New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-08-22
NEW PUBLICATIONS
pIOGEN.


,,o,rv spr,r,, ALTON ON TIRE ORIGIN ANr
NATURE or LIFE ny Professor ELLIOTT N''''
boston Estes iauria| ~
This volume contains an address denVereu ooioio
che philosophical Society of Washington toge,ner
-,h nrcface introduction and appendix. The
author has undertaken to show reasonable proon-
bhty for tho existence of a vital principle when
he calls Biogen IN opposition TO the material n.y.
cothosis of modern science and philosophy lie de-
MOS the sulicicncy of the protopasm theory argn-
ing that according 90 the chcmico.physical
theory IL tprotoplasml lives only IN virtue ot ls
peculiar chemical and physical constitution IL
liyss necessarily simply because IL Is protoplasmi
hut So protoplasm Is only itself when II is living
when II IL dead It is something else therefore TINS
something else is what is Analysed, aud IN Wha'
life consists has eludcd the process" lie claims
that the physico.chcmical theory lis not on sc'eh
tiRo ground until Il explains what physical ana
1chcmical difference there Is between living anu
dead pla.son-body; for the difference must oe
physical and chemical only. since only phyS'cai
mud cbenical forces are admitted to be concerned
an its productionn The real difference between the
doad and living amIha, according 10 froioNS''
Cones ia precisely that represented by tho presence
or absence of vital force or Biogen, The ma'cr'''
,s assert that life Is The result of certain combna-
tions of matter Our author holds that lie Is INC
cause, aud not the consequence, OF orsahl|a-
tion Aud he employs lhls 'o"9Vu"s ~
support of his position: 1T hfe) GER
tainly prccedes organization and exists IN uh-
organized matter. as any scrap of living plaSsoh
demonstrates Furthermore, the highest known
grade of organizations MS the body OF man,
though never attained except through vital force
may and does exist without life, as any corpse
mutely tostIfes until decomposition or dlsorgahza-
ton sets in II life inhered in matter as the neceS
sary result of any particular composition OF matter
death would follow decomposition, ana be o'her-
wise impossible but in fact the reverse is the actu
al sequence of events"
This is very forcible argument, and it has never
ret been fairly met. The position Of the material
lists indeed is one which can only be maintained
nv excluding several very pertinent considerations,
md by prohibiting all speculation which does not
tsud 10 the glorifcation of matter. Professor
Cones appears to hold views which may
be traced far into antiquity. In one
sense his philosophy is a revival OF the ola d""d
mand hypothesis but il proceeds much farther ana
4. much more consistent with known facts Bloeeh'
IN truth az conceived by HIM, is natural force,
or world stuff" not to be confounded with spirit
II IL neither more nor less than the Akasa of the
Hindu philosophers; that subtle, all-pervsdlhg
element which corresponds most closely with the
modern conception of the lumnferous ether, though
n is credited with potenoies far exceeding those
nosscssed by the natural forces which science has
been able TO examine.
Professor Coues does not apparently hold with
that modern school which postuates single coslnl-
cal substance at one pole of which Is pure spirit
and at the other gross matter; though several IN
pepious spectators have found 1t possible TO OK
plain cosmical evolution upon such an hypothesis
and though IL must be admitted that II removes
many difficulties Biogen, however is supposed to
he simply vital principle: life, but not mind. The
latter belongs to spirit Professor Coues thinks and
while he believes IN spirit and in its control OF the
living organism, consideration of it does not neces-
sarily enter into his present argument. BIogen Is
certainly not less thnkable or less logical INFER
ence than the luminileIOus ether, and modern sell
ence has accepted the latter, though Its existence
cannot BIZ practically demonstrated.
The problem of the origin and nature of Life has
not been solved by modern science On the con-
trary, the ,athelstic aud spontaneous generation
theory has signaly broken down. 1t does not even
cxplain palpable facts much less things which are
obscure Ii required, however, some courage to
challenge boldly that scientific dogmatsmwhich mas
shown itself quite as narrow and bigoted as the
docmatisn of the old theology and Professor Coues
has in his address gone straight to the heart OF the
scientific failure aud very lucdly and ably demon
strated the uuphlosophca character of the present
scientific attitude IN regard TO this great question
His pamphlet too is very suggestive Ill other ways
and deserves to be generally read.
------------------------- ----------r-