126 
the solar system. What caused the haze to condense? Loss 
of heat” (that is to say of motion). So loss of motion produces 
motion, and “ the nebulae and the solar system, life included, 
stand to each other in a relation resembling that of the germ to 
the finished organism” — man is originally the product of “a 
loss of motion ” ! * * * § 
I cannot allow Tyndall to summon Kant to his aid without 
a protest, because this illustrious reasoner has in a few words 
defined a truth which scatters the whole of the Professor’s 
philosophy to the winds. 
“ The cause of the particular mode of existence of a living 
body resides in the whole.” 
What, then, becomes of “ molecular organization , )} or a power 
residing in the molecules — that is to say, in an almost infinite 
number of parts ? f 
I cannot follow out the metaphysical views of our author, 
nor do I know whether he does justice to those whom he quotes. 
To use his own expressions, “ a word-weariness has taken 
possession of my mind. I am sick of (metaphysical) philosophy 
and its verbal wastes, which lead to no issue and leave the 
intellect in an everlasting haze.” J But on one point he shall not 
find me slumbering, as he does his imaginary bishop — aware, 
perhaps, that it is not uncommon for admissions to be made 
under such circumstances. 
“ I admit,” says this imaginary bishop, “ that you can build 
crystalline forms out of this play of molecular force; that the 
diamond, amethyst, and snow-star are truly wonderful structures 
which are thus produced. I will go further, and acknowledge 
that even a tree or a flower might in this way be organized.” 
Before thus giving up the whole question, I should require a 
refutation of the above doctrine of Kant ; which, however, is so 
unquestionably the truth as to be continually reckoned upon as 
such by those who have to do with organized structures, whether 
of plants or animals. 
It would be necessary, also, that we should be certified concern- 
ing the recondite causes of the fact that the most skilful physicists, 
and the most eminent microscopists, find themselves face to face 
with§ “ phenomena; which we at present call vital, because we do 
not know any physical causes for them.” 
* Preface, p. xv. 
t See Miiller’s Elements of Physiology, vol. i. pp. 19 -26, 
t Address, p. 18. 
§ See works of Dr. Lionel Beale, passim ; and, as to plant life, “ The Action 
of the induced Current upon the intracellular Protoplasmic Circulation in 
Plants,” by Henry Pocklington, F.R.M.S., Fharm. Journal, March, 187&, 
from which I take the above quotation. 
