iil3 
basis of life. The matter of a living thing which is alive at 
the time is also a physical basis.’’ That which is alive is a 
physical basis of lifej and that which is dead is equally a 
physical basis of life. Such is the reply made to the question, 
What is the difference between living matter and the same 
matter which has ceased to live? Such is the method by 
which it is shown that the difference between the living and 
the non-living is not a difference in kind, but in degree only. 
Such is the method by which people have been misled and 
confused. It is, of course, mere idle trifling of the most 
transparent character. But few persons have taken the 
trouble to carefully examine the statements with the object of 
discovering exactly what was the meaning the author intended 
to convey. Many, perhaps the majority of readers, are 
content to catch the words, without troubling themselves to 
ascertain what meaning ought properly to be attached to 
them. Perhaps they feel much confused, and, not liking even 
to think disrespectfully of the writer, they persuade them- 
selves that the full consideration of the question is beyond 
the province as well as the capacity of busy people engaged 
in the ordinary work of life, and that, therefore, they must 
accept without inquiry the assertions, as the authoritative 
utterances of gifted spirits. 
Such views would have little chance of being received, 
or even tolerated, had ; they not been advanced at a time 
which was remarkable ; for the decline of thought, and for 
the dislike or fear of examining and analysing authoritative 
statements. 
The phrase undifferentiated protoplasm,^^ as contrasted 
with differentiated protoplasm,^^ is now often used. Children 
are asked questions about it in elementary examinations, and 
yet no exact meaning has been given by any one to the terms, 
and the sense in which the words are often used is incorrect. 
The differentiation ” of protoplasm is one of the cant 
terms of the time, and is supposed to explain a great deal, 
while it only deceives and confuses ; for instead of differentia- 
tion being an explanation of change, or the cause of change, 
as is implied, it is really only a way of stating a fact. If it 
is correct to call the undifferentiated matter protoplasm, it 
cannot be correct to call the differentiated matter by the same 
name, because the first exhibits phenomena absolutely distinct 
from any manifested by the last. 
Let us endeavour to keep clearly before our minds the para- 
mount importance of the answer given by the science of our 
time to the question, What is the difference between living 
matter and the same matter in the dead state If it can 
