A very strange sort of machine indeed, which is the same in all its parts (Fig. 14)! [Illustration: Fig. 14.--An “Harmonious-equipotential System” of whatever kind. According to the “machine-theory” of life this system ought to possess a certain unknown very complicated machine *in its completeness*: (*a*) in its total length, and (*b*) in each of the equal volumes *v*, *v*_1, *v*_2, *v*_3 and so on, and (*c*) in each of the unequal volumes *w*, *x*, *y*, and so on, and (*d*) in every imaginable volume, no matter of what size. Therefore the “machine-theory” of life is absurd.] But we have forgotten, I see, that in our operation the absolute amount of substance taken away from the system was also left to our choice. From this feature it follows that not only all the different *V*_n, all of the same size, must possess the hypothetic machine in its completeness, but that all amounts of the values *V*_n-*n*, *n* being variable, must possess the totality of the machine also: and all values *V*_n-*n*, with their variable *n*, may again overlap each other. Here we are led to real absurdities! But what is the conclusion of our rather wild considerations? It seems to me that there is only one conclusion possible. If we are going to explain what happens in our harmonious-equipotential systems by the aid of causality based upon the constellation of single physical or chemical factors and events, there *must* be some such thing as a machine. Now the assumption of the existence of a machine proves to be absolutely absurd in the light of the experimental facts. *Therefore there can be neither any sort of a machine nor any sort of causality based upon constellation underlying the differentiation of harmonious-equipotential systems.* For a machine, typical with regard to the three chief dimensions of space, cannot remain itself if you remove parts of it or if you rearrange[64] its parts at will. [64] The pressure experiments and the dislocation experiments come into account here; for the sake of simplicity they have not been alluded to in the main line of our argument. Here we see that our long and careful study of morphogenesis has been worth while: it has afforded us a result of the very first importance. *The Autonomy of Morphogenesis Proved*