A Vi ta l R a ti o n a l i st

Se l e cte d Wr i ti n g s f rom

Ge o r g .t yn g u i l h e m

Edit cd b, v Fr ango is l) e lapo r t e

Tr anslat cd bv Ar t hur G oldham nr er

l vit h an int r oduct icr n bv Paul R. r binor v and

a c r it ical bib li ogr aphv bv Cam ille Lim oge s

ZON E BOOKS N E\v YOR K

1994
 (t
, i\I Contents
O 1 9 9 4L I r T o n e ,In c.
Z O N EB O O K S
6 r r B r o a d r v r y ,S u itc 6 0 8
N e * Y o r k , N Y to o tz rr
,^t \ ['
A l l r i g h t s r c s c rve d .

N o p a r t o l t h i s b o o k m a y b e r e p r o d u ce d , sto r e d in a
r e t r i c v a l s y s t e m ,o r tr a n sm itte d in a n y lb r m o r b y a ny
m e r n s , i n c l u d in g e lcctr o n ic, m e ch a n ica l,p h o to co pl -
i n g , m i c r o l i l m in g , r cco r d in g , o r o th e r u ' ise ( e xce p t
f o r t h a t c o p y i ng p e r m ittcd b y Se ctio n s r o 7 a n d r o 8 of
Editor's Notc b.vFranqoisDelaporte e
t h e U . S . C o p y r ig h t L a t| a n d e xce p t b y r e vie we r slo r
t h e p u b l i c p r e ss) with o u t wr itte n p e r m issio n fio m
lnt r oduct ion: A Vit al Rat ionalist
the Publisher. by PaulRabinow 1r

S o u r c e sf o r t h e cxce r p ts a r e liste d o n p p . 4 8 0 - 8 1 .
P,qnr ONr M Er oDor ocY
P r i n t e d i n t h e U n ite d Sta te so fAm e r ica .
I lhe Hr st or r ol 5cr ( n( e 25
D i s t r i b u t e d b y l h e M l l- Pr e ss,
II The VariousModels ar
C a m b r i d g c , M assa ch u se tts,
a n d L o n d o n . En g la n d
III The Historl of the Histor,vof Science
L i b r a r y o f C o n g r e ssCa ta lo g in g - in - Pu b lica tio nDa ta

C a n g u i l h e m . Ge o r g e s,r e o a - PARrT\\'() Epr s:l, t t o I o<; v

A v i t a l r a t io n a list: se le cte dr vr itin g s lio m Ge o r ges
C a n g u i l h e m . r ed ite d b v F r a n q o isDe la p o n e ; tr a n sla ted IV Epistemologyof Biologv oz
b v A r t h u r C o l dh a m r n e r with a n in tr o d u ctio n b r : Pa ul Epistemologvof Phvsiologv
R a b i n o s a n d r cr itica l b ib lio g r a p h vb y Cim illc L im o gcs. A BoroguePhvsiolog.t' er
p cm. An ErperimentalSciencc 7o3
I n c l u d e s b i b lio g r a p h ica lr e fe r e n ce s. 'fhe
Molor ProblentsoJ Nincteenth-Centur.r'
r s B No - 9 4 )?9 9 - 7 2 - 8
Ph.vsiolog.t' tts
r . S c i e n c e - l Iisto r v. z. Scie n ce - Ph ilo so p h y.
t . D e l a p o r t e , f ra n q o is, r 9 .1 r lr . T itlc. VI Ilpistemologvol N{cclicine
Qr) t.cl4 The Linits of Healinll ns
'991
9 l- 86rI 7hc Nev,Situationol lletlicinc 13:
A lledical Revolution ras
P aer llr t r er H ts ro n Y

VII C el l fh c o ry re r
V lll T h e C o n ce p t o f R c fl e x 179
lX l j ec ts 2 0 3
B i o J o g i c aOb

P,\RT FouR IN I F RF RET A r r o NS

X Ren6 Descartes zrg

XI AugusteComte 237
X ll C l a u d eBe rn a rc l z o r

P,url Frvr P n o n r r l rs Translotor's Note

Thc texts collected here are translatedfrorn thc French fbr thc
XIII Knorvledgeand the Living from
first tirne, but for trvo exceptions:I haveincluded passages
and LiJe zet
Science ml translationofGcorges Canguilhem'sIdeoloo.v
and Rationality
The ConccptoJ l.iJe zoz (Cambrirlge,N{Ar NllT Press,1988) and from Carolvn Farvcett's
XIV The Norm.rl .rnd the Pathological 321
(Ncu York: Zonc
transfationof The Normo]on<l the Pathological
lnrrodttctionto theProhlcm szr
B ooks, 1989) .
The ldcntitv ol the Two Statcs tzt
I mpI ications antl Counterposi
t ions
XV Normalitv and Normativitv esr

Critical Bibfiographt b.yCanille Linoges 3 A s

N( ) tcs t5 5
 Editor's Note

Frangois Dclaporte

The texts collccted in this volumc introduce English-language

readersto an especiallvdifficult and complex dimcnsionofGeorge
Canguilhem'srvork, namcly his philosophv of biology and merli-
cine. Its primary purpose, then, is to chart the main themes of
Canguilhem'sthought, l\hich is distinguishedby minute atten-
tion to developmentsin biology and medicinc over the past fifty
vears.To achievethis end, importance lvasgivcn to questionsof
methodology in the historv of science.This in itself u'as neces-
is not scicntific dis-
sarybecausethe ob.tectof historicalcliscourse
course as such but the historicitv of scientific discourseinsofar
as it representsthe implementation of an epistemologicalproj-
e.ct(prcjetde savoir\.If the historv of science is the history of a
discourscsubiect to the norm ofcritical rectification, thcn it is
clearlv a branch of epistemologv.Canguilhcmrecogniresthat thc
disciplinesrvhosehistorv he rvritcsgive the appearanccof a gen-
esis,that is, a processopposedto the divcrsityof the variousfbrms
of pseudo-sciencc.This, in f)ct, is the sourcc of his interest in
cpi stcmol ogicalbr eaks.St udvingt he hist or v of an act ivit v it self
defined by its ref'erenceto truth asan cpistcmologicalvalueforces
one to focus attention on both thc failurcs and successes
of that
acti vi ty. fa king a m acr oscopicrvic* ol t he hist or v ol science,
Cangr - r ilhem u n d c rto o k to s tu d v th e e m c rgenceofthrcc rl i sci -
plines:biologv. physiologvanrl medicinc. l)epenclingon the sub-
jec t ol s t udr . C a rrg ri l h c m rl i l l s o me ti m e sp l ovi de a hi storl of
theorv. s()mctimcsa history ofconcepts antl sometimcsa historv
r r l biologic al o b j e c ts . Bu t th c o b j e c ti v e i s a l vravsthc same; to
describeho* ideologv and scicnce Jre at once internvincd and
separatc.Furthcr, his studicsof Ren(: I)escartes,AugusteComte
and Claude B e rn a rccl l e a rl v r< te a l rv h y ,a s L t rui sA l thusseronce
put it, Canguilhemis consideredonc ofthe bcst "tcachersofho*.
to rer(l *'orks ol phi)osr4rhr'
.rndscit nce." The readcr.x e assunre,
* ill not be surprisedthat the prcsent rvork cnds * ith a sericsof
general questiolls conccrning the relation ol knowledgc to Jife
and ol the normal to the pathologic.rl.Canguilhem bcgan r. ith
error aDdon that basisposed the philosophic.rlproblcm ol tr.uth
and lii! . F or Nl i c h e l F o u c a u l t,th i s a p p ro a c hc()nsri ruted" onc of
the crucial eventsin thc historv of modern philosophv."
Introduction: A Vital Rationalist
Prul R,rbinorv
GeorgesCaDguilhem$'is bor n in Cast eln. r udarin
v sout hr vcst -
ern Fran ceon Junc 4, 1t ) 0, 1.Alt hough his f at her r , vas. r t ailor ,
C angui l hem likes t o r ef er t o hir nsr : lf , not r vit hout a cer t ain
trvi nkl e in his eve, as bcing of pcasantst ir ck, r oot cd in t hc har -
moni ous ,cvclical lif 'eof t he soil and t he seasons,
his scnsibilit ics
I6nrrcd bl the I'tarlr rorintl ol the lruit trecs.The storv ol his sen-
tinrental erlucationis a classicone. High rnarkson nationalcxam-
i nati onss ent him on a iour nev t o Par ist o st udv; once t her er hc
,
lvasa grearsuccess. Aftcr complcting his studiesat the prestigious
lrc6e Henri IV he cntered thc most elitc educationalinstitution
i n France,t he Ecole Nor m ale Super ieut e,in 1924.Anr ong his
promotion,his cohort, rvcrelean-PaulSartrc,R.almondAron and
('nteredthc [:co]ea vcrr larcr.
Paul Nizan; l\{auriceN{erlcau-PoDt\r
Alr.eadyat this tin1c, Canguilhem $as interestc(lin thenrcsthat
hc rroul d r ct ur n r o and de*elop r hr oughouthis int ellcct uallif e:
i n parti cular ,a p. r peron August eCom t e's t hcor r of or der and
progrcss ,u hich Canguilhemst r bm it t edf br a diplom a, displavs
rhc begi n nings( ) l t his per sist cntint er estin t he r elat ion ol r ea-
son and socict \ ' * an int er cst he shar cd wit h his ot her dist in-
gui shtd c lassm at es
but \ i hich Canguilhcnrdevel, r pedin a highlr
originalmanner.The philosopherAlain'sjudgmenroi Canguilhem
 in 1924as " liv e l v , re s o l u tca n d c o n te n t" s ti l l capturesthe man' s
spirit almost three-quartersof a century Iatt'r.l
O nc e he b e c a n rea g ri g d i n p h i l o s o p h v i n 1927, the young
Canguilhem beganhis tenching tour crfprovincial lyc6es,as wirt
requircd ofall Ecole Normalegraduatesin rcpaymentto the stare
t br t heir c dqc a ti o n , l l i s i n i ti a l p e re g ri n a tionsended i n 1935 i n
T oulous e, wh e rc h e ta u g h t a t th e l y c 6 e , r vhi l e begi nni ng hi s
m edic al t r ain i n g . In 1 9 + 0 ,h e rc s i g n e dfro m hi s teachi ngpost,
because.as ht' rvrotc thc Rector of the Acad6mie de Tirulouse,
he hadn't becomc an agregdin philosophy in ordet to preachthe
doc t r ine of t h c Vi c h v re g i m e .2H e to o k a d vantageof hi s new l v
lbund fiee time to complete his medical studies, prophcticallv,
in both a philosophic and political sense,C.rnguilhemreplacerl
.feanCavaillis, the philosopher of mathematics - he had been
callerl to the Sorbonne- at the [.lniversityol Strasbourg,rvhich
relocated to Clernront-Ferrand in 1941, when Strasbourgrl,as
annex edbl t h e R e i c h . H e p a rti c i p a te d i n r he fi rrmati r_rn
ofan
rmportant resistancegroup to rl hich he made availablehis skills.
A ll in all, a life i n th c c c n tu rv , a s th e F re nchsay:l i ke so manl
of his compatriots,Canguilhem'slifc vvasshapedby the conjunc-
ture of France'senduring institutions and the contingent evenrs
ol his t im e.
In 1943,Cangrrilhemdefendedhis rledical rhesis,,,Essais sur
<luelquesprobldmcs concernanr lc normal et le pathologique.,'
The continued timelinessand exceptionaldurabilitl.ofthis u<rrli
is attcsted to by the lact that he updated it t\!,entv years later
rlith significant ncrv rc{lcctions, and that ir rvasrranslatedint<r
English clecarleslater as lie Normal and the patholog;cal,t After
thc rvar,he resumedhis posr lt rhe Llniversityof Strasbourg(in
Strasbourg), hc remained until 1948. After lirst refusing
'r,herc
the inlpoltrnt admini51r.11lys port of inipccteur gdneral de phi-
los ophieat t he L i b e ra ti o n , h e fi n a l l y a c c e p tcdi t i n 194g,and
servedunt il 1955, *'hen he accept edt hc Chair of Hist or v and
P hi l osophyof Sciencesat t he Sor bonneand succeededG ast on
Bachelardasdirector of the Institut d'histoirc des sciencesct des
techni ques.I I is r eput at ion as a f er ociousexam iner livt 's on in
Paristoday, as docs a deep rvell of affection for thc intellectual
and institutional support he providcd over the decrdes.a
History ond Philosophy of Science
Louis Althusser paid Canguilhem a complinrent rvhen he com-
parcd him ( as r vell as Cavaillt s, 'Bachelar d,
Julcs Vuillem in and
,\'lichel Fouc.rult)to an anthropologist who !oes jnto the field
armed lvith "a scrupulousrespectfor the realitv ofrcal science."5
The compar isonis r e"ealing if not r ; uit e an accur at cdescr ipt ion
of Canguilhem'snlethod, More strictlv ethnographicstudies of
l aborato r y lif e, like t hosc of Br uno Lat our , u'ould com e lat er
and rvould aim not merely at corrccting a positivist and idealist
underst andingof scienceas a singJeunif lcd act ivit r achievinga
cumulative understandingof nature, but also at dismantling the
verf idea ofscience - a position as far liom Canguilhcm'sas one
could imagine. Nonetheless,Althusscr'sstatcment capturesthe
mole, first initiatcd by' Bache]ard,anay from the static univer-
sal i sm th at t he Fr ench univer sit y svst emhad enshr ined in it s
rationalistand idealistapproachcsto science.For Bachclard,phi,
losophy'sne\4,role was to analyzethe historical developmentof
trtrth-pr oducingpr acr iccs.The philosophv of science bccam e
the study of regionalepistemologies,the historical reflection on
the elaborati<rnoftheories and conceptsbv practicingscientisrs,
physicists,chemists,pathologists,anatomistsand so on. Thc aim
\r'asnot to.rttack sciencc but to shor,tit in action in irs speci-
flcity and plrrralitv.
Canguilhemis clear an<laclrmantthat evcn though philosopirv
had lost its sovcreigntvand its autonr)my,it still had important
rl
 \ 1or k t o ac c o rrl p l i s hL. tn l i l < eth e ta s ko l th c sci cnti st,thc cpi ste-
mologist'sproblem is t() esrablish"the ordcr of conceptualprog-
ressthat is onlv rlitr thc fact and of rvhich thc prcscnt
'isible
notion ofscicntjJic truth is thc provisionalpoint of crrlmination."6
Truths arc fbund in the practiccsofscience; philosophyanalvzes
t he plur alit y o f th e s c tru th s , th e i r h i s to ri ci ty,and consequentl y
their provisionalitv,u hile aflirming - not legislating,asthe oldcr
Frcnch philosophv of sciencesought to clo - their normativit)r.
Epistcmology is a rigorous description of the proccssby which
t r ut h is elabo ra te d ,n o t a l i s t o f fi n a l re s ul ts.A l thusser' senco-
mium takesfor granted ttrit sciencccxists and holds a privileged
status,but Canguilhem,like FoucaultanclPicrre Bourdieu, never
doubted this: "To take as onr"s object of inquirv norhing other
than sources,invcntions,inlluenccs,priorities,sintultaneities,and
successionsis at bottcrm ro fail to distinquish betu'cen sciencc
and ot her as p c c tso l c u l tu re ." l T h i s a s s u nrpti on- Latour has
c alled it t hc k e v s l mb o l o f F re n c hp h i l o s o phyand hi storv of sci -
t nc e - is t ht ' c o rn e rs t()n (o l th e rv h o l c a rc hi recturcofthe house
of r c as oninha b j te db r C a n g u i l h e m.iSc i c n c e,l or C angtri l hem,i s
" a dis c our s ev e ri fj t' rli n .r d e l i m i te d s e c to r o f experi encc." eS ci -
ence is an explor.rtiorroftlre norm ofrationality at uork. But just
as lir m as r he b c l i e l i D s c i c n c ei s rh e b e l i e f i n i ts hi stori ci tv and
its pluralitv. There arc only divt'rsescienccsat rvork at particu-
lar historica]moments:phvsicsis not biology; eighteenth-centurv
natural historv is not trventieth-centur.t- genetics.
'fhus, fbr Canguilhem,
"thc historv of scicnceis the historv of
an object - discourse- that l'' a history and las a historv,rvhereas
s c ienc cis t he s c i e n c eo Ia n o b .j c c tth a t i s n ota hi storv,that has
no historv."lilSciencc,thrcrughits usc ofmethod, divirlcs nature
int o objec t s . T h e s c o b j e c ts .rre s e c c tn d a rv,
i n a sensc,but not
derivative;one coul<lsa\ that thel.arc both constructed and dis-
covcred. The historr <rfscience pcrlbrnrs a similar sct of opera-
r+
ti ons on scient if ic olr jcct s.Thc obj( ct of hist or icaldiscour seis
" thc hist or icit v of scient if ic discour sc,in so m uch ns t hat his-
tory effectuatesa projcct guided bv its orvn intcrnal norms but
travcrsedby accident s int er r upt ed bv cr iscs, t hat is t o sa1b1
moments ofjudgmcnt and truth."ll These trtrths are alwavscon-
testableand in proccss,as it were, but no less"real" on account
of thei r cont ingencl. The hist or v of scit 'nceis not nat ur al his-
tory: it docs not identify the sciencewith thc scicntist, the sci-
enti stswit h t heir biogr aphies,or sciencesr vit h t heir r esult r , nor
the resultsrvith their currcnt pedagogicaluse. fhe epistemolog-
ical and historical claims assumeclbv this notion of thc historv
of sciencearc magisterialand run countcr to t'nuchol contem-
porarv doro in the social studics o[ 5cien(e. The texts gathcred
i n thi s v olum e pr or ide t he cvidcnce f or Cr nguilhem 'sposit ion.
FrangoisDclaportc hasarrangedthem in a conccPttl,11 and peda-
gogi c.rlf ashionu- it h such clar it - , t-hat ic t ould bc lr t r ir lessand
i nappropr iar et o bur dcn t hem r vit h ext endedcont nr cnt ar v.ln-
deed, thev pr ovide a kind of coht - r ent"boo) . , " r lhich, cxccpt
l br hi s seconddoct or al disser t at ion, rCanguilhem
l him sell'never
w rote; he pr eler r ed,af t er 1t ) 4l, t ht ' ess. r rlor m cr am m cd r vit h
prcci se, alm ost aphor ist ic, sent eDcer ,t 'Danv! r 'it h t he clensit v
of krypt onit e.
The Normal ond the Pathologicol
A l though Canguilhempublishedin t he lat e 1930sa philosophi-
caf treatise on ethics and epistemologv, froitd de lol1iqueet de
morale,intcndedasan unconventionaltextbook fbr advancedlvc6e
studcnts, thc *'ork fbr rvhich he is hest Lnotvn starts vvith lris
medical thesisivhere he invcstigatcsthc verv tlefinition of thc
a nr aiorr ever sal
normal and t he pat hological.This nor k signalc<l
i n thi nk ing about hcalt h, Pr cviouslr ,m eclicalt r . r iningin Fr anct :
h.rd privilcged t he nor m al; ( liseaseor m alt unct ion \ 1t s under -
r5
stood as the dcviation from a fixed norm, which rvastaken to be
a constant.Medical practicc rvasclirectedtorvardestablishingsci-
entifically thesc norms and, practice fbllorving theory, torvard
r et ur ning t he p a ti e n t to h e a l th , re e s ta b l i s hi ngthe norm l rom
rvhich the patient had strayed.
As FrangoisDagognet,the philosopherof biologr',hascrisplv
observed,Canguilhemlauncheda f'rontalattack on "that edifice
of normalization"so essentialto thc proceduresof a positivistsci-
ence anrl medicine.1l He did so bv re-posingthe question of the
organismas a Iiving being that is in no prcestablishe(lharmony
with its environment.It is suffering,not normativemeasurements
and standarddeviations,that establishesthe stateoI disease.Nor-
mativitv beginswith the living being, and with that being comes
diversitv.Each patient rvhom a doctor treats presentsa different
caseieachcasedisplavsits or"n particularity.One of Canguilhem's
famousaphorismsdrives this point home: "An anomaly is not an
abnor r nalit y .D i v e rs i tv d o e s n o t s i g n i fy s i c k ncss."W i th l i vi ng
bc inqs ,nor nr al i tyi s a n a c ti v i tv .n o t a s te a < l sv tate,The resul t, i f
one lbllor v sCa n g u i l h e m' sre a s o n i n g ,i s th a t " a nunrbrr, even a
constantnumber, translatesa stvle, habits,a civjlization, cven the
under ly ingv it a l i ty o f l i l ' e ." 1 1T h e re c e n t d i s coven rhat huntan
bodv tempcraturehasa much rvider rangeof normalitl than rras
previouslyassumeddemonstratesthis point. Normalitv - and this
is one of Canguilhem'sconstant themes - means the abilitr to
adapt to changing circumstances,to variableand varying envi-
ronments. Illness is a reduction to constants,the yerv norms bv
rvhich we measureourselvesas normal, Normality equalsacti\'-
ity and flexibility. Hence thcrc is no purely oblective pathology;
rather, the basic unit is a living being that exists in shifting rela-
tions with a changingenvironment.Arguing for a clramaticrever-
sal, Canguilhemmaintained that illnessultimatcly is defined bv
the vcrv terms that had defincd health, namely stable norms,
l6
unchang ingvalues. l5Lif e is not st asis,a f ixed sct of nat ur alJau, s,
set in advanceand the samefbr all, to rvhich onc must adherein
order to survive. Rather, life is action, mobility and pathos,the
constantbut only partiallysucccssfirleffort to resistdeath, to use
B i chat' sf am ousdef init ion: "Lif e is t hc collect ion of f inct ions
th.rt resistdeath."
Canguilhem's*-ork hasbeen a consistentand disciplined his-
torical demonstration,a laving-outof the consequences,
of these
pri nci pl cs. Lil! has it s specif icit v:"Lif e, what evcrf br m it m ay
rake,involvesseltlpreservation by meansof sclf-regulation."l6 This
specilicitv can - in lict, must- be elaboratcdperpetuallv,but it
can never be evadcd.C. r nguilhem 'spunct uat e,hist or ical essays
are not a philosophvot lit e, like t hose of HansJonasor M aur ice
i\lerleau-Pontv,rvhich scck to fix an understandingof li[e rvith
a si ngl e s et of concept s. Rat her , C. r nquilhem 'st ight ly r vr it t en
di d.rcti cl b r avsdisplavhor v t ht 'lif e sciences,includinq t he t hcr -
apeuti ci )ne1,havesir nult aneouslv elabor at edconcept sof lile and
the waystheseconceptsmust be seenasan integratedpart o[the
phenome nonunder st udv: lif e and it s nor m sl ''l
Although he has been carelll ncit to turn these cxplorations
i nto a pan cgvr icof vit alism ,Canguilhemdem onst r at est hc con-
stant presenceof evaluativenotions like "prescrvation,""regula-
tion," "adaptation"and"normality," in both everydavandscientific
approachest o liI e. "lt is lif e it sclf , and not m edical judgm ent ,
that makesthe biological normala concept of valueand not a con-
cepr ofsrarisricalreality."lt Humanity'sspecilicitv lies not in the
fact that it is separatefrom thc rest of naturc but, rather, in the
licr that it hascrcated svstematicknou,ledgeand tools to help it
cope. This testing, parrying rvith pathologr.,rhis active relation
to the enyironment, this normative mobilitv and projective abil-
it!, humanitv'sconceptualcareer,is central to its health. "Bcing
healthymeansbeing not onlv normal in a given situation but also
normativc in this and othcr evcntual situations.What character-
iz es hc alt h is th c p o s s i b i l i ty o f tra n s c e n d i ngthe norm, rvhi ch
dellnes the momentarv normal, thc possibility of tolerating in-
fractionsof the habitual norm and instituting ncw norms in nerv
siruations."r8t ifc is an activitv that fbllorvsa norm. But hcalth is
not heing nor m.rl ;h e a l th i s b e i n g n ,' rm a ti re
In gcneral, reflectionson the relationshipsbetteen concepts
and Iif'e require clarification ofthe fact that at least trvo distinct
orders are bcing investigated.First, there is life as fbrm, life as
tlre "univcrsal organization of mattcr" (le vivantl, and second,
tlrere is life as the experienceof a singular living being rvho is
consciousof his or her lifc (1evLu). By "life" - in French - one
could mcan either 1evivant,the presentparticiPleof the verb "to
livd' (r,n're),or thc past participle ./erecu.Canguilhcmis unequiv-
ocal on this point: the first level o{ life, form, controls thc sec-
ond, cxpcrience.Although it is only the first level, the powcr ancl
dimensionsof life, rvhich constitutesthe explicit sub-
for-rn-giving
ject mattcr of his u'ork, the presenceof the sccontl is fiequentlv
filt nonetheless.re For all its declarativeclaritv, the claim of pri-
ority only thinly masksthe kecn a*arenessof suffcringand search-
ing - in a rvord, pathos - rvhich is the expericntial double, the
c ons t antc om p a n i o n , o f C a n g u i l h e m' si n s i stentconceP tual i sm.
Thc pathosof cxistenceis alrva,rsclose at hand for this phvsician
cum philosophercum pedagogue.
In fact, a not-so-latentexistcntialism,albeit ol a distinctive
and idiosvncraticsort, shadowsCanguilhem'sconccption ofmed-
icine. ( )ne easilvhearsechocsof Sartreand Merleau-Pontv'searlv
themes,transposedto a diffcrcnt registerand played rvith a dis-
tincti'e llair. Canguilhem'svariantsof "to freedom condemncrl"
and "thc structurc ofcomportment" arc composeclin a diflerent
kev. His individual is condemnedto adaptto an environmcnt and
affin-
to act using conccptsand tools that haveno preestablishec]
r8
ities r" ith his surrotrndingu,orld. "Lif'e becomesa rvilv, supple
intelligence of the rvorld, v'hile reason,for its part, cmergcsas
somethingmorc vital: it finally developsa logic that is more than
a mere logic ol identity."20Reasonand life are intcrtu,incd, not
opposed,but neither legislatcsthc othcr,
A New U nderstonding of Life: Error
It hasbecome a commonplaceto saythat Canguilhem'srecogni-
tion bv an English-speak ing public, bcvond a fcrv specialistsin
the history of thc lifc sciences,fbllorvs in the q'ake of the suc-
cessofo ne of his f avor it est udent sand f iiends,M ichcl Foucault .
While not exactlv false,such an appreciationremainsinsuflicient
unless rve also ask rvhat it rvas in Canguilhem'slvork u'hich so
intercstcd Foucault. And, even further, are these problems the
most pertinent lor an American auclience?panguilhem'srvork, it
is rvorth underlining, is relevantfirr diversert'asols.The qucstion
to be askedthen is, Why read him todav?Thc ansrverlics par-
tiallv in anothcr frequent commonplace.Canguilhem'spredeces-
sor, Bachelard,inventeda method fbr a ne*.historv of the "hard
sci ences"of chem ist r v, phvsicsand m at hem at ics;his st udent ,
Foucault,worked on the "dubious sciences"ol Man; Canguilhem
hi msel f h asspcnt his lif c t r acing t he linim ent sof a hist or y of t he
conceptsofthe sciencesof life. l-et us suggestthat today it is thc
biosciences- rvith a rencrvcd claboration of such conccpts of
norms and life, dcath and information - that hold center stage
in the scientific and social arena;hcncc the rencrvctirclcvance
ol GeorgesCanguilhem.
In his 1966essay"Le Concept et la vie," Canguilhemanalvzecl
the contemporaryrevolution under rvavin geneticsanclmolecu-
lar biologv. The essay,a historical tour de lbrce, traces the con-
cept of lilc as form (and cxperience)as rvell as knorvleclgeof that
[or-n, fiom Aristotle to thc present.Canguilhemdemonstratesthe
continuitv of problematiTationand the discontinuitv of ansllcrs
in t he his t or y o fth c c o n c e p t o fl i fe . T h i s h i stori calreconstruc-
tion providesthe groundrvorkfor an analvsisofour contemporary
conceptualizationof life, Canguilhem framcsJamesD, Watson
and FrancisCrick's discovervof the structureof the double helix
as an information svstemrone in which the codc and the (cellu-
lar) milir:u arc in constant interaction. There is no simple, uni-
directional causalrelation between genetic infbrmation and its
ef'fccts.The ne* understandingoflifc Iies not in the structuring
of matter and the regulation of functions, but in a shift of scale
and location - fiom mechanicsto infbrmation and communica-
tion theory.2rIn an important sense,the new understandingoflife
as information rejoins Aristotle insofaras it posits life as a logos
"inscribed, converted and transmitted" u,ithin living matter.22
Hou,evcr,rve havecome a long way since Aristotle. Thc telos of
lifc most commonly proposedtoday is more an ethological one,
s eeing behav i o r a s d e te rm i n e d a n d h u mans more as ani mal s,
than a contemplative one that assignsa special place to reflec-
tion and uncertainty.From sociobiologiststo manv advocatesof
the Human Genomc Project, the code is the central dogma.
Canguilhemrejectsthis telos.lf homosapiensis as tightll pro-
grammedasthe ethologists (or many molecularbiologists)think,
then hot', Canguilhcm asks,can rve explain error, the history of
errors and thr: history of our victories over error? Genetic crrors
are nou'understood as informational errors. Among such errors,
hou'ever,a large number arise from a maladaption to a milieu.
Oncc again hc rcintroduces the theme of normality as situated
ac t ion, not a s a p rc g i v c n c o n d i ti o n . Ma n ki nd makes mi stakes
uhen it placesitself in the rvrong place, in the rvrong relation-
ship rvith the environment, in the vvrong place to receive the
infbrmationneededto survive,to act, to flourish,We must move,
crr, adapt to sunive. This condition of "crring or drifting" is not
merely accidental or external to life but its Iundamentallorm.
Knou.ledge,following this understandingof life, is "an anxious
r;uest" (une rechercheinquiite) fcrr thc right infbrmation. That
information is only partially to be fbund in the genes.Whv and
how the genetic code is activated and functions, and what the
resultsare,are questionsthat can bc adequatclyposedor anslvered
onlv in the context ol life, le vivant,andcx perience,1eldcu,
Conclusion
Michel Foucault, in an essaydedicated to Canguilhem,"La Vic,
I' exp6ri enceet la science, " char act er izeda division in Fr cnch
thought betu.eensubject-orientedapproaches,u'hich emphasize
meaning and experience,and those philosophiesllhich take as
their object knorvledge,rationality and concepts.2lThe rhetori-
cal efl'ect*,as marvelous.While everyonehad heardof Sartreand
Merleau-Ponty,f'ewpeople bevonda small circle of spccialistshad
actuallv read the u,ork of Cavailldson the philosophyof set thc-
orv in mathematicsor Canguilhem on the historv of the reflex
arc.li The irony rvasmade more tantalizing by al)usionsto the
activitiesin thc resistanceof one side
unflinching and high-stakes
of the pair (Cavailldswas killcd by the Nazis after forming the
rcsi stancenet wor k t hat Canguilhem. joined) ,while t he ot her s
livecl in Paris, n'riting pamphlets. Foucault u'as rcvealing to us
a hi dden r elat ionshipof t r ut h and polit ics, indicat ing anot hcr
type of intellectual, one lbr whom totality and authenticitv bore
different forms and norms. Hou,ever,there is a ccrtain insi(ler's
humor involved;twenty vearsearlier,Canguilhemhad employcd
the samcdistinctions,applvingthem to Cavaillisduring the 1930s
lhile mocking thosc who deduced that a philosophv u'ithout a
subject must lead to passivityand inaction. Cavaillis, u'ho had
madc thc philosophicjour ncv t o G cr m anydur ing t he 1930sand
*.arnedearlvon ofthe dangersbrervingthcrc, did not, Canguilhem
 tells us, hesitateu-hen the rvar finallv camc.2tRather than lr.rit-
Panr ONr
ing a nroral trcarisc to ground his actions, he .joincd thc rcsis-
tance \vhile finishing his rvork on logic as best he could_ Truth
and polit ic s w c re d i s ti n c t d o m a i n sfb r th e sethi nkersofthc con-
c c pt ; or ) c $ a s e th i c a l l r o b l i q e d ro n c t i n br)th dorraj ns u,hj l c
M e th o d o l o g y
ncver losing sight of rhe specificity of cach. Cavaillds'sexamplc
of rigorousthought and principlcd action, while still compclling
todav (espccirllygiventhc misunderstanding and moralizingabout
French thought rampant acrossthe Rhine, thc Channel and the
A t lant ic ) , r i o u l d s e e mro d e n ra n da re n ervcdconceptual i zati on.
The riseand cphenreralglory of structuralismand Althusserianism
havesho'r'n rhat rcnror.ingth< humanisrsubject in rhc social sci,
cncesby itself guaranteosncithcr an epistemoJogicaljump from
ideologv to sciencenor more elfictive political action (anv more
t hnn r eins e rti n ga q u a s i -tra n s c e n d c n ta
s ul bj ectrvi l l provi de such
guarantees).While Canguilhem'svrork enablesone to think and
r f t hink s uc h p ro b l e ms , i t o b v i o u s l y d o cs not ofl i ,r an,-readr_
madeans.wers lbr the ftrture.Dcplovingreadvmadesolutionsfronr
the past, r,hen historl hasnrovcdon, conceptschanged,milieus
alt c r ed, r v o u l d , C a n g u i l h e m h a s ta u g h t u s, c()nstj tutea mai or
crror - an crror nratcheclin its gral ity onlv bv thosc sceking to
annul his t or v .b l u r c o n c c p tsa n d h o mo g e ni zeenvi ronmenrs,Li v_
ing beingsarc capablcof correctingrheir errors,and Canguilhem.s
u ork oflirs us tools to begin, once agar'n,the processofdoing so.
 CHapr r n C) Ne

The Hist or y of Science

The Object of Historical Discourse

[1 ] W he n one speaksof t he "science of cr vst als, "t he r elat ion
bctwccn scienceand crystalsis not a genitive,asvvhen one speaks
of the "mother of a kitten." The scienceof cr,vstals
is a discourse
on the nature ofcrystal, the nature ofcrvstal being nothing other
than its identity: a mincral asopposcdto an animal or vegetable,
and independcntof an,r'useto u,hich one may put it. When crvs-
crystaloptics and inorganicchemistrvare constituted
talJography,
as sciences,the "nature of crvstal" just is thc contcnt of the sci-
enceofcrystals,bv which I meanan objectivediscourseconsisting
ofcertain propositionsthat ariseout ofa particularLind oIrvork.
That w or k, t he r vor k of science,includes t he f br m ulat ion and
testing ofhypotheses,which, once tested, are forgotten in favor
of their rcsults.
When H6ldne Metzger wrote Ld Geniscde la scicncedesctistaux,
she composeda discourscabout discourscson thc nature of crvs-
tal.l But thesediscoursesu.crc not originallv the sameas rvhat u,e
nou'takc to bc the correct discourseabout crystals,thc discourse
that defines rvhat "crvstals" are as an object of science. Thus,
the historv of sciencc is the history of an object - discoursc-
that ir a historv and fiosa historv, rlhereasscienceis the science

