590 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. II. No. 44. 



SCIENCE OR POETRY. 



Editor of Science : In your issue of October 

 4th, p. 437, under the title, ' Science or Poetry" 

 there is discussed the soundness of the scientific 

 views of three Americans. Referring to one he 

 quotes from his address in Science, August 23, 

 p. 210, "It can be stated without fear of refu- 

 tation that every physiological investigation 

 shows with accumulating emphasis that the 

 manifestations of living matter are not explica- 

 ble with only the forces of dead matter, ' ' and he 

 adds, p. 438, " The assertion that this is shown 

 by every or by any physiological investigation 

 is flatly contradicted by most of the investiga- 

 tors." On p. 439 the evidence is called for. I 

 have selected from investigations on what in 

 general comes under the term Osmosis (dif- 

 fusion, absorption, transudation, etc.), a few 

 references to recent work. This branch of phys- 

 iology has been chosen for it is in this that the 

 stronghold of the mechanical physiologists may 

 be found. The questions are sharply defined 

 also and experiments may be made on precisely 

 the same object, both in the living and in the 

 dead condition. 



Heidenhain, R.: Versuche und Fragen zur 

 Lehre der Lymphbildung. Arch. f. d. ge- 

 sammte Physiolgie des Menschen u. der Thiere 

 (Pfliiger's Archiv.) Bd. 49, 1891, pp. 209-301. In 

 his conclusions he says : ' ' Da die Triebkraft 

 nicht in dem Blutdrucke liegen kann, muss die- 

 selbe ihren Urspruug aus den Capillarwanduug 

 selbst herleiten ; es handelt sich um Secretion, 

 nicht um Filtration." 



Reid, W.: Osmosis experiments with living 

 and dead membranes. Journal of Physiology, 

 Vol. XI., pp. 312-351. 



It is shown that the dead differed markedly 

 from the live membranes. With the living mem- 

 branes the osmosis is more like the secretion of 

 a gland. . 



Starling, E. A. and Tubby, A. H.: On ab- 

 sorption from and secretion into serous cavities. 

 Journal of Physiology, Vol. XVI., 1894, pp, 

 140-155. "Absorption from or secretion into 

 the pleural cavities is not a mere question of os- 

 mosis." Conclusions, p. 151. 



Chittenden, R. H.: On digestive proteolysis, 

 being the Cartwright lectures for 1894. New 

 Haven, 1895, p. IIG. "The view once held. 



that the rate of absorption from the alimentary 

 tract stands in close relation to the diffusibility 

 of the products formed, and that non-diffusible 

 substances are incapable of absorption, is no 

 longer tenable. Absorption from the intestine 

 is to be considered rather as a process involving 

 the vital activity of the epithelial cells of the in- 

 testinal mucous membrane, where chemical af- 

 finities and other like factors play an important 

 part in determining the rate and order of trans- 

 ference through the intestinal walls into the 

 blood and lymph." 



Howell, W. H.: The Physiology of Secretion. 

 The Reference Handbook of the Medical Sci- 

 ences, Vol. VI., pp. 363-379. "If the living 

 lung tissue that allowed no liquid to filter 

 through it was killed by heat or any other 

 means, filtration quickly commenced. Similar 

 results were obtained with the frog's intestines 

 and abdominal wall ; and if we were justified 

 in applying these results to the other mem- 

 branes of the body, it would be necessary to ex- 

 plain transudations by something more than 

 simple physical laws." * * * After speaking 

 of some other facts he continues : ' ' Investiga- 

 tions like this compel us to be cautious in ex- 

 plaining the simplest phenomenon of the animal 

 body by physical laws obtained by the study of 

 dead matter." 



In the experiments the structure remains the 

 same, and consequently if the results differ the 

 difference cannot be deduced from structure, 

 for the only difference, so far as can be deter- 

 mined, is that it is alive during one experiment 

 and dead at another. If it is urged that the 

 difference is still due to structure which is dif- 

 ferent in the dead membrane, then life made 

 the difference and there is no ground for dis- 

 agreement. 



In preparing the address it was supposed 

 that a moderate amount of scientific restraint 

 was exercised, and among other qualifications it 

 is stated in the paragraph preceding the one 

 quoted by the critic that, " In brief, it seems to 

 me that the present state of physical and physi- 

 ological knowledge warrants the assumption, 

 the working hypothesis, that life is a form of 

 energy different from those considered in the 

 domain of physics and chemistry. . . . It, 

 like the other forms of energy, requires a ma- 



