208 
Professor Mohs’s General ReJlectioJis on 
various kinds of knowledge acquired uniting in one great body ; 
so that, should a distinction of several sciences be yet introduced, 
their distinction must depend upon the bodies or subjects to 
which the sciences refer. The distinction of sciences, however, 
according to their subjects, cannot be admitted ; for it militates 
against the very idea of a science, as may easily be shewn by 
an example. If we subject a plant, or a part of a plant, to che- 
mical analysis, the result obtained is a chemical one ; and no one 
would think of denying, that the information derived from this 
result belongs to Chemistry, although it refers to a plant. The 
same also is the case if we analyse a mineral : the knowledge 
obtained belongs to Chemistry, although it refers to an object 
different from those which enter into the constitution of that 
science. Hence it appears, that it is not the subject of which 
we possess knowledge, but the kind or quality of this knowledge 
itself, that makes it part of any particular science, although it 
may refer to objects the most different, as is the case with Che- 
mistry, which comprehends information relating to animals, 
plants, and minerals. Should the chemical knowledge of plants 
and minerals be included within the limits of Botany and Mine- 
ralogy, then either Botany and Mineralogy, and, like them, every 
department of Natural History, would cease to be a particular 
science, and would coalesce with chemistry, or chemistry must 
lose its independence, and form part of Natural History. We 
are equally averse from admitting either of these alternatives, 
at least in so far as respects the mineral kingdom ; for there 
seems as little reason for the one side of the question as for the 
other. 
If Natural History, therefore, form a particular science, dif- 
ferent from History, from Chemistry, and from every other 
science, it must contain a certain kind of information, which 
cannot be referred to those sciences, on account of its not agree- 
ing with any of their respective characters. In order to ascer- 
tain the kind of information contained in Natural History, let us 
take away from it every thing belonging to other sciences, so 
that nothing may remain but what is peculiar, and that cannot 
be referred to any other department of knowledge. If nothing 
remains, then there is no Natural History, because the whole 
mass of information has been distributed under the appropriate 
heads. But this does not take place. The information which 