2t
ol'an objecr rhit is rt()t.rhisrorv,that hasno historv'
T he objc c t " c rv s ta l " i s a g i v e n . Ev c n i f th e s ci enceofcrystal s
must take the historr',r1the earth and the historv of mincrals into
ac c ount ,t hat his to n ' s ti n re i s i ts e l fa g i v e n . Because" crvstal " i s
in somc scnseindcpenrJcntof thc scientific discourscthat seeks
to obtain knou ledge atrout it, we call it a "natural" object.2 Of
course, this natural object, cxternal to discourse,is not a scien-
tilic oblcct. Naturc is not t1ivento us asa set ofdiscrcte scientific
objccts and phcnomena.l.Science constitutcsits obiects bv invent-
i ng a m et hod of fo rm u l a ti n g , th ro u g h p ro p o s i ti onscapabl eof
being combined intcgrallv.i theory controlled by a concern rvith
constitutcd as soon as
proving itself * rong, Crystallography\'\,as
the crystallinespeciescould I'e defined in tcrms of constancyof
fice anglcs,srstemsol symmetrr. and regular truncation ofvcr-
ti c es . " T he es s rn ti a lp o i n t," R e n (' J u s tH a i i v \\,ri tcs," i s that the
theon and cnstalliTationrrltinratclrcome togetherand find com-
m on gr or r nd. "l
T hc objc c t of th e h i s to rv o f s c i c n c c h a sn o thi ng i n contmon
$it h t he objec t o fs c i c n c r.' [h e s c i e n ti fi co b j cct, consti tutedbv
mcthodicalrliscourse.is secondaqto, althoughnot clerivedfrom,
the init ial nat ur a lo b j e c t, rv h i c h mi g h t rv e l l b e cal l ed(i n a dcl i b-
cratc plal on lr.or<ls)tlre pre-text. The historr,ofscicnce applies
itself to these sec.rndary.nonnatural, cultural objectsl but it is
not derived liom them dny more than thcv are derived fiom nat-
ural objects. The object oI historical discourscis, in ef]ect, the
historicitv ol scientific cliscourse.Bv "historicitv ofscientiflc dis-
course" I mean the progressofthe discursiveproject asmeasurcd
againstits orvn intcrnal norm. 'lhis progrcssma\i moreover,meet
rvith accidents,be delavedor diverted bv obstacles,or be intcr-
rupt ed by c r is c s ,th a t i s , l n o mc n tso fj trd g mc n t and truth.
T he his t or v o l s c i c n c c w .ts b o rn a s a l i tc r art' genre i n the
eight c c nt h c ent u rv . I l i n d th a t i n s u ffi c i e n t a t tenti on has bcen
pai<Jto a significant f;ct about tht' crnt'rgcnceol this genre: it
re<luiredno ferverthan two scientific.rnd trvo philosophicalrev-
ol uti onsas it s pr ccondit ions.C) ncscient ilic r evolut ionc. r ccur r ed
in mathematics,in rvhich Descartes'sanalltic geornetrvrvaslol-
lorved bv the infinitesimal calculusof Leibniz an(l Ne\vton; the
secondrevolution, in mechanicsand cosmology,is svmbolizedby
Descartes'sPrinciplesol Philosoplr.y
and Newton's Principia- ln phi-
losophy,and, more precisely,in the theorv of knovr'ledge,that
is, the foundationsofscience, Cartesianinnatism was one revo-
lution and Lockeian sensualismthe other. Without Descartes,
rvithout a rending oftradition, there $,ould be no history ofsci-
ence. IEtudes,pp. 16-17]
[2] W as Ber nar d I - e Bouvicr f ont encllt m ist akt 'n uhcn hc
looked to Descartesfbr justification of a cerrain philosophv of
the hi story of science?Fr om t he denial t hat aut hor it v holds anv
val i di tl i n s ciencc,Font encller casoncr l,ir lbllons t hat t hc con-
di ti or.,,ftl u t h , r r esubjectt o hist or ic. r ch,
l r ngr .But d, , e, ir
, r h"l
make sens ct o pr oposea hist or icist r e. r dinqof a t ir ndam ent ally
antihistoricistphilosophy?lf rve hold that rruth cornesonlv liom
the evi den ceand t he I ight of nat ur e,t hen t r ut h, it u'cr uldseem ,
hasno historical dimcnsion, and scitncc cxists rub spccreoercrnr-
fdfi .r(hcncc t hc Car t esianphilosophyis. r nr ihist or icist ) Bur
. per -
haps Fontcnelle deser vescr edit f or not icing nn im por t ant but
negl ectedaspect of t he Car t t 'sianr cvolut ion: Car t csiandoubt
refused to comment on prior claims to knowlcdgc. lt not only
rejected the legacvofancient and medicval physicsbut erected
nclv norms of truth in place of the old. Hence, it rencleredall
previotrsscicncc obsoleteanclconsignedit to the surpassedpast
lle passdddpass{.Fontenellethus rcalizcdthat rvhcn Cartesianphi,
losophv killed tradition - that is, the unrellective continuitv of
past and present- it provided at the sametime r rational lbun-
d.rtion fbr a possiblehistorv, fbr an emergentconsciousness
that
the cvolution ol humankindhasmeaning lfthe past$.ls no longer
judgc of t he p re s c n t.i t u a s , i n th e fu l l s e nseof thc I' ord, rvi r-
nessto a movelncnt tnar rranscendedit, that dethroned the past
in favor of the prescnt.As Fontcnelle rvaswell aware,before the
Moderns could speakabout thc Ancients, even to praise thcm,
thev had to take their distance.IEtudcs,p. 55]
hasno his-
[3] According to Desc.rrtes,however,knowlcdge
torv. It took Newton, and the refutation ofCartesian cosmology,
fdr histon - that is, the ingratitudeinherent in the claim to begin
anervin repudiation of all orlgins - to aPPearas a dimension of
s.i"ncei Th" historv of scienceis the explicit, theoretical recog-
nition ofthe fact that the scicncesare critical, progressivedis-
coursesfbr determiningwhat aspectsof cxperienccmust be taken
as r c al. T he o b j c c t o fth c h i s to tt o fs c i e n ce i s thereforea non-
given,an object wlrosc incomplctenessis tssential.ln no rvaycan
t he his t or v o l s c i e n c e b e th e n a tu ra lh i s to rv ofa cul tural obj ect.
All too oftcn. horvever,it is practiccclas though it uerc a lbrm
of naturalhistorl',contlatingscienccrvith scientistsand scicntists
or else conflating sci-
u'ith their civil and ac.rdenticbicrgraphics,
encc rvith its results.rndrcsultsu ith the fbrm in *'hich they hap-
pcn to be expressedfbr pcdagogicalPurPoses at a particularpoint
in t im e. I E t u d e r,p p . l 7 -1 8 ]
The Constitution of Historical Discourse
[ 4] T he his to ri a n o f s c i e n c e h a s n o c h oi ce but to defi ne hi s
object. lt is his decision alone that determines thc interest and
importance of his subject mrtter. This is essentiallvalrvavsthe
case,evcn rvhen the historian'sdecision rcflccts nothing more
t han an unc ri ti c a l rc s p e c tfo r tta d i ti o n .
T ak e, f o r e x a m p l e , th c a p p l j c n ti o n of probabi l i tv to ni ne-
t c ent h- c en tu rv b i o )o g y a n d s o c i a l s c i e n ce.aThe subj ect does
not f all *it hi n th e b o u n d a ri e so fa n l r-' fth e ni D etccnthcentur)' s
28
nraturesciencestit cor r espondst o no nat ur alobject , hence it s
study cannot fall back on rrrercdcscription or reproduction. 1'he
historianhimself nrust createhis subject mattcr, startingfrom the
current stateof the biologic.rl.rndsocialsciencesat a given point
i n ti me , a st at e t hat is neit her t he logical con5cquencenor t he
historicalculmination of any prior stnteof a dcvelopedscience-
not o[ thc mathematicso[ Pierre-SimonLaplaceor the biologv
ofCharles Darwin, the psychophvsics
of GustavFechner,the cth-
nologv of Frederick Taylor or the sociologvof Emile Durkheim.
Note, moreover,that Adolphe Qu!teJet,Sir FrancisGalton,.lames
McKeon Catell and Alfred Binct coul(l develop biometrics and
psvchometricsonlv after variousnonscientiflc practiceshad pro-
vided raw materialsuitablefbr mathem.rticaltreatment.Qu!telet,
fbr example,studieddataabout hrrmansize;the collection ofsuch
data presupposesa certain tvpc ol institution, namelv,a national
armv whose r anks ar c t o be lilled bv conscr ipt ion. hence an
i D tcrc stin t he st andar dsf or select ilg r ccr uit s. llinet 's st uclyof
i ntel l ect ual apt it udes pr esupposcsanot her t ) pe of inst it ut ion,
compulsor v pr im ar v educat ior r ,an( l a concom it nnt int er est in
measuringbackwardness.Thus,lin order to study the particular
aspectof the history of scienccdeflneclabove,one must look not
only at a number of differcnt scicncesbearingno intrinsic rcla-
ti on to one anot herbut alsoat "nonscience, "t hat is, at ideologv
and political and social praxisJOur subject, then, hasno natural
theoreticallocus in one or anotherofthe sciences,any more than
it hasa natural locus in politics or pedagogv.lts thcorctical locus
must be soughtin t he hist or yof science it self anclnowher eelse,
fbr it is this historv and onlv this histor\,that constitutesthe spc-
cific domain in w-hichthc thcoretical issuesposed by the rlevel-
opment of scient if ic pr act icc f lnd t heir r esolut ion. 5Q udt elet ,
(i regor M endel, Binet and Th6odor t 'Sim onest al>lished neu, and
unfore seenr clat ions bet ween m at henr at icsand pr act ices t hat
 \\.ereoriginall! nonscicntilic, such asselection,hvbridizationand
or ient at ion . T h e i r d i s c o v e ri c sw e re a n s \1crstcr questi onsthev
askedthcnrsel'esin a languagethey had to fbrge for thcmselres.
, Critical studv of those <luestionsand thosc ansrversis thc proper
I object of thc historv of science.Should anvonevvishto suggest
t hat t he c on c c p t o [ h i s to rv p ro p o s e dh e rc i s " external i st," the
firregoingtliscussionshoultl suffice to disposeoIthc objection.
l-hc history of science can of course accommodate various
kinds of objects rvithin the specific theoretical domain that it
constitutes:tlrerc are alrvavsdocuments to bc classilied,instru'
ments and techniquesto be dcscribed,methods and questionsto
be interprcted, and conccpts to be analvzedand criticized. Only
t he las t of t h e s e ta s k sc o n l e rs th e d i g n i ty of hi storv of sci enct'
upon t he oth e rs . It i s e a s vto b e i ro n i c a bout thc i mportanc< :
at t ac hed t o c o n c e p ts , b u t m o re d i ffi c u l t to understand rvhv,
u it hout c on c e p ts ,th e rc i s n o s c i e n c e .T h e hi storv of sci encei s
' int er es r edin , s a r,th e h i s to rvo l i n s tm m e n tsor ol ' academi esonl r
ins of ar as t h c y a re re l a te d , i r b o th th e i r uscsanclthei r i ntcn-
tions, to theories. Descartesneeded David Ferrier to grind opti-
cal glass,but it rvashe rvho provided the theorv of the curvesto
be obtained lrr srinding.
A his t or y o l re s u l tsc a n n e re r L rea n y th i ngmore than a chron'
iclc. The historv of scienceconcernsan ariological activin'. the
scarchfor truth. This axiologicalactivity appearsonly at the Ievel
of ques t ions , m e th o d sa n d c o n c e p ts ,b u t norvhereel se. H cnce,
t im e in t he h i s to rv o fs c i e n c t' i s n o t th e ti me o[cvcryday l i fe.
A chronicle of inventionsor discovcricscan be peliodizcd in the
lame wiv as ordinary historv.The datesoI birrh and death listcd
in scicntific biographicsare datesfiom thc ordinarv calendar,but
the aclventof truth fbllowsa dif]irent timetablein eachdiscipline;
t he c hr onol u q r o l rtri l i ,..rti o tr l ra r i ts o ,tn \i \(oj i t\, i ncompJt-
ible rvith onlinarv historv.Dmitrv Mendelevev'spcriodic tablc of
lo
the clt'ments accelerateclthe pacc ol progressin chcnristrv,antl
eventuallyled t o an upheavalin at or nic physics,u'hile ot hcr sci-
enccsm aint ained a m or e m easur edpace. Thus, t he hist or v of
science,a historv of the rclation of intelligence to ttuth, gcner-
atcs its own senseof time. Just how it does this dcpcn<lson horv
tht' progressof scicnce permits this history to reconstitute thc
theoretic.rldiscotrrseoI the past. A ne.r c]iscovcrlnrar rrakc it
possibleto unclerstanda discoursethat waj not untlerstoodrvhen
it was first enunciated,such as Mcndel's thcory of hereditv, or
i t may dem olish t hcor ies once consider edaut hor it at ivc. ( Jnlv
contnc t wit h r ecent scicncccan give t he hist or iana senseof his-
tori cal r upt ur e and cont inuit r . Such cont act is t : st ablished,as
Gaston Bachelar dt aught , t hr ough cpist em ology,so long as it
remai nsvigilant .
Thc history of scicncc is therefbreahavs in flux. It must cor-
rcct itself constanth.'Ihe relation betrveenAichimcrles'method
ol erhaust ion and m oder n calculus is not t he sam e lbl t odav's
m.lthcmatician.rsit u as for JeanEtienneMontucl.r,the firit great
hi storianof m at hem at ics.I - hisis lr ecauscno def init ion ol m at h-
ematicswas possiblebelore thcre rvasmathematics,that is, belorc
mathematicshad b,.-enconstituted through a serieso1 rliscoveries
antl decisions."Nlatht'maticsis a devclopmentalproct,sslun do'c-
nir]," saidJeanC.rvaillis. lhe historianoI mathem.rticsrnu\t take
his provisionaldcfinition of$'hat m.lthematicsis fiom contempo-
rarv mathematicjans.Manv rvorksonce releyantto nlathematics
in an earlicr pcriod Draytherefbrecraseto be relcvantin historical
pfrsp('ctive;fiom a ne$lv rigorousstandpoint,previouslr impor-
tant works nr.rr'lrecomctrivi.rl .rpplications.IFruJcr,pp. I8-20]
Rccursion ond R uptu res
[5] In est ablishingsuch a closc connect ionbct u, eer repist em ol-
,rgv and t hc hist or r ol'scit 'nce I am , of cour se,clr r r vingon t hc
ll
 MEIFTOD

6 approach,Br-observingthcsc rules hc rvill avoid the error of, fbr

inspirational teachingso[ Gaston Bachelard The fundamental
instance,seeingPierreLouis Moreaude Maupertuisasa prcm;rture
conceptsof Bachclard'sepistcmologvarc bv no\4'*'ell knort n' so
transfornristor geneticist,"[/dcologrond Rationalit.r, pp. l0-12]
well knou'n, perhaps,that thev havebeen disseminatedand dis-
When Bachelard speaks
ofa nom or value,it is bccauscin
cussed,especiallyoutside France,in a vulgarized,not to saYsani- [6]
fbrct'ol the original- Among thi nkj ng ol his f ) vor it e science,m at hem at icalphvsics,he ider t i-
tized, lbmr, devoid of the pc-,lemical
fies theorv with mathemati<s. I Iis rationalismis built on a lrame-
t hem a re th e n o ti o n s o f n e w s c i e nti fi c spi ri t, epi stemol ogi cal
rvork of m at hem at ism . I n nr at hem at icsone speaksnot ol t hc
obstac)e,epistemologicalbrcak lrupture),and obsolete or "ofli-
" normal " but ol r hc "nor m ed. " ln cont r asrt o or t hodox logical
c ial" s c i e n c e . ' .
posi ti vi st s,Bachelar dholds t hat m at hem at icshasepist em ologi-
To my mind, the best summarv of Bachelard'sresearchand
ca] content , nhet her act ual or pot ent ill. and t hat plogr essin
teachingcan be lirund in the concluding pagesof his last episte-
mathematicsadds to that content. On this point he agrccsrvith
mologicaf work, Le Mati alismerationnel.l I{erc the notion ot
epistemologica)discontittuity in scientific pro-qressis supported JeanCavaiJlts.r",hosccritique of logical positjvismltJs lost norh-
the history and teaching of science in ing ofits vigor or rigor. Cav.rillisrefutesRudolph Carnapbv shorv-
' by argumcnts based on
i ng that "m at hem at icalr easoningis int er nallvcoher entin a lav
the twentieth century. Bachelardconcludcs with this statement:
"Contemporarr scienceis basedtrn the searchfor true lviritablel
that cannot be rushecl.lr is by nature progt'ess ivc." r) As to thc
natureoft his pr ogr ess,he concludcs,
facts and the synthesisoftruthful lvd digue) larvs'" Bv "truth-
lul" B a c h e l a rdd o c s n o t me a n th a t sci enti fi c l arvssi mpl v tel l a
(Jneof rlrc lundamental problemsr,rith the docrrincol scicnccis
tiuth pcnnanently inscribed in objects or intcllect. Truth is sim-
prcciscllthat proglcssis in no waycomparablc to increasing
a givcn
pl} \\'hat sciencespeaks,Horv,then, do rve recognizethat a state-
lolumc br addingI smaliaddition.ri .rmounrrrrwhari\ nlrea(lrrhere,
nrent is scientific? By the fact that scicntiIic truth neversPrings
the old subsisting rvith tlre nerr'.Rather,it ir perpetualrevision,in
fully blorvn from the head ofits creator' A scicncc is a discourse
u hichsonrerhingsar.eeliminrtetlrnd otherschboratrd.\\rharcorrrcs
qoue rn e db y c ri ti c a l c o rre c ti o n . If thi s di scoursehasa hi storv
rlrer is greatcrthanr,r'hatr,r,cnt
bclbrc,nor bccause the prescnrcon-
*hose course the historian believeshe can reconstruct, it is be-
tainsor supcrsedcs thc pastIrut bccausc thc onc ncccss.rrily
causcit i.ra historr r,rhosemeaningthe cPistemologistmust reac- cmcrges
liom the otherandin its c()ntentcnrriesthe nrrrk o1its suprri()rity,
tivate. "Everv historianof scicncc is necessarilya historiograPher
rvhi chis in cachcaseuniqut . ll
of truth, The eventsof sciencc arc linked togethcr in a steadilv
gr<-,rvingtruth. . . . At variousmoments in the historv of thought,
Ncvcrtheless,the use of cpistemologicairecursionas a historical
thc past of thought and expcriencecan be scen in a neu' light'"8
method i s not univer sallvvalid. I t best f it s t he disciplincsf ir r t hc
Guided br this ne\1light, thc historianshould not make tlre error
study ol rvhich it r vasor iginallvdcvcloped:m at hcm at icalphvs_
of thinking that persistcntuse o[ a particular term indicatesan
ics and nuclcar chemistr\'.C)fcourse.therc is no reasonrvhv onc
ir v ari a n ru n d c rl y i n gc o n c e P t,o r that persi stental l usi onto si mi -
r ann,,l rrr r dr a p, r r t icr r l, r r lr
. r dr an<. . ,.11r , ,i.<r lt r anr l t lt -
lar cx p c ri m c n ta l o b s e rv a ti o n sc o n notesai l i ni ti es ofnl ethod or . r hstr . r .t

t? tl

\
rules for the production ofknowledge l'hich may, with caution,
be extrapolatedto other disciplines. In this scnse,the method
cannot be generalizedso much as it can be broadened.Yet it can-
not bc extended to other areasof the history of sciencewithout
a good deal of reflection about the specific nature of the areato
be studied. Considcr, fbr cxample, eighteenth-century natural
history. Before applving Bachelardiannorms and proceduresto
the study of this subject, one must ask when a conceptualcleav-
age12
occurrcd whose effectswere asrevolutionaryas were those
of t he int r o d u c ti o n o f re l a ti v i ty a n d q u antum mechani csi nto
physics.Such a cleavageis barelvperceptiblein the early Danvin-
ian vears,ll and, to the extent that it is visible at all, it is only
as a r es ult o f s u b s e q u e n tc a ta c l y s ms :th e ri se ofgeneti cs and
molccu lar biology
Hence, the recurrenccmcthod must be usedjudiciously,and
u,e must learn more about the nature of epistemologicalbreaks.
Ofien, the historian in searchof a major watershedis tempted
to follorv Kant in assumingthat science begins w,ith a flash of
insight, a rvork ofgenius. Frequently the effectsofthat flash are
saidto be all-embracing,aflectingthe whole of a scientist's*.ork.
But the reality is different. Evenwithin one man'su'ork $'e often
fincla sericsof fundamentalor partial insightsrather than a single
dramatic break. A theory is r.r'ovenof many strands,some of which
mav be quite new rvhile others are borrorvedfiom older fabrics.
The Copernicanand Galileanrevolutionsdid not sweepawaytra-
dition in one fell srvoop.Alexandre Koyre has located what he
considersto bc the decisive"mutation" in Galileo's work, the
dec is iv e c ha n g e i n th i n k i n g th a t ma d e h i m unabl e ro accept
medieval mechanicsand astronomy.raFor Koyr6, the elevation
of mathematics- arithmetic and geometry - to the statusof key
t o int elligib i l i tv i n p h y s i c si n d i c a te d a re jecti on of A ri stotl e i n
favor of Plato. Koyr6'sargument is sufliciently r+ell knorvn that I
\
need not discussit in detail. But in painting a quite accuratepic-
ture of Galileo as an Archimcdeanas much as a Platonist, is not
Koyr6 abusingthe fieedom of the recurrencemethod?rsAnd is
he not somewhat overstatingthe casein sayingthat the change
in Galileo's thinking marked a total repudiation of Aristotelian-
ism? Is not Ludovico Geymonat right to point out that Koyr6's
interpretation neglectsall that Galileo preseruedfrom Aristote-
lian tradition even ashe was proposingthat mathematicsbe used
to bolster logic?16Thus, Koyr6 is him self challengedon the very
poi nt on which he challengedPier r e l) uhem when he wr ot e,
"The apparentcontinuity in the developmentoIphysics fiom the
Middle Ages to the prescnt [a continuitv that Jean-PaulCaverni
and Pierre Maurice Duhem have so assiduouslystressed]is illu-
sory.... No matter how well the groundrvorkhasbeen laid, a rcv-
olution is still a revolution."rTlldeologrond Rationalitr,pp. l3-15]
Science ond Scientific Ideologies
Whot is scientificideology?
[7] Scientific ideology, unlikc a political classideology, is not
lalse consciousness. Nor is it falsc science.l-he essenccof filse
scienceis that it neverencounterslalsehood,neverrenouncesanY-
thing, and never has to change its languagc,For a lhlse sciencc
there is no prescientific state. The asscrtionsof a falsc science
can ncve r be f alsif ied. Hence, f alse sciencehas no hist or v. Bv
contrast,a scientific ideologydoeshavea historv.A scicntific ide-
ologv comes to an end when thc place that it occupied in the
encyclopediaof knou4edgeis taken over by a disciplinethat oper-
ationallv demonstratesthe validitv of its own claim to scientific
status,its ou'n "norms of scientificity." At that point, a ccrtain
lorm ofnonscience is cxcluded fiom the domain ofscience. I sa!
"nonscience" rathcr than use BogdanSuchodolski'sterm "anti-
It
scicnce" simplv in ordcr to take note of the fact that,\n a scicn-
t if ic idc olo g y , th e rc i s a n e x p l i c i t a m b iti on to be sci ence. i n
im it at ion o f s o m r a l re a c l vc o n s ti tu te drrodel ofu,hat sci encei s.l
T hjs is a c ru c i a l p o i n t. T h e e x i s te n c eol sci enti fi c i deo)ogi es
implics the par.rlleland prior existenceoI scientillc discourses.
Henc c , it a l s o p te s u p p o s e sth a t a d i s ti n cri on has al rcadl bccn
m ade bc t v v e c ns c i e n c ea n d rc l i g i o n .
Cons ide r th c c a s c o f a to mi s m. D e m ocri tus, E pi curus and
Lucrctius claimerl scientific statusfor thcir physicsand psychol-
ogv.To the anriscienceofreligion they oppost'dthe antireligionof
science.Scierrtificideologvneglectsthe nrethodoiogicairequire-
m c nt s and o p e ra ti o n a lp o s s i b i l i ti e so f s ci encei n thar real m of
cxperienceit choosesto cxplorc; btrt it is not therebv ignorance,
and it cloesnot scorn or repudiatcthe firnction ofscience. Hence,
scicntiflc idcologr is by no meansthe samething assupcrsrition,
fbr ideologvhasits place,possiblyusurperl,in the realm ol knorvl-
t ' r lgc .not in th e re a l m o l ' re l i g i o u sb e l i c l . N or i s i t supersri ti on
in t he s t r ic t e t1 ' mo l o g i c asl e n s c .A s u p c rsti ti oni s a bel i ef from
an olc l r eligi o n th a t p c rs i s tsd e s p i tei ts p rohi bi ti on by a ncu rcl i -
gion. Scientific ideologvdocs indccd standover fsuperrtorel a sitc
t hat u' ill ev e n tu a l l vb e o c c u p i c d b ,vs c i c nce.B ut sci encei s not
merelv ovcrlain;it is pushedasidefdcporrore]bv idcology.There-
lc,re,lr.hensciencecrt'ntuallv supplanrsideologv, it is not in the
sitc expecte<1. and Rationalit.r,
lldeolog.v pp. 32-31)
Ilow scientiJicidcologiesdisappearand appear
[8] For another, I hope convincing,exampleof the u'av in ll.hich
scientific ideologiesare supplantedbv science,consiclerthc Nlcn-
dc lian t heory o f h c rc d i tv .Mo s r h i s ro ri rn so f bi ol ogv bel i everhat
Nlnupertuislvasrhe folerunnerol modcrn gcneticsbecausein his
Vdnus phvsiquehe considercd thc mcchanismsbv r,,,hichnormal
and abnormal traits are transmittecl.l-{calso uscd thc calculusof
36
\
probabilit ies t o decide u'het hcr t he lr equencv ol a par t icular
abnormalitv rvithin a particular lamilv rva,ior $as not fbrtuitous,
and exp laincdhvbr idizat ionbl assum ingt hc cxist enceof scm i-
nal atoms. her eclit ar vclcm ent s t hat com bined dur ing copula-
tion. But it is enough to conlparc the writin(s crfl\'laupertuisand
It4endelto see thc magnitudc oI the gap betu'ccn a scienccand
the ideologv that it replaccs. fhe f:actsthat Mcnclel studics are
not thoscglcanedbv a casualobsen,er;thcv are obl ained through
systematicresearch- rescarch(lictatedby thc nature of Mendcl's
problcm, lbr *"hich thcre is no precedcnt in the pre-trlendelian
iiteraturc. lUcndel invented the icleaof a ch.tructet,bv rvhich he
me.rnt not thc clementar\'.r!lcnt of hereditarl transmissionbut
thc element ofhcrcditv itself. A Mcndelianchar.rcccr
coulclenter
into cornbination rvith n other characters,anclone could mea-
sure thc licquencv of it s appear ancein successive gencr at ions.
Mcnrlel rras not intcreste(lin stmcturc, fertilization or (levelop-
ment. For hinr . hvbr idizat ion\ r 'asnot a wal ol cst ablishingt hr
constancvor inconst ancvol a glcr balt vpe; it u'ls a *ay of dccom -
posing.rtvpe, an instrumcntr-rtanalysis, a tool fbr separatingchar-
actersthat madc it necessarl'towork \\'ith largesamples.Hencc,
Mcndcl rvasinterestcdin hvbridsdespitchis repudi.rtionol an age-
ol d trad it ion ol hybr id r csear ch.He $as not int er est edin scxual-
itv or in thc controversvovcr innate versusacquiredtraits or ovcr
prtfirrmation versuscpigenelis. He rvasinrerestedonlr in verih-
i ng fi i s h r pot hesisvia t he calculat ionol com bin. r t ions. rM
8 enclel
ncglectecleventhing that interestedthosc *ho in rtalitv rverenot
his predecessors
at all. The seventeenth-centurv
idcologvofhered-
itarv transmissionis repleteu ith obscn'ationsof animal and plant
hl bri ds and m onst cr s.Suchcur iosit v scr vcdsever nlpur poses.I t
supported one side or thc other in the dcbatcsl.lt'trveenprcfirr
nrari on ir t sand epigenesist s,
ovist sanr lanim alculist s.As a r esult ,
it rr,asusefil in rcsolving lc-galquestionsconccrning the subor-
l7
 paternitv, the puritl ofbloodlines and the
dination ofthe sc.\-es,
legitimacy ofthe aristocracy.fhese concernswere not unrelated
to thc controversvbetween innatism and sensualism.The tech-
nology of hvbridization r,vasperfected by agronomistsin search
varieties,as well as by botanistsinterestedin the
of advantageous
relations betrveenspecies.On)y by isolating Maupertuis's [dnus
phvsiquelrom its context can that work be compared with the
Versucheiber Pllanzenhvbriden.Mendel's science is not the end
point ofa trail that can be tracedback to the ideologyit replaced,
for the simpie reasonthat that ideologvfollowed not one but sel-
eral trails, and none r\.asa course set by scienceitself. All were,
rather, legaciesofvarious traditions, some old, others more re-
cent. Orism and animalculisnru,ere not of the sameagc as the
empirical and mythological .rrgumentsadvancedin favor ofaris-
tocracy. Thc ideology of hercditvre u,'asexcessivelyand naively
ambitious. It sought to reso]vea number of important theoreti-
cal and practr'callegal problems rvithout having examined their
fbundations. llt're the ideology simply rvithered au,ayby attri-
tion, But the elimination of its scientific underpinningsbrought
it into focus as an ideologv.The characterizationofa ccrtain set
ofobservationsand deductionsasan ideology came alter the dis-
qualification ofits claim to be a science.This was accomplishcd
by t he de v e l o p mc n t o f a n e w d i s c o u rse,w hi ch ci rcrrmscri bed
its field of validity and proved itself through the consistencyof
it s r c s ult s .
l9l Instructiveasit is to study the wav in which scicntific ide-
ologies disappear,it is even more instructive to studv how they
appear,Consider brieflv the genesisof a niDeteenth-centurysci-
ent if ic id e o l o g v , e v o l u ti o n i s m. T h e * ork of H erbert S pencer
makesan intercsting casestudv. Spencerbelievedthat he could
statea universallyralid larv ofprogrcssin terms ofevolution from
the simpie tcr tht'conrplex thrriugh successivediff!rentiations.
l8
\
Everything, in other u,ords,evolvesfiom more to lesshomoge-
neity and from lesserto greater individuation: the solar svstem,
the aninral organisnr,living specitrs,man, society,and tht'prod-
ucts ofhuman thought and activity, including language.Spencer
explicitly statesthat he derived this law of evolution by gcneral-
izing the principlcs of enrbryologr;contained in Karl-Ernst
'on
der Thiere(1828). The publica-
Bacr's Ubcr Entwickelungsgeschichte
tion of the Origin of Species
in 1859 confirmcd Spencer'sconvic-
tion that his generalizedtheory of evolution sharedthc scientific
validity o[ Darwin's biol<.rg1'.
But he also claimed for his larv of
evolution the support of a sciencemore finnlv establishedthan
the new biology: hc claimed to have deduced the phenomenon
of evolution from the lau' of conservationol energy,which he
maintainedcould be used to prove that honrogeneousst.rtcsare
unstable. If one follons the development of Spencer'swork, it
seemsclear that he used von Baer'sand, later, Darrvin'sbiology
to l end scient if ic suppor t t o his vier vson socialengineer ingin
t u r y Englishindust r ialsocict \ ',in par t icular ,his
ni nete ent h- cen
advocacyoffree enterprise,political individualismand competi-
tion. From the larv ol differentiation, he deduccd that the indi-
vi dual m ust be suppor t ed against t he st at e. But per haps t his
"deduction" was containcd in the principles of the Spcncerian
svstemfiom the very bcginning.
Thc lar r 'sof m echanics,em br r ologv and evolut ion cannot
validly bc extended berond thc <lomainproper to each of these
sciences.-fo $'hat end are specificthcoreticalconclusionssevcred
fiom their premisesand applied out ofcontext to human expcri-
ence i n gener al, par t icular ly social exper ience?To a pr act ical
end. E volut ionistideology u, asused t o just it v indust r ialsociet v
as againsttraditional societv,on the one hand, and the demands
of workcrs, on the other. It $,asin part antith eological, in part
aD ti socialistThus,
. elolut ionist idcology r vasan ideo] ouyin t he
l9
Nlarxist scnse:a rcpresentationof nature or society lvhosc truth
lay not in rvhat it saidbut in n'hat it hid. Ofcoursc, cvolutionism
rvaslir broadcr than Spencer'sidcologv. But Spenccr'sviews had
a lastinginfluence on linguistsand anthropologists.I lis ideology
gavemeaning to the t'tord P mitive and salvedthe conscienceof
c olonialis ts .A rc m n a n t o f i ts l c g a c y c an sti l l be found i n the
lrchaviorof advancedsocietiestor",ardso-calledunderdeveloped
countrics, even though anthropologv has long sincc recognized
t hc plur al i tv o f c u l tu re s , p re s u m a b l ymaki ng i t i l l egi ti matc for
any one culture to set itself up as the vardstickbv which all oth-
ers are mcasured.In freeing themselveslrom their evolutionist
origins, contemporarv linguistics, ethnology and sociology have
s hown t ha t a n i d e o l o g t d i s a p p e a rsrv h en hi stori cal condi ti ons
ceaseto be compatible u.ith its existencc,The theorv of evolu-
tion haschangedsince Danvin, but l)arrvinism is an intcgral part
ofthe historl ofthe scicnccofevolution. Bv contrast,cvolution-
ist idcology is merelv an inopcrative residuein the historv of the
and Rationalit.r,pp.31-111
human scicnces.lldcolog.v
,1o
\
CHapr r n lt vo
The Var ious M odels
T h e Posi t i vi st Trad i ti on
110] Event scom plct elv ext r insict o scienceand logic, por t r avcd
conventionall)il at all in standarclhistoriesofscientitlc rescarch,
vield an account that claims, if onlv in r-itualf.rshion,to tracc the
logical development of a scientific idca. This l'ould bc surPris-
ing onlv if there rvcreno distinction benveenscicnceand thc his-
tory of scicncc. I n t hat casc,a biologist coul<lwr it e a hist or l ol
his rvork in exactly thc samc \\'av as he vloulcl rvrite a scicntific
paper,relving on exactlv the samccriteria he rvould use in evalu-
ating the truth of a hvpothesisor thc Potcntial ol a particularIint:
of rcscarch.But to procecd in this rvavis to treat h,vpothcses and
rescarchprogramsnot as projects but as obiects. When a scien-
ti l i c p r oposit ion is judged t o be t r ue, it t akeson a r et r oact ivc
validitv. It ceasesto be part ofthe endlessstrcam ol lbrgottcn
dreams,discardedprojects,failcd proceduresand erroneouscon-
clusions- things, in short, fbr u hich somconemust shoultlcrthe
respo nsibilit v.Thc clim inat ion of t he f ilsc bv t he t r uc - t hat is,
the ver illed - appear s,oncc it is accom plished,t o be t he quasi-
mechanicaleff'ectof ineluctablc,impersonalnecessity.Importing
such norms ofjuclgment into the historical domain is, thercfbre,
an inevitablc sourcc of misundcrstancling.
The retroactiveefl'ect
 of t he t r u th i n fl u e n c e sc v e n o n e ' s a s s essnl cnt
ofthe respecti ve
contributions of variousinvestigatorsto a scientific discovery(an
as s es s m c nth
t a t o n l v a s p e c i a l i s its c o mpetent to make),because
thc tcndencv is to see the historv of thc subject in the light of
today'struth, n,hich is easilyconfuscd \a'ith eternal truth. But if
truth is eternal, il it nevel changes,then there is no history: the
historical content ofscience is reduced ro zero. It should come
asno surprisethat it $'aspositivism,a philosophyofhistory brsed
on a gencralizationol'the notion that theor) inelrrctablysuccceds
theory as the true supplantsthe false,that led to science'scon-
tempt lbr historv.Over rime, a researchlaboratory'slibrarv tcnds
to divide into two parts:.tmuscunlanda uorking referencelibrary.
The museumscctioncontainsbooks rvhosepagesone turns asone
might examinea llint ax, rvhereasthe referencesection contains
book s t ha t o n e e x p l o re si n mi n u tc d e ta i l , as w i th a mi crotome.
lFormotiondu rdJlexe,pp. 155-56]
Ifl ] Eduard Jan Dijkstcrhuis, thc author of Die ,llechonisi.r-
un61des Weltbildes,
thinki that thc historv of science is not only
science'smemory but also cpistcmology'sIaboratory.This phrase
has been quored flerluently.The idea, u,hich has been accepted
bv numerousspecialists,hasa lesswell knor+nantecedent.pierre
Flourcns,refi:rringin his eulogv of GeorgesCuvier to the Hisroire
dessLienccs naturallespublished by Nlagdelaine<ieSaint-Agy,states
that the history of science"subjects the human mind to experi-
ment . , , makesnn experinrentalthcory of thc human spirit." Such
a conception is tantanlountto nrodelingthc rclation bctrveenthe
history of scienceand the science of which it is the history on
the relation betr"een the sciencesand the objects of rvhich thev
are scirnccs.But cxperimentationis onlv one ofthe rvaysin rvhich
science relates to objects, and it is not self-evidentthat rhis is
the relevantanalogvfor understandinghistorv'srelation to its ob,
jcct. Furthcrmorc,in drc handsof its recent champion,the meth-
1!
\
odological statement has an epistemologicalcorollary, namelv,
that there exists an eternal scientiflc method. ln some periods
this method remainsdormant, r+hilc in others it is vigorousand
active.Gerd Buchdahlhascharacterizedthis corollary as naive,z0
and onc would be inclined to agree if he u.erc rvilling to apply
the sam edescr ipt iont o t he em pir icism or posit ivismunder lving
his own vierv.It is no accidentthat I attackpositivismar this point
in the argument:for after Flourensbut before Dijksterhuis,Picrre
Lafitte, a confirmcd disciple ot Auguste Comre, compared the
history of science to a "mental microscope."ll The use of such
an instrument, Lafitte suggests.revealshidden truths: thc under-
standingof science is decpt'nedthrough cliscussionol the diffl-
cultiesscientistsfacedin making thcir discoveries
and propngaring
their results.-fhe imagc of the microscope defincs the contcxt
t as the laboratorv,and there is, I think, a positivisrbiasin the idea
that historv is simply an injection of duration into the exposition
of sci ent ilic r esult s.A m icr oscopcm er eJvm agniliesor her wise
invisible objccts; the objects exist w'hetheror not one usesthe
instrument to look fbr them. l'he implicit assumptionis that the
historian'sobjcct is ll ing thcrc u'aiting fbr him. All hc hasto do
is look lbr it, just as a scientistmight look fbr something rvith a
mi croscopc.[ f t udes,pp. l2- 1] ]
Hi storical Epi stcmol oBy
-fo undcrstandthe function and nrcaningof thc historv of
[12]
sci ence,one can cont r astt hc im ageof t hc labor at or yu'it h t har
of a school or t r ibunal, t hat is, an inst it ut ion nher e judgm ent is
passedon either the p.rstof kno','ledge or knorvledgeof the past.
B ut i fiudgnr cnt is t o be passcd,a juclgeis essenr ial.Epist em ol-'
ogy pr ovides a pr inciple on r vhich jur lgm ent can be based:ir
i
tt'achesthe historian the lantuage spolien at sonre point in thc
evolution of a particularscientilic discipline, sav,chcmistry.-l he
4l
his t or ian t h e n ta k e s th a t k n o u J t' d g ea n d searchcsbackl rarrli n
t im e unt il t h c l a te r rtc .rb u l a rvc e a s e sto b e i ntcl l i gi bi e, or unti i
it c.rn no longer bc transl.rtt'dinto the lessrigorous lt'xicon oIan
ear li. : r pc r io d . A n to i n c -l -a u re n t L a v o i s i e r,fbr cxanrpl e,i ntro-
rluced a nelr. nomcnclature inlo chemistry. Ilcnce, the language
s pok c n bl c h e m i s tsa ftc r L a v o i s i e rp o i n t s up semanti (:gaps i n
t he ) anguag eo l e a rl i e rp ra c ti ti o n c rs .l t h a snot been suffi ci entl y
notice(l or admirc(l that Lavoisier,in the "Discours preliminaire"
tohis frotti ilimentairede chimie,rssunreclfull responsibiJitrlbr
t r v o dc c is io n sth a t l e tt h i m o p e n to c ri ti c i sm: " revi si ng the l an-
gu.rqcspokenby our teachers"and failing to provide ".rnv histori-,
cal .r,.:count
ofthe opinions ofmy predcccssors."It r"as,rsthough
he understood the lesson of l]escartes,that to institute a ne\r'
branch of knorvledgeis in efli'ct to severone's ties to $'hatever
had plesumptivelvusurpcd its place.
Thcrc are in fact trvo versionsofthe histon ofscicnce: thc his-
t or l o1' obso l e te
k n o u l c d g ea n d th c h i s to r v ofsancti onedknou l -
edge, bv which I mcan knon le<lgethat plavsan rctive Idtirrdnr]
role in its o\1.ntime. Without epistemologvit is intpossibleto
distinguish betrveenthe two. Gaston Bachclarriwas the first to
make this distinction.22His dccisionto recount the historv ofsci-
ent if ic ex pe ri me n tsa n d c o n c e p tsi n th e l i g ht ofthe l atestsci en-
tilic plinciples haslong sincedenonstrated its u.orth.
A I e> , anc l re
Ko v re ' si d e a o fth e h i s to ry o fsci encc rvasbasi cal l v
simil.rr to Bachelard's.True, Kol re's epistemologvrr'ascloser to
Emile Meverson'sthan to Bachclard's,and morc kecnlr attunecl
to the continuitv ofthe raticrnalfunction than to rhe dialcctics
of rationalist activitv. Yet it uas becausehe recognizedthe role
of epistemologvin doing historv ofscicncc that he casthis Etuder
5lalildennes anclTheAstronomicalRcvolutionin the lbrm that he did.
ls t ht ' dati n g 3 l ,a n " e p i s re m o J o g i c abl reak" a conti ngent or
s ubjec t iv eju d g mc n t?T o s e eth .rt th e a n s u eri s no, one l eed onl v
note that Krrrr!and Bachelardrvereintcrcstedin diflcrent periods
i n tht' hist on ot t lr e e\ act scicnct 's.Fur t hcr m or e,t hese pcr i( ) ( ls
rverenor cquallv equippcd to deal ntathcmaticallvrvith the prob-
lems ol physics.Kovre began rvith Copernicusand ended 11ith
Nervton, u here Bachelardbegan.Kcrvri:'scpistemologicalobser-
vationstcnd to confirm Bachelard'svieu, that a "continuist" his-
torv of scienct 'ist he hist or l of a young science.Kovr c believer l.
for i nst ance,t hat scienceis t heor v and t hat t heor l is f ir nclam en-
tal l v mat hcnr , r t iz.t ion.
r ( G alileo, lbr exanr pJe,is m or e Ar clt i-
m(' (l eant han Plat onist . )He alsc'helclt hat cr r or is inelit ablc in
the pur suit of scient if lc t r ut h. To sr ud\ t he hist or v of a t heor v is
to studv the historv of thc theorist'sdoubts. "Copernicus. . . ttas
not a Copernican,"
The hist or v of sciencet hus claim s t hc r ight t o m akc judg-
mcnts ol'scientific value.Bv ".iudgmcnt,"horvcvcr,I do not mcan
purgc o r execut ion.I list or v is not an in'er t ed im agcof scient if ic
progrc ss,lt is not . r por t r ait in per spect ive.t vit h t r anscended
doctrines in the lc,regroundlntl todav'struth u,avolfar thc "van-
i shi ng p oint . " I t is, r at her ,an ef t ir r t t o cliscovcrand expl. r in t o
'w'hatextent discrcdited notions, attitudes or mcthods rvere, in
their day,uscd to discredit othcr notions, attitudesor method5-
and therclbrean ef-fortto discoverin \\'hatrcspectsthe discredited
pastrcmainsthe past(]1an activitr that still desenesto be callcd
sci entilic. lt is as im por t ant t o under st aD(uhat
l t he past t aught
as it is to fin<lout rr h\' \r'eno longerbelielc in its )essons.IFru,/cr,
P P .ll-l + l
Empiricist Logicism
calls"nor -
[13] It is easrt' o dist inguishbet wcen \ lhat Bachelar cl
mal i tv"] l and r vhatThom as Kuhn calls "nor m al scicnce. "r alhc
tvro epist r r r r olulit . , 1. ,. har , r r r t ain l'r iint . in . om m on: in lir -
ti cul ar, t ht ' ot r scr r at iont hat scicnt if ic t er t books over em phasiue
4t
 the continuit\ of scientific research.Both stressthe discontinu-
ous naturc of progress.Nevertheless,while the fundamentalcon-
cepts sharea l.rmily resenrblance,they do not really belong to
the samebranch. This has been notcd by Father FranqoisRusso,
who, despitereservations about the claimsofsuperiority to which
epistemologicalhistoriansare somerimespronc. arguesthat Kuhn
is m is t ak e na b o u t th e n a tu re o fs c i e n ti fic rari onal i tvas such.25
Though ostensiblvconccrned to preserveKarl Popper'sempha-
sis on the necessityof theory and its prioritv over experiment,
Kuhn is unablt' to shakeoff the legacv of logical positivism and
join the rationalist camp, w-herehis kev concepts of"paradigm"
and "normal science"rvould seem to place him. Theseconcepts
Presupposeintentionality and regulation,and assuch they imply
t he pos s ib i i i tyo fa b re a k w i th e s ta b l i s hedrul es and procedures.
Kuhn *'ould havethem play this role r".ithoutgranting them thc
meansto do so, fbr he regardsthem as simple cultural f)cts. For
hinr, a paradignris thc result of a choice bI its users.Nornral sci-
encc is dcfincd by the practice in a given petiod of a group of'
specialistsin a universityresearchsetting. Insteadofconccpts of'
philos ophi c a cl ri ti q u c , rrt' a re d e a l i n grv i th mere soci alpsvchol -
ogv. This accountsfor the embarrassmentevident in the appen-
dix to the secondedition ofthe Srrucrureof ScientilicRevolutions
when it comes to answeringthe question of hou' the truth of a
tlreory is to br undcrstocrd.lldeolog.rond Rotionality,pp. l2-l3l
Internalism ond Externolism
[ ] 41 How d o e s o n e rl o th c h i s to rv o l s c i ence.and how shoul d
one do it? This question raisesanorher: wlat is the histon of sci-
, nc c a, his t .ryo f r" ,\n y a rrth o na p p a rc n r l lrakc rhe answ erro rhi s
s ec ondquc rti o n l o r' g ra n trd , to j u d g e h v r he fact Ihar ther rrever
c x plic it ly a s k i t. T a k e , fb r e x a m p l c , th e debatesbetrveenw hat
English-spcaking u,riterscall internalistsand extemalists.26 Exter-
4{'
nalism is a rvav of writing the historv of sciencebv describinga
set of events,which are called"scientific" fbr reasonshavingmore
to do u,ith tradition than with critical analysis,in terms of their
relation to econolnic and socialinterests.technologicalncedsand
practices,and religious or political idcologies. In short, this is
an attenuatedor, rather, impoverishedversion of l\'larxism,one
rather conrmoDtoda) in the ruorld'smore plosperoussocietit's.17
fint"r.rulism (rvhich
extcrnalistscharacterizeas "i<Jealism")is the
vier.l'that there is no history of scicnceunlessonc placesoncsclf
w i thi n t he scient if ic endeavorit self in or der t o analvzet he pr o-
ceduresby rvhich it seeksto satisflythe specific norms that allou,
it to be defined as sciencerather than as technologt or ideologv.
In thi s per spect ive.t he hist or ianof scienccis supposedt o adopt
a theor et icdlat t it ude t owar d his specim ent heor ies;he t her elbr c
hasas much right to formulate modcls and hvpothcsesas scicn-
tists thcmselves.
Clearlv,both the internalistand erternalist posirionsconflate
the object of t hc hist or v of sciencen'it h t he object oI a scien( e.
The extemalistseesthe historvofsciencc asa mattcr of explaining
cul tura l phenom ena t er m sof t he cult ur al m ilieu; he t hcr elor e
confus est he hist or l 'n
of sciencer vit h t he nat ur alistsociologt of
institutions and f;ils to intcrpret the truth claims intrinsic to sci-
enti fi c discour se,The int er nalistseest hc f act sof t hc hist or v of
sci ence,such as inst anccsof sinr ult ancousdiscovcr l ( ol'm odcr n
calculus, lbr examplc, or the law ofconservation oIenergv), as
facts rvhose historv cannot be urittcn without a theorv. -fhus,
a fi ct in t he hist or r of science is t r cat ed as a f ict of scicnce, a
procedureperf'ectlvcompatible with an epistcmologyaccording
to r" hich t heor y r ight f ullv t akes pr ior it v over cnpir ical dat a.
IE rudc s,pp. l4- 15]
47
 C n r pr l n - f u n r r

