into our social 

 fabric. In many ways, this is as it should be. 

 iledieine, besides being a science, or com- 

 posite of all the sciences as far as they can be 

 made to bear upon human welfare, is likewise 

 an art; and the practical aspects hold sway 

 more tenaciously in the country at large than 

 in some of our eastern medical institutions, 

 such as Johns Hopkins, so that one must not 

 judge of the spirit of medicine from a few 

 chosen, advanced institutions such as the one 

 we have mentioned. In fact, the pure science 

 leanings of Johns Hopkins and other medical 

 schools have been utilized in certain quarters 

 as destructive criticisms of these institutions 

 in their role as purveyers of medical training. 

 JEore and more the intensely practical. " fruit- 

 gathering " functions of the medical school 

 are being emphasized. 



Now all this has direct bearing upon the 

 matter in hand. We have seen that zoology, 

 typically, leaves to the medical school the 

 functional side of its work. "We have seen, 

 too, that the tjiiical aspect of the medical 

 school is teleological, the end being the pro- 

 duction of practical physicians. Consequently, 

 the physiology of the medical school is at- 

 tuned to the obtaining of results bearing di- 

 rectly upon human material. Muscle-nerve 

 preparations are paramount upon the one side, 

 metabolism studies upon the other. The zoo- 

 logical, that is the comparative, or general 

 aspects of the living thing are approached 

 casually. In the nature of the case, this must 

 be so; the problems of the medical physiologist 

 are succinct and different from those of the 

 zoologist. It is to be considered an imposition 

 for this condition of affairs to exist, for the 

 medical physiologist gains little from his as- 

 sociations with the student from the depart- 

 ment of zoology, whereas the zoologist gains 



materially from the association, yet so crowded 

 and interdigitated are the various activities 

 of the medical school that, save in a few cases, 

 it is stealing the time from the professor and 

 assistants to handle the zoological physiolo- 

 gists. Of far greater importance, however, 

 from the side of efficiency is this: The zoo- 

 logical student gains the impression that the 

 fundaments of the study of li^dng functions 

 can be gained from the presentations of the 

 medical physiologist who deals with human 

 and mammalian material. In common par- 

 lance, he is not getting his money's worth. 



Physiology, then, falls into the following 

 distinct groups: 



1. General physiology, found in such isolated 



examples as may be culled by a perusal 

 of the catalogs of our universities and 

 colleges. 



2. Botanical physiology, a part of departments 



of botany. 



3. Zoological physiology, rarely presented as 



such. 



4. Applied physiology: 



(a) Medical physiology. 



(6) Agricultural physiology, etc. 

 The statement is frequently made by applied 

 physiologists that they are presenting the sub- 

 ject in a broad way and making what is es- 

 sentially " general or biological physiology " 

 out of their work. Nothing is more evident 

 from such statements than that there is ex- 

 tant a distinct failure to grasp what is meant 

 by the terms general or biological physiology. 

 Let us take an example: One of the most suc- 

 cessful teachers and men of research in phys- 

 iology to-day presents an opening course in 

 physiology. The content of the course con- 

 sists of the familiar experiments in muscle- 

 nerve physiology, as a background; why is 

 not the muscle-nerve preparation sufficient to 

 demonstrate the essentials of contraction, ir- 

 ritability, etc., which are the fundamental 

 characteristics of protoplasm everywhere? Is 

 there anything more " general " or more " bio- 

 logical " ? The answer may be given in var- 

 ious ways, but scarcely save in the positive. 

 There are many ways of presenting more fun- 

 damental factors, for in the first place, while 



