Ontogenetic development, says Roux, is the production of a _visible_
manifoldness. It cannot be said that this cautious description of the
developmental process has been apprehended by those who expound the
dogmas of mechanistic biology. Development is indeed the production
of a diversity, but this diversity is only a phase of a preceding
diversity, a rearrangement of spatially extended pre-existing elements.
How else could the developing embryo and its material environment be
regarded as a system of physico-chemical elements, capable of study
by the methods of experimental and mathematical physics, except by
regarding it as a system passing through phases each of which is a
necessary consequence of the preceding one, and each of which contained
the same elements separated from each other in space? Let us think
of water occupying a vessel at a high temperature and continually
cooling. The states of this system are (1) the gaseous state in
which the molecules of the water are moving at a high velocity and
are a relatively considerable distance apart, and in which they are
incessantly colliding with each other and with the walls of the vessel;
(2) the state of the system consisting of the separate phases, liquid
water and gaseous steam in contact with it; and (3) the solid phase, in
which the molecular motions almost, or quite, cease. Here the progress
of the system through its phases leads to physical diversity and then
again to physical homogeneity. But the diversity of the different
phases is in a sense an apparent one only: any single phase, or at
least those which involve the passage of the system from the gaseous
to the liquid phases, and _vice versa_, can be represented by van der
Waal’s general equation, RT = (_p_ + _a_/_v_^2) (_v_ - _b_). Does
anything in modern biological investigation, except, of course, the
speculations of non-physical physiologists, suggest that an ontogenetic
process can be represented in such a manner?
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