The Hist or y of t he Hist or y of Science

A History of Precursors
[15] Every theorv is rightlv expected to providc proofi ol prac-
tical cfficacv.What, then, is thc practical eflect lbr thc historian
ofsci cnce of a t heor v whosc cf ' ct is t ( ) m ake hisdisciplinc t he
place u.hcrc the theoretical qucstions raist'd bv scientilic prac-
tice are studiedin an cssentiallvautonomousmannt'r?C)neimpor-
tant practicalelfect is the climinati()nof \\'hatJ.T.Clark hascalle'd
" the precur sorvir us. "r sSt r jct ly speaking,il pr ecur sor scxist ed,
the historv ol sciencervould losc all meaning,sincc scicncc itsclf
uoul d m cr elv appeart o havea hist or icalclim ension.
Consi<icrthe u'ork of AlexarrdrcKovre. Kovre contrasted,on
\ epistemologicalgrounds,thc "closed world" ofantiquitv u ith the
"infinite universe"of modcrn times. ll it h.rd bccn possiblelbr
some ancient pr ecur sort o haveconceivedof "t hc inlinit e uni-
vcrse" before its timc, then Kovr6's r't'holcapproachto the his-
torv ofscience anrl idcas rroulclmake no scnsc.t')
A precursor,rvc arc told, is a thinker or rcscarcheruho pro-
ceeded some distancealong a path later crplortd all the \\'av to
its cnd br someoneelse. To lotrk lbr, find and cclebrate precur-
sors i s a sign of cor nplacencvand an unm ist ak. r blcslm pt om of
 incompctcncc fbr epistemologicalcriticism. Trvo itinerariescan-
Ferchault de R6aumurand Maupertuis as precursorsof Mendel
not be comparedunlessthe paths lolloned are truly the same.
rvithout noticing that the prob)em that Mendel set himself rvas
In a coherent sYstcmof thought, ever) concept is related to
ofhis or.r.ndevising.or that he solvedit bv inventingan unprc'ce-
everyother conccpt. Just becauseAristarchusol Samosaduanced
dented concept, the independcnthereditarvcharacter.ll
the hypothesisol a heliocentric universe,it does not follow that
So long as texts and other *'orks yoked rogether by the heu-
he rvasa precursorof Copernicus,even ifCopernicus invokcd his
ristic compression of time have not been subjected ro critical
authoritl'. To changethe center of reterenceof celesti.rlnrotions
anal ys isf or t he pur pose of explicit ly dem onst r at ing t har r $'o
is to relativizehigh and lo*r',to changethe dinensions of the uni-
resear cher ssought t o answ'erident ical quest ionsf or ident ical
verse- in short, to constitutc a system,But Copernicuscriticized
reasons,using ident ical guiding concept s,def ined b, r ident ical
all astrononricalthr:oricsprior to his ou'n on rhe groundsthat thev
sl stems,t hen, insolaras an aut hcnt ic hisr or y of science is con-
wer e not ia ti o n a l s y s tc m s .l 0A p rc c u rs o r,i t i s sai d, bel ongsto
cerned, it is completelv artificial, arbitrary and unsatisfactorvro
more than one age: he is, of course, a man of his own time, but
say that one man finished what the other started or anricipated
he is simult.rneously
a contemporarYof'later in!estigatorscredited
rvhat the other achieved.Bv subsritutingthe Jogicaltime oftruth
rvith conrpietinghis unfinishedproject. A precursor,theretbre,is
relationsfor thc historicaltime of these relations'invention, one
a thinker \1hom thc historian belicvcscan be extracted liom his
trcats the history of scienceas rhough it wcre a copy ol science
c ult ur al m ili e u a n d i n s e rte di n to o th e rs .1 'hi sprocedureassumcs
and its object a copv of the object of science.The resuit is the
t hat c onc ep ts ,d i s c o u rs c ss. p c c u l a ti o rrs
a n d e\peri ments can be ,i
creation o[an artif;ct, a countcrfeit historical objrct - the pre-
shiftedfioru one intellectualenvironmcntto another.Suchadapt-
cursor. In Koyr!'srvtrrdsr
ability, of course, is odhned at the cost of ncglccting the ,,his-
t or ic it v " ol th e o b j e c t u n d e r s tu d v . H o rv manv hi stori ans,fbr
Thc notion ol a "lirrerunncr"is.r.r'erydangerous
onc for thc histo-
example, have looked lirr precursorsof D,rrrviniantransfbrmism
rian. lt is no doubt frue thar idcashavc.r gucriindependcnt
dcvel
amongeighteenth-cenrury naturalists,philosophersanrlevtn jour-
opmenl,that is to say,theyarebornin onc mind,andreachmaturity
nalis t s ?lrT he l i s t i s l o n g .
to bearliuit in anothcr;consequentlvt the historyol prolrlemsand
Louis Dutens's Rcchcrches
surI'orininerjesdicouvertes
attribudes their solut ionscanbc t r aced.lt is cqual) vr r ue t har t hc hisr or icnl
(1176) nr.rybe taken asan (admirtedlvextreme)case
ou\ modernes
importance
ofa doctrineis measurcd
by its lruitfulness,
andchatlater
in point. When Dutens \r'ritesthat Hippocratesknerv about the
gcncrations
arenot concerned
rvith thosethat prcccdcthemexcept
circulation of the Lrlood,and that thc Ancients possessed
the sys- in so far ls thevseein thcm their "ancestors"
or "forerunners."
It is
tem of Copcrnicus, rvc smiler he has lbrgotten all that Wiilia[r
quite obvious1orshouldbe) that ncr-one hascvcrregarded himsell
Harveyorvcd to Rcnaissance anatomvand mechanicalmodels,and
asthe "firrerunner"ofsomeoneclse,nor beenablcto do so.Consc-
he fails to credit Copcrnicus'soriginality in exploring the math-
qucntlv.to regardanyonein this light is the bestwavof prcventing
ematical possibility of the earth'smovemenr.We ought to srrile
oneselffrom undcrstandinghim.Ji
iust as much at the nlorc rcccnt lvriters who hail Ren6 Ancoine

to
A precursoris a man of sciencervho, one linorvsonlv much later,
ran aheaclofall his contemporariesbut before the person \{hom
one takesto bc the winner ol the race.To ignore the lict that he
is the creaturcol a certain historv ofscience, and not an agentof
scientiflc progress,is to accept asreal the condition ofhis possi-
bilitv, namcly,the imaginarvsimultaneityof "belbre" an<i"afier"
in a sort of logical spacc.
I n m ak i n g th i s c ri ti q u e o f a fa l s e h i stori cal obj ect, I have
sought to justifv by countcrcxamplcthc conccpt I havcproposed
accorclingto rvhich thc historl of sciencedcflncs its object in
it s o$n int ri n s i c te rm s . T h c h i s to rv o l s ci cncci s not a sci cncc,
anr l it r c , bi c c ti s n o r a .c i l q i l i r ,' h i e c t. To Jo hi storv oIsci encc
( in t h. m , r rt u p rrrri v e s e n i F ,' f rh . v rrb " to rJo" 1i s one ol ' rhe
lLnc t ions ( a n d n o t th c e a s i e s t)o f p h i l o s ophi calepi stemol ogv.
[Etudes,pp. 20-2 3]
A History in the Service ol Politics
[ 16] I t r v a si n 1 8 5 8 th a t a n e u p o l e m i c, i ni ti ated thi s ti me by
Ceorge Prochaska's grovling rcnoun, resulte<J in l)escartes's namc
being brought into the history of thc reflex fbr the first time. Thc
occasionrvasan article bv A.L. Jcittr:lcs,a prof'essorof medicine
at Olmiitz, cntitled l4lhols the Fountlerol the Theorr ol Rellet
,Movement?)a leittclcs summarizedMarshalltlall's first paper,said
a flrv uorcls about Hall's prioritv ovcr JohannesMrillcr, ackno$l-
edgc<lthc grcat value of both men's nork, vct claimed that the
im pet us f or re s e a rc hi n to re fl e x a c ti o n came l rom el se.rvhcrc,
liom an carlicr timc, and fiom anothersource."lt uas none other
than our cminent, and todav insullicientlv honorcd, compatriot,
Georgc Prochaska,lho richlv deservesto be prcscrvcd in the
eternallygratcfLl mcmory of our Czcchfatherlancl,
so rich in supc-
rior men of cvcry kind." feittelesassertedthat Prochaskarvasthc
true lbunclerof thc thcor_vofreflex movemcnt, quoted excerpts
52
lrom De functionibuss,ystematis ne.vo.ri,and concltrdcd that thc
cntirc theory of thc reflex action inherent in the spinalcord rr.as
there "prefbnlred and preestablished"(pniforn;rt und pnisLab;lirt).
Although not interestedin investig.itingu hether Hall and Mrillcr,
rvho may not have kno$,n Prochaska'srvork dircctlv, might havc
been inlluenccd bv rvorclof it filterecl through "the scientific
milieu ofhis contcmporaricsand cpigoncs"(rn diegleichzeitige
und
epillonische l\blt trcnspitittc),leitteles askshorv this
wissenschaJtliche
lork could have been ignorcd for so long. [{is ansrver,u.hich
seemsj u dicious t o m c, is t hat Albr echt von Haller 'saut hor it v is
a sufficient explanation.Thc theory of irritabilit), of a strcngth
inherentin the muscle,divertedattention from the intrinsic func-
tions ofthe spinalcord.'l-his onlv makesf'rochaska'smerit a]l the
more apparent:rather than rchcarscthe ideasof thc pcriod, his
rvork cont r adict ed t hem . The f inal lincs of t hc ar t iclc ar c an
appeal to some generoushistorian to revive the great Prochaska
as a model for firture generations.Jeittelesthought that the man
to do this $as the current occupant of Prochaska'scllajr at thc
vcncra blcand celebr at cdUnivcr sit v of Pr aguc,t hc "i] lust r ious
forerunnerofall German universities."That man \l'asthe distin-
gui sheclphysiologistJanPur kinje( 1787- 1869) .
The im pct uosit yof t his plca, r vhich nat ur allyand pat hct icallv
combincs a claim for thc originalitv of a scholaru.ith an afllrma-
tion of the cultural valuesol an oppressednationality,is equaled
only bv the brutalitv anclinsolenceofthe replv it receivedfl.oman
ollicial representative,not to savhigh priest, ol German phvsiol-
ogy. E m ile Du Bois- Revm ond( 1818- 1896)N{r
, iller 'sst udentand
successor
in t hc chair of phvsiologvat t he Univer sit vof Bcr lin -
u,ho becamea member ofthe Berlin Academyol Sciencesin 1851
anclrvho rvasalreadycclcbratcd not onlv lbr his work in neuro-
muscularelectrophysiologybut also lbr his numerousprofessions
of phi l osophical liit h in t hc univcr salvalidit l of m cchanist ic
tl
determinism and the inanity ofmetaphysicalquestionsls- sum-
marilv disrnissedProchaskaand gave l)escartescredit fbr har'-
ing had the qenius to anticipate both thc ovordand the idea of
" r ef lex . " I n a c o m m e m o ra ti v ea d d re s sd el i ueredat thc ti me of
M iillc r ' s de a th i n 1 8 5 8 , fi B o l s -R e y m o n < J statcd that he had
{bun<f(wie ich gelundenfiabe) that Descartes,roughly a century
and a hal[befbre Prochaska,had correctly descritredref]ex rtove-
meDt (er.rfcnrbeschrieb...
Descartes...dic Rcllexbc$,egungcn vbllig
fichtig\: he had used thc same analogr'(u ith reflection) to de-
I
scribe the phenomenon;and he also deservedcredit {br thc Iaw
of periphera)manifestationof senseimpressions.l6 The passages
that precedeand follow theselines on Descartesgive a clear indi-
cation of Du Bois-Reymond's intention. It lvas,first ofall, to pro-
tect Miiller's "copvright," as it n'ere: Mriller mav not havcknow'n
about Desclrtes,but Prochaskarvasanother matter. If Prochaska
lr,'asnot thc t)ther of the notion of rcflex, then he himself f'ell
under the shadorvof rhc judgment proposed in his name.rgainst
Furthermore,Descartes\1ns,accordingto Du Bois-
his successors.
Revnrond,a selllconsciousmechanist phvsiol,rgist,a theorist of
the aninr.rl-machine, and therefbre deserring ol the sameadmi-
ration erten(lcd to Julien Offrav de La Mr:ttrie, the theorist of
the man-machine,lT By contrast,Prochaska lvasa vagueand incon-
sistentthinkcr in whose mind the notion ofrellex rvasassociated
rvith that crf consensus nervorum,an anatomical myth of animist
ins pir at ion .ri In d e e d ,i f Pro c h a s k ah a d fbrmul atcdthe pri nci pl e
of the reflection of scnseimpressionsin 1784,he f)iled to men-
tion it in his Phrsiolo<tic
oder Lehrevonder Natur des,ltenschen
in
l820, t t F in a l l y ,Pro c h a s k ad i d n o t k n o u w hat hc rvasdoi ng the
first tinre he had the opportunity to descrilrecorrcctly thc reflec-
t ion of s en s ei mp re s s i o n sAs
. fo r M i ]l e r's contcmporari es,the
onlv author rvho might justly bc creditedu'ith prir.rritvoverMrillcr
rvasHall, and that $.asa prioritv of tu'o months.r0lt mav be that
in diminishing Prochaska,Du Bois-Revmondlr'asreallv trving to
discredit a group ofbiologists manifcstlyguilty in his eyesofthc
sin of metaphysics, n.rmelv, the Na turphilosophieschool.
Du Bois-Reymond's1858 text rvaspublished in 1887 in thc
sccond volume of his Rerlenalong with explanatory notes. The
of Descarteson u,hich Du Bois-
notcs concerning tlre passages
Reymond basedhis comments are particularlv r';luable lbr our
are fronr Arriclt 1J of
purposes;alsonrc ol the relevant passages
The Possions
ol the Soul,rvhere thc palpebralreflex is described.
I must point out t hat Du Bois- Reym ondm akesno dist inct ion
between a description and a definition, and that it is rather dis-
ingenuousof him to reproachProchaska,as he does in one note,
for havingused the sameexampleas Descartes.It would be laugh-
able to maintain that CharlesScott Sherringtonsh,.ruldnot harrc
studied the "scratch reller" becauseit meant borrorving from
Thoma s Willis. I n anv c. r se,Pr ochaskar vasan opht halm ologist
and, str ict lv speaking.had no nccd oI Dcscar t est o knor v t hat
there is such. r t hing as involunt ar y occlusion ol t hc cyc) ids. al
The secondtext of Descartes'scited bv Du Bois-Revrnondis Ar-
ol the Sou1.Although it does contain the
ticfe 16 of lle Possions
expression"espri* riJly'chis"(reflcctcd spirits), this expression,
unique in Descartes'swork, is used to explainthe mechanismof a
form ofbehavior that is not a reflex in the strict senseof the word.
lf, in fhct, Du Bois-Revmondis right to contend that Prochaska
did not knorv rvhat hc rvasdoing whcn he devotedpagt'.rtterpage
ofhis Comnrcntdfiono1 178-lto thc "rcflcction" ofsensorv into
motor impressions,rvhatare Ke to say,applying thc sanl('ciiter-
ion of judgnr('r')t,about an author who usesa pair of rvordsonly
once?lFormationdu ftllcxc, pp. 138-a0]
[17 ] We t her elbr c im put e t o Du Bois- Revm oncl,at his r e-
quest, f ull r esponsil>ilit vf or his hist or ical discovely. ll- I have
du,elt on the details of this controversv,it is becauseit enables
t5
us at last to establishthe prccise origin of the rvidelv acceptecl
vicrv that paternitv ol-both the rvorcl"reflcx" and some rudimen-
tarv vcrsion ol thc idea can bc traced back to Derscartes,
a vierv
that Franklin Fearing,as we haveseen,rrpcats scveraltimes, but
u.hosr'origins hc neverexamines.+lAlong rvith thc origin of the
as s er t ion,r,r' ch a v ed i s c o v e re di ts m e a n i ng.A s fbr the ci rcum-
stanccs.I)u Bois-Revmond'saddresswas mcant as a rebuke to a
Cz ec h pr ofc s s o ri n s u fl i c i e n tl y p e rs u a dedo1 the supcri ori tv of
( ic r m an c iv i l i z a ti o n . Bu t a s fa r a s i ts s c ienti {i c i mpl i cati onsarc
concerned, this addresscan bc attributcd to a concern - a con-
cern, that is, on the part of a phvsiologistfbr rvhom "scicntism"
did dutv lbr philosophy- to discover,in Descartes's allcgul antici-
pation ol a discovcrvthat u'asbeginning to justify a mcchanistic
intcrpretation of a u hole rangc o{ psvchophvsiologicalphenom-
ena, a guarantccand, in a sense,an authcnticationol the use that
people nou proposcd to make ofit. lt was not so much for rea-
sonsof purc phvsiologvasfor reasonsof philosophvthat Descartcs
rvasanointed a grcat phvsiologistand illustrious precursor.IIor-
mationdu iflc\e, pp. l,+1-42]
[ 18] I n th e h i s to rv o f th e c o n c c p t o f the rel l ex, verv di ffr:r-
ent circumstanccsand moti\.ationsaccount fbr the appearanccof
I)cscartes,Willis, JeanAstruc and Prochaska,rvith JohannAugust
Unzer gcncrallybeing left shroudcdin shadou.I'rochaska'snamt:
came up in the course of a polemic bctu'een Marshall I lall and
c c r t ain of h i s c o n te m p o ra ri c s ,a p o l e mi c that gradual l vturned
into rvhat is conrmonlv called a settling ofscores. The storv bc-
I ongs ,alon g w i th c o u n tl e s so th e r ta l e so fri val ry betrveensci cn-
t if ic c ot er i e s , to th e a n e c d o ta lh i s to ry o fsci encc. D escartes' s
nam c c am e u p i n th e c o u rs eo f a d i a tri b c agai nstone dcad man
lor the apparcnt purpose ofhonoring anothcr. In fact, it u.asa
m at t er of li q u i d a ti n ga n o p p o s i ti o n ,o r e v en- rl ,henone l ooks at
it c los elv- tu o o p p o s i ti o n s .On e c u l tu re , speaki ngrhrough the
voice ofone of its official representativcs, dcfentledits political
supcrior it yof t he m om ent againstanot hercult ur e. O nc philoso-
phy ol lif e, const r aincd r vit hin t he t r am cr vor kof a biological
researchmetho(1,treatedanothcrphilosophvasa mvthologl allcg-
edly incapable of fbstering ef'fectivescientiflc rcsearch. It was
mechanismagainstvitalism. llormation du rdflerc,p. 155]
A Cononical History
[19] An cmpcror's rvish to glorifv and justilv nervacaclernic insti-
tuti ons lcd t o a new depar t ur ein t hc hist or v of science.ln 1807
Napoleon I ordered a report on the progressthat had becn madc
in sciencesince 1789.GcorgesCuvier, as permancntsccrctarvol
ct Nat ur cllessince 1801,
the Ins t it ut pour les SciencesPhvsiques
w as assigncdr csponsibilit v lbr t he Acpor rt hat r r . asevent uallv
publishedin 1810,r,v'hile.lcanBaptisteJosephDelambrc\l'asmade
rcsponsiblelbr a similar report on thc mathematicalscienccs.Thc
authoritiescoulclpride themselvcson havingfbund a nerv Bemard
Le Bouvicr Fontenelle,a man capableof strpplcmcntingthe vearlv
analvsesof the rvork of thc aca(lemv\rith eulogies of<lcccased
acade m icians.But ant onc *ho *oulcl exam inet hc hist or v of a
lif'edevotedto researchmust considerothcr, similar researchcon-
tcmporary rvith, or prior to, that of his subject. Ancl rvhen onc
has receiveda Germanic c(luc.-rtion- an education that rvas,in
Fl enryl) ucr ot ay de Blainvillc'swor ( ls,"encyclopedicand philo-
logical"rl - one could conceiveofgiving a "course in the history
of natur al sciencc. " And u. hcn one had chosen,as Cuvier had
toward the end of his studiesat thc C.rroline-'\cademvin Stutt-
gart, to st udr -"cam er alist ics, "or t he scienceof adm inist r at ion
and economics,45it rvasonlv natural to dcvotc spaceto technol-
ogy in onc's rcport to thc empcror and to adumbratea thtorv cll
the social statusofmodcrn scicncc in tlrc l8l6 R/f.le.rions rrr /a
morcheactuelletlest.ien(c\ et r leursropportsavecla sociiti, as ucll
57
as in thc DiscouruJur l'(itat de I'histoite naturellect sur sesaccroisse'
mentsdepuisle retour de la pdix maitime (1824). The reader of
volume three of the Histoiredessciences noturellesis not surprised,
t hen, t o f in d th a t th c fi rs t l e c tu re i s d evoted to a remi nder,
inspired by the Marquis de Condorcet in the Esgursse
of 1794,of
the debt that modern scicncc owes to the technologicalinnova-
t ions of t he fb u rte e n th a n d fi fte e n th c e nturi es: al cohol , cl ear
glass,papcr,artillery, printing, the compass.In the samelecture,
Cuvier, a Protestantand the official within the ministry of the
interior responsiblefor overseeingnon-Catholic religious wor-
s hip, c ould n o t h e l p n o ti c i n g th c c n c o u ragementand support
that men of learning had fbund in the Relbrnationr freedom of
thought and the gradual emancipation of philosophy from sub-
servienceto theologicaldoctrine,
Blainvillc and Franqoisl-ouis Michel Maupied's Histoircdes
sciencesde I'organisationet de leurcprogris, conme basede Ia philo-
sophieis constructed on the basisof diametrically opposedjudg-
ments. To bc sure, thc chaptcr dcvotcd to Conrad Gesnerrecalls
the positive contributions of technology to Renaissance
science
(vol. 2, pp. 134-35),but immediatelythereafterthe Reformation
is denouncedlbr "reviving the unfortunatereactionsthat we have
previouslyseenarisingout ofvariousstrugglesofthe human spirit,
applyingmethod rvithout authority to the explication ofdogma"
(p. 136). Becauseofthe friendshipbetu'eenthe principal author
and those trvo cultural agitators,Biainvillcand Maupied,the work
contains numerous passagcs
conccrning thc rclation o[ the sci-
encesand their teachingto the ne\v social needsof an emcrging
industrialsocietv,but theseexcursesalmostalwaysend in sermons.
t...1
Blainville anclMaupied's Histoireis also different from, even
cliametricallvopposedto, that of Cuvier llhen it comes both to
cletermining the method, or ways and means,of the scienceof
58
living things, and to appreciatingthe cflects of seventeenth-cen-
tury ph ilosophieson t he developm entof t hat science.Cuvier
the scienccsif it disposesminds
thinks that philosophyencourages
toward observation but discouragesthe sciencesif it disposcs
WhereverAristotle's method, based
minds toward speculation.16
on experience, was adopted, the sciencesprogressed,rvhereas
Descarteschose the opposite path, and the regrettable conse-
quencesof that choice lasteduntil the middle of thc eighteenth
centurv, *'hen the scienceswere countered by "another philoso-
phy that was a copv of the true Peripateticismand that hasbeen
called the philosophl'ol the eighteenthcentqv <tr of the slepdcr."
A rather sweepingjudgment, it might seem,although it wascur-
rent at the time in one form or another. Blainvilleand Maupied's
judgment is equally broad, as well as considerablymore prolix:
Descartes,Bacon and all the others (src), they say,are merelv
the logical consequence,the elaboration,of Aristotleia?Bacon's
philosophy is nothing but Aristotle's;a8Descartcsrvorked in an
Aristoteliandirection;aeDescartesbuilt on the u.ork of the great
Stagirite;t0and so on. What is the significanceof our tu-o his-
torians' fiscination n ith Aristotle? The ansrverto this question,
I think, determines what view thc history of science ought tcr
take of Blainville and Maupied's project. The first step to\4ard
answeringit, moreover,must come from a final comparisonrvith
Cuvier's Histoire.
The third lecture in Cuvier'sthird volume is clevotedto Leib-
niz, and Cuvier drvells at length on thc grcat chain of being and
on CharlesBonnet'sdevelopmentof this [.eibniziantheme.Cuvier
statesthat "physiologvdoes not fbllovumathematicsin admitting
unlimited combinations,"and that, in ordcr to accept the notion
that there existsa continuouschain of beings,as Bonnet and oth-
ers do, or that beingscan be arrangcdalonga singleline, one must
havea very incomplete view ofnature's organization,5l"l hope,"
 t
Cuvicr says,"to have provcn that this ststcm is false,"tr alluding
to rvhat hc knou'shc hasclemonstrated through comparativeanat-
omv and paleontologv,namclv, that thcre is no unitv of organic
gr ac lat ion,n () u n i tv o fs tru c tu ra l p l a n , n o uni ty of composi ti on
and no unitv o f tv p e ,
Norv,if Blainville,fbr his part, acknolr,ledges five distinct tvpes
of c r c at ion , h e n e v e rth c l c s sa rg u e sth a t thcv are arrangecli n a
scrics, r.:achone trcing the distinct exprcssionof a general plan
u,hoscprogressiveor regressivcorder, il one Iooks at the level of
thc specicsfor graclationsand degradationsthat ought to applv
only t o gc nc ra ,d o e sn o t p ro c c c d $ ' i rh o u t apparenrhi atus.Ifthe
numerouspapers,rcportsand dissertationspublishedbl Blainville
can bc seen as the a postcrioriof his zoological system,then thc
a prioi is described in his Hisroirc des sciences
de l'organisationas
an a ptioti not of rational intuition but ofdivine rcvclation.This
afflrmation can bc read in the Introduction, signedbv Blainville
himselfi "l conccivedand carricd out m\ llistoircde I'otganisation
as a possiblc founclationlbr philosophv,whilc at the same timc
clcmonstratingthat philosophv is one and the same thing as the
Christian religion, rvhich is so to speakonlv an a prtori, rcvcaled
to man bv God himself rvhcn the state of socictv required it."eJ
And flrther: "Scicncc in general is knorlledge a posterioriof the
existcnceol God through his,w,orks."5q
llorv, then, does kno*lcdge proceed?Through readtng,The
preliminary analysisofzoological notions at thc bcginning ofvol-
ume thrce conflrms this unambiguously:"C)ne does not crcate
in scicnce,one readsllhat is created.Thc pretensionto createis
abs ur d,ev en i n th c g re a te s tg e n i u s c s ." ;5
In vi rtuc of thi s heuri s-
tic imperative,thc scicnccsoforganizationshoulclbe atrlc to dis-
cover - that is, to read in thc structuresand functions of living
beings- onlv u hat the Book of Genesisallirms about the orclcr
of t hos e bei n g s ' c rc a ti o n ,i n th c \\' a te rs i, n the ai r and on earth,
ending finally rvith man, proclaimedto be the "master" of all that
$.ent befbre. Norv, it so happensthat therc is a Wcstern philoso-
pher ofGreek antiquity rvho rvasable to rcaclthat orcler,r'hich
was unknown to EasternmvthoJogvrthat philosophcr u'asAris-
totl e, "u. ho under st oodt hat t hcr c is in nat ur e a collect ion of
groups,anrl that eachgroup fbrmsa veritableseriesrvhosedegrees
passimperceptiblv fiom onc to thc other, fiom the most imper-
fi:ct to thc ont: in rvhich life achievedits highest perfection.";6
1
Af!:tqtl-C_i-S9S!,clearlr',rvasto achioe Inorvlrdgr,,f man r.ganl-
].uz
i ng al l thosc aspcct st hat m ake him super ior t o t he anim als,a I
bei ng possessing a t ouch of t he divine. t l
This kev to readingthc forms of lifi: givesus the kev to rea<Jing
tslainvilleand Maupied'sHistoirc.That kcv is thc notion of "mca-
surc," an absolutc tcrm of rcferenceand comparison."l\'leasure"
is a rvord that rccurs ficqucntly in the Ilisroirc.The measureof
organi z edbeingsin t heir ser ialclisposit ionis m an. 58Anr l it *as
bccauscAr ist ot lt 'm adr m an t he m easur eof anim alit v t hat Ar is-
totle himself is thc mcasureof truth fbr thc scriesof investiga-
ti ons that t ook anim alsas t heir object . Thr ough t hc ccnt r r r ics
A ri stotle is t he m easur eof t lr e sciencesof or ganizat ion.[ . . . ]
Norv that we possessthc kcv to the Histoire desstienccsde
wc can un(lcrstan(l*hv ccrtain authors were in-
I'orSTonisation,
cl uded in t he book r vhile ot her s ner e excludecl.Unlike eclcc-
ti cs such as Cuvier ( r vho u. asf r er ; uent lvchar act er izedas such,
both sc icnt if icallyand polit icallv5e)Blainville
, baseclhis choices
on an explicit critcrionr "ln this historva numbcr of cminent men
stand as landmarksol scientific progrcss.I chosc them because
thci r or vn nor k and t he u. or k of t hcir legit im at e pr edecessor s
ptrshedscienccin the right direction and rvith an impctus appro-
pri ateto t he age" ( voi. 1, pp. viii- ix) .
t hc hist or v of t hc scicnceol or ganizat ionis
C on se<1uent lv,
governcdbv the firndamental,rvhich is to sav,divine, larr o{ the
 OF IHE H

