Life and Matter: A Criticism of Professor Haeckel's "Riddle of the Universe"Lodge, Oliver, Sir
Religion
Life and Matter: A Criticism of Professor Haeckel's "Riddle of the Universe"
Lodge, Oliver, Sir
Haeckel, Ernst, 1834-1919. Welträthsel; Life -- Origin; Monism; Philosophy and religion
(_b_) That life is something outside the scheme of mechanics—outside
the categories of matter and energy; though it can nevertheless
control or direct material forces—timing them and determining
their place of application,—subject always to the laws of energy
and all other mechanical laws; supplementing or accompanying these
laws, therefore, but contradicting or traversing them no whit.
This second answer I hold to be true; but in order to admit its truth
we must recognise that force can be exerted and energy directed, by
suitable adjustment of existing energy, without any introduction of
energy from without; in other words, that the energy of operations
automatically going on in any active region of the universe—any region
where transformation and transference of energy are continuously
occurring whether life be present or not—can be guided along paths
that it would not automatically have taken, and can be directed so as
to produce effects that would not otherwise have occurred; and this
without any breakage or suspension of the laws of dynamics, and in full
correspondence with both the conservation of energy and the
conservation of momentum.
That is where I part company with Professor James Ward in the second
volume of _Naturalism and Agnosticism_; with whom nevertheless on many
broad issues I find myself in fair agreement. Those who find a real
antinomy between "mechanism and morals" must either throw overboard the
possibility of interference or guidance or willed action altogether,
which is one alternative, or must assume that the laws of Physics are
only approximate and untrustworthy, which is the other alternative—the
alternative apparently favoured by Professor James Ward. I wish to
argue that neither of these alternatives is necessary, and that there
is a third or middle course of proverbial safety: all that is necessary
is to realise and admit that the laws of Physical Science are
_incomplete_, when regarded as a formulation and philosophical summary
of the universe in general. No Laplacian calculator can be supplied
with all the data.
On a stagnant and inactive world life would admittedly be powerless: it
could only make dry bones stir in such a world if itself were a form of
energy; I do not suppose for a moment that it could be incarnated on
such a world; it is only potent where inorganic energy is mechanically
"available"—to use Lord Kelvin's term,—that is to say, is either
potentially or actually in process of transfer and transformation. In
other words, life can generate no trace of energy, it can only guide
its transmutations.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account