Подробнее о книге
Моя библиотека
Книги в Google Play
II. BIOGENESIS:
Harvey, and Francesco Redi.
Paradoxical position of Mr. Huxley.
(1) As a Biogenist, he holds that
"All living matter has sprung from pre-existing
living matter."
(2) As an Abiogenist, he thinks that
Life may 66
together."
some day be artificially brought
(3) He thinks this has never yet been done. But yet
(4) If he had been living in the remote Past
He should expect to have seen it done.
III. Prof. Tyndall's Fallacies
(1) The "impulse inherent in primeval man."
(2) "The possible play of molecules in a cool- ing planet."
(3) "Physical theories beyond the pale of ex- perience.'
(4) His imagining the unimaginable.
(a) The passage from physics to conscious-
ness
Is "unthinkable." And yet he says
(b) "By an intellectual necessity
I cross the boundary."
(5) He tells us of
(a) "The chasm between the two classes
of phenomena.”
(b) He declares this chasm to be
"Intellectually impassable"; and yet
(c) He proclaims his belief in
"The Continuity of Nature."
(6) The Continuity of an "impassable chasm"
(a) A chasm "intellectually impassable”;
and yet
(b) "By an intellectual necessity"
He crosses it.
IV. The Homers of Modern Materialism
Buchner, Oken, Haeckel, Huxley.
66 quandoque bonus dormitat Homerus."
CHAPTER VII.
PROTOPLASM.
Origin of the word.
The Physiological Cell Theory.
The several stages which marked the
Application of the word.
Dujardin, Von Mohl, Cohn, Remak, Max Schultze.
Prof. Huxley's employment of it to denote
"The Physical Basis of Life :
"The one kind of matter which is common to all
living beings," and
Ultimately resolvable into the same chemical con- stituents.
Ulterior Assumptions:
By which Protoplasm, From being the "basis "
Becomes the "Matter of Life."
That all organisms consist alike of the same matter
of life."
66
That this "matter of life" is due to Chemistry alone.
That all the activities of life,—
Arise solely from,—
Thought, Conscience, Will,
"The arrangement of the mo-
lecules of ordinary matter."
MATERIALISM of Mr. Huxley's doctrine.
In what sense disavowed by him.
Refuted by Dr. Stirling.
His admission, that "Most undoubtedly the terms
of his propositions are distinctly materialistic."
E.g., "The thoughts to which I am now giving
utterance, and your thoughts regarding them,
are but the expression of molecular changes in
that matter of life which is the source of our
other vital phenomena."
Mr. Huxley's doctrine, then, is “distinctly material-
istic "
But,-
IS IT TRUE?
"I know of no form of negation sufficiently explicit,
comprehensive, and emphatic, in which to reply
to this question." (Dr. Elam)
I. It is in no sense true that Protoplasm "breaks up,”
as Prof. Huxley says it does.
II. (CO2), (H2O), and (NH3) cannot, by any combination,
be brought to represent
C36H26N4O10, which is the equivalent of protein,
or protoplasm.
III. It is not true that when carbonic acid, water, and
ammonia disappear,
An "equivalent weight of the matter of life"
makes its appearance.
IV. In the two processes which Mr. Huxley regards as
identical
(i.e., the formation of water and of protoplasm)
"There is no resemblance whatever."
V. The proposition that Life is a product of Protoplasm Is demonstrably untrue.
VI. The proposition that life is a property of Protoplasm
Is equally untrue.
(Contrast between "aquosity" and "vitality.")
VII. Martinus Scriblerus Redivivus.
The " development" of meat-jacks.
VIII. The identity of Protoplasm, "living or dead,"
Assumed by Mr. Huxley.
Denied by the Germans.
Involves a whole train of Effects without a Cause.
IX. The fulcrum on which Mr. Huxley's Protoplasmic
Materialism rests
Is a single inference
From a chemical analogy.
This analogy has two references, and fails in both
of them.
The relation of the organic [protoplasm] to the inorganic [water]
Is not an analogy, but an antithesis.
The gulf between Death and Life.
X. The entire Theory
Summed up in two Propositions.
"Protoplasm is the clay of the Potter"
The bricks are the same (says Mr. Huxley)
But-
Because the clay is the same.
Is the clay the same?
Can it be identified? as Mr. Huxley affirms.
Examination of the alleged three-fold unity, Faculty, Form, Substance.
Instead of "identity" there is
"An infinite diversity."
XI. Protoplasm not convertible
As alleged by Mr. Huxley.
Functions, too, are inconvertible, and
are
Independent of mere chemical com-
position.
XII. As of the Bricks, then, so of the Clay :
It is not identical
It is not convertible
It includes-
XVII. Dogmatism of his assertions: Contrasted with Magni- tude of his admissions.
XVIII. Dr. Elam's exposure of his Chemistry.
"Professor Huxley's
Chemistry of
XIX. "Ex ore tuo."
Life' has no foundation except that
of deliberate and reiterated assertion."
"That such verbal hocus-pocus should be re-
ceived as science will one day be regarded as
evidence of the low state of intelligence in the
nineteenth century."
2. Force:
How? Where? Whence? did it Begin?
Its Nature
Its Properties
Its Powers
From what Source acquired?
"In the Beginning?"
"The Atoms eternally falling."
Why "falling?"
In an eternity "not eternal."
What Force was that which moved them? What Will was that which directed them?
Operating in a given Order: and
Controlled by "Definite Laws."
ORDER: FORCE: LAW:
How came they to Begin?
3. "Mutual Interaction :
Of the molecules of the Primitive Nebulosity" The sole and exclusive cause of "the whole world; living and not living."