organizationof organisms- the ascendingseries.Blainville, bv uraf sciences,a complement to that author's Gdniedu christianisme.
alwaystaking thc idea of the animal series(u'hich fbr him was ["De Blainville," Revued'histoire,pp. 90-91]
mcrcly thc readingof an ontological fact) as the measureof the
importance of men and their u'orks, composed his Hrsroirein
t he im age o f Go d c re a ti n g th e s e ri e s .[" D e B l ai nvi l l e," R erue
d'h;*oire, pp.15-821
[20] All history ofsciencc that is not strictly descriptivemav
be said to be implicitly normative insofaras its author, owing to
his culture at that moment, can do nothing to prevent himsclf
fiom reacting,as would a chemical reagent,with the meaningshe
thinks he seesemergingon their own from the past.But Blainville
and Maupied's H8foir!is more than normative in this strong sense:
it is a canonicalhistory in thc strict senseofthe word. How else
can one characterizea work in rvhich a man ofscience, such as
B lainv ille,c o u l d l v ri te i n h i s s i g n e d In tr oducti on that he took
account"only of thosestepsthat fell on the straightline between
the startingpoint and the end or goal," and thar he neglected"the
rvorksol individualsrvho, voluntarily or involuntarilv,veered,as
it \a'ere,to the leftrr60- a \r.ork,moreover,in u,hich Jean-Baptiste
Lamarckand LorenzOken are called"errant naturalists,"6la *'ork
that claims to professthe viervsof the "Christian Aristotlc"?62In
virtue ofthis, the authorsrl.rite, "As for those lost children nho
appearin nearly every era ofscience, .rvhohavestruck a bold but
misplacedblorv,or u ho fired befbrebcing orderedto do so, their
cfforts havealmost alwaysbeen r,"ithout effcct when not positivcly
harmful.We must not speakof them."6l lf the expression"canoni-
cal history" seemstoo severefor characterizinga work u,ritten
joint ly by a s c h o l a r* h o u ' a sa l e g i ti mi s t in pol i ti cs and a pri est
rlho *,ould one day serveas a consultant to thc Inder, one can
neverthelcsssay,havingnoticed that thc authorstook sevcralquo-
tations from Franqois-Ren6Vicomtc dc Chateaubriand'sErudes
historiques,6l
that their Histoireis, in its orvn way and for the nat-

6l
ll

Pn n r Trvo

Ep i ste m o l o g y

2
 Crt,rrrr.n Foun

Epistemology of Biology

Origi ns of the Concept

f 21] Ar isr ot ler vast he f ir st t o at t em pt a gener aldclinit ion of lif i:
"Of natural bodies Ithat is, thosc not f)bricatcd by man], some
vitalitv'that
posseisvitalit\.,othersdo not. We morn try'possessing
Larer he savsthat
.r thing can nourish itselfand gro" and clecav."1
life is u hat distinguishesthe aninratetrodvfiom the inaninrate.But
the term "lif e, " likc "soul, " can bc under st oo<l
in sever als<r nses.
It i s enought hat one of t hcm should accor dr l ir h sonr eobject of
our ex per ience"f br us t o af lir m t hat [ t hat object ] ir alive. "rThe
vegetalstatcis the minimal cxpressionof the soul'sfirnctions.Lcss
than this and t her e is no lilc; r nv r ichcr f ir r m of liit 'lr esupposcs
i l t l castt his m t r ch. r Lif 'e,idcnt iliecl r vit h anim at ion,t hur dif ler s
l rom m at t cr ; t he lif 'e- soulis t he f br r r , or act , of u'hich t he living
natura lbody is t he cont ent : : uch r vasAr ist ot lc'sconccpt ion of '
life, anrl it remainedasvigorousthroughout the ctnturies asAris-
totel i a n philosophvit sclf di<1.All t he m edical philosophiest hat
held, dou n tofe beginning of thc nineteenth ccnturv, that lif'e
u'aseitlrt'ra unique principle or somchorvassociated
u ith the soul,
essen t iallIdif lcr cnt f iom m at t er , r nd nn cxccpt ioD t o it s laws,
rveredirectlv or indirccrlr inrlelrtedto that part ol'Aristot)e'ssr,s-
tcnr u hich can e<luallvrrell lre called biologv ,rt psvchol<-rgv.

67
 But rhrough the end of thc cightccnth ccnturri Aristotle'sphi-
losoph'r'rr'.rsalso responsiblcfirr a mcthod of studling the nature
an<lproperriesof living things,especialllanimals.lLifeforms rvere
c las s ilied .rc < o rrl i nto
g s i m i l a ri ti c sa n d d i fl crenccsi n thei r parts
(or organs),rctions, Ilnctions anclmodcs of lifi:J Aristotle gave
naturalistsrcasonto look at lifc fbrms in a particular rvav.The
method sidestcppedthc question of life as such. Its aim was to
exhibit, rvithout gapsor reclundancies,thc obscrvablcproducts
of what A r i s to tl c h a d n o d i ffi c u l tv i m a g i ni ngas a pl asti cporvcr.
llenc e eig h tc c n th -c c n tu ryn a tu ra l i s tss uch as C omte B ufl bn and
Car olusLin n a e u sc o u l d rl c s c ri trca n d c l a ssi fvl i fe forms ui thout
c v cr r ielini n g l h a t th e v m e a n tb y " a l i v e . " In thc scvcnteenthand
i: ight ec nt h c c n tu rj e \. th e s tu d v o l ' l i f' e a s such rvaspursucd bv
phv s ic ian srJ th c r th a Dn n tu rn l i s tsa, n d i t \1.as naturalfbr thcm to
as s oc iat e
li fr: rr i th i ts n o rm a l n ro rJ c", h c a l th." From the mi d sev
c nt c ent hce D tu r' \o n rr.rrc lth
, e n , th c s tu dvofl i fc becamethe srrl > -
Icct ol'phrsiologr (narrox ll construed).Thc pLrrpose ol this sturlr
r v ast o det e rm i n e th r' < l i s ti n <ti v c fe a tu resof the l i vi ng. nor ro
d ir ine t ht <s rc n c co f th i s re m a rk a b l ep o u cr of nature,[. . . ]
I t r r as a (i < :rm a np h rs i c i a n ,C e o rg Ernst S tahl (1660-l 7l .t),
r v ho nt or o th a n a n l rrn <c. l s c i n s i s te d th at a thecl rvof l i fe u.as.r
necess.lrvprcrcquisiteol medical thought and practice. No phv-
s ic i. r nus ec lth ( t(:rm " l i fi " ' m o re o fte n . l f a doctor has no i cl ea
u,h.rt the purpose of thc vital lunctions is, horv can he explain
*.hv hc d,rcs uhat he does?Novr',uhat confers lil'e * Jif'ebeing
the directed, purposefi.rl movcmcnr without \ihich thc corporeal
m ac hineuo u l d d c c o m p o s e- i s th e s o u l . Li vi ng bodi esare com,
positc sulrstancesu'ith the lacultv to impcde or resist thc cvcr-
pr c s c nt t hl c a t o f d i s s o i u ti o na n d c o rru pti on. Thi s pri nci pl e of
consrirvation.of the autocracl of living nature,cannot bc passive,
henc c it m u s t n o t b c n a te ri a l . T h e fa c u lty ol sel fl prcservati on
is
the l>asis
of Stlhl's Ilcoriri mctlicalcra (170t1).Certaincarelirlread-
68
ers * h o r vould lat er clenvhis ident ilicat ir r noi lile r t ir h t he sr r t r l
sti l l nevcr f br got his f br ccf ir ldef init ior rof lif c as t he Po\ r cr t em -
poraril) t o suspcn(al clest invof cor r upt ibilit v.
In rerms lessfreightcd rvith metaphvsics,Xavicr Bichat b<gan
his Rcc,hercfics iologiqucssurlo vic ct /o mort (1800) rvith this
ph-r's
ccl cbr at edm axim : "Lif e is t hc collect ion o1linct ions lhr t r esist
dcath." In defining lif'ein tcrms of a conflict bet*'een, on the onc
hancl ,a bodv com posedof t issuesof spccif icst t . uct ur e, r nd pr oJr -
crti es ( elast icit \ ,cont r act ilit v,sensit ivit v)and, on t he ot her , an
envi ro nm ent ,or m ilicu, as August c Com t e r vould lat el call it ,
governedbv lau.sincliffcrcntto the intrintic needsol living things,
B i cha tcasthim sclf asa St ahlpur gedof t hcologt . 1.. ]
In the ver y vcar of Bichat 'sdcat h, 1802,t he t er m "Lr iologr "
rr',rsused fbr the first timc in (lermanr' l.l'-Clottfiit rl Reinholtl
lier ir;nus and simultancouslvin France[>r'Jean-Baptiste Lrnr.rrck
\h Hr<lroolologlie); thev therebr stiked a claim trr indtpcnrlence
on beh alf ol t he lil'e scicnccs.Lam ar ckhad long plannedt o gir <
thc ti tle lliolo{ir t ( ) one of his r T'or ks,
h. r vinglt r , r poser J.t heor
t \ 'of
life rcrv carly in his tcaching.rt thc r\1usa'um d'l listoirt Nattrrelle
i n P ar is. Bv st udving t he sim plest or qanisnl, i,lr e . r r gued,<t ne
c,rul <lclet er m inr r: vhat uas "csscnt ialt ( ) r he c\ ist ence ( ) [ lile it r
a bodv. "[ .. . ]
Lamar ckconceivcdol lif i'as a cont inu( , us,st ci( |1'nccum Llla-
ti on an classim ilat ionol'lluids bv solicls,init iallr in t he f br m ol a
ccl l ul a r t isst r e,"t he m at r ix of all or ganizat ion. "I ile or iginat es
i n matt er and m ot ion, but it s uni<1uepor vcr is evidct r t onlv in
the ordcrly pattel+?ofit5 cfli:cts, the seriesof lile fbrms, u hich
qradualll increascin complexity anclacquirc nerv liculties.+ [-ife
beginsrvith an "act of vitalization," an effect of heat, "that matc-
ri al soul of living bodies. "5lndiviclualsm ust ( lie, vct lile, Par t ic-
ularly in its most advanccrl.rnimal lbrms, comes, ovcl time, to
bear e vcr - lcr sr cscm blancct o t hc iner t passivit vol inanim at c
objccts, To call I amarck's theorv of life "marerialist" is to lbrget
that lbr hinr "all the crLrde or inorganic.ompo.rfucmrtter rhat one
ob scrvcs in nJ t ur e" is t hc r c s idue of or ga n i c <l e c o m p o s i t i o n . f o r
on lv Iiving t hings ar c c apablc of c hem ic a l s v n t h e s i s .
Ce org es Cuv ier ' s c onc c pt ion r v as v e r v d i f f e r e n t . Unlike
l-a marck, Bic hat and St ahl, Cuv ier s ar v l i l e a n d d e a t h n o t a s o p -
p osir<s bu t as elenr ent s o{ r v hat ht ' c allc d " m o d e s o f I i f e . " T h i s
concepr \r,as intended to capturc the wav in uhich highlv spe-
cialized internal organizations could entertain compatible rela-
tions rvith the "general conditions of existcncc." "Life," Cuvjer
argucd,
is a con t inual t ur bulen< r , . r f lo* whos e d i r c c t i o n , t h o u g h c o m p l r x ,
remainsconstant.This fiux is composetloi molcculcs,rvhich ch.rnge
individuallvvtr remain al|\,tvsthe sametvpe. IndecrJ,the aciual mit,
tcr thit constitutesa living bodv rvill soon hare clispersed,yct that
mitte r sc nc s . r s t hc r c pos it r ) r \ of a f br c e t h a t $ i l l c o m p c l l u t u l c
mart(r t( ) m ov e in t hc s am c dir c c t ion. T h u s , t h c f b r m o 1 a l i r . i n g
body is rnore essent'.rlthan its mattcr, since rhe lattcr changcscon-
stantlv rvhilc the lormcr is preserved.6
I.ifc th us bc ar s a c lear r elat ion t o deat h.
It is a nristnketo look upon lifc] as a mcrc bond holding togrrhcr
thc various elements of a living bodv, rvhen it is actuallv a spring
that keepsthore clemcnts in constantmotion rnd shilts them aborrt.
'I'hc rclationsanclconnections
trmongthc clcrnents;rrenot thc sanc
lrot}r onc m()mrnt tcr fhc na\f; in other
';rrrrrlr,thc statc or compo_
sition rr1 the living bodv changesfrom m(,m(nt to momcnt. Thc
morc active its lile is, the more its cxchangesand metamorphores
arc ncvcr-encling.And thc iDstant ofabsolute rest, u,hich ir called
to ral d c at h, is but t he pr c c ur s or of lur t h c r m o r r c n t s o f p u t r e f a c -
7o
tion. Fromtlris point on it makcsscnse.thcrefbre,to lrscthe term
"vital fbrcrs."7
Thus, death is presentin lif-e,as both universalarmaturc and in-
elrrctable[atc of individual components organizedinto compat-
ible vct fiagile svstcnrs.
The ol nr t ur alist slike Lanr ar cknnd Cuvier led, albeit
'r 'or k
in different \r'ays,to a conceptualan(l methodologicnlrcvolution
'fheories
in the representationol the $,orld of living things. ol
lile subsequentlyfirund a Iogical place in the teachingsof phvsi-
ologistsrvho, neverthelcss,believcdthat thcir cxperimentalmeth-
c,dshad exorciscdthe specterof mttaphrsics.Thus, fbl example,
IohannesM iiller discussed"lif c" and t hc "vit al or ganizat ion"of
tlre organismin the introduction to his llandbuclr<1,:r
Ph.vsiologie
tlesMenschens(1833-34). And Claude Bernard,rvho rccorcledhis
intellectual progrcssduring thc most fertile period ol his carcer
(1850-60)in hi\ Cohis (lenotet,alrvalsregardedthe n.rttrreol lif!
.rsthe fundamentalqucstion ofgent'ral biologv. The carc[ul con-
sur lesphinominerde Io
<lusionshc reachedare set lbrth in I cgons
vic communsdu\ dnimau\ et aux iplitaux (1878,espcciallythe first
three lcctures)morc systematicallvthan thcv arein lntroductiond
la ntirlecine (1t365).f)l course,thc Bernarrliantlreorl
expitimearolc
of l i [e involvedr el. r t <rexplan.
d of t uo r Jcliber at clropposc<i
r t ions
nraxi ms:lif 'eis cr eat ion( 1865)an<llif e is dcat h ( 1875) .
H aving gained cm incnt ly scient if lc st at usin t he ninct eent h
ccnturv, the question"What is lifc?" becamcone that evenphvsi-
cists did not disrLf to ask: Eru,in Schrr;dingerpublisht'da book
bcaringthat title in I947.At lcastone biochenristlirund cheques-
tion meaningfcss.hcrwever- Ernest Kahane,La I'ic n'e.riste pas,
1962.1n ,ntr histolical r6sum6of hou the conccpt of lifc hasbeen
uscd in variousdonrainsofscicncc, I orvea great deal to the rvork
ol i\lichel Foucault.$["Vie," Enrlclopricdio,
pp. 764a-66.r]
7t
Obstqcles to Scientific Knowledge of Life
[22] Contemporarvfrench cpistcmologyis indebted to thc $'ork
6f G as t on B ac h .' l a rdfi rr i ts i n te re s t i n u .h a t m av be descri bed,
in gencral tcrms, as obstaclcsto knon,ledgc. In sketching out a
o f o b j e c ti v ek n o u .l e d g e ,Il a c h cl ard,i l he hi mscl f'
ps v c hoanalr s is
clid not Propose,at Ieasrhinted at the idca that obiccts crtknorvl-
e dge ar e not int ri n s i c .rL l vc o n rp l e x b u t ra th c r arr ennreshe<i n l !ri rh rcsi sta nct .t ight uP t o t ht pr t st 'nt dr r ' l1 slr ch r r sist nllcc
ps v c holo{ ic alc o mp l e x e s .T h c q u e s ti o n o l c p i stemol ogi calob-
s t ac les( J oc snot a ri s c l b r e i th e r c l a s s i c ael n rp i ri ci smor cl assi cal
ra t ionalis m .F or e m p i ri c i s ts ,th e s e n s c sa re s i r D pl creceptors;thc
l ac t t hat qualit ie sa rc a s s o c i a te drv i th s c n s a t i onsi s i gnored. For
rationalists,knol'ledge pennancntlvdevalucsthe senses;thc intel-
lcct, its purity rcstored,must ncver againbe sullied. But contcm-
porarvanthropologv,infbr-medbv psvchoanalvsis and ethnographv,
takr.:sa vcrv different vierv:primitive psvchicmechanisnsimpose
cer t ain ot r r es t io n a cl o n s tra i n tso n th e c u ri o u s yet (l oci l e mi nd,
thereb\ crcdting certain gencralize<io priori olrstaclesto untJer
st . r nc ling.I n t he l i l e s c i c n c e s ,th e n , u h .rt u e hope ro cl i scovcr
i s t hc obs es s iv cp rc s e n c eo f c c rta i n u n s c i e nti fi c val ut s at the
very inccption ol scientific inrluirv. Even ifobjcctire knowlcdgc,
bcing a human eDrerprisciis in the cn<lthe u.ork of living human
beings,the postulatethat srrchknorvledgcexists - rvhich is the
first condition of its possibility- lics in the systematicncgation,
i n anv objr : c t t o rrh i c h i t ma v b c a p p l i e d , o f the re,rl i tvof the
q ualit ies r v hic h h u n ta n s ,k n o u i n g u .h a t l i v i n g mcanr to them,
i dc nt if v r v it h lif c . T tr l i v e i s to a tta c hv a l u e to li fc' s purposesanrl
cx per ienc es it ; i s to p rt' l tr c e rta i n n rc th o c l s ci , rcuntstances.rnd
d ir ec t ionst o ot h e fs . I i l c i s rh e o p p o s i teo l i n di ffercnccto oD e' s
sur r ounr lingsf . ..]
S c ic nc c ,hou e v c r, d e n i e sth e v a l u e sth a t l i l i i nrputcsto di fl
l ir c nt objec t s ,lt d e l i n e so b j e c ts i n re l a ti o n to oD e anr)rher- i n
other \ords, it l'ucnsurcsu'ithout ascribingvalue. lts lirst major
72
hi stori calsucccsswasnr echanics, basedon t he pr inciple ol incr -
ti a, a concept t hat com cs int o being $hen onc consider st lr e
movement o f m at t er it self abst r act edf iom t he abilit v ol living
things to impart movem('nr.Incrti.r is inactivitv and indiIference.
It shoul d co m c as no sur pr ise,t hen, t hat cf 'f br t st o ext cn( l t hc
nrethodsof m at cr ialistsciencct o lif i'havc r epeat eclllbecn nt ct
oftcn rcfl ec t s enr ot ioD. t host
l ilit v, it m av also st enl lr onr , l r ea-
soncd judgment: n.rrnelr',tlrat it mav be paradoxic.rlt() attcmPt
to cxplaina pou,ersuch ls lilc in termsofconccpts anclIaus l>aserl
on thc nega t ionof t hat ; >or vcr . 1. . . 1
P ersi stcntquest ions. r boutt hc or igins ol lile anclt heor icsof
spontaneousgencration nlav \\'ell Point to another latent over-
detcrmination. Norvadalsit sccnrsto be taken fbr-grantc(lthit
our fasci nat ionr vit h r epr oduct ionis all t he gr eat crbc( . r u5csoci'
ctv shunsand indccd <t nsorsout-cLlr-iositv about thtr subject.Chil-
dren' s bcl i e llr at ) out sexu. r lir vr cf lecr bot lr t he im Por t ancc. r n( l
n)vstcri ousness ol- biI t h. Whilt m anr hist or iansol bit 'logr ', r scr il>e
gcDcr at iont o t he lack of evidcnt t 'or unPer -
bc)i efi n spont aneous
suasi venesof s ar gunr ent st o lhe cont r ar Y,t he t heor Y t r at r vt ll
point to a nostalgicdcsilt' lirr spontaneotrs gr:ncration- n D)\'th,in
short. Freud'sdissidcntdisciple Otto Rank argutrl in The Trouma
of Birth 11929)that thc <hild's sucldenseparationfi-om thc pla-
cental environmentis the sourceol, or ntorlcl fbr, all subse<lucnt
anxicty.eHis ,Mythol thc Birrhol the Hero,rvhich dealsrvith nrcrr
rvho somchorvavcricl the fearlst.l1lc,\\'assupposecl to Iend strppcrrr
ro thi s vi c* b, r <lem onst r $r l r he pr evalcnccr , 1 t r ir t h- clenving
D rvrhs.l 0\\' i t hout going so lir a\ t o cliir n t ir . r t. ill Pr oPoncDt sol'
rl hat has been r , r llLr l "L'r luivoca)gcncr at ion" or "hct er og, r nl, "
u'hethermaterialistsor crt'atiolrists,havcdone nothing molf thnl)
give shapeto a lantasloriginrting in the traumatizeduncoDscinus,
one can sti ll ar guc t hat t hc t hcor v of spont . lncousgener , ) t ion
73
 s t em s f iom a D o v e re s ti m a ti o no l th e v al ue of l i fe. Thc i dea of
pr oc r eati o n .rn db i rth i s i n o n e s e n s ea n i deaofsequenccand pri -
ority, and avcrsionto thar icleamust be seenas a consequcnceof
the prestigeattached to uhat is original or primordial. lf cvcrv
liv ing t hin g mu s t b e b o rn , a n d i f i t c a n be born onl v to another
liv ing t hin { , th e n l i fc i s .r fb rm o fs e rv i tude. tsut i f the l i vi ng c.rn
riseto perfectionthroughan ascendantlcss
ascension,life is a form
ol domination. l"Yie," Entvclopaedia,
pp.7 66a-66t>l
Li[e as Animotion
[23] We conrplctcly forget that r.hen rve speakof animals,ani-
malitv or inanimate bodies, the terms \1e use are vcstigcsof thc
nDc ic ntm e ta p h l s i c a li d e n ti fi c a ti o n .,fl i l e u' i rh the soul and of
the soul rn'ithbreath(dnrmd= anernos). Thus whcrr man, the onlv
living creaturecapablcof <liscourse on lile, discussedhis orvn life
in terms of rcspiration (\. ithout rvhich there is not only no lif'e
but no s p e e c h ),h e th o u g h t h e * ' a s d i s cussi ngl i l i i n general .l l '
Creek philosophersprior to Aristode, cspcciallyPlato,spcculatcd
about the essenceand clestinyofthe soul, it rvasAristotle's De
onima that first proposedrhe rraditionaldistinction between the
vegetativeor nutritive soul, the facultl of gro\a'thand rcproduc-
t ion; t he J n i m a l o r s e n s i ti v es o u l , th e facul ty to feel , desi reand
move; and the reasonableor thinking soul, the facultv ofhuman-
itv. In this contexr, ir maters little r"hether Aristotle thought of
t hes t ' t hr e es o u l sa s d i s ti n c t e n ti ri e so r a s mere)yhi erarchi call ev-
els, the lesserof rvhich could exist u ithout the greater,where.rs
the greater crruld neither exist nor function lvithout the lesser.
'Ihc
important thing is to rememberthat lbr the Grecksthe u'ord
plche meant cool breath. The Jels, moreover,had ideasof life
and t he s o u l q u i te s i m i l a r to th o s e o f rh e C reeks:' A nd the Lord
Ciodformed man of the dust of the ground and breathcd into his
nostrilsthe breathoflife; and the man becamca living soul" (Gen.
71
2r7). This is not t he placet o r et r acct hc hist or vof t he schoolsol-
A l cxan dr ia- t hc. ler vishschool r vit h Philo, t he Plat onjcschool
*,ith Plotinus - rvhoscteachings,coupled rvith the preachingot
P aul(l Cor . 15) , inspir edt hc f ir ndam ent alt hem esof ear ly Chr is-
ti an doct r ine concer ning] if 'e,deat h, salr at ionanr l r esur r ect ion.
Indeed, the cultural cclecticism of Nlediterrane.rn
civilizationsis
even responsiblefor thc polvsemicconnotations(another u a,vol'
saying"ambiguitv") ofthe term "spirit," liom .rpirdre- an ambi-
guitv that pennitted it to sene cquallr rlell in tht'ologv,to dt'nott'
the thir d per r on ol t he Tr init v, and in m edicine, r l'hcr c. in t lr c
phrases"vit al spir it " and "anim al spit it , " it bccanr ean ant icipr -
tory trope lir the so-callednervousinllux.
A fter 1600,t he conccpt ion of li{i' , r san anim at ionof m at t er
l ost ground t o m at er ialistor m er el\ m echanist icconccpt ionsol
thc intrinsic lifc firnctions, and it uas no longer acceptcd as an
objectivc ans\l,erto the cluestion"What is lile?" \ct it survivcrl
rvcl l i n t o t he ninet eent hcent ur v in t he lbr m ci{a nr edical- philo-
sophi calideologv.[ : or evidenccol t his, onc hasonlv t o glance
I
at a l i t t le- kno$'n t ext , t he pr cf ; ce t o t hc t hir t eent lr edit ion o1'
the D i ct ionndir ede m idccine( 187i) , publishedbv Jean- Bapt ist c
B ai l l i d r cr r nr lert he edit , r r shipol lm r posit ivistphvsirir ns, Em ilc
t.i ttr6, t hc aut hor ol . r cclt : br at eddict ionar v ol t he Fr t 'nch l. r n-
guage,and CharlesRobi;;g profbssorol histologvat I'aris's[:acult!
dc N l tdccine.f . . . 1
'l'he Dictionnoire dc miLlccine
in qucstion \\'asa r( cJstingof thc
1855rer.isecl edition of PierreHubcrr N\sten'sDicrionnorrc
(l8l{),
i tscl f the r evisedand cr panded successorof Joseph Capur on's
Dictionnaircclemddecinc (1806), I'he cditors $'crc keen to point
out the diller ence l) ct \ vccn t he m at er ialistidcas t hcr . *er e ac-
cusedof cham pioning. r nclt he posit ivistdoct r ine t hev pr olessed
to tcach.-lcrthat encl,thev commented on thc varioLlsdcfinitions
of the t er m s "soul, " "spir it , " "m an" an<l"cleat h" r hat Capur on
7t
had pr opos e rli n 1 8 0 6a n d th e v (l -i ttre a n d R obi n)had themsel ves Life os Mechanisnt
pur f br u ar d i n 1 8 5 5 . [2,1] At thc cnd ol thc Trcatiseon (cornpleted in l6ll but
'l'lan
I n 180 6 ," s o u l " rv a s< l e fi n e da s th e " i nterD rl pri nci pl e ofal l not pub lishcdunt il 1662- 64) ,l) cscar t es\ \ 'r ( ) t c:
operati.ns t,l lir ing bodies;more particularlv,the principle of lifc
in t he r egc ta li l ,r(li n th e a n i m a l .T h e s o u l i s si rrpl r \egetati vei n I shouldlikc \ ou t o coDsider t hat t hesclt r nct ionr|, llor r lr r r nrt hc
p) ant sanr l s c n s i ti v ei n L re a s tsb;u t i t i s s i m pl e and acti re, reason- mcr ear r angcm cnt ol t hc nr ar binc's or ginsc\ r r r !bit ; s n. r t ur allrr s
. r blcan< linrm o rta l i n m rn ." tl re I n. ) r 'cm cnt,\r i . r clocl r ) r {) t ht r aut ( ) n) lt {r nI t llor t lr r 'nr t hc
ln 1855 ,o n c fi ru n da d i fl c rc n t d c l i n i ricrn: rrrangcnr r nc s s ht . ls. ln r r r dcrr o <r plain
ol it r count ( r - \ \ ( 'ightand
t()concaivt'ol this machinc
thcn, it i:i not neccssarv
thcscfirncrions.
Tcrnrs hich,in biologv,cxprcsscs,
consiclcrcd
analornically,
thc col-
ashavinganvr,cqctiti\(()r scnsitive'ioulor othcr principle<rlrnovc
lcction of [unctionsol rhe brain and spinalcord and,consiclcrcd
mcnt and liic, ap. r r tlr om ir s blood and it \ sPir ir s,r r hich. r r eagi-
phvsiologicalll,
the collcctionof firrctionsof rhe cnccphalicscnsi-
tatedbl the be;rtol thc lire burningcontinuou\ll in ils he.rrt- a
bilit y ,t h i t i s , th c p c rc c p ti o no Ib o th e x ternal,rbj ectsandi nternal
s t hc lir cst h. r t( ) acurin in. r ni
l i re nhich hast hc sam onat ur e. r all
objccts;thc sum total ol the neetlsantlpenchants that servein the
mat cbodies. ll
pre\en.iti{)n
ol the individualanrlspccicsanrlin rt l.rtionss irlr other
beingsrlh c a p ti tu rl erh s a tc o n s ti tu terh e imngi nnri r)n. l anguage and
It i s fa ir lv nell knolr n t hat Dcscar t cs'sident ilic. r t ionol t he . r ni-
t \ pr c \ s i ()nIb
: c l .rc u l ti cth
s a t fo rm th c u n rl crst,rndi ng: thc s i l l , and
mai (i n cludingphvsical. r phvsiological nr an)r r ir lr a nr cchanizct l
linall! t h e l )(' \\' (rt(r s e t th e rn u s c u l .rr
s \j tcm i n ntol i on.tn(lco act
or mec hanic. raut l onr at onis r ht , r bver scof [ xr t h his it lcnt if icat icr n
t h r , r u g h it o n th c cxtt r n a l n o r kl.
of thc s oul n'it h r hought ( "For .t hcr c is r lit lr in t r s hut onc soul,
I n 1861,t h i s d e l i n i ti o n * a s s u b j c c te dt() \' chcmcntcri ti ci sm bv and this soul h.rsrvithin it no <livcrsitvol parts"rl) an<lhis substan-
Anatolc l\t.rlic Emile Chaullard,.rvhoattackcrlnot onlv Littra and ti al di st inct ionbet r Teent hc indivisiblesoulandext endt d m at t er .
Robin but afso l.uclrvigBiichncr (( ralt untl StolJ,1855 ), the high ll the Treatise on ,tr|.rnsurpastlcvcn the summaryof its contents
pricst of Cerman materialismar rhc timc. ln Dc la Ph;losoph;e d;te given in the fifth part of the 1631 Discourse on ,,l,Iethorl
as a mani-
Positivedans scsrdpports.ryecI.t midccinc,Chaull;rrl cclcbratcd "thc fisto supporting an animal phvsiologvpurifiul of all lef'erenccs
indis s olub l r:n ra rri a g co f mc d i c i n e a n d p hi l osophv"anclyearned to a principle of aninr r t ion of anv kind, it r 'as bccat r se\ Villian't
to ldund "thc notion of thc rcal and living being" on "human rea- llarvev'sdiscovrrvol thr circulation of thc blorxl and Ptrl'lication
s on a\ \ ar e o l i ts e ]l -,rsc a u s ea n d { i rrc e ." li vo vcarsl ater, C l aude ol thc ErcrritatroonLlto i.o (lc notu cot(litet sontluinit in dDitnctlihut
Eern.rr(l!\'r-ote,"For the experimental phvsiologist,thcre can bc a hr dr odr r r . t nr icex; r la-
(i 628) had, in t lr e nr cant inr e,pr esent c<l
no s uc h t hin g a i i p i ri tu .rl i s mo r ma tc ri .rl isnr.... Thc physi ol ogi st nati on of . r lif e t ir nct ion - an explanat iont h. r t t ] t inv phr sicianr ,
.rnd the phlsici.rn shoulclnot think that their role is to discover parti cular lyin lt alv and Cer m anl, had t r ied t o im it at e, ot t cr ing
the causeo ile or the t'sscnceofcliseases."rL
["Vie," Lnc,vclopae- a vari et v of ar t ilici. r l m oclelst o cxplain such ot hcr t r r nct ionsas
dia, 1tp.167 a-67b1 muscu larcont r act ionor t hc equilibr ium of lish in uat er . I n f ict ,

