But life, as we know it, makes use of the materials and the energies
which are available to it in the conditions in which it exists. The
plant organism obtains its energy from solar radiation because this
is the most abundant source of terrestrial energy. The human eye is
most susceptible to light of a particular frequency of wave-length,
but this is the radiation that is most abundant in the light of the
sun. Does this not mean that the organism has merely adapted itself
to the material and energetic conditions in which it exists? Does it
necessarily mean that because the conditions were very different life
could not exist? Protoplasm could not exist at a temperature of several
thousand degrees Centigrade, but does that mean that life, which on any
hypothesis of mechanism must be described in terms of energy, could not
exist in these conditions?
It must have had an origin, says Weismann, because it has an end.
Organic things are destroyed, inasmuch as they disintegrate into
inorganic things. Organisms die. Thus the organic process comes to
an end, and because it comes to an end it must have a beginning.
Spontaneous generation of life is thus, for Weismann, a “logical
necessity.”
Need this logical necessity exist? The argument clearly implies that
life is a reversible process. Organic things become inorganic, and
therefore inorganic things must become organic things. The first
statement is a fact of our experience, but the second one would only
be logically true if we were to postulate that the process of life,
whatever it may be, is a reversible process. But we must not postulate
this if we are to hold to a physico-chemical mechanism, for it is
a fundamental result of physical investigation that all inorganic
processes are irreversible: reversible inorganic processes are only
the limits to irreversible ones. Physical processes go only in one
way, and that organic substance is destroyed to the extent that it
becomes inorganic is a particular case of this irreversible physical
tendency. Now the mechanism of Weismann must base itself on the
concepts of physics and chemistry, and it must postulate the origin
of life from non-living substances. Why? Because life is a reversible
process, that is, it exhibits a tendency which does not exist in
inorganic processes. Clearly the logic is faulty! And must we conclude
that life has an end? Weismann himself suggests that nothing in the
results of biology indicates that physical death is a necessity: it
is rather an adaptation. The soma, or body, is the envelope of the
germ-plasm, and exposed as it is to the vicissitudes of an environment
which is always hostile, it becomes at length an unfit envelope. But
with the reproductive act the germ-plasm acquires a new soma, and it
is no longer necessary that the former one should continue to exist as
an unfit envelope. Physical death therefore occurs as an adaptation
serving for the best interests of the race. The organism need not die,
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