Irritability : $b a physiological analysis of the general effect of stimuli in living substance — John Shaqi
Irritability : $b a physiological analysis of the general effect of stimuli in living substanceVerworn, Max
Science
Irritability : $b a physiological analysis of the general effect of stimuli in living substance
Verworn, Max
Irritability
however, be induced by very different kinds of processes, namely,
by all processes which possess in common the condition that they
suddenly increase certain disintegration processes in the living
nerve substance. Indeed, the further analysis of the whole process
shows in addition that the nerve impulse as such likewise does not
form a condition for the contraction of the muscle, but it first of
all produces the necessary condition for the muscle contraction by
suddenly greatly increasing certain chemical processes, which take
place in the living substance of the resting muscle. The nerve impulse
can, therefore, also be replaced by other processes, if only these
contain the condition for an increase of disintegration of the muscle
substance, as in the case of the direct stimulation of the curarized
muscle, where the influence of nervous impulses is totally eliminated.
In a further analysis of this process we should penetrate even more
deeply into the differentiation of the individual constituent processes
and the isolating of the special conditions on which each link in the
chain is dependent.
Such an analysis then shows us the following: Every thing, every state
or process, is a complex of numerous components, of which _one_ always
conditions the other in the manner that the individual conditioning
components are themselves in their turn contained as constituents of
other complexes and are conditioned here again by other factors. These
factors in themselves as such are not directly necessary to the taking
place or existing of the special component and can, therefore, be
replaced by others. Closer observation shows that there is a constant
interdependence between all things in the world. _Every_ thing in the
world is _indirectly_ dependent upon _every other_, although often so
remotely that we are not able to trace the connection. Absolute things,
completely isolated and independent of others, _do not_ exist in the
world. In observing and studying complexes individually, we must not
forget that we only _think_ of them as isolated from the great eternal
coherence, from which they are in reality not separated. The conception
of condition, however, only then has meaning, if we refer to it in
connection with the direct dependence of one factor upon another.
Nevertheless if we understand by conditions those which are connected
by multitudinous intermediate components, then we would render the
conception of conditions useless. For if every thing in the world were
the condition for every other, the conception of relation would lose
its value in special states or processes. Should the conception of
condition have a meaning in regard to a _certain_ state or process,
then we should only look upon _that_ part of a complex upon which the
other is _directly_ dependent as a condition. When, however, we meet
with a factor for a process or state, which can apparently be replaced
by another factor, we have not carried the analysis far enough. Upon
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account