7t) 77
 r
G alileo' ss tu d c n tsa n d d i s c i p l e sa t th e A ccademi adel C i mento,
Giovanni Af fbnso Borclli (De motu dnimalium, 1680-81), Fran-
c es c o Rc d i a n d Ma rc c l l o M a l p i g h i , h a d actual l v tri ed to appl v
G alileo' s t e a c h i n g i n m e c h a n i c sa n d h ydraul i csto phvsi ol ogv;
Descartes,though, rvassatisfiedto set forth a heuristic program
that wasmorc intentional than operational.
C)ne uav of explaining ho*' organslikc thc cvc or organ sys-
tcms like the heart and vesselswork is to build what rvc l'ould
nou call "mcchanical modcls." This is preciselyr'"hat the iatro-
m ec hanic s (o r i a tro m a th c ma ti c i a n s ) of the seventeenthand
c ight eent h c e n tu ri e s tri e d to d o i n o rd er to expl ai n muscul ar
contraction, digestion and glandular secretion. Yet the Iaws of
Calilean o r C a rte s i a nme c h a n i c sc a n n ot by thcmscl vcscxpl ai n
thc origin of coordinatcd organ systcms,and such coordinatcd
svstemsare preciselvv',hatone meansby "life." ln other rvords,
mechanismis a theorv that tells us hou machines(living or not)
rvork once thev are built, but it tells us nothing about how to
build t hem .
In practice, mechanismcontributed Iittle to subjectssuch as
embrvologv.The useof the microscope,rvhich bccamecommon
in the seconclhalf of the scventecnthccnturv, made it possiblc
to obscrvcthc "sccds" of living things, living things in the earli-
cst stagesof rlcvclopmcnt. But Jan Swammerdam'sobservations
of insect metamorphosesand Anthonic van l-ccurvcnhock'sdis-
covervof the spermatazoidu'ere initiallv understooclto confirm a
speculativeconception of plant or animal generation,according
to which the seed or cgg or spcrmatic animalculecontains, pre-
fbrmed in a miniature that optical magnilication reveals,a being
u.hoseevolution rvill proceeduntil it attainsits adult dimensions.
The microscopic observationthat did most to validate this the-
or y was un d o u b te d l y Ma l p i g h i ' s e x a mi nati on of thc _vcl i owof'
a c hic k c n' s e g g fa l s e l ya s s u me dn o t to have been i ncubated.ra
76
There is r easont o t hink t hat M alpighi's belief in m cchanism
unconsciouslystructured his perccption of phenomena.
Intentionallyor not, behind evervmachineIoomeda mechanic
or, to u sc t he languagcof t he dav, a builder . Living m achines
i mpl i ed a m echanicof t hcir ou'n, and t hat im plicat ion Point ed
toward a Summu.ropilex,Go<1.It rvasthcrefbre logical to assumtr
that all living machincs had been constructed in a single initial
operation, and thencc that all the gcrms of all thc prcfbrmed liv-
ing things - past, prescnt or luturc - u'ere, from the moment
of creat ion,cont ainedone inside t he ot her . Under t heseconr li-
tions, the successionof living thingr onlv appearsto be a histor,v,
becausea birth is in reality onlv an unpacking.When lcssbiased
or more ingcniousobser vat ionsled t o t hc r evival,in a r evised
lbrm, of the old vieu that the embrvo grorvsthrough epigencsis
(thc successiveappcaranceol anatomicalformationsnot geomct-
rically derivablefrom anteccdcnt lbrmationsl;), modcrn embrv-
ologv rvasinstitutcd asa sciencecapableofencouragingphvsiologl
to frec itselffrom its f;scination \\'ith mechanism
Mea nr r hil, , gt or r ing nt t m l', r . ol oh. ( r \ ali. lns br m icr , t . co-
1,i .r.,na rur ali"r . .phur i. ion'il?. , h. r t . ur ioLrr lr out n. r t t t r chelPeJ
to cliscrcditmechanismin a dillirent but Parallelu'ar'.The hidden
inncr structure ofplant and animal partsgraduallvcame to sccm
prodigiouslvcomplicated comparecln'ith thc macroscopicstruc-
tures visible t hr ough disscct ion.The discovcr l of anim alcules,
hencefbr t h called Pr ot ist a, opcncd up pr eviouslvunsusPcct e( l
rl cpthsin t he em pir e of t hc living. Wher cassevent ecnt h- cent ur v
mechanicsu'asa theorv ofmovcmcnts and impulses,that is, a sci-
ence ba sedon dat a accessiblet o sight and t ouch, m icr oscopic
anatom v$as concer nedwit h object s bevond t he m anif cst ancl
tangi blc. Availing onesel{ of t hat st r uct ur al m icr ocosm , t hat
"other rvorlcl" rvithin, one could conceile of evcr more minute
mi croc osm scm bcddcd onc w. it hin t he ot her . Thc m icr oscopt :
 c nabledth e i m.rg i n a ti o nto c o n c e i v co f structuralcompl cxi tv on
a scaleneverbefbrt'inragincd,much asmodern calculusextcnded
thc porver of Descartes'sanalyticalgcomerr\'.As a result, pascal
and I cibniz, unbeknonnst to each othcr, both fbund mechanism
uanting. But I.cil'niz'scritique, unlike Pascal's,
prorided the fbun-
c lat ion li rr J D c w c o n c c p ti o n o l i i v i n g rhi ngs - l ri oJogvrvoul d
hc nc c lo rrhp i c tu re l i fi .i n te rn tso fo rg ani snrand organi zati on:
Thuseach<rrganic boclvofa living cre.rrurcis a kind o1divinema,
chincor nnturalautomatonsurpassing inlinitclvevcrvkind ol artifl-
cial.rLltorn.rton.
Fora machincmadebv hunr.rn
art is not a machinein
cvcrvpartol it... . lSutNature's
machines,
livingbcxlier,arcmachines
cveniD thcir minutcstpartsanclto inlinitv. fhis is r!hat constittrtcs
thc riilli renccbct.neennaturt'andart, l>enrcenthe rlivineart and
or r rhu m,rna rt.l 6
l"Vie," fncr c/rpocrlro,pp. 7671>-68a]
Lifc as Orgo n ization
[25] C)nceagain, it \1asAristotlc .who coincd the term ,,organ-
ized brrrlr'."A bo<lvis organizedif it providt,rthe soul $.irh instru-
ments or organsinclispcnsable to tlre exerciseol its pou.ers.Until
the scvcnteenthcerrtury,then, thc paradigmol thc organizcdboclv
r v ast hc a n i ma l (b c c a u s ei t p o s s e s s cad s oul ).()fcourse, A ri stotl c
s aidt hat p l a n tsto o h a v eo rg a n s ,a l th o ughol an cxtremcl vsi mpl c
k ind, anrl p c o p l e d i rl rv o n c l e lrb o u t rh c organi zati onofthe pl ant
k ingdom . ,\l i c ro s c o p i cc x a m i n a ri o no l pl art prcparati onsl ed to
gerrer.rlizations ofrhe concept ol org.rnitation,an<lir eveninspired
i.rnt.rsticanalogiesbctv|eenplant.rnd anint.rlstructuresanclfLnc-
t ions - Ro b e rt l l o o k e (.4 l i c ro g ra p h i al ,( ,6i ), N l arcel l o Mal pi ghi
( A nat onttp l a n ta ru m,f6 7 5 )a n d N c h c m i .rhC rc; (l ' he A natoml ,oJ
Plants,1682)discoveredthc structurc of b.rrk, rvood and cortcx,
8o
di sti nguishedt ubulcs, vcssclsand liber s, and com par ct l r oot s,
tv' ,i gs ,leavcsand f iuit s in t er m s of t hc m cm br anesor t issucs
thcv co nt ained.
The Greek u'ord or.Tonon
relerred to both a musician'sinstru-
ment and an ar t isit n'rt ool. The hum an bodv n'ascom pr r er l t o a
musi calr ) r ganin nr or et han onc scvcnt eent h- cent ulv
t c\ t . iDclu( l
ing rtorks br Dcsc.rrtes,Pascal,J.rcqucs-Bin i{tnc lJossuel{Irdils
elcla connoisrancc
<tcDieu ct <!eroi-mdme)
and Lcibniz. "()rganiza-
ti on," "or ganic". r nd"or onnize"st ill car r icd bcr t hbiologicaland
musi ca lconnot . r t ionsas r ecent lvas t hc ninet eent hcent ur v ( scc
l-<rr[)escartes,
Emile Littr6's Dictionnairetlc la languet'ranqoise).
the organic "organ" lirs an instrument th.rt nccdcd tro organist,
but Ieibniz believeil, hat vr , it hout . r nor ganistt her c c'uld bc no
structural or lunction;rl rnit\ of the "organ" it-rstrument.\\rith-
out an or ganizcr ,t h, r t is, r vit hout a soul, not hing is ot g. r nizecl
or
org.rnic:"[W le rr ould nevcrreach.rnvthingabout rt hiclr ''*r'c,l:ld
sav,he r e is t r r r lv a lr cing. lr nlcss\ ! e f ir Lr ndanim at ,r l nr r chint s
rvhoscsoul or strtrstantial lbrnr producrl .r suhstanti.rlunin in<]c-
pcndcn t of t he e\ t er n. r lunion ar isingliom c( ) l1t . t ct . 'rLess
Li cclc-
blated but more of a tcaclrcr,the phvsicianDanicl L)rrncanurote:
" l he soul is a skilled or g. r nist ,r vhich f br m s it s or q. r nrbcf or t :
p].ryi n gt hcm . . . . lt is a r em ar . kable
t hing t hat in inanim at c or -
gans,th c or ganistis dif ler ent f r om t hc air t hat he causest o f lou,
* hereas in anim at e or ganst hc or ganistanclt lr e air t hr t causes
them t o plav ar e onc and t hc s. r m et hing, bv lhich I nr cr n t hat
the sou l is ext r em el\ sim ilar t o t hc. r ir or t o br ear h. "lr
'Ihc concept ol organisnrrlevelopedin thc cighteerrthc('ntur\'.
as natur alist s,phvsicianran<lphil<- r sophersought
s sr niant ic sub-
stitutesor ('(luivllcntskrr th< rvord"soul" in ordcr to cxplain h<"t
svstemscom pose( lol dist inct com ponent snevcr t heless
r r r r r k in
a uni fi eclm anner t o per lbr m a linct ion. The par t soi sr r cha svs-
tenr mutuallv influence onc another in (lirect or nrt'<li.rtedlish-
a
 *-r-
$i
ion. The rvord "part" secmed ill-suited to dcnote the "organs"
I that nat ur e f can] . , , , ": t . tI n t he sam eper iod, t he physicianCar l
of r v hic h t h c o rg a n i s mc o u l d b e s e e n a s thc " total i ty" but not
the "sum."
ReadingLeibniz inspireclCharlesBonnct, rvhosehostilitr to
mechanism had been confirmed by Abraham Trembley'sobser-
vationson the reproduction of polyps by propagation,and bv his
clrvnobscrvationson the parthcnogenesis of plant Iice.
I am not i-ct makingthe difliculty plainenough:it lics not only in
an organthat is itscl{ composedof so manr
how to form mechonicall.v
dilfcrcntpiccesbut primariiyin explaining,by thc Iawsof mechan-
ics alone,thc host ol variousreldfioDr
that so closelvbind all the
orgaoicparts,and in virtuc of which thev all conspiretorn,ard
the
samcgcncralgoal- bv which I mean,thel form that unity vr,hich
onecallsan animal,that organizcdwholc lvhichlives,grorvs,feels,
moves,presc'rves
andrcproduccs
itsel[.le
In Gcrmanv the text that dicl most to place"organism" at the
t op ol t he la te e i g h te t' n thc c n tu ry ' s l i s t o f bi oJogi calconcepts
$,asKant's Critiquc of Judgnent (1790). Kant analvzedthe con-
cept ofan organizedbeing rvithout using the rvords"lif'e" or "liv-
t1
ing thing." An organizedbeing is in onr: sensca machine, but a
machine that rcquircs a fbrmativc cncrgy, something more than
mere motor cncrgyand capableof organizingotherwise inert mat-
tcr. lhe organic bodv is not only organized,it is self:organizing:
"ln such a natural product as this every part is thought as owirfrf
its presenceto the ogenclof all the rcmaining parts, and also as
cxisting for the saheof the othersand ofthe wholc, that is, as an
ins t r um ento r o rg a n .Bu t th i s i s n o t c n o u gh..,. On the contrary
the part must be an organproducingthc other parts - each, con-
secluently,reciprocallv producing thc others. No instrument of
art can ans\r,erto this description, but onlv the instrumcnt of
u2
Friedrich von Kiclmcver, rvhom GeorgesCuvicr had mct asa fel-
l ow studcnt at t he Car oline Academ l in St ut t gar t , dcliver ed a
celebratedlecture on thc main ideasof an influential approach
to zoology and botanv, the Rappott deslorces organiquesdans Io
(179)). The organism is delincd
sirie desdilldrentesorganisations
as a syst cmof or gans in a r clat ion of cir cular r ccipr ocit v. 'f hese
organsare determinglbv thcir actions in such a wav that thc
organism is a svst cm of f br ces r at her t han a svst emol or gans.
Kiclmcycr scemsto bc copving Kant rvhen he savs,"Each of th<:
organs,in the modifications that it undcrgocsat caclr moment,
is to such a degreea function of those that its neighborsundergo
that it seemsto be both a causeand an ef'lect." It is easvto sec
u'hv imagesof thc circle and sphereenjovedsuch prestiger among
R oma nt ic nat ur alist srt he cir cle r cpr cscnt st he r ecipr ocit v ol
meansand endsat the organlevel,thc sphcrcrcprcsentsthe total-
itv, individual or universal,oforganic forms and fbrccs.
In Fr anceat t hc beginningol t he ninet eent hcent ur v it was
A ugus t eCom t e's biological philosophy,dist inct f r om but not
unrelated to Cuvier's biology, that sct fbrth in svstematicf;sh-
ion the elementsofa thcorv of living organization.lrArguing that
" the i dea of lif e is r ealll insepar ablef r om t hat of or ganizat ion, "
Comtc dcfined the organismasa consensus of functions "in regu-
l ar anc lper m anentassociat ionu. it h a collect ion of ot her f unc-
tions." Consensus is a Latin translation ol the Greek s.vmPatheia.
S vmpat hv,r vher ein t he st at esand act ions of t he var ious par t s
determine one anot her t hr ough sensit ivecom m unicit ion, is a
notion that Comtc borrorvcd, along rvith that of svncrg\',from
PaulJosephBarthez,* ho * rote:
' [' hepr eser vat ion lile wit
of is ; r sr ociat er l h t he svm pat hics
o1t hc
organs,as *ell ar lvith thc organismol their lirnctions....Br the
 \\'()r(l'rlncr!\,'i I mun .r <oncotttsc oi simultaneousrrr str<.<cssilt
.l(ti(r)s,)t rhe lirrrcr oi rlirrrsr rrrg,rDs.
rhir corlcourscbeingrLrth
t hnt t hr \ c , r c t i ()ncs()n s ti tu tr,b r th c i r o rd c ro l harnl on\ol sua(:c\
s jr r n.t hr ' int r i n s i cl b rrn o i a l rrn c ti o no l h c , rl thor ol a tenus trl
C om t c , of c our s c , i m p o r-te dth e c o n c c p t o l consensusi nto the
thcorr oi rhe socialorganism,an(l he l.rtcrrcviscdand generlli,/e(l
i t in his *' r r r k on s o c i a ls ta ti c s ." C o n s e n s u s "then bccamt svnon-
\lllou' u ith solidarityin orgaDicsvstems,and Conrtc skctchedout
a s( riL's()l (legreesol organic (onsensDs,llhose efli:cts lrccome
i n c r eas ir gll s t r i n g e n t a s o n e ri s e s l i o m p l a nts to ani nral sand
man,2)Oncc conscnsusis identifled rr ith solidaritv,one no l()nger
knorvsr* hich of thc trvo, organisntor society,is thc model or, at
anv rat{, rhc metaphor lbr the othcr.
I c nv , r r r l<
[ . lc a mi s ta k eto a s c ri b t'rh c .rm b i gui tvofthe r<l ati on
[rct.r'ccnorq.rnisnrand soci<tv solclv to the la\ity of philosophical
languagc.lr the background,onc cnn seethe pcrsistenceof tech-
noiogical imagerv,r'ividlv present liom Aristotle's dar onrvarrl.
At thc bcginning ol thc nineteenth centurv, a concept imlx)rted
from polit ic al ec o n o m v ,th c d i v i s i o n o l ' l a b o r, cnri ched the con-
cept of organism.The first accountof this metaphoricaltranscrip-
ti on is < luct o t he c o m p a t' a ti vpeh rs i o l o g i s tIl c n ri Mi l ne-l :< l nl rds,
who \r'r'otcrhe articfe on "Organization"Ior the Dictionnareclas-
ti(iuc dcs rircra.,-rnaturcllcr(1827). Since the organirm rv.rscon-
cc ir er l as l s r r r t 6 f 1 1 .6 1 1 5 1 eopr l ,rc to rr, i t * as onl r l ogi cr) to
measurethc pcrfection of livin{I Lreingsin tcrms of the incrcas-
ing structuraldifferentiationand firnctionalspecializationol rheir
p ar t s , anr l t hus i n te l ms o f rr:l a ti v cc o m p l e x itv. B ut that com-
p lex it v r t quir ec l , i n tu rn , a n a s s u rJ n c eo f u n i tv and i ttdi vi dual i -
z. . t t ion.T ht ' int r o c l u c ti o n o f c e l l rh c o rv i n the bi ol ogv fi rst of
p lant s ( ar oun< l1 8 2 5 ) a n d l .rfc r o [.rn i m a l s (a round 1ti 40) i ncvi -
tabl v turned at t ent ion t owar d t he pr oblcnr ol int t 'gr at ing ( l( -
mcntarv i nd ividualit iesand par r i. t llile lir r m s int o t he t ot alizing
i ndi vi cl ual it yol an or ganismin it s gt - ncr ll lile lor m .
Such problerrs ofgeneral phvsiologrrlould increasinglvclainr
the attenti o n ol- ClaudeBer nar rover
l t he cour seof his car eerasa
researchera nclpr of essor .For pr oof one need onlv consult t hc
ninth ofhis Legontsurlesphinomincttle Ia vi,:communtdu\ animdu\
The organism is a societl ol cclls nr clemcntnrv
et aux v,lp1ttour.
The specializa-
organi sms,a t once. lut onom ousanclsu[ , ot - dinat e.
ri on of thc conr ponr nt s is a f int t ion ol r hc com plexit v , r l t he
rvhol c. Thc cllt 'ct ol t his coor dinat edspecializat ionis t he cr er '
ti on, at the le'el oI t he elem ent s,ol a liqLr iclint er st it ialm i] icu
-
\ut B ..nur, l dubbed t he "int cr nal cnvir onm cnt , " $'hich is t hc
sum of the phvsicaland chem ical conr lit ionsof all cellular lif e.
"Onc might dcscribc this condition o{ org.rnicperfection bv sar'
i ng that i t con5isr sin an cvcr - m or cnot iccat r lr '<lif lir cnt iat ionol
the l abor of pr epar ingt he const it ut ion oI t he int t 'r na]envir on
mcnt," As is r.ell knoun, Bernarduirs one ol the lirst to cliscover
r , vit ha m echa-
thc constan croJ t his int cr nal envir oDnr eDt , . r long
ni sm, rvhi c h he called "int er nal sccr t : t ion, " lir r r cgulat ingand
controlling that constancv,u.hich hasbccn knou'n cvcr sincc .rs
homcostasis.This rvasthc original, anclc.rpital,contribution ol
Brrnardianphvsiologvto the moclernc.,nceptionol living organi-
zati on: thc c\ iSt cnceof ln int cr nal cnvir ( ) nnt cnrof
. a const anc!
obtai nedhv colr pcnsat ingf or t lo iat jonslnt l pt r t ur blt ions, pr r >
vides regulrterlorganismsrvith an assuranctol rclativc indcpcnrl-
encc fi om v ar int ionsst em m ing liom t ht 'ext cr nal condit ions ol-
their cxistence.Bernardwaslirnd ofusing the tenn "elasticitv" to
convev his idea c,forganic Iifc. Pcrhapshe had fbrgottcn th.1tthc
paratligmaticmachinc of his era, the stearnengine,wasequipped
rvith a rcgulator rlhen he rvrotr:
8t
 C)ne treats thc organism as a machine, and this is correct, but one
conridcrs it as a lired, immutrble, mcthanirol moc/lnr, confined
rrith in r hr linr it s c r l m at hc m at ic al pr ec i s i o n . a n d t h i r i s a s e r i o u s
nristakc. The organism is ar otBdnic moclrine,that is, a machine
equipped rvith a llcxible, elaslic mcchanisnr,ou.ing to thc special
o rgn nic pr oc c s \ c s it c m plor s , \ et wit ho u t v i o l a t i n g t h e g e n e r a i
l;rls of mechanics,physicsor chcmistrv.2{
lYie," F,ncvclopacd;o,
p. 768a-69a]
Life as I nfornation
[26] Cvbcrneticsis thc gcneral theon- of servomechanisms, that
is , ol m ac h i n e sc o n s tru c te (ls o n s to m a i ntni n certai n outputs
\
( pr o< luc t so r e fl e c ts ) rv i th i n fl x c < l o r v ari abl cl i mi ts. S Lrchma-
chines form the heart of selflregulatingsvstems,and it is hardlv
s ur pr is ingt h a t s e l f-re g u l a ti n go rg a n i c s vstems,especi al l vthose
mediated bv the nerrous system,became models fbr thc t,ntirc
class.()fcourse, the analogl betrveenscrvomcchanisms
and organ-
isms runs both *avs, In a regulatedsvstem,not onlv do the parts
interact u'ith one another but a feedbackloop connects one or
m or e m onito re d o u tp u ts to ()n er)r mo rc r cgul atorl ,i nprrts.Thus
c y ber net ic m a c h i n c s ,rv h e th e r n a tu ra l or man-made,are oftcn
describedin terms of communications or information theory. A
sensornronitorsan output fbr (lcviationsfronr a fixed or optimum
lev el. W hc n s u c h .r d c v i a ti o n i s d e te c re d ,the fecdbackl oop si g-
nals the control input so as to convevan instruction from sensor
t o ef lec t or. It i s th e i n fb rm a ti o n c o n te nt of thi s si gnaJthat i s
im por t ant , n o t i rs i n tri n s i c fo rc e o r ma gni tude. l ' hc {ccdback
inf or nr . r t io ne mb o d i e sa n o rd e r i n trv o d i sti nct senses:a cohcr-
ent structure as.rvcllasa command.
An organism caD thus be understood as a biological svstem,
an open c lr n a mi c a sl y s tc mfh a r s e c k sto prcsrrvt' i ts crl ui l Jbri rrm
86
and counteractperturbations.Sucha svstemis capableofaltering
its rclation to the en\ironment ll'om which it drarvsits cnergv
in order to maintain thc lcvcl of some paranreteror to perlbrm
Somcactivity.
C l aude Shannon'sr vor k on com m unicat ion and inf or m at ion
theor v and it s r elat ion t o t her m od\ nam ics( l9. 1li) appealedt o
offer a partial ans\1erto an age-oldquestion .rbout lif'e. The sec-
ond la*' of thermodvnamics,which statesthat translbrmationsof
an isolated systemare irreversible,owing to rhe degradationof
energv in the systemor, put another u?\', to tlre increaseol thc
system'sent r opy,appliest o object s indif ler ent t o r he qualir v of
their statc, that is, to objccts that are either inert or deacl-Yet an
organism,rvhich feeds,grows,regcDeratcs
mutilatcd parts,rcacts
to aggr cssion,spont aneously healscer t ain diseases - is not such
an organismengagedin a struggleagainstthe lite ofuniversaldis-
organ izat ionpr oclained by Car not 's pr inciplc? I s or ganizat ion
order amidst disordcri Is it the maintenanceol'a quantirv of iDfbr-
mation proportionalto the conrplexityol the structure?Doesnot
information theory havemore to say,in its orvn algorithmic lan-
guage ,about living t hings t han llcnr i Bcr gsondid in t be t hir d
r olume ol'his Ivo./otionudott;cc(1907)?
In fact , t her e is a gr eat gull. an ir r educible dif f er ence, be-
tween currcnt theories of organir.ationthrough inlbrmation and
Bernard'sideasabour indilidual developmentor Bergson'sirlcas
about the evolution ofspecies and the e/an litol. Bcrnardhad no
cxpl an at ion f or t he evolut ion of species,and Bcr gsonhad no
cxplanationfbr the stability or rcliabiliry of living structurcs.But
the com binat ionof m olecularbiologv u it h g( 'net icshasI ed r o a
unified theory of biochcmistry,phvsiologicalregulation.rndheri-
tabilitv oI specific variationsthrough natural selection,ro which
information theorv has addcd a rigor comparableto thar of rhe
phvsi calscicnces.
t\7
 O nc qu c s ti o n re m a i n s ,h o s c v c r, rv i thi n thc thcorv i tscJf,to
r v hic h no a n s rv e irs y c t i n s i g h t: Wh e re doesbi ol ogi cal i nfbrma-
t ion or igin a te ?An d rt I.rv o fl ma i n ta i n sthat bi oJogi calorcl crcan
ar is eonll o u t o f b i o l o g i c a l o rd e r, a fb rmuJati oncontemporary
rvith tlre aphcrrisrnsomne vivum cx vivo, omniJcelluloet cellulo.
llor v did t h c l i rs t s c l f-o rg a n i z a ti o n
c o mc about i f communi ca-
tion dependson a prior sourceof information?One philosopher,
llav m ond R u y e r, p u ts th e p ro b l e m th i s rvav: " C hance cannot
account fbr antichancc.Thc mcchanicalcommunication of infor-
mation bt a machinc cannot account fbr infbrmation itself, since
the machine can onlv dcgradcor, at bcst, prcscrvcinfbrmation."
B iologis t sd o n o t re g a rdth i s c l u e s ti o na s meani ngl ess:contem-
por ar v t hc o ri c s o [ th e o ri g i n s o f l i fe o n earth l ook to a pri or
chcmical cvoltrtion to cstablishthe conditions necessarvfbr bio-
logic al ev o l u ti o n .Wi th i n th e s tri c t c o n fi ncsof i nfbrmati on the-
or\, one young biophvsicist,Llenri Atlan, hasrcccntlv proposed
an ingenio u sa n d c o m p l i c a tc < lrc s p o n s cto thc questi on i n the
fbrm of u hat hc calls a "noisc-basedprinciple oforder," accord-
ing to u.hich self:organizingsvstemsevolvc bv taking advantage
ol " nois e, " o r ra n d o m p c rtu rb a ti o n si n the envi ronmcnt.,\l i ght
t he m eanin go f o rg a n i z a ti o nl i c i n th e a b i l i t) to rnakeuseof di s-
organization?But rvhv alrvaystwo opposite tcrms? ["Vie," Encr,-
clopaedia,pp. 769a-69b]
Life and Dcath
127] P ar a d o x i c a l l l ,* .h a i c h a ra c tc ri z e sli l e i s not so much thc
cxistcnccofthe life functions tlremselvesas thcir gradualdctcri-
or at ion and u l ti m a te c e s s a ti o n l. )e a th i s rvhat di sti ngui shesl i v-
ing individualsin the rvorlcl,and thc inevitability of death points
up thc apparcntexception to the larvsof thermodvnamicsrvhich
living things constitute.Thus, the searchlor signsofdeath is firn-
damcntally.rscarchfbr an irrefutablc sign of lifc,
A ug ust Weism nnn'st heor y of t he cont inuit v of t hc gcr m ina-
ti ve pl a sm aas opposed t o t he m or t alit y of it s som at ic suppor t
(1885), Alexis Car r el'st echniclucs f br cult ur ing em br vonict issuc
(1912),and thc do'elopment ofpure bactcrialculturesestablished
the potential immortalitv of thc singlc-cellorganism,rvhich .rvas
| l rr.rl onlv br . r ctidr nt . . r n, l t h, . r l, nt t r t d. nce t o r hc i, lc, rr har
.!
thi pht nom , na , , 1. r ging. r n,n. l r t ur ll t l, at h af ier . r , er t , lin . f r , r n, , 1
vearsar e conscqucncesof t he com plexit v of highlv int egr at ed
organi sm s.I n such or ganism s,t he pot cnt ialit iesof each com po-
nent are limited by thc lact that other componcntsperfbnn inde-
pendent fhnctions. Dying is the privilegc,or rhe ransorn- in anv
case,the <Jestinv
- of the most highlv regul.rtcd,mosr homcosraric
natura lm achines.
From t hc st andpointol t he cvolut ion of species,cleat hm ar ks
an end to the reprievethat thc pressureof naturalsclcctiongrants
to mutantstemporarilvmorc llt than their compctitors to occupv
a certain ecological context. Death opens up avcnues,lrees up
spacesand clcarsthe rvavlbr novt'l life forms - but this opening is
illusorv,for one dav the bcll * ill toll lbr todar''ssur.r'ivors
as rvell.
From t he st andpointof t hc individual,r he genet ichcr it ageis
l i ke a l o an, and deat h is t he t luc dat c uhen t hat loan m ust bc
rep:ri d .I t is as if , af t cr a cer t aint im e, it ner c t hc dut v ol'individ-
uals to disappear,to rcvcrt to the statusol incrt matter.
W hv , t hen, did I r r cud'st heor "-of t he "dcat h inst inct , " pr e-
sentcd in Be,yond fhe Plcasure Prineiple(1920), mect u.ith so much
rcsistance?In Freucl'smind this iclearvasassociatcduith encr-
gcti ci st concept sof lif c and ol't he psvchicpr ocesses,
I f a living
thing i! an unstablc svstem constantly lblced to borrorv energv
from the external environment in ordcr to survive,anclif lil'e is
i n tcns ion r vit h it s nonliving en. r 'ir onm cnt uhat
, is so st r ange
.rbouthvpot hesizingt he exist cnceol in inst inct t o r educe t hat
tensi ont o zcr o, or , put dilf 'er ent lv,a st r iving t or var ddeat h?"lf
l{ ',1
\\'egrant that the existenceofa living thing dcpenclson the prior
t'xistenceof the inanimateobjects h'oln rvhich it arises.it tbllows
that the death instinct is in accord rvith thc fbrmula statcd ear-
lier ac c or d i n g to rv h i c h e v e rYi n s ti n c t tends to restore a pri or
state." PerhapsFrcud's theory u'ill nou'bc reexaminerlin light
of t he c onc l u s i o n so f A tl a n ' s rv o rk : " l n fact, the onl v i denti l i -
ablc project in living organismsis death. But o\r'ing to the initial
complexity of those organisms.Perturbationscapableot disrupt-
ing t heir t ' < l u i l i b ri u mg i v e ri s e (o s ti l l g re atercompl exi tv i n rht:
\ er v pr oc esoJfre s to ri n g e q ui l i b ri u m ." z l
F inally , o n e mi g h t a l s o rl i s h to u n d erstandthe reasonfbr,
anclmeaningo1, the reactionaldesire for immortalit\', the dream
ol survival - uhich Bcrgsoncalls a "useful theme ol mvthifica-
t ion" - f bu n d i n c e rta i n c u l tu re s . A d e ad tree, a dead bi rd, a
c ar c as s- in d i v i d u a l Ii v e s a b o l i s h e d w i thout consci ousnessof
t heir des t i n y i n d e a th . l s n o t th e v a l u e ofl i fe, al ong rvi th the
ac k nolv led g n re not f l i fe a s a v a l u e . to o t ed i n kncrn' l edqeot i ts
csrentialprecariousness/
l)eath(or thc illusionof dclth) makesmen preciousrnri pathetic
-fheirghostlvconditionis noving. llvervact mavbe thcir last.Not
a {accthel makc is not on rhe point of vanishinglikc a faccin a
dream.Evcrvthingin mortalsh.rsthc valueof *hat is irrerrievable
antlunprcc!ictable.26
pp. 769b-69c]
l"\' ie," F,nc.vclopaedro,
9o
I CH,rprrs Frvr
'l Epistemology of Physiology
A B. r r ocl Lr c Phvsiologv
1
\
I
Objectives ond Methods
[28] In 155a,when t he celebr at edJeanlr er ncl( 1. 197- 1558) col-
lccted his previouslvpublished treatisesunder the titlc Univcrsa
medicino,hc providcd a prcfacedetailing his conception of me<l-
i ci ne' sconst ir ucntelem ent sand it s r el. r t iont o ot her disciplines.
Thc first ofthose elementshe called Pllrinlo11io, an<lunclerthat
head lre placed his 1542 treatiseDc noturaliparte medicinioe,fhe
object ol phvsiologv*,as describedas "the nature of the healthv
man, of all his f br cesand all his f inct ions. " lt scar celym at t er s
here that Fernel'sidea of human nature is more metaphvsicalthan
posi ti v e.The point t o be not ed is t hat physic'logy*as bor n in
1542asa studr distinct fiom, and prior to, pathoJogv,u hich itsell
u aspri o r t o t he . r r t sof pr ognosis,hvgieneand t her apeut ics.
Sincethen the tenr "phvsiologv"grarluallvacqtrircdits current
meani n g:t he scicncc of t he lir nct ionsand lunct ional const aDt s
of living organisms.The seventeenthcenturv sa\4,the appearJDce
metlico(Bascl,l6l0)bv Thcorlor
of, amongother works, Ph.vsiologia
(Amstcrdam, 165))
Zu.inger (1553-1588\, Medicinophvsiolollica
bv J.A. Vander-Linden( 1609-1664) and Er ercitotionesph.vsi icoa
olo11
(Lei pzig. 1668) bv lohannesBohn ( 16. +0- 1718)ln. t he cight eenr h
centur\, if Fre(lcri(k I bf-fmann( 1660-17+2)publishedhis Fundtr-
 as earl\ as 1718,it *as undeniablv Albrecht
ment.rPh)'siologiae
von Hallr:r(t708-1777) uho made phvsiologvan indcpcndcntdis-
c ipline of r e s c a rc ha n d s p c c i a l i z e dte a c hi ng.Il i s ci ght-vol ume
l:lementoph.rsiologiac (1757-66\ remaineda classicfbr half .r cen-
tur\'. But it *as evcn car]ier, in 17'17,that von Ilallcr, afier hav-
ing used his teacherIlerman Boerhaave's lnstitutionesmedicinae in
his coursesfbr nearly twenty years.dccidcd to publish his tirst
textbook, Primaclineoephvsiologioc, in the introduction to rvhich
he dc f inc c l p h y s i o l o g vi n a rT ' a vth a t c s t abl i sheclthe spi ri t and
method of the clisciplinefbr a long timc to come: "Someonemay
objec t t hat th i s rv o rk i s p u rc l v a n a to m i cal ,bLrti s not phvsi ol ogl
anatomyin motion?" lF.tutles,pp.226-21)
129] It is easvto unclerstandwhv anatomy took prioritv over
thc studv ol organ functions. In manv cascspcople felt that the
best wav to undcrstandthc functionsof the organswas to inspcct
t heir s hap c sa n d s tru c tu re s .Stru c tu re su ere macroscopi c,and
llnc t ions , n o m a tte r h o rv c o m p l e x th e underl vi ng processes,
c oulc l be u n d e rs to o db ,va n a l o g i e srv i th man-madei nstruments
suggcstc<l bl superficial structural similarities. From thc struc-
ture ol the eve,lbr example,it l.as possiblcto dcducea feu'crude
notions about the phvsiologvofvision baseclon knon ledgeol'the
construction and usc of optical instruments.But the structure of
the brain asrevealedbv clissectionimplied nothing about its ftrnc-
tion, becausethere wasno man-madetechnologyor instrumcntto
uiich it could bc compared.When von Haller clescribecl
the pan-
gland," its sccretoryfunction coulcl
creasas "the largestsalivar,v
perhapsbc comparedto that ofthe parotid, but it $'asimpossiblc
to go further. In his Elogcol'the surgeonJean M6rv (d. 1722\,
Fontcnclle rcmcmbcreclone of N{6rv'slrequentlv quotcd statc-
ments: "\Ve anatomistsare like thc dclivcrvmcn of ['aris, r\'ho
knorv cvcn the smallest,most out-of-thc-rvavstrcetsbut haveno
icleau hat goeson inside people'shomcs."
92
To find out u.hat llcnt on insidc, scvcraloptions rvere avail-
ablc: one could monitor comingsand goings,introrluccspiesintcr
the household,or sm asht hc r vallspar . t lvor t ot allv in or clert o
catch a glimpse ofthe interior. l\16rv'sstatementnot* ithstanding,
physicianshacllong used such procerlurcsto find out rvhat uas
goi ng on inside t he anim al or g. r nism .Expcr im cnt at iont hr ough
organablationrvasa naturalextensionol rurgicalcxcision.Andreas
Vcsalius(151,{-1564),
the founder ol modern anatomv,concludcd
his ccfcbratedHumani corporis
labrico (15.13)rvithrcm.rrkson the
uscfirlncssofvivisection and a discussionof its tcchniqucs,in thc
courseof u,hich he rcported on experimentsu ith ablation of thc
spleenand kidnev in dogs. In thc sevcntcenthcentur\',the mech-
ani st concept ionol or ganicst r uct ur cscncour agcdt his pr act ice,
at oncc premeclitateclancl blind. If thc bo<lv is a machine, one
shoul clb e able t o cliscovcrt hc f ir nct ionsol par t icular par t s, of
the mechanism'scogsand springs,bv destrovingpartsanclobserv-
i ng thc dist ur banccor br eakdor vnol't he m achinc'sopcr at ion.
f"Phvsiologie," Enc.vlopaedia,
pp. 1075b-c]
[]01 Il)' 1780, phvsiologyhad finallv outgrown iatromechani
cal theoriesthanks to thc rvork ol Antoine-LaurentLavoisierancl
l-uigi Galvani.Chemistrvand phvsicsrvould supplvthe nerv mod-
els. Laws,in the Neu,toniansense,rvoulclreplaccmcch.rnicalthc-
orems.' l he Nc* t onian spir it , u hich had br eat heclneu lif e int o
eighteenth-ccnturvscicnce,transformedphvsiologvbv supplving
i t not so m uch lvit h ner t concept sas uit h ncu m ct hods. l'ir cd
ofrhetorical conf lict , phvsiologist sf ocusedon specif ic ploper -
ti es ol thc vit al f lnct ions. But t he ver v inllr r enceol'Ne\ r t oniin
sci enccs t ill f bst er eddogm . r t icat t it udcsin lnanvm in( lsof philo-
sophi calbcnt .
V i tal ism r vasone r eact iont o t his dogm at ism .Far t oo m uch
i l ] has been spokcn ol vit alism . I t ( lid nor hindcr expcr im cnt a-
ti on or th e f or m ulat ionof neu conccpt sin neur ophvsiologv; on
9l
r he c ont r a n , i t e n c rru ra g c dp ro g rc s s .Vi tal i sts, emtrl ati ng thc
Nervtonian stvle, fbcusedon thc details of biological flnctions
\1,ithoutspcculatingas to their causes.Thc so-calledMontpellicr
Schoof o[vitalists was led bv Theophile dt' Bordeu (1722-1116)
and P.lrl-JosephBarrhez(1734-1806).Thele \r'asno more mcta-
phvsicsin thev called "vital moventcnt" c-rrthe "vital prin-
'vhat
ciple" than therc u.asin what Haller called"irritabilitv." Barthez's
Nouveauxdlimentsde la sciencede I'homme(l77tl)r,r'as in many tays
a s v s t c mo f e m p i ri c a l p h v s i o l o g v :" T h e ri tal pri nci pl e i n man,"
B ar t hezar g u e d ," s h o u l d b e c o n c c i v e di n trrms of i deasdi sti nct
lnr m our id c a so l ' th e a ttri b u te so fb o d y a nd soul ."
Antoine Augustin (lournot seemsto havegraspedthc origi-
nalirv of vitalist phvsiologv:"Vitalism bringsout thc analogiesthat
s f l i fc e x h i b i t i n s u c h astoni shi ngvari cty,and
all m anif e s ta ti o n o
takes them fbr its guide, but does not prctend that it can pene-
r r ar c t he e s s e n c co f l i fe ." 2 7T o s tu d y th is " astoni shi ngvari cty,"
cighteenth-centurvphrsioJogists looked at thc uhole animalling-
donr, lrom polyp to nran, from thc lrog to thc orangutan- that
strangemissing Iink that cighteenth-centurvlvritcrs referred lo
as"jungle man," and * hoseIinguisticabilitv and intelligencethev
s t udic dbv c o m p a ri s o nu i th th c h u ma n .
Il'cl.rssicism
in biologl meansrigorousclassificationcombined
rvith mathcmatical!cr<'ralization. thcn the term does not apply
to eightccnth-centuwphvsiologv,* hich tcrokall living rnatter fbr
its subject. It tolerated"in-betrveen"catcgories,as Lcibniz called
t hem , and i f i t g e n c ra l i z e da t a l l , i t $ a s i n i mi tati on ofl i fe i tsel f,
uor k ing en d l c s sv a ri a ti o n so n a s ma l l n u mber ofthemes. It uas a
picturesr;uescicnce,curior:s about minutiae .rnd about nature's
ln r nc at e w a )s .
Eighteenth-centunphvsiologvstandspoiscdbetrveenthe doc-
trinaire dignity of the prcviouscentury'smedical svstems,u'hich
bore the rvcight ofear)icr dogmas,anclthc rather frenetic cxper-
inrcntalismofthe nineteenth ccntury. lt rvasa fiuitful pericrd,as
old ideas were explodt'd by nerv experierrce.Bold speculrtion
$'asthe order ofthe day,and traditionalmethodsgavel\'ayto intu-
ition. It would not bc long before new techniques,many discov-
cred trv chance,revealedu hich innovativeintuitions u'erc sound
and rvhich lvere not.
The per iod'sphvsiologynas as vit al as lit e it self , as m en like
LazzaroSpallanzaniand Armand S6guinexperimentcd on them-
selves,while Robert Whvtt, Ren6Antoine Ferchaultde R6aumur
and StephenI lalesper{bnned similar testson fiogs, buzzardsand
horses.It rvas,in cvcrv senseofthe \r'ord, a bdroguephvsiologr.
["Phvsiologieanirnale." Hstoiregdnerctlc,
vol. 2, pp. 618-19]
[31] The eighteenth centur,vwas an age not onlv ofenlighrcn-
ment but also ofprogress,and ol technologicalprogressfirst.rnd
foremost,[. . .] Inventiveness
andapplicationswerc the watchwords
govern ingcxper im ent at ionin physicsand chcm ist r v especiallr .
Researchersinvestigatcdheat,electricitv,changesof physicalstate,
chenticalallinities, the dccompositionol matter,combustionan<l
oxidation,and their resultsoften spilled ovcr into phvsiologv,rais-
ing ncu problemsfor further investigation.Flectriciryjoined light
and hea t in suggest inganalogiest hat coulr l be used t o exp) ain
" vi tal l br ces. "The analvsisof dif f er ent kinds of "air s, " or gascs,
gavepositivecontent to the idea ofexchangesbctlreen or-qanisms
.rnd their envir onm ent . This "pneur nat ic" chcm ist r y r esolved
the once purely speculativcrivalry betu.eeniatromechanistsand
iatrochcmistsin fivor of the latter. New instrumentssuch as rhe
themrometerand calorinretermade it possibleto measureimpor-
tant bi o logicalpar am et er s.I t wasin 171. t5hat Daniel Fahr cnhejt
solved the technical problenrsthat ha<ldelared the consrruction
of sensitivc,reliablt'thcrmometers, and R!aumurfollowt'd r,r'ith
l urther im pr ovem ent s in l7lJ. I n 1780, I . avoisierand Picr r c-
Simon Laplacebuilt a device fbr mcasuringquantities of heat,
9t
 T hus , a p rrt l ro m re s e a tc ho n th e n ervous svsteD r,most of'
t he m ajor d i s c o v e ri e isn c i g h tc e n th -c e ntunphvsi ol ogruere thc
rtork, if not of amateurs,thcn of men uhose primary specialtv
$ns not m e d j c i n e .Amo n g th c m v v e res u ch namcsas H al es,John
B()\nton Prie\tle\, Lavoisicr,R6aumurand Spallanzani. l. . .] Con-
tcmporarv te\ts therelble givc a misleading,altogcthcr too ac.r-
dem ic pic tu re o f th c s ta teo [th e d i s c i p li nc. It i s odd that rvhcn
['ierrc JeanGeorgeCabanispublishedhis survcyof the nerv phvsi-
ologv in 1804,hr'mentioned only u,orksand experimentsbv ph,--
sicians,even though he rtas rvell arvarcthat one of the rcasons
I ir r t he s up c ri o ri tvo f th e n e rv m c d i c i n e w ' asthe contri buti on of
"thc collateral scicnccs,rvhich are constantlvproviding us vvith
nt ' u ins igh tsa n d i n s tru m c n ts ." [...]
The sevenrccnthand eighteenthcenrurici are alike in that both
rterc <lominateclby a singlcgrcat discovery.But Willi.rm Harvev's
rrork nearly inauguratedhis century, w'hereasLavoisier'snearlv
c lt ' s ed his . l l a rre v i n l e n tc d a m e c h a n i c l l nrodel i n ordcr to (l e
s c r ibconc p h i rn ()me n o nL; a v o i s i c ri n tro d ucecla chemi calmodt' l
t o ex pf ain a n o th c r, [" Ph v s i o l o g i e a n i rnal c," H i stortegi ni ral e,
v ol. 2, pp. 59 3 -9 .1 1
Ci rcu Iati o n
[ 32] T hc r v o rk o f th o s e re f' e rre dto a s " i atromcchani cs" (or,
r guallv ap p ro p ri a te l y ," i a tro m a th c ma ti ci ans" ) rvasconstantl y
nr ot ilat ed b ! a n a m b i ti o n to d e te rm i n e, through mrasurcment
an<lcalculatirtn,the larvsof phvsiologicalphenomena.This was
the least contcstableof their postulates,morcovcr. 'l he circula-
tion of the blood and the contraction of the musclcshad alr',,avs
been objec tso fp rc d i l c c ti o n i b r th e p h v si ci ans
of thi s school .
ln Dc motLtcordisWilli.rrn Harvcysuntmarizedhis conclusions
.rsan anatomistand his observationsasa vivisectionist.He calcu-
latcd thc rvcight of the blood displacedbv the hcart simply in
96
order to show th.rt so large a quantitv ol blood could not possi-
blv bc produced continuouslv by any organ or be dissipatcdbv
the organism,Ciovanni Alfonso Borelli uas the first to view the
circulatory function, bv then well established,as an ideal prob-
l enr to w h ich t o applv t he laus of hvdr aulics. He at t cnr pt edt o
calculatethe fbrce of the svstoliccontr.rction.Assumingthat thc
contractive force of a muscle is proportional to its volume and
that the vo lum e of t he hum an hear t is equal t o t hc com bincd
vol ume of t he nr asset erand t em por al m uscJes,he dct er r nined
that the contractive forcc ol the heart is equal to three thousancl
Roman pounds(l Roman pound = l1llu ounces).As for the pres-
sure thc heart communicatesto the blood, an elaboratcseriesof
deducti on sled hinr t o t he ligur e of 135, 000pounds!
In 1718,Jar r r csKeill ( 1673- 1719)de"ot ed t br et cssavsof his
Tentaminamedico-phvsico tcr the problcms of detcrmining thc
quantitv of blood, its vclocitv and the fbrce of the heart. I le esti-
mated that t he blood account sf br 100poundsof t he ucight of a
160-poundman; the blood in the aorta iravels at a rate of fivc
fect, three inches per hour; and the forcc of the hcart is nvelvt:
ounces.(The modern figures arc that the rvcight of the blood is
r)ne thi rd o l bodv r veight ; t he velocit v of t he blood is t wcnt v
inches per second;and the rvork ofthc contraction rvaveofthe
left ventricle is three and a halfounces.)
A skilled experimentalistand a religiouszealot,StephenI Iales
made an i mpor t ant cont r ibut ion t o cir culat or vm echaDicswhen
he published his Staticol Esscrrr,ContainingHaemastoti.sctc.(l7J3l.
Hc had already written important v',orkson mathematical bot-
anv.I Iis [egetob.lc (1'721\containedillustrationsof instru-
Statichs
ments he had built to measurevariationsin sappressurcin roots
and branches.From there it was but a short step to measurinll
the pressureof blood in the vesselsusing a manometerconsisting
of a long glasstube attached by a cannulato the jugular vein or

