401 



THE AMEBIC AN NATURALIST [Vol. XL VII 



(p. 36) ; he insists on the need, if vitalism is to be dem- 

 onstrated, of showing that a vitalistic agent is at work 

 at particular steps of the occurrences. In a general 

 theoretical paper of 1902 he says, "But such a descrip- 

 tive teleology as I have myself formerly held has noth- 

 ing to do with the assertion of real autonomy of the life 

 processes." 19 This distinction between static and dy- 

 namic theories has been maintained by Driesch ever 

 since; it is emphasized in "The Science and Philosophy 

 of the Organism" (II, p. 136, etc.), static teleological 2) 

 theories not leading to vitalism, while dynamic theories 

 do so. 



The true problem is: by what single acts does the restoration of 

 " equilibrium " take place here, especially in those cases in which it is 

 proved that enteleehy is at work, and that physicochemical diversities 

 and potentials are not able to offer a sufficient explanation of what 

 happens. 21 



Driesch answers this question by holding that a non- 

 perceptual vitalistic agent may actively intervene at cer- 

 tain steps in the processes, altering what would other- 

 wise occur. The method by which this agent operates we 

 shall take up in a moment. 



38. Now, it results from the occasional 22 active inter- 

 vention of such a non-perceptual agent that the same 

 physical combination may give sometimes one physical 

 result, sometimes another, depending upon whether, and 



1B "Zwei Beweise fur die Autonomie von Lebensvorgangen, " Separatab- 

 druck aus: Verhdlg. des V. Internat. Zool. Congress, p. 2. 



20 It is to be noted that Driesch 's vitalistic doctrines are throughout 



that determines whether a given one of these doctrines asserts "a real 



place during morphogeiu 



