Inanimate bodies, when placed under favourable circumstances, last
for an indefinite time, neither taking nor giving anything to the
surrounding world; organised beings, under whatever conditions they
are placed, only last for a fixed period of time, and, during this
existence, undergo every moment losses of substance which they repair
by means of materials taken from without. Inanimate bodies, even
when they assume the fixed and definite form of crystals, are formed
independently of all other bodies resembling them; they have from
their commencement fixed forms, and increase simply by superposition
of new layers. Every organised being is connected either directly or
indirectly with a similar being, in the interior of which it first
appeared in the form of a germ, then grew and acquired its definite
form by intussusception.
In other words, filiation, nutrition, birth and death, are so many
characteristics of the organised being, of which no trace is found
in inanimate bodies. I agree with Pallas in making inanimate bodies
compose the Inorganic Empire, and organised beings the Organic Empire.
I must here make an observation, the importance of which will be
easily understood.
The existence of the two groups which have been recognised by the
good sense of the general public as well as by the science of
Pallas, is a fact absolutely independent of all hypothesis. Whatever
explanation we may propose to account for the differential phenomena
which distinguish them, these phenomena will not the less exist; the
inanimate body will never be an organised being.
To attempt, under any pretext whatever, to reconcile or confound
these two kinds of objects with each other, is to go in direct
opposition to all the progress made for more than a century, and
especially during the last few years, in physics, chemistry and
physiology. It is inexplicable to me that some men, whose merits I
otherwise acknowledge, should have recently again compared crystals
to the simplest living forms, to the sarcodic organisms, as they were
called by Dujardin, who discovered them, and was the first to give a
comprehensive theory of them from minute observations. A change of
name is useless; the things remain the same, and protoplasm has the
same properties as sarcode. The animals, whose entire substance they
seem to form, have not altered their nature; whether monera or amœbæ,
these forms are the antipodes of the crystal from every point of view.
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