carotid or crural arterv of a horse, dog or shcep. Hales rvasablc
to establishthat the blood pressureis lorvcr in the veins than it
is in t hc arte ri c s(i n th e h o rs e ,th e b l o o d roseto a hei ght of ni ne
feet lvhen thc cannularvasinsertedinto the crural artery but to
onlv fifteen inches u.hcn inserted into the jugular vein); that it
fluctuates rvith the svstolcand the diastolc; that it is character-
istic of a given animal species;and that it is a test of the state of
the hcart.
Apart from thc tentative work of Borelli and Kcill, the next
rvork of cqtralll great importance uas JeanPoiscuille'sAecierches
sur la lorce du coeuraortique(1828). Haller kncrv and spoke of
the r',,orkof tlalcs but treated it as a development of ideas of
Borclli's, ftiling to apprcciatethe novcltv of the concept of arte-
rial pressure.
Thc importanceand originality of Hales'srcscarchshould not,
horvever,cletract from the merits ofthosc uho, follorving him
and building on his results, madc progresstorvard solving some
of thc major problemsof hcmostaticsand hemodvnamics.Daniel
B c r noulli, p ro fe s s o ro fa n a to mv a t B a s elfrom l Tl l to 1751,u' as
the first to cxplain correctlv horv to calculatethe rvork done by
the heart asthc product of the rvcightof blood expelledtimcs the
svstolic displaccmcnt. He also made comparativestudies of tht'
llorv ofliquids in rigid pipesand in living vcssels( l/rdrodvnamica,
(De vi cordis,lT'18),usedHalcs's
1738).His pupil, I)aniel Passavant
ligures to arriveat a motc accurateevaluationof the work of the
heart, onc close to presentlyacceptedvalues.
'lb*ard the end of the seventeenthcenturv, researchers
began
to invcstigatethe causesof the movement of blood in the veins,
rvhich are not clirectlyconnecteclto the arteries.Borelli, though
admitting the forcc of the heart, dcnicd that it \r'assuflicicnt to
dr iv e t he b l o o d i n th c v c i n s . H e n c e , thc mi croscopi cexami na-
tions bv Marcello 1\'lalpighi(1561)andAntonie van Lecuwcnhoek
98
(1590) ol the capillarv circulation in the mcscnter) of fi-ogsand
the tail of tadpolcs assumecl a verl grcat importancc, and so clid
of the mesentervol a cat (1697).Albrccht
Corvper'sinvestigations
von Haffer(De morusanguinh,1752)shou'edthat the hcart'spulse
could bc observedsimultaneouslyin both artcriesanclcapillaries,
proving that the powcr ol the heart extcndcd to the capillaries.
H i s theo r y of ir r it abilit y t hen enablcd him - as t he t hcor y of
tonicity enabledGcorg Ernst Stahl - to argue that thc shcath o1'
thc capillarycan contract independcntll,imparting an additional
also contributed ttr
circulatorv impctus to the blood. SpaJlanzani
the solution of this problem in a sericsof papers, Surla circula-
tion observiedans 1'universalitidu s,vstimevasculoire,l-esPhenomines
tle la circulotion languissante,I es.llouvementsdu sang indipendants
de I'actiondu coeurand La Pulsat;ondesartires 1171)). ["Physiologie
.rnimale,"Hxtolrc gindrale,vol. 2, pp. 601-601]
Respiration
[33] From Robert Boylcs'sNovoetperimentaphysiomcchanica de
ti otris clasticoet ejusdemeJJectibus (16691,)ohn Mavorv concluclecl,
.rbout l 6?. 1, t hat anim al r espir at ion involvest he f ixat ion ol . r
" spi ri t" cont ainedin t he air . I t is t he event ualdcplct ion of t his
spirit from the air in a confined spacethat rendersit unlit to sus-
tain life. ln his Experimentsancl Observtttionson DiJlcrcnt Kinds oJ
Air 11774-17),John Bo-vntonPricstley reportcd that a sprig ol
mint *,ill rcleaseenoughdephlogisticateclair (oxvgen)to suPPort
combustionin an invertedbcll jar. In I775, hc infbrmed the Rolal
Society that clephlogisticatcdair obtained b-vthe samc mcthocl
coul d sust aint hc r cspir at ionol a m ouse.
Lavoisier'sfirst invcstigationsof tht' "principlcs" u ith n hich
mctal s c om bine dur ing calcinat ionhad m uch t he sam c aim s as
Priestlcv'ssturlies:thc analvsis,dctcction and idcntiflcationof var-
i ous ki nds of gascs.Thc inf lucncc of t hcscgaseson anim al r cspi
99
ration $'as initially conceivedas a kind ofchemical test to study
the experimentalseparationof the hypotheticalelcmentsofatmo-
sphericair, had been do*ngraded lrom its ancientstatusas
'ihich
an element. Lavoisier'smore systematicstudiesofthe respiration
of bir ds ( 17 7 5 -7 6 )a n d g u i n e ap i g s(1 7 7 7)enab)edhi m to present
to the Acad!miedesSciencesa de{initive paperon changt'sin the
blood dtrring respiration(M!moitesur leschaneemcnts
que le sang
Io
tprouvedans lespoumonset su le micdnkme de rcspiration,1777),
Us ing c o mp a ra ti v em e a s u re mc n tso f the vol ume of gas ab-
sorbed.rnd thc quantity of heat relcascdbv guinea pigs placed in
a calorimcter, Lavoisierand Pierre-SimonLaplace werc able to
generalizeall theseobservationsand to state,in 1780, that respi-
ration is nothing other than a slorv form of combustion identi-
cal to the combustion ofcarbon. They rlcre rvrong, however,in
asscrtingthat respiration is the combustion of r:arbonalone, as
l avoisierrr.rsobliged to admit in his 1785 palter Sur lcsalty'rations
qu'dprouve l'oir rcrpird,in rrhich it wasshorvnthat respirntionpro-
duced not only carbon dioxide from the combustion o[ carbon
but also rvaterfrom the combustion of hvdrogen.They u,erealso
\{,rongto dcrcribe the lung as the locus and seatof combustion,
thc hcat from u'hich thev believedrvasdistributedthroughoutthe
organismby the blood.
Finallv, aftcr mcasuring, in collaboration rvith Sdguin, who
volunteere(lto serveasan experimentalsubjcct.energ,rexchanges
in human beings,Lavoisiersummed up his vierrs in t$'o papers,
Sur lo rcspirotiondes animaux (1798) and Sw lo trontpirdtion des
aninaux ( 1 7 9 0 1 .I l i s d e c l a ra ti o no l p ri n c i p)ei s often ci tedl
oI thcscresultsrsith earlierones:,horvs
Comparison that thc animal-
nr . r c hi n ei r c o n tro l l e db v th rc c p ri n c i palgovernors:
respi rati on,
rvhichconsumes hydrogenanclcarbonand rvhichsuppliescaloric;
transpiration,rvhichlluctuatesrvith the requiremcntsofcaloric;
IOO
and,lastbut not leasr,digcstion,which rcstoresto the blood n hat
i t ha.lor t br r espir ar ion
andt r , r nspir at ion.
vol. 2, pp. 595-96]
["Physiologieanimale," Histoircgdndrc.le,
[34] The end ofthe debateover the causesofanimal heat cojn-
cided with the beginningsof a dcbate over the jeat ol the phe-
nomenon. L.rvoisicrhad proposed that carbon and hvrJrogenin
the blood are oridiztd in the vesselsof the lung bv the action of
oxvgenon a hvdrocatbonicfluid secretedtherein. Objections to
thi s vi e w vver eput f br war d in l79l by Jcan- t lenr \ Hr ssenf r at z,
a former assistantol Lavoisierand later a disciple of the mathc-
mati ci an l- agr ange,who descr vescr edit f or having f ir st r aised
them, Ifall the heat in thc organismis first relcasedin the lungs,
Hassenfi'atzasked,u,hv don't the lungs drv out? Or, in anv case,
vvhvaren't they rvarmerthan thc other organsof the bodvi Isn't
i t theref or e m or e liLelv t h. r t heat is r eleasedin al) par t s ol t he
bodv supplied wit h blood? Accor ding t o I agr ange,pulm onar r
* it h dis-
bl ood, in cont act u it h inhaledair , becom essar ur at e<l
solvedoxygcn, u'hich then reactswith the carbon and hydrogen
in the blood to vield carbondioxide and \",ater,rvhich.rrercleased
u ith the exhaledair. This cxplanationis roughly corrcct (except
fbr the fact that oxidation takesplace not in the blood but in thc
cells themselves),but it wasnot conflrmed experimentallyuntil
18f7, rvhen Gustav )\'hgnusused a mcrcury pump to detcct the
prescnccoffree gasesin venousand arterial bloocj.
Furthermore,the posthumouspublication of Jean Senebier's
surIo rcspiration (1803)revealedthat Spallanzaridt-roted
'l'l6moires
thc l .rs rr car sof hi, I ile r ( ) \ \ : \ t cnlat i( er pcr im . nt at i, , r ron r <spi-
ration in vertebratesand invcrtcbrates,fiom $ hich he. tc,o, con-
cluded, afier thousandsofexperiments, that oxyqen is absorbed
and carbon dioxide releasedby all tissuesand org.rns,and that
amphibians and reptiles may absorb morc oxygen through the
s k in t han rh ro u g h th c l u n g s . In o th cr \\' ords,i n ani mal s * i th
lungs, thc lungs arc the organ of cxpressionbut not the organ of
exerciscol r function coextensivcu.ith the entirc organism. Bv An Expe r im t 'nt al Science

per f or mi n g c x p c ri me n ts to d i s s o c i a tethe respi rati onfuncti on

evennrole than Lavoisier,
organ,Spallanzani,
from the pulnronar-v
btrt using his mcthodsofcomparativcphysiolog\',laid tht'{Iround-
f or a g e n e ra lp h rs i o l o g v .[" Ph v s i ol ogi cani mal e," H i stoi re
' r ' or k
yllniralc.tol.2, pp. 597-981

New Styles in the Age of Lahoratories

[35] l L clat ionsbet $, ccn t hc f ir st syst em at icallvexper im cnt al
phl si o logv and t hc t hcor et icallv,t hat is, m at hem at ically,m or e
advancc<lphvsicaland chemical scicnccsfbllorveddillelent pat-
tems in france anclCenranr'.Thc flrst vcarof the nineteenthccn-
turv nitnesserl the pubJicationol Recherthes ph.rsiolooiqucs
rur lo
,tieet la nort br' \ar i<r Bichat. n ho stroveto prescn'ctht ciistinc-
ti venessol biologr ''ssubjeccm at t cr and m et hods in t he lacc of
efforts bv ph1'sicistand
s chcm ist s t o annex phlsiologv t o t hcir
ou.n disciplincs.Bichat,thc brilliant lbunder ol gcneralanatomy,
or tl re st udv ol or ganict issues,and a t cnaciouschanr pionof t he
conccpt of t he "vit al pr opcr t ies"of such t issue,had a pr of bund
i nfl uencc on t he f ir st Fr enchphlsiologist st o em br acem et hodi-
cal exp cr im ent ar ion.Alt hough Fr anqoisM agcndie and Claude
B ernar d,unlike Bichat , ncvcr doubt ed t he need r o usc phlsical
anrl ch em ical m ct hor lst o ir r vcst igat cphvsiologicalr nechnnir nr s.
thel ncverceascr)to Lrr:licvc in the uniquenessol orqanicphenont-
ena, Th ir r v. r st he dist inct ir c f i'at ur c, oDc nt ight elen say t hc
nati on al t r . xlcnr ar k,of Fr ench physiology,at a r inr e r vhen phv-
si ol ogv in G er nr anr r . as alr eadr being done, like phvsicsand
chemistry,in laboratoriesequippcd with steadilvirrproving, in-

rol
dustriallv manufacrurede<luipment,rvhile Frcnch physiologists
soldiered on u'ith nothing more than the rudimentary facilities
availableto university professorsand hospital physiciansas per-
quisitesof thcir positions.This accountsfor the undeniabiedif-
f er enc cin o ri e n ta ti o na n d s ty l e o f rc s e archon ei ther si de of the
Rhine. \\rhcn Bernardcompared himself to Hermann von llt.lm-
holtz and remarkcd in his notebook that his German colleague
lbund only rvhat hc uas looking fbr, he u'asremarking not only
on a diflerence in spirit but also on a disproportion of available
means.For, bv this time. nerv discoveriesin physiologyu'ere not
to be had on the cheap. This u,asone re.rsonu'hy doctors rvho
carne from the Llnitcd Statesto studv in Europe generallv pre-
ferrcd to studv u.ith Germanphpiologists,especiallyKarl Luclwig
(1816-1895),ratherthan rvith their Frenchcounterparts.The first
phvsiologvlaboratorieswere establishedin rhe United Statesin
t he 1870 s ,a n d th e y s o o n c o u l d b o a s t offaci l i ti es and equi p-
ment superior to the flnest Europeanlaboraton'es.As physioJogv
laboratoriesgren larger and their equipment more complex, it
bccame common lbr rcsearchto be conducted bv tcams rather
than individuals.Researcherswere more anonymous,but the dis-
cip)ine as a u,hole u'as less dependent on individual strokes of
genirrs.["Physiologic," Encvclopaedia, pp. 1076a-b]
l6] I l p h y s i c sa n d c h e n ri s trl c x c rte dgrorvi ng i nl l uenct' on
researchin phvsiologv,it was mainll,bt'causcphvsiologistsfound
the cechniquesofthose sciencesindispensableas researchroolsl
though not necessarilvas theoretical models. While Claude Ber-
nard's oftcn-repeated claim that physiologv became scientific
when it becameexperimeDtalneed not be taken strictly lirerallv,
it is certainly true that thc radical difference betrvccn thc phlsi-
ological expcrimentation of the nineteenth century and that of
thc eighteenthcentun lay in thc systematicuse ofmeasuringand
detcction instrumcntsand equipment borrorvedor adaptcdfrom,
I O,l
or i nspir edby, t he llour ishingsciencesol phvsicsand chem ir t r v'
deservecrcdit tor
To be sure, Ludrvig and his school in Gernran-v
their persistentinterestin physicaland chemicalmethods,as n'ell
as their ingenuity in thc constrtlctionand usc of new instruments.
Bernarcl's rcsearchseemsrelativelvartisanalbv comParison.lt uas
al so mor e nar r or vlvbiological, vivisecr ionbeing it s <hiel t , . 'ch-
niclue.But it rvould be misleadingto suggestthat therc was.r [un-
damental difference of national inte]ligencc or genius bet$een
the two countries. Indeed, thc historv of physiologv(not t'r be
s) shous that researchers
conlirscd\r.ith the historv of phvsiologist
in both countries leanred from each otht'r nnd exchangedideas
.rhout how to inrproveexPerimcntalmcthods by borron'ing from
other d isciplines.Ludwig becam cf am ous.lor exam ple,not only
lbr building the mercun pump ftrr separatingblood gasesbut even
more for the construction of the celcbratedkymograph (18'16).
thc ancestorofthis instru-
In ternrsoftechnologicalphvlogencsis,
mcDt \1assurelythe "hcmodvnamometer"ofJtan Poiscuille.Lud-
u ig's genius u.asto couple Poiseuill."sartcrial manomet('r to a
, \ lar ev( 1830- 1904) sctout
graph icr ecor dcr .Whcn Et ienne- Julcs
to develop and perf'ect the graphic method in France, he rvas
therefbreindebtedindirectlv to Poiseuilleand dircctlv to [.udrvig.
pp.231-32]
IErudcs,
l )7 1 Event hough anallt ical t echniquesbor r or vedlr om phr s-
ics and chcmistry pro'ed fiuitful in Phvsiology,they could not
di scredit or supplant t hc m et hod t hat Claudc Ber nar d called
"operative physiology,"in rvhich vivisection, resectionand abla-
tion are usedto disturb the balanceofothenvise intact organisms,
'fhis traditional method $.asuscd bv
Julien Jcan Ctsar Lr:gallois
and Fr anqoisl\ 't aqendieear lv in t he ninct cent h cenr ur v and br
P i errc Flour ens lat er on. G ust av Theodor c Fr it sch and Julius
E dw a r d Hit zig used galvanicst im ulat ion of t he cor t ex t o dis-
tinguish betwecn motor and scnsory functions in the ccrebral
to t
 _r
lobes( J 870) . F ri c d ri c hGo l tz re fu s c dto a c l m itthe val i di tv of any
ot her m et hod.
l\4ostof thc t'arlv rvork on glandsrelied on ablation. Charles-
E douar d B r ou. n -S6 q u a rd u s e d i t to s tu d y th e adrenalfuncti on
( 18. 56) ,Nlor it z Sc h i fl to s tu d v th e th v ro i d functi on (1859 and
1883) ,and I : m i l e Gl c v to s tu c l yth c p a ra rh v r oi dfuncti on (1891).
Beforc the active principlcs of the variousendocrine sccretions
coulcl be identified (aclrenalinbv Takaminein 1901,thvroxin bv
E dr v ar dCalum Ke n d a l l i n 1 9 1 4 ),p h v s i o l o g i ststri ed to ri cmon,
s t r at e t he c hemi c a l a c ti o n s o fg l a n d s trv me ansof organ trans-
plants. In 1849, fbr examplc, Arnold Adolphe Bcrthold rcvcrsed
the ellects of castrationin a roosterbv transplantingtesticlesinto
its peritoncal caviry. In 1884,Schiff transplanteda thvroid lrom
o nc dog t o anoth e r, th e fi rs t i n s ta n c co fa n opcrati on that had
bec om cc om m o n p l a c cb v th c c n d o f th c c e n turv.
The techniquesof operati.r'e phvsiologvu ere used in conjunc-
tion rvith the ne.rr.mcthods of (tec rrophvsiologyto map thc func-
ti ons ol nc r v c bu n d l c si n th e s p i n a lc o r< la n d t o producean atl as
of cercbr.rllLnctions.CharlesScott Sherrington'sdiscoveries.rvcre
basedon very preciseoperativctechniquesinvolving difTcrentia)
"prcparations" (decorticated,riccerebratcdand dccapitatcdani-
m als ) . I n s t udy i n gth e fu n c ti o n so fth e s v m p a theti cnervoussvs-
tc m , phv s iologi s tsre l i e d o n v i v i s c c ti o n l o n g bel brc turni ng to
chemicalmethods u ith .lohn Novport l-anglev.It wasvivisection
th at enabled CI a u d e B e rn a rdi n 1 8 5 .1to d e m onstratethc rol e
pJayedby thc svmpathericsvstemin calorification(regulatingthe
cir c ulat or vf low i n th e c a p i l l a ri c s ),[...]
Despite the f;ct that some of its grcatesrrcpresentatives_
Bernard,lbr instance- insistedthat phvsiologvl,as an indepen-
dent discipline rvith methodsof its orvn, l.lrilc othersstressedits
subordinationto physicsand chemistrv (Karl Ludu,ig) or mathe-
matics (Hcrmann von Helmholtz), ninetecnth-centunphvsiologv
ro 6
EP STEMO OGY
')
\\as not altogether dcvoid of unitv of insPirationor Purpose lt
\4asthc 5cienceof functional constantsin organisms One sign
that it was an authentic scicnce is that from l\{agendieto Sher-
rington anclPavlovu'e find a grcat manYovcrlaPPingstudiesand
cliscoverics and a large numbcr of seParateand simultaneousclis-
coveries(sometimesrvith disputtrsover prioritv, somctimesnot )'
The historv of physiologvcnjovcrl a relative inrlependenccliom
I t m at t er slit t lc r vhet herit r vasSir
thr: hi storv o f Phvsiologist s.
CharlesBell or Nlagcndiervho "rc.rlly" discovcrcdthc firnction of
the spinalnerveroots, rvhether MarshallHall or lolrannesJlliiller
first discovercclreflcx actions, Emile Du Bois-Revnlonclor ller-
mann motor currents,or David Ferrieror Ilermann i\'lunkthe cor-
tical centcr of vision. As soon as mcthods and Problemsbecome
adjuste<Jto each other, as soon as instrtlmentsbecome so highlv
specializcdthat their verv use imPliesthc acccPtnnceol comnlon
uorki ng hv pot hescs,it is t r ue t o sav t hat scienccshaPcsscicn
ti sts j ust as m uch as scient ist sshapescience.[ "I 'hvsiologic en
Alfemagne," ITistotrc gindrale,vol. ), pp. +lt2-8'11
Physiology ls Not an Empirical Sciencc
sidc of cxperimtrn-
[38] b concentratesolelvon the instrumcntal
tati on \\!ul d be t o give a m isleadingidea ol t he clevclopm cntof
nineteenth-centurvphlsiology, though. Some historical skctches
and methodologicalmanifistousgire thc irnpressionthat instnr-
mcnts and the tcchniques that useclthem rvere someho\\ idellt'
'ib be sure, tlsing an instrument obligcs thc user to subscribeto
a hvpothesisabout the firnction under studv. For cxample, Emile
Du Bois-Reymontl'sinductive slide phvsicallrembodicsa certnin
idca of the linctions of ncrve anrl muscle, but it is hardlv a sub-
sti tute fbr that idca: an inst r um ent is an aicl t o explor at ionbut
ol'no use in fiaming qucstions. l-hus,I cannot agrce\\'ith thos(
hi stori ansof phvsiologr , , Pr of cssionalas ut 'll as am at cur , \ nho
t0 7
 would outdo even Claudc Bernard'sopen hostility to theorv by
reflects an instinctive need to re(:onstitutethat PrototYPeof all
ascribingall progressin nineteeDth-centuryphysiologyto exper_
di ets, milk.
inrenration.The theories that flernardconclemnedwere systenls
If the wor k of Her m ann von elm holt z dom inat edr he physi-
such asanimism and vitalism, that is, doctrinesthat ansiverques_
ol ogy of t he sensor vor gansin t he ninet eent h cent ur y, it was
t ions bv in c o rp o ra ti n gth e m , F o r B e rn a rd,dara col l ccti on and
becausehe, justly renorvnedas an inventor of instrumcnts (such
researchwere to be distinguished from fruitpicking and stone
as thc opht halm oscopein 1850) .r vasan ingeniousexPer im ent al-
quarrving: "To [re surc," he rlrotc, "many rvorkersare useful to
ist rl'ith a broad mathematical background that he orved to his
sciencerhough their activitiesbe limited to supplyingit with rarl,
training asa phvsicist.When a mathematicalmind turns to natu-
or empirical data. Nevertheless,the true scientistis the one who
ral sciencc,it cannot do r vit hout ideas.A st udent of Joh. r nnes
takesthe rarv materialand usesit to build sciencebr, litting each
M0ller. rvhoselarv of the spccific energv ol the ncrves.rnd sen-
fact into place and indicating its significancewithin the scien_
sory organsguided all the period's thinking about psychophvsi-
tific edifice asa u'hole."28Furthermore, the IntrcductionA litude
ol ogy, Hclm holt z *as able t o com binc his o$'n insist enceon
clela midecineexpirinentale(18651is a long pJeaon behalfofthe
ralue oficleasin research,with the understanding,ofcourse, thar measurementand quantificationu ith a philosophicalundcrstand-
ing of the unity of nature that he took fi"om his teacher,whose
in s c ic nc ea n i d e a i s a g u i d c , n o t a s tra i tj a cket.
influence is apparcntin all of Hclmholtz'su'ork on muscular*ork
W hile i t i s tru e th a t e m p i ri c a l e x p cri mentati on enabl ed
M agendiet o e s ta b l i s hth e d i fl i :rc n c e i n functr.onbetu.eenthe anclheat. lfthe 18,18paperon the principal sourccofheat in the
$orking nruscJercpotts dataqathcred u,ith temPeraturt-Dreas(lr-
ant er ior anc lp o s tc ri o r ro o ts o f th e s p i n alcord i n 1g22. i t must
ing instrumentsspeciallvdesignedby Helmholtz himsell, his 1847
be grantcd that Sir CharlesBell had not found it unhelpful eleven
rvork on the conserv,ltion of forcc, Uber die Erhohung der Krot't,
vearsearlier to rely on an "idea," namely,his ldea oJa Nev Anot_
rvasinspired by a certain idea of the unity ofphenomena and the
om y oJ t hc B ra i n(l 8 tl ): i ftrv o n e n e s i n n crvatethc samepart of
inteliigence thereof.
the body, their efli'cts must be differcnr. The spinal nervcshave
In his flnal lectures at the l\{usdum, published by Dastre as
both motor and scnsory f'unctions,hence different anatomical
Leqonssur lesphinominesde la vic communsaur animou\ et au\
structures.Given that the spinal cord has r$.o roots, each must
vdgdtoux(1878-79\, Claude Bernald discussed,along with other
be a firnctionallr differcnt nerve.
key ideas,the unity of the vital lunctions:"There is onh one rvav
A lt houg h th e e a rl i c s t re s u l t: i n th e p hrsi ol ogv of nutri ti on
of life, one physiology,lbr all living things." Bv then, this idea
came from.lustus von Licbig's chemical analysesand Magendie's
epitomizcd his life's u'ork; carlier, hou'ever,it had sureh guidcd
investigatjonsof the el}'ectsof dilicrcnt diets on dogs, rhe rvork
hi s rescar ch.I n t he l8. l0s, it had encour agedhim t o challenge
of W illiam P ro u t (1 7 8 5 -1 8 5 0 )o n s a c c h a ri des,
fats and al bumi ns
the conclusionsreachedbv Jean-Baptistc Dunlasand JeanBaptiste
in the human diet crnnot be said to havesufferedfiom thc fact
Boussaingaultin their Stotiquechiniguc (1841),much asvon Liebig
that his rvork wasguided by an "idea," namelv,that what humans
wasdoing at the sametime in Gennanv.Dumasand Boussaingault
eat , r v hc t he r i n tra d i ti o n a l d i e ts o r c a rc f ul l vcompost,dnenus,
had arguedtlrat animalsmerclv break dorvn organic compounds,

r o8

J
T
 uhich onlv plants could svnthesize.Bcrnard,horvevcr.described
ali his rvork on rhc glvcoqenicfunction ,rf rhe liver,fiom thc lg.lll
paper reaclto the Acadimie des Scicnccsto the doctoral thesis
ol l85l, as a c o n s e q u c n c co f rh e .rs s u m p ti onthat therc i s no di F
fcrencebetu,eenplantsarrdanimalsrvith rcspectto their capacitv
t o s v nr hes iz e
" i n tt' rmc d i a rep ri n c i p l c s _ "In d eed,tht,rc i s no hi er_
arch,vof plant and animal kingdoms; still more radically,I3crnard
clairred that fiorn rhe standpointofphrsiologl there are no king_
c lom s . He r c ftrs e dto b e l i e v c th a t th e re w as somethi ng pl .rnts
c or r ld do t hat a n i n ra l sc o u l d n o t. l n a n s l re ri nghi s cri ti cs bv rc_
Jectlnga certain conception of the division of labor anrongorgan_
isms, Bernardmar havercvcaledthe (not vcrt,ntvsterious)secret
ol his s uc c es sT
. o b e s u re , B e rn a rd ' sb c l i e f u,.rsa,.fccl i ng,,.not
an "argument," as he stated in the lcqons de phvsioloqie expdri_
mcntaleoppliguie d lo nidccinc (1855-56;. It rlas not cven a *.ork_
ing hypothcsisconcerningthe functions of some organ. But even
if it u' asnot s tri c rh D e c e s s a r,v to h o l d th i s b cl i cf.i n orrl er ro di s_
covcr the liver's glycogenic firncrion, the facr that Uernard
dirl
hold it hc lpc d h i n r to t-m b ra c ea n i n rc rp retrri on ol .hj s resul ts
t har m os t of his c o n te mp r.rra ri cl bs u n d < l i s c oncerti ng.
These eramplcs. dra* n {iom variousflclds of research,shorv
t h, r r .ex pc r im e n ta l i rtsn c e d n o t p rc tc n d to b e pure empi ri ci !ts,
lvorking *,ithout icleasof anv kind, in order to makc
progress.
llt'rnardobservcdthat the expu-inrentalist.r,ho dcresn,t
knorv rvhat
he is look ing f b r w o n ' t u n d e rs ta n du .h a t h e fi nds. The
acqui si -
tion ol scierrtillc lnow.leclgercquires a ccrtain kind of
luci<iitr.
Scientific discovcrvis more than indiviclualgood fbrtune
or accl_
dent algood luc k : h e n c e ,th c h i s ro r.,r.oslc i e nccshoul d
l > t,a hi s_
torl of the formation, delormation and rcctification of
scientific
c onc c pt s .S inc es c i e n c ci s ; b ra n c ho fc u l trrrc , educati on
i s a prt,_
r e< luis it eof s c ie n ti fi c d i s c o v e rr.,
W h a t th e i n di ri dual sci cnti sri s
c apablcof dc pe n d s o n rv h rt i n fi -,rma ti o ni s avai l abl e;
i frvc fi rr-
get that, i t is easvt o conf useexper im ent at ionr vit h em pir icism .
pp. 232-35]
IEru</es,
Accidents, the CIinic ond Sociolizotion
[39] It i s im possiblet o u'r it e t he hist or l ol r andom evcnt s,and
i fsci encc \ er e pur ely cnr pir icalit r vould be im possiblct o r vr it e
the histor) of sciencc.One must havea rough scnseof periodiza-
tion to benefit lrom anecdotalcviclence.Researchon digestion
ofl ers a g ood exam ple oI t his. A gr ear deal r vaslear nccl. r bout
digestivephvsiologr in thc secondhalfol the ninetecnth century,
disco"ere,Jhorv tcrusegastricfistul.rsto perlirrnr
.rfier rcse.rrchers
the experimentson rvhich todav'sunclerstandingof digcstion is
bascrl.After 1890, in particular. Iran ['a' lov nradcgood use ol a
techni quet hat he him self had lr clped t o per f cct . But t hat t cch-
ni r;trc had bcen pioneer cr l,sim ult anr ouslvbut quit r : indr pen-
derrtl v,by VassiliBassovin 1842 and Nicolas Blondlot in Tr oir l
(lnalt,tique,1cIo ditlestion,considtrdcpotticuliircnent dans I'honnte
ct l cs ani ndu\ ver t dbr di( 18, t ] ) . r e Near ly t r vo cent ur . icsear . licr ,
Rcgnerdc Graafhad sucrt'ssfullr produced a pancreaticllstula in
a dog (Dirpulrrriomediccr
dc natLtroct utu suc(ipdncra(lttci,1661),
but no one everattempteclthc sameoperation rvith othcr organs.
R cnc A ntoinc Fer chault<lc Ri. r um ur 'sexper inr cnt sin 1752anci
l-azzaroSpallanzani'sin 1770,both ofrvhich haclbcen perfirrmed
in orclerto <lecidrbetrlcclr van I lclmr>nt'schcnrical.rnd Borclli's
mechani calcxpl. r nat ionol digest ivephcnonr cna,involved t lr e
col l ccti on of gast lic juiccs lr om t he csophagus
hr ingeniouslr ut
roundaboutm eans;neit hcr m an secm sr o havct hought of int r o-
duci ng an ar t if icial f ist ulaint o t he st om r ch. f be invent ionol t he
arti fi ci algast r ict ist ulali'llo*cr l t lr e Am er icanphysicianWilliam
B eaumonl'spubJicat ionof his obser vat ions of . r Canadianhunt er ,
A l exi s S aint - M ar t in,*'ho, alier bcing shot in t he sr om ach,pr c,
sentcd w i th a st om ach list ula r vhoseedgcsadhcr eclt o t he ab-
 dominal rvalls.Beaunronr,havingtaken the man into his cmplov,
Addison'sdiseaseor surgervon goiters, it is impossibleto make
reported his observationsof contractions and gastric secretions
senseof progressin unrlerstandingthe physiologvof the adrenal
in a paper entitlcd "Experimcnrs and C)bser\ationson thr: Gas-
and thvroid glands.The u ork of rhe phvsiologistBrorvn-sequard
t r ic J uic e a n d th c Ph v s i o l o g yo f D i g e s ti on' ,(1g33). The hi storv
often beg. r nwit h som e m edical linding; and in t his r espect it
of surgcryollers ferv other casesof spontaneousstomachfistulas,
diflered sharplyfrom the work ofcertain othcr phvsiologists,
such
and none u.asobscrvedin any rvay comparable to Beaumont's.
asClaude Bernard.IErr.rrles, pp. 2 36-38]
Thus, an accident suggesteda mcthod of experinrent_ one that
[40] Dise.rse\.\,rsnot thc phvsiologisr'srrnlv source ot scien-
Bassovand Blondlot rvould later make systematicuse of. It was
tific challenges.Healthv individualsare neither idle nor inert and
no accident,hou-cver,rhat this originalaccidcntlvasfirst patiendy
cannot be maintained artificiallv at the beck and call of ingen-
ex ploit c d a n d l a te r i n tc n ti o n a l l y re p roduced,The chemi stsof 'l- he healt hv per son t oo
i ous or rcst lessexper im ent alist s. is, by
t he per iod w e re i n te n s e l vi n te re s tc di n the chemi cal composi _
definition, capabJeof carryingout tasksset by naturean(l culture.
tion of fbodstuffs,and this had led to interest in the chemistry
In the ni net eent hcenr ur y,t he dcvelopm cntof indust r ialsocie-
of digestivesccrerions.The flrst chemicalana)rses ofgasric juices ti es i n E urope and Nor t h Am er ica led r o r he socializar ioD.
and
uerc undertakcnbv Prout (1824). Hou.evcr,becauseph,,siologists
thereforepoliticizatitrn,of qucstions<rfsubsistence, diet, hvgiene
neededto obtain thesejuices, uncontaminatcdby foo<lparticlcs,
.rnd u'orkerproductivitv.It is no acci(lentthat problemsoI energy
in consiclcrablequantities,they had to figure out ho\a,to retricve
utilization arosearounclthis time, especiallyin Germanl,in rcgarrl
t he juic es i t rh e m o m e n t o fs e c re ti o n . fhey al sohad ro l l nd
the to both th e st enm engin( 'and t ht 'hum an r ) r ganism The
. sam e
right anim.rl to stud), (,nc rvith an appropriateanatomical
ltruc- doctor, Julius Robert von Maver, rvho proveclthat energy could
turc and digcstivepatterns.
Dot be destroyedbut onlv convr:rtcdfiom one fbrm to another
Thus, accidentsand unfbresceneventssornetimesgive rise to
(J842) - Ir om wor k r o heat , or vice ver sa- also publisbedt he
Deu t ec hD i q u e so f o b s e rv a ti o na n d n re rhodsofresearch.
One rcsul ts ol his r csear chon diet ar v ener get icsin 1845. His wor k
thing le.rdsto anothcr. Similarlv,scientiflc problems sornerimes
confirmcd that of von l-icbig, n'hose researchon organic chem-
ar is e in on e d o m a i n o r fi e l d o f s c i e n c eonl v to be resol vedi n
i stry as app lied t o phvsiology( lli42) r clat ed r hc calor if ic values
another.For c'xample,the history ol phvsiolr_rgv cannot be entirelv of vari ousnut r ient s such as f ir s, sugar sand pr ot eins lo var ious
div or c ed f i o m th e p a ra l l e lh i s to ri c so fth e cl i ni c anrl ot.rnedi cal
organic phenomenainvolving expendituresol energv; thesc rc-
pathologv.And it w.asnot alrvaysphvsiologythat instructcd
path- sults rverefLrther elaboratecland refined bv Marcellin Bcrthelot
ologv : r ela ti o n sa mo n g th e d i s c i p l i n e srv erecompl ex. C onsi der
( l E 79) and l\ 1axRubner and Wilbur O lin A r war er( t 904 ) .
[i-rra nroment the historv ol nervousand endocrine phvsiology
in S i mi l arly,t echnologicalpr ogr . ess
and econom ic changehad
rhe ninetccnth century. Clinical obsenation revealedfunctional
subjectedhuman beingsto extreme conclitions.Peoplehad bccn
disordersand disturbancesrhat physiologistsnr first foun,Jdiffi_
l brced, i n \ {ar and peace,t o cndur c cxt r cm gs of t em per at ur e,
cult to explain,fbr they couJdnor ideDtifi u.hat repularon nrech_
to uork ar high altitudes, to dive ro grear depths; orhers chorc
anism had gone a\r-ry,Without the history of clinical rvork on
to subj ect t hem selvesvolunt ar ilv t o ext r em c condit ions, as

rl l
in s por t . - lir c i te j u s t o n c c x a mp l e ,Pa u l Bert' sresearchon anox-
c nr ia at high a l ti tu d e (1 8 7 8 ) p a v c d th c w av for l ater studi esof
plrenonrenathat had to be understoodbcfbre intercontinentalpas- Thc Nlajor Pr oble m s of
sengerl-Jightcoulcl become routine. ["Physiologie," Enc.vclopae-
dia, p. 1076c-11a) N in e t e e n t h - C e n t u r v [ 'h v s io log r

Bioenergetics
[-11]The r esolut ion,t hr ough chem ist r v,r r f an age<r ldpr r r blt nr
ol ' phvsi ologv f or ced phvsiologist st o conf r ont a pr . r blenr t hat
phvsicshad yet to resolve:Hor,, can energv exist in a v.rrietyol
( l( pcn( l on f hc conser v. l-
l i rrnrsTl n Car r csianm echanics, 5t at ics
ti on of uor k, and clvnanr ics oD t he conser \ r t ion of nr ( ) r nent um
(mr' , massr im es velocit v) . Leibniz. in his clit ique ol C. r r t esir n
mcchanics,considcrcdthe quantit\ nir'l (masstirres the sguareof
\el oci t\, \ ahich he called t he "live f br ce") t o be a subst ar . r cc.
t hat
i \, nn i nva r iant ,but hc f ailcd t o not c t hat in anv r cal nr echanical
sYsteminr,olvingf;iction, this quantitv does not J'enr.rin cor)stanl,
due to thc gcncr at ionand loss of heat . The eight eent hcent ur r
Iiilcd to formulate thc notion of conscrvationof cn,.'rgv.At tht:
beginning of the nineteenth ccnturv, tl\'o firrms of energr nere
rccognizcd:the energvof motion (kinctic or potential) and heat.
But observationsmade bv techniciansand engineersconcerning
the operation of thc steam engine, the boring ofcannon Lt.rrrels
and so on lcd to studv ofthe rclationsbctrvcenrvork an<lhe.rt.
' fhe fi r st
per son t o asser tt hc indest r ucr ibilit v and, const , -
qucntlv, the conservationof energv through varioustransfornr.r-
tions rvasthc German plrvsicianvon Maycr, rvho baseclhis r lairns

I Ir l
llt

on medical obscrvationsmade in Indonesiain 1840 havingto do
rvith the influcnce ofheat on the oxidation ofblood ln 1842,von
Licbig published a theoretical papcr by Maver, entitlcd "Bemer-
kungen tibcr die Krafte der unbelebtcnNatur," in the ,4nnalender
Chemieund Pharmocie,but it attracted little attention initiallY.
I n 1843,J a me sPrc s c o tt l o u l e u n d e rtook to determi nc cxperi -
mentalll thc mechanicaleqtrivalentofthe calorie, and in an 1849
paperread before the Roval Societl he claimed rcsponsibilitvfor
a discoveri-- and J\{ayerthen f'elt compellcd to dispute his claim
ofprioritl. In 1847,rncanrvhile,von Helmholtz also published a
paper entitled "Uber die Erhaltungder Krafi."
Maver'srvork actuallylvasmore oriented tolvard biology than
Joule'sand rlas therefbremore significantfor thc history of phys-
iology. In 1845, Maver published the results of his researchon
dietarv energcticsunder the title "Die organischeBewcgungin
ihren Zusammcnhangmit dem Stoffivechsel."Earlier, in 1842,
von Liebig had published his Organiscie Chemieund ihte Anwendung
und Pathologie,in which he demonstrated, through
aul Ph,ysiologie
investigationof the caloric content of variousnutrients, that all
vital phenomenadcrive their energyfrom nutrition.
T he uo rk o f Ma y c r a n d v o n L i e b i g actual l y cl aborated on
s t udies de s c ri b e de v e n c a rl i e r b y T h 6 o dore de S aussurci n hi s
Recherches chimiquessur la vigdtotion(1804). Henri Dutrochet,
aftcr establishingthe lau,s of osmosis(1826), shou'edthat res-
piratorl phcnomenav"'ereidentical in plants and animals(1837).
When the Acad6micclesSciencessponsoreda competition on the
origins of animal heat in 1822, nvo Frenchmen,C6sarMausuite
Despretz, a physicist,and Pierre Louis Dulong, a physician,at-
tempted to reproduceLavoisicr'sexperiments.Dulong found that
the eflects of respiration*'cre not enough to account fbr the full
quantity of heat produced.This fbnned the startingpoint for fur-
ther rvork to determine the amount of energy contributed by
t l6
nutrition: IIenri Victor Regnaultand JulesReisetpublishedtheir
Recherches chimiquessur la respirationdesanimoux de diversesclosses
i n 1849 , and t heir r esult s wer e lat cr cor r obor at ed by Eduar d
Pfliiger's researchon thc contribution of each nutrienr to the
total input of nutritional energv,that contribution being mea-
sureclin each caseby the so-calledrespiratoryquotient. In 1879,
Berthelot systematizcdthese results in his Essaide mdcanique
thimique,andhe also formulatedthe lavv,s
of animal energeticsfor
organismsdoing external work and fbr those simply maintaining
thcmsclves,Finallv,Rubner, through cxperimenrswith dogs car-
ried out benveen 1881 and 1904, and At\r'ater, through experi-
ments u 'it h hum an bcings conduct ed bet wecn 1891and 1904,
rvere Ied to generalizethe resultsofearlicr wrrrk on the conscr-
vati on of ener gv in living or ganism s.
A s fo r t he second law of t hcr m odynam ics,conccr ning t he
riegraclation ofcncrgv, it rvasofcoursc first fbrmulateclby Nicolas
S adiC ar not in 182. 1but lit t le not iced at t he t im c. Benoit Pier r e
[mi l e Clapeyr ont ook it up againin 183. 1,wit h just as lit t lc suc-
cess;then at mid-century,fbllorvingfurther research,it was redis-
covcrr:dby both Rudolph.fuliusEmmanuellClausiusand William
' I' homs on( l, ot d Kelvin) . O r ganism s,
like ot her phvsicochem ical
systcms,confirm the valiclityof thc sccond lar,',u'hich statcsthar
transformationsof energv- fbr our purposes,those taking place
rvithin living cells - are irreversib)e,
due to an increasein entropv.
Organisms,though,arc mechanismscapablcof reproducingthem-
selvcs.Like all mechanisms,thev arc capableof doing rvork, of
accomplishingtransfbrmationsthat are structuredand, thcrcfore,
lessprobablethan disorganizedmolecularagitation,or hcat, into
u hi ch a ll ot her f or m s of ener gvdegr adcr vit hout possibilit yof
revcrsal.While it is no longer possibleto accept Bichat'sfbrmu-
lation that "lif'e is thc collection of functions that resist death,"
one can still saythat living rhings are systcmsu.hoseimprobable
tt7
organizationslous a universalprocessofevolution torvardther-
mal ccluilibrium - that is, tor,'artla more probablestate,dcath'
To surn up, then, the studYof the organism'stransformations
of the energv it borr<trvsfrom the environtncnt \ras the \\'ork of
chemisrsasmr.tchasofphlsiologistsin th( strict sense.L)ur under-
\ t anding o l th e l .ru s o f c e l l u l a r mc ta b o l i smprogressedi n paral -
lcl u ith thc svstem,rticstudr ol the compoundsofcarbon, *hich
ler l t o t hc u n i l l c a ti o no fo rg a n i c c h e mi s trl rvi th i norgani cchem-
is t r r ' .F r ie rl ri c hW o h l c r' ss y n th e s i so f u re ai n 1828l cnt ne\l rP rcs-
tige to the central idcasand methodsof rrrn I iebig and his school.
But von Liebig'sthcorv ol' lermcntation, lvhich rvasassociatedin
his mind rvith the studv ofthc biochemicalsourcesofanimal heat
( 1840) , u rru l d l a te r b c c h a l l e n g e db y Loui s P asteur,* ho uas
rightlv loath to believc that fermentation phenomena\r'creinor-
ganic pro<essc'r,b,r nature akin to death, and thcrcfbre unrelatc<l
to the specific.rcrivitiesof microorganisms.IErurlei,pp. 250-62]
Endoc ri nology
[ a2] T he te rm " e n d o c ri n o l o g y ," d u c to N i chol as P cncl c,rvas
c oiner Jon l y i n 1 9 0 9 ,y e t n o o n c h e s i ti testo use i t to rcl er, ret-
roacti\elv, to anl discovcrvor researchrelntcd to internal secre-
tions. \\brk on thcse secretionsin thc ninetecnth centurv was
not as far-rcachingas nork on the nervous system,vet the verY
be sccn toda,vasthe
original nature ofthat u'ork can nevertheless
causeand ctlect ofa veritablc mutation in phrsiologicalthought.
-I'hat is the succinct term "endocrinologl-"se('rnspref'erablc
'r,hv
t o anv c ir c u m l o c tl ti o n ,
t'aradoxically, thinlis to tht uork ofClaude Bernarrl,the phvs-
ioJoeicalproblcm posedby the existenct'olglandsrvithout excrc-
ton ducts - ()rgans,originallv knou'n as "blood-r'essclglands,"
r v hos r f: n c ti o n s c o u l d n o t b c d e d u c e dl i onr anaromi cali nspec-
t ion - $n \ s o l v e db l u s i n g th c s a m es tri ct D )ethodsol chemi cal
r r8
i nvesti gat iont hat had been applied t o t he phcnom cnaof nut r i-
tion, assimilationthrough svnthcsisof specific compouncls,dis-
i ntegra t ionand clim inat ion.[ . . . ]
At the beginningof tht'ninctccnth centur!',nothing \1ir kno$'n
about the f unct ionsof t he spleen,t hym us,adr cnalglandsor t hr -
roi d. Th e f ir st glim m cr of liqht c. r m eat m i( l- ccnt ur \ in connec-
ti on u i t h Ber nar r l's
r t sear chint o t he digest ionanr labsor pr ionol
sugari n t he int est ine,r uhichr cvcaledt he hit her t o- inconceivable
function ofa glanrl r. hoseafllnitv vvith thosejust n'rcntioned\4as
unsuspcctcd.Moritz Schifl wasalso lr-orkingon hepaticglvcogcn-
esisand fermentation in Bcrne in 1859 rvhen hc rliscoveredthe
latal eff'ectsofdestroving the thvroicl,a result for rvhich he could
provi de no explan. r r ion.I t r vasm uch lat cr , in G enevain 188J,
that S chif f ,r evisit inglr ir car lierexper im ent sin t h<.light of Em il
Thi rodor e Kocher ar r r lJa<quesLouis Rever din'r r r or k on t he
of sur gicalexcisionol goit cr s( m vxedem at ous
sccl uel lac cachexi. r ,
postoper at ive m vr cdcnr a) ,had t he ider of t r ansplant ingt he t hr -
roi d i n or der t o conlir r n or r elut e t he hypot hcsist hat t hc glancl
somchor vact ed chenr icallvt hr ough t he blood. \ r ict or Alcxander
llaclen Horsclv successlirllyperfbrmetl thc same erperiment on
an apc in 188.1;()dilon Nlarc [-annelonguerepeateclit ldr thcra-
peutic purposeson a n.ranin 1890.In 1896,EugenBaumanniden-
ti fi cd an or ganic cnnr pound of iodine in t he t hlr oid. I n 191, 1,
Eduard Calum Kend:rll isolatcd the active principle in thc fbrm
ol crysta llizable
t hyr or in. Thus, alt houghr esear chint o t he lLnc-
tion ol thc thyroid beganin thc phvsiologist's
laboratorl,the solu
fi on i nvolved t hc clinician'ser . r nr iningr oom and t he sur geon's
operatingroonr.
l n th e cast ol t he aclr enalgland, t he point ol- depar t ur ef ir r
rcsearchlav in clinical obscr-vations made bctuccn l8-lt) rnd 1855
by Thomas Addison and r epor t cd iD a paper ent ir led "f ) n t hc
C onsti tut ional and Local Ef f ect s of l) iscascof t he Supr a- r enal
 read to the than an explanatorvrole in physiology:it distinguishedthe con-
Capsules."In 1856,Charles-EdouardBrorvn-Sequard
cept ofa gland from that ofan excretory organ, But a hormone is
Acad6mic des Sciencesa seriesof three PaPerson "Recherches
a more generalconcept than an internal secretion:a hormone is
c x p6r im t n trl c s s u r l a p b v s i o l o g i ee t l a pathol ogi e des gl andes
a chcmical messenger,rvhereasan internal secretionis simply a
surr6nales,"in rvhich he reported on thc lethal ellects of rcmov-
distribution or dilhrsion. Furthermore,the hepatic flnction, the
ing the capsuJes asr"ell asofinjecting normal aninralsI'ith blood
fi rst-kn owncxam pleof an int er nalsccr et ion,is specialrit plact 's
t ak en lio m a n i n ra l su h o s e " c a p s u l e s "had been rcnroved.A s a
a procc ssednut r im ent , a m et abolit e, int o cir culat ion, I n t his
result, Brorvn-stquardhvpothesizcdthat thc capsulessomehou
sense,theie is a dit'ferenccbetween the endocrine secretion of
produced a chcmical antitoxic ef'f?cton the comPosition of the
the liver and that ofthe pancreas:the function ofone is supplr,
blootl. That sameyear,Alfred Vulpian reported his obsenations
of the ot her , consum pt ion. lnsulin, like t hvr oxin. is t hc st im u-
in a papercntitled "Sur quelqucsr6actionspropresi la substancc
lant and regulatorof a global mechanism;it is not, strictlv spcak-
des capsulessu116nales."The cortical cclls reacteddif'ferentlvto
ing, an intermediar.v,energ,v-ladencompound. Thus, to credit
various dves than the medullarv cells did, from rvhich Vulpian
Bernard as the author of the fundamental concept of modern
concluded that the latter, which turned gret'n rvhen cxposedto
erndocrinologyis not false,but it is misleading.The concept that
ir on c hlo ri d e , s e c re te da c h ro mo g e n i csubstance.Thi s rvasthe
proved fruitful lr'asthat of the internal environmcnt, u hich, un-
first hint of thc cxistenceof rvhat rvould one dav be calledadren-
like the concept ol intern.rlsecretion,was not closelr.rssociated
aline. ln l i i 9 3 . J e a n -Emi l eA b e l o u sa n d P au)Langl oi sconfl rmed
rvith a specific function; rather, fiom the flrst ir was idcntilic'tl
Brorvn-Sd<1uard's experimcntal results. ln 1894, GeorgesOliver
rvi th anot herconcept , t hat ot 'a phlsiologicalconsr ant .! \ 'hen it
to the London Phys-
.rnd E<lrvardAlbcrt Sharpey-Schifer.reptrrted
turned out t hat living cells depend on a st ablcor ganic envir on-
iologic.rlSocietvon their obsen'ationsof thc hypertensiveeffects
mcnt, which \Valter BradfcrrdCannon named "homeostasis" in
of injt'cting agueousadrenalextract. In 1897.John-lacobAbel iso-
1929,the logical possibilityaroseof transfbrmingthe t:onceptof'
latcd a hypertensivesubstancefi'om thc atlrenalmcdulla, u'hich
internal sccrction into one ofchemical regulation.Once the fun-
he calledepinephrinc.In 1901,Tikamine obtainedu'hat hc called
damental idea rvasclear, researchon variousglantlsquickly led
adrcnalinein crystallizableform, and Thomas-BellAldrich in that
to the i c lent if icat ion. r nd
( at least )qualit at ivedescr ipt ionof t heir
samcvearprovidcd the formula.Adrenalincuas thus the flrst hor-
firnctionaleflects.
mone to be rliscovercd.The history ofthe hormonesofthe atlre-
It i s not sur pr ising, t hen, t hat f iom 1888 on, t he of
nal corter does not begin until after 1900. 'r 'or k
Moritz Schif] and Bro$ n-S6quardattracted man)-emulators anri
From this brit'l sutnmaryofearly expcrinrentaluork in endo-
sti mul at ed r r scar ch in c'ndocr inologr ,usuallv in conjunct ion
c r inolo{ } , i t i s c l e a rth a t th e c o n c e p to I i ntcrnalsecreti on,w hi ch
rvith a desire to correct unsubstantiatedp.r(hologicaletiologies.
Bern.rrdformulatedin 1855,djd not nt first plav thc heuristicrole
It rvasthe studv oI diabetes,for example, rvhich Bernarcl'swork
that one might be tempted to ascribeto it. This nas becausethe
had al readvclar if icd, t hat led joseph von M cr ing and Eugene
concept. which *as first applied to the llvcogenic function of
Minkowski to discover the role of thc pancreasin the metabo-
the liver, initially plaveda discriminatory role in anatomyrather

t2l
12C)
 lis m of glu c i d s (1 8 8 9 ),a n d s u b s e q u e n t l yto the i denti fi cati ontrv
r:nt p;t hw'ays,r eller cs, localizat ion and cent r alizat ir ) n- \ r er e
F r eder ic kC ra n t B a n ti n ga n d C h a rl e sH erbert B cst 11922)ofthc
b.rsedin part on analogiesu'itir opcr.rtionsor objectl that rvcrt:
substancethat Sharpey-Schifer had named insulin in 1916.lr rvas
finriliar bv dint ofthc constructionand/or usc ofmachines, prog-
the studv oI acromegalvby l'ierre Marie ( 1886) that led, evcntu-
ress in this branch of phvsiologv, r'hosc discoveries\,verealso
allv, to cxperiments in hypophvsectomybv Gcorgcs Marincscu
incorporated by psvchology,earned it widespreaclrecognition.
( 1892) anrlC i u l i o Va s s a l a
e n d Erc o l e Sacchi(1892),and l arer ro
A l thoug h t cr m s such as"hor m one" and "conr plcx" har , eent er ed
u orl that dis<rinrinatcdbcr$ ccn the llnctions ol the anterioranci
contmon parlance,they surelv rentain morc csoteric than a rrrrd
pos t er iorl o b c s o fth c p i tu i ta ry (5 i r IIe n ry D al c i n 1909, Il arvcv
l i ke " ref lex, " r vhoseuse in conncct icr nr vit h spor t shas m adc it
Cushing in 1910,and Herbert McLean EvansanclCrarvlbrclWil-
enti rcl y r out ine.
liamson Lolg in l92l). Bror"n-Sequard's
experimentsalsospurred
lf the motor elfectsofthc dccapitationofbatrachiansand rep-
rvork on sex hormones,despite the ironic slepticism of many in
ti l es had led eight eont h- ccnt ur yr ese. r r chertso suspcctt hc r ole
t hc f ic ld. T h c ro l c o f th e p a ra th v ro i d s ,u' hosc,' rnatomi caldj s-
ol the spirralconl in the nruscularlinctiorr, and il the erperinrents
tinctivcn(sr \\'cnt unnoticed until lvar Victor San<lstrrjm's
$ork of
of R obcr t Wh, r t r ( 1768) and Julien JcanC6sarLeg. r llois( 1812)
1880,uas elucidatedin I89? through the researchof Emile Glev.
alreadv had a positive character,it rvasncverthelessimpossible
Thus, the phvsiologicalconcept ofa chemical regulator,in its
to explain u,hat Thomas Willis in 1570 called "rcflt'cted move-
current scnse,u.asclaboratcdin the late ninctecnth century, but
ments" in terms of thc rcflcx arc untii the Bell-Magcnrliclarvhacl
an ex pr es s i v e
te rm fb r r' t h a d v e t to b e c o i ned. In 1905,W i l l i anr
trccn l dnnulat edand r er ilicd ( l8ll- 22) . l\ 'lar shall
Hall'sdiscover v
B ay lis sanc l Ern e s t Sta rl i n g , a fte r c o n s u l ti ng a phi l ol ogi st col -
of the "<liastaltic"(reflex) function ol thc spinalcorcl.simultanc-
feague,proposeclthc tcrm "hormonc." [Etudes.pp.262-651
ouslr glimpsed bv JohannesMiiller, rlas a ncccssaryconsequence
of differcntiating the variousfunctions of thc spinal nerve. That
Neurophysiology
dilh'rcntiation also lecl inevitablv to idcntillcation ol lirnction-
[ . + 3] O l a)l th e s v s te m s* h o s r' l i rn c ti o n s arc dctermi ned bv rhe al l r spe cialized
bundlesof conduct or suit hin t he spinalcor d - bv
need t o pre s e rv eth e i n re { ri tv c rf c e l l u l ar Ii fl , thc onc rvhorc
K arl Friedr ichBur d. r chin 1826,JacobAugust usLockhar tClar ke
mechanicalnature al\iavs arousedthe lervesrobjcctions rvasrhc
in 1850,Brorvn-Sirquard in 1850an(l FriedrichGoll in I860. Uasecl
neur om us c u l a r.Me c h a n i s ti c th c o ri e s fl rst.l rose not from thc
initiallv on experimentsinvolving scction and excitation of ncrve
studv of plant growth or from viscousanclvisceral palpation of
fibels, this work precededFrieclrich\4ralter'sdiscovcrvofspinal
t he m ollus k b u t l ro m o b s e rrrti o n o f th e di sti ncti ve,sequenri rl
degenc r , t t ionin l8 5l) .
locomotion ol r<rtcbr.ltcs.rvhos<ccntr.rl ncnous svstcntscontrol ()ncc t he du. r l signif icanceof conduct ion along t he ner r ous
and coorrlinatc a scriesof srtgmentarymovcmcnts that onc can
fl ber ha <lbe, . : nder t 'r m incd,t he cxcit abilit v anclconduct ivit v of
s im ulat eby m e c h a n i c a me
l a n s .' A n a m o eba,"A l ex von U exki i l l
ncrvoLrstissue vverestucliedsystcmatically,along lvith the con-
m aint ainec l",i s Ie s so fa ma c h i n eth a n a h orse."B ecausesomc of
tra(tilc propertiesof muscle. l his r"ork uas the positivt'or cmpir-
t he ear lies tc o n c e p tso f n e rro u s p h y s i o l ogv- afl ercnt and cl l i r-
i cal port ion of a lar gc volum e ol r eser r ch.som e of ir nt agicalin

r2l
character,spurred by the discovcry of "animal elcctricity." The
lield of electrophvsiologybeganwith Luigi Galvani'sobsen'ations
and experimcnts,his polemics w.ith AlessandroVolta (1794), and
A lex ande rv o n I l u mb o l d t' s c o rro b o ra tionofGal vani ' sresul ts.l n
1827,Leo p o l d o N o b i l i b u i l t a n a s ta ti cgal vanometcrsensi ti ve
enoughto detect very rveakcurrents.Carlo Matcucci established,
in 18.11,
a correlationbetween muscularcontraction and the pro-
duction of electricity. Du Bois-Reymondvirtually inventcd the
cntire apparatusand techniquc of electrophysiologyin order to
subject Mateucci'srvork to stringentcriticism. He demonstrated
the cxistence of u'h.rt he called "negative variation," an action
por ent ialth a t g e n e ra te da c u rre n t i n c o nj uncti on w i th the sti m-
ulat ion of a n e n e : h e a l s o s tu d i e d p h rsi ol ogi caltetanus,U si ng
s im ilar t ec h n i q u e s ,v o n Il c l mh o l tz i n 1 850 measuredthe speed
ol propagationalong the nerve. Although this cxperiment failed
to shed the expectedlight on the naturc ofthe mcssagetransmit-
t ed, it did a t l e a s t re fu re a l l th e o ri e sh ol di ng that thi s m< ssaqe
involved the transportof somc substance.
After Whvtt and GeorgeProchaskaidentified the spinalcord's
s ens or im o to r c o o rd i n a ti o n fu n c ti o n b ut be[ore Marshal l H al l
explained its mechanism, t-egalloisand Pierre Flourens located
t he c ent e r o fre fl e x mo v e m e n t i n th e medul l a obl ongata. A t
ar ound t he s a meti m e , th t' a n c i e n t c o n cept ofa seatofthe soul
r>rorganofcomnron sense,whose possiblelocation had been thc
subject of much speculationin thc seventeenthand eighteenrh
centuries,collapsed,Albrecht von Haller had providcd a negative
answer to the question, "Do different functions stem from dif]
lerent souls (An diversaediversarumoninde functionum prcrin-
ciac)?"r{r
In 1808,horvtver,the father ofphrenologv, FranzJoseph
Ga)1,argued that "the brain is composed of as many distinctive
systemsas it performsdistinct functions," and that it is therelore
not an organ but a composite of organs,each correspondingto a
| 24
facultv or appctite - and, furthermore, thnt thosc organsare to
be found in the convolutions of the brain's hemispheres,rvhich
were reflected in the con[iguration oIthe cranial she]1.
This is not the place to deal with the allegationthat Call was
a charlatan.It is more imPort.rnt to undcrstands'hv he enioyed
as nruch inlluence as he did, and f br so ) ong. lle pr ovided t he
phl si ol o gist sand clinicians of t he f ir st t wo t hir ds of t he nine-
teenth century u,ith a furrdamentalidea that one of his critics,
Louis Franqoist-elut, callcd "the polysectionof the encephalon."
Recall, moreover,that Gall claimed to have <onre upon his the-
orv through obser vat ionof t he skullsof ccr t ain of his colleagues
rr ith a particularlykeen memory for u'ords;hc located the organ
of thnt memory in the lower Posterior portion of the antcrior
lobe. Now, it happensthar the first idcntjfication of an anatomi-
cal lesion responsiblefor.r clinical diagnosisof aphasia,made by
JeanB.rptisteBouillaud in 1825,confirmed Call's obsen'ation.In
1827,B ouillaudpublishedt he f ir st exPer im r r r r alf indingson t he
ab)ationof regionsof the cerebralcortcx in nrammalsand birds
Fronr then on, exper int ent son anim alsconr l>inedr vit h clinical
and pathologicalobservationof humans to producc a functional
mappingofthe cerebralcortex. In 1861,Paul Erocaidentified the
seato[aticulate languagein the third fiontal convolution, which
l ed hi nr t o nr aket his decl. r r at ionof f ait h: "t lr elievein t he pr in-
ciple of localizationslI cannot believe that the complexitv ol the
cercbralhemisphcresis a mere capriceofnature."
In 1870,G ust avThcodor e Fr it sch and Julius Ed*ar d llit zig
providedexperimentalproofof cerebrallocalizationbl emploving
a rcvolutionarynerv technique,electrical stimtrlationol the cor-
tcx. P reviously,due t cr t he t ailur e of at t em pt s t o sr im ulat ( t he
brai n dir ect ly dur ing t r cpanat ion,dir cct t t im ulat ion had becn
declarcd impossible. From experiments with dogs, Fritsch and
tlitzig concludeclthat the anterior and posterior regions of the
115
 br.rinvvercnot e(lui!?lent;the anterior region w.asassociarcd
rvith i nrerpret ingsim ilar obser vat ionsin t cr m s oI Spencer ianevolu-
t he m ot o r fu n c ti o n , th e p o s te ri o r rv i th the sensorvfuncti on. tionism, introduced the conccpt of a conservativcintegratirrnof
B ec aus eH i tz i g c o u l d n o t a p p l y e l e c tri cal sti mul i to a human
neurological structurcs and lunctions, accorclingto rvhich less
brrin, in 1874 hc insteadmapped the motor region in an apt'; in
complex structurcsand functions are dominated and controlled
1876.Dav i d F c rri c rc o n l i rmc d Il i tz i g ' s r esul ts.N ami ng Fl ourcns
at a higher Jevelbv more complex and highll dil'ferentiatedones,
bLrtairrringhis criticism nr Friedrich Goltz, Ferricr ryrotc, "Tlre
rvhich appearlater in rht phvlogeneticcrrd<r. Pathologicalstates
soul is not, as Flourensand many rvho came after him belietecl,
arc not decom posit ionscr rdim inut ions ol phvsiological: it at es;
sonrekind ol synthetic firnction of the entire brain, rvhosemani-
rather, thev involve a dissolut ionor loss of cont r ol, t he liber a-
fcst,rtionscan be suppressed
in totobut not in part; on the contrary, ti on of a dom inat ed lunct ion, t hc r et ur n t o a m or c r cf lexive,
it is c c r t a i n th a t s o m e , a n d p ro b a b l eth at al l , psvchi cfundi ons
.rlthorr[h in itsell positivc,rtatc.
derire lrom rvcll-dcflnedcentersin the cen ical cortex," Similarl\,
A n i Dr por t antevent in t hc hist or v of t he localizat ionconcept
F c r r ier ' sd i s c o v e rvo f th e ro l < ro f th c c rc ci pi tall obe i n vi si on l cd
\!?s the I nt er nat ionalCongr essof l\ 1t 't licinehe[ d in Lon<lonin
Hcrmann N'lunkin l8?8 to givc the first preciselocalizationoI a
l i J81.at which Sher r ingt on,t hen aged t r vent y- lbur ,hear d r hc
sen!'oryccntcr, A grou ing number of expcriments, confir-meclby
llomeric debatcbctueen Ferrierand FrierL'ichGoltz. I.ater,when
clinical obscrvations,provided Carl Wernickc rvith the marerial
CharlesScott Sherringtonvisitcd Goltz in Strasbourgin l8[i.1-1.l5,
t o ent it le h i s 1 8 9 7trc a ti s eo n th e a n a toml and physi ol ogvol the
he lcarnt'd the techniquc lor taking progrcssivesections ol thc
f>rainthc ,.1rlos desGehirns.But it rvasnol until the earlv ruenti-
spi nal cor d, His u'or k on t he r igidit v causedLr r decer cbr at ion
et h c ent uryth a t A l ti c d C a mp b e l l(1 9 0 5 ) an<Kl orbi ni anB rodmann
(ll{97) and rcscarchon subiectsranging liom reciprocal innerva-
( 1908) ,dr a rv i n go n a (l v n n c c isn h i s to l o gvl i om C ami l l o C ol gi to
tioD to the concept ol .rn intcgrativeaction oI rhe ncrvouss|stem
SantiagoRamon v Cajal, were ablc to lav the founclationsfbr a
(1906) enabled him to corroborate and correct .lackson'sfln<la-
cvt()Jrchitectonicsof rhe cortcx.
mcntal ideasr vit hout vent ur ingout sidet he r ealm of phvsiologv.
ln Lc7onssurlcslocolisorlons (1876),Jean-,\lartinCharcorrvrote, B ctl c cn M ar shallHall and Sher r ingt on,t he st udy of t he la\ \ s
"The brain is not a honrogcreous,unitarv organ but nn associa-
of rcllex nradc litt)e prog:'essapart fiom Eduald Pl1iiq,:r'sear-
t ion. " lhe tc rm " l o c .rl i z a ti o n "rv a sta k cn l i teral l v at thc ti l l l e: i t
l i er, rathercr ude st . r t elr cntin 1853of r he r ulcs of ir r adi. r t ion,a
uirs assumedthat thc trnfolded surfac.' ,rI thc cortex could be
concept that impliod thc existenceof an clcmentarv reflcx .rrc.
div ided in to d i s ti n c t z o n e s ,a n d th a t l c s i onsor abl ati onscoul d
Shcrringtonshou.ed,to the contrarv,that even in the cascof thc
cxplain sensorimotordisturbancesdescribedasdcflcits (a-phrsia,
si mpl estr cf lcx, t hc spinalcor d int egr at cst he lim b's ent ir c bun-
aaraphia,a-praxiaand so orr). Yct Jules(iabrit'l l-ranq:ois Baillalqer tlli: ol-nencs. Brain lirnctionsmerelv expandupon this capacitvof
had point e < o i u r i n I3 6 5 rh a t a p h a s i ai s not a l ossof rhe memon the spi nalcor d t o int cgr at ev. r r i( , us
pnr . t sof t hc or ganism .Follou-
, , 1r r , r r r lr .b ( ( J U :\c\o l l te .rp h .r.i c rt.t.ri
r rrrl rei r voc.rl ,ul .rrrhut l ,r.,e ing lackson, Shcrringronthus cstablishedthat thc animal organ-
the ability to usc *,ords properly - and in anvthing but an .rutn- i sm, seenin t er m s of it s sensor im ot orf unct ions,is not a nt osaic
m at jc m an n e r.Ov e r th e n e x t tu .o d c c a dcs,Fl ughl i ngsJackson, but a structure. 1'he great phvsiologist'smost original contrihu-

t2 6
t) 7
tion, however,was to explain, rvith the concept of thc cortex, CsrPren Stx
the differencebet$een nenr'ous
mechanismsfor integraringimme-
diate and defbrrcd movements. Epistemology of Medicine
At around the same time, Ivan Pavlovstudied anorher corti-
c al inte g ra ti n gl u n c ti o n , w h i c h h e c al l ed" condi ti oni ng" (1897). The lirrrits oI llcaling
Pavlovshorvedhow the cortical functions could be analyzedby
modifying techniquesborrowed from reflexology.When an ani-
mal (in this case,a dog) wascondirionedthrough the simultaneous
application of different stimuli, ablation ol more or lessexten-
sive regionsof the cortex allowed one to m!asurethe degreeto
u.hich the sensorimotorreflex dependedon the integrity of tht:
cortical intermediary,This technique, which Pavlov re[ined as accomPanies
[44] Awarenessof the limits of medicine's Po\!er
results accumulatcd, rvastaught to large numbers of the great any conception of the living body which attributes to it a sPon-
Rus s i a np h y s i o l o g i s t'ds i s c i p l e s [...]
. tanrous caPacit!, in nhattvcr fbrm' to preserveits siructurc and
I u'ill cnd with a I'ew words about what John Newport Langley, regulateits functions. lf the organism hasits oun powersofde-
in 1898, calledthe "autonomic" nervoussystem,whosefunctions, fense,thcn to trust in thosePowers,at leasttemporarilv,is a hvpo-
becausethev involve u,hat Bichat called "vegetative"asopposed thetical imperative,at once Prudentand shrcwd. A dvnamic bodv
t o " an i m a l " l i [e , w e re l e s ss u s c c p ti bl eol ' mechani cali nterpre- deservesan expectant medicine. Medical genius may be a form
tations than those of the central nervous svstem. It was _facob ol patience.Ofcourse, the Patientmust agreeto suffer.Th6oPhile
Winslow rl ho in 1732 coined the erpression"great svmpathetic" sur I'histoire
de Bordeu, well anare of this. u-rote in his Acchercfies
nervoussvstemto refer to rhe ganglionicchain. ln 1851,Bernard de nitlecine: "The method of expectation has somcthing cold or
discovcredthe effect of the symparheticsystemon scnsitivityand austereabout it, which is difficult fbr the keen sensibilitiesof
body temperature;in 1852-54, Bro*'n-sdquardcontributed new patients and onlookers to bcar. Thus, Ierv lew phvsicianshave
techniques fbr exploring the firnctions of the sympathetic ner, peopie ar c nat ur a) lv
practi cedit , p. r r t icular l\ in nat ions r uhr . r se
vous systembv sectioningnen'esand applying electrical stimuli. ardent, impatient, and f'earftr]."
Langleyu'asa pioneer in the use ofchemical techniqucs,includ- Not all patients respondto treatmenti some recoverwithotlt
inq thc block.rgeof synapsesbv nicotine ( 1889) and the sympa- i t. l l i pp ocr at es,sho r ecor dt d t heseobser vat ionsin his t r eat ise
thicomimetic propertv of adrenaline( t 901). lEtudes,pp. 266-7 ll On theArt, rnasalso, according to legr:nd,responsiblefor - or,
i f you r vill, cr edit ed r vit h - int r oducing t he concePtot nJt ur e
i nt,r met lical t hinking: "Nat ur es ar e t he healer sof discases'''he
rvrotc in Book Six of Eprdernics. Here, "healer" relt'rsto an intrin-
si c activit y of t he or ganismt hat com Pcnsat cslbr def iciencies,

t 29
 r es t or esa dis ru p te d e q u i l i b ri u m o r q u i c k l r correctsa detccred
dc v iar ion. - f h i s a c ti v i rv , h o rv e v e r,i s n o t thc product of i nn.rte
knou.ledge:"Naturc fincls its orvn w-aysand means,but not bv
intelligence:blinking is one such,thc variousoflices ofthe tongue
are aDother,and so arc other actionsof this sort. Naturc doesI,hat
is appropriaterr ithout instruction and r,,,ithoutknorvledgc.',
T hc analo q l ' b e trn e c nn a tu rc a s h e a l e r and the nrcdi cal art
t hr o\ r ' st h( li u h t o fn a tu re o n th e a rt, b u t nor vi ce versa.The
medical art nrust observe,must listen to naturc; to obscrveand
t o lis t c n in th i s c o n re x t i s to o b e v . Ga l e n, w ho attri buted to
Hippocratesconceptsthat one can only call Hippocratic, adopted
t hc m in his o* n l i g h t a n d ta u g h t th a t n a tu r ei s the pri nran,con-
servatoro1'healthbecauseit is the principal sh.rperof the org.rn-
ism. I lorvever,no Hippocratic text goesso far as to portray nature
asinfallible or omnipotent. The meclicalart originatcd,devcloped
and rvasperfected as a gaugc of the porverof naturc. Depcnding
on rvhether nalure as healer is stronger or $,eakcr.the phvsician
must either allorv nature to tnke its course, intcrvene to support
it or help it ou t. o r re fl s e to i n te rv e n co n thc groundsthat there
are diseases for rvhich nature is no match. Whcre nature givcsin,
m edic inem us t g i v c u p .' l ' h u s , H i p p o c ra te sv vrote,,,Toaskart fbr
\ \ hat ar t c ann o t p ro v i c l ca n d to a s k n a tu rc f br uhat nature
can_
not provide is to tulfer from an ignorance th.rt is more
akin to
madnessthan ro lack ofeducation,"
[,.ld6e de rnttre," ,Mddecine,
PP.6- 71
[a5] h simplifl (probably to excess)thedillerencc bet.rvcen
anc ient ( pr im a ri l v Grc e k ) m e d i c i n c a n d th e mocl ernme< l i ci ne
irrauguratcdbv AncircasVcsaiiusancl Willianr Harvcy
and cele-
br at r r l hr I ( , , { .r Brc ,rn 1 6 6 1R (,n eD c rc a rrr\ , r,,"
rh" r
the lbrmcr.rvas contemplati.r,e , the latter -i ghr..,,
operation;I. A;cient
mcclicinervasfbundcdupon a strpposcdisomorphism
betrveenthe
c os m ic or dc r a n d th c e q u i l i b ri u m o f th e o rgani sm.
refl ectcd i n
r lo
naturL"spresumedpo\{er to corrcct disordcrson its or,'n. Nature
rhe physi ci a n r cspect cd b1 a t hcr apet r t icsof r lar chlulness
'r 'as
and support. Bv contrast,modern medicinc \\'rsactivist in its ori-
cntati on. B acon expr essedt he hope t hat it u'ould lcar n lr om
chemistrv.and Descartesthat it u'ould learn fiom mechanics.Yet
bcnvcen the Greeksand the Moderns,for all that thcy {'erc sePa-
rarcd br,thc Copernicanrevolution and its critical consequfDces,
the di ffercncer em ainedphilosophical,$'it hout per cept ibleim -
pict on rhc health of mankind. The sharedproiect ol llacon and
[)escartcs,to prcservehca]th and to avoitl or at least dclav the
decline of old age- in short, to prolong lifi - resultedin r)o not-
abl e achi evr nr t 'nt s.Alt hough Nicolas dc l\ lalelr r ancher nd lat cr
E dmc N l ari or t c spoke ol "exper im ent al m eclicine, "t he phr a: c
remai neda s ignif ier in sear chof a signiliecl.Eight eent h- ccnt ur l
me<licineremaineda symptomatologyand nosolog,v, that is, a sys-
tr:m of cl ass if icat ioner plicit ly bascdon t hat of t hc nat ur alist s.
eti ologv squander edit s ener giesin t he cr cct ion ol sls-
l \' l crJi cal
tcms, revi vingt he ancient doct r inesof solidism and hunlr r r ism
by introducing nerv physicalconceptssuch asmagnetismin(l gal-
vanism or bv raising mctaphysicalobjections to thc Procedures
'l'herapcu-
of thosc s ho l,ould assimilatemedicine to mechanics.
ti cs, gui ri ed bv pur e em pir icism , alt er nr t ed bct r veenskept ic. r l
cclccticism anclobstinatedogmatisrn.Tragicallv,medicint could
not accomp lishit s goals.lt r em aincdan cm pt v discour seabout
practicesoficn not verv diflerent from magic.
Freud said of ancient medicine that psychic thcrapy was the
onl v trci tnre nt it hat l t o oller , an( l m uch t he sam et hing could
lr.rvebeen saidabout nreriicinc in the eighteenthanclnrost ol th<
ni neteenthc cnt ur ics. Bv t his I m ean t hat t hc pr escncelnt l per -
sonalitvof thc phvsicianrrere the primarv remcdiesin manv afllic-
ti ons ol rvhich anxiet y was a m ajor com ponelnt ,Udeololltond
R ati onol i tr,
p p. 52- 5 l]
rl l
 The Ner v Sit uat ion of M edicine

A Shilt
[46] The gradualclimination from medical understan<iing o{ anv
refercnceto thc patient'sliving conditions u.as.in part, an ellect
of thc c olonizat ionof m edicine by basicand applied scicncein
the earlv nineteenth ccntury; but it *as also a consequenceof
i ndrrstrialsociet y'sint er est ( in cver y senseof t he uor d) in t he
hcal th o f it s wor king populat ions( or , as som e r vould pur it , in
the human component of thc productive fbrces). The political
authorit ies,at t he bchest ol, . r nd *it h advice f ionr , hygienist s,
took stepst o m onit or and im pr ove living condit ions. M edicine
and politics joined forces in a neu approachto illness,cxempli-
lied br changesin hospitalstmcturesand practices.In eightcenth-
ccnturv Fr ance,par t icular lvat t he t im c of t he Revolut ion,st eps
\{'eretaken to replace hospices,which had provided shelter and
care to sick patients, many of lvhom had nowhcre else to turn,
uith hospitalsdesignedto lacilitatc patienr suneillance and clas-
sificati<-rn.
By design, thc ncrv hospitals operated as, to borro$
lacques Ren6 Tenon'sphrasc,"healing machines."Treating dis-
easesi n hospit als,in a r egiDt eDt edsocial envir onnt cnt ,helped
strip them oftheir individuality.Meanuhile, thc conditionsundcr
rvhich diseases
developedrveresubjectedto incre.rsinglvabstract

r ll
anal\sisand, .rsa result, thc gap u idened betrvccn thc rcalitv of
pat ic nt s 'l i v c sa n d th c c l i n i c a l re p re s e ntati on
of that rcal i ty.[...]
Thc statisticalstudy ol the frequencv,social contcxt and spread
of dis ea s ec o i n c i d e de x a c tl v\,v i thth e a natomi cal -cl i ni cal
revol u-
tion in the hospitalsofAustria, Englancland l]rancc in the earlv
nineteenth century. f"Maladies," Univers,p. 1235a]
' fh re e p h e n o m c n a a l tc re d t he si tuati on ol E uropcan
[ 47]
medicine.'l'he first rvasthe institutional anclcultural changethat
i\ , lic hc l F o u c a u l t h a s b a p ti z e d " th c b i rth of the cl i ni c," l r.hi cl r
combined hospital relbrms in Vicnna and Parisr'r'ithincrcasingly
'widcsprca<l
useofsuch exploratorvpracticcsaspercussion(Joseph
LeopolclAuenbriiggcr,.fcan-Nicholas Corvisart)and mediateaus-
c ult at io n (R e n 6 .l ' h !o p h i l c l l v a c i n th e Ladnnec),and rvi th svs-
tcmatic effbrts to relate obscrvcd symptoms to anatomical and
pathologicaldata.Sccond,a rationalattitudc of therapeuticskep-
ticism was fbsteredand developedin both Austria and France,as
Edu'in Heinz Ackerknecht has shorvn.rrThird, physiologygrad-
uallv liberated itsclf from its subservienccto classicalanatomy
and becamr:an independent medical discipline, rvhich at first
fircuscrlon diseaseat the tissuelevel, asyet unawarethat cventu-
ally it uould come to fbcus evcn more sharplvon the ccll. And
physiologistslooked to physicsand chemistrvfor examplesasrvell
astools.
Ilcncc, a nervmoclelof mcdicine uas elaborated.Nerv diseases
u.ereidentified and distinguished,most notably in pulmonarvand
cardiac pathologv (pulmonarv edcma, bronchial dilation, cndo-
carditis).Old medications,w,hosenumbers had proliferatedn,ith
no discernible cflict, wcre discounted. And rival medical theo-
ries cast discreclit on onc another. Thc nelr- model rvasone of
knou.ltrJgewithout systcm,basedon the collection of facts and,
i1 possible,the elaborationoflavvsconllnlred bv cxpcrimcnt. This
knowlcdge, it rvashoped, rvould be capableofconversion into
I 14
cflcctive therapics,rvhoseustrcould be guidcd bv critical arvare-
ncssof t heir lim it at ions.
In Fr ance,elabor at ion of t hc ncu' m edical m odel t 'as pur -
stredfirst by frangois-loscphVictor Broussais,then bv liranqois
Nlagendie,and finallv by Claudc Bcrnard.Despite the traditional
claims of medical historians,however,it can bc shorvn that the
phvsiologicalmodel remainedan ideologv.If the goal of thc pro-
gram \\'asevcntualll achicvcd,it rvasreachcdb-vroutesquitc dil:
fercnt lrom those envisioncrlbv the progr.am'sauthors. [,ldeologr
pp. 5a-551
ond Rationalit.v,
The Physiological Point o[ View
I :ra nqoi*l osephVictor Broussois
[.]8] By demolishingthe period'smost majesticand imposingsvs-
tem, th at ol'Philippc [ 'inel, Br oussaisclear cd t hc r vay f br t hc
advcnt of a ncw spir it in m t r licine. "lt u'as Br oussais's
opinion
that pa t hologv was not hing but physiologv,since hc called it
'phvsiologicalmedicinc.' Therein lav thc rvhole progrcssin his
"svstemol irri-
uav ol looking at things."ll To bc sure, Broussais's
tation" hincleredhis understandingunnecessarilv, and he discrtri-
itt'd hinrselfbv overrelianceon leechcsand bleeding.Yct it should
not bc fbrgotten that thc publication ofhis Examendc la docttine
nidicale giniralementadoptie rvas,in the rvordsol l-ouis Pcisst',
"a medicalfequivalentofl 1789."rrln order to refute Pincl's"phil-
osophicalnosographv"and cloctrincof "essentialfcvers,"Broussais
borrou,edlrom Bichat'sgcncralanatomvthc notion that eacht,vpe
of tissue,orving to its specific tcxture, exhibits certain charac-
tcri sti c alt er at ions.I I c idcnt if ied lever u. it h inf lanm at ion, dis-
ti ngui shed<lif li: r r : ntor iginal sit esand pat hs of pr opagat ionf or
cach type of tissue,anclthus erplaincd thc svmptomatic(liversitv
ol di fl c r m t t ever s.I le cxplainedinf lam m at ionas t he r csult ol an
ri5
 excessiveirritation. rr hich interlered rvith the ntovcmentofa tis-
svstems,Physiologicalmedicinc, even if it mimickcd the tbrm of
sue and could in the long run disturb its organization.Ile stood
a svstem,markcd a decisiveshift fiom the era ol systemsto the
on its head the basicprinciple of pathologicalanatomvbv teach-
ige ofrescarch. from the ageof revolution to the epoch ofprog-
ing that thc dysfi-rncrion
precedesthe lesion. Ilc bascdmedicine
ress,bccauseBr oussais'sidca looked t o t echniquesn it hir r each
on phv s i o l c rgra
v th e r th a n a n a to m t.A l l crlthi s i s summcd up i n a
ol conte m por ar ypossibilit ies.I f t udes,pp. 136- 38]
rvcll-knonn passageoIthe preface to thc Eramenof l8l5r .,The
c har ac t c ri s ti ctra i ts o fd i s e a s e smu s t b e sought i n phvsi ol ogy....
l:rongoistrlagendie
Enlightcn me with a scientific analyslsof the often confusedcries
of the suff-eringorgans.... Tcachme about their reciprocalin0u, l+t)l What Broussaispromiscd, someonr clse had alreadvbegun
to dcl i v er .Thir m an, t oo, had declar edt h. r t "m cclicine is not h-
ences."Discussingthe new ageof medicine in his Essaidephiloso-
i ng but t he physiologvof t he sick m an. "l'r Just onc year af t er
phie mddicale,Jean Baptiste Bouillaud wrote, "ls not the fall of
Broussais's (1808), this man had publishcd
Htstoiredc phlellmosies
the systcm of Nosogroph;e phtlosophiqueone of the culminating
his fromen dc ]'oction de quclquesvigdtaut sur la noille dpiniirc,
ev ent sol o u r m e d i c a l c ra , a n d i s n o t the overthrorvofa svsrcm
|lc lounde<l t\e Journal de phvsiolollieetpirimcntol a vear beforc
that had governed thc medical rvorld a revolution ro,hoscmcm-
Brc.'ussaisfoun<le<fthe ,4nnal.'sde la nidetine phvsiololyiqucand in
ory will not fade?"raln a more lapidaryflashion,]\,lichelFoucault
i t i n 1822 conllr m eclChar lcsBell'sdiscovt r v ( 1811)t hr ough his
put it this u'ay in lhc Birth ol the C,/inic:"Since 1815,the doc-
" E xp6riencessur les f bnct ionsdcs r acinesdcs ner ls r achidiens"
t or ' s ev e h a s b e e n a b l e to c o n fro n t a si ck organi sm." l 5E mi )e
I:ronr thc t it ies of t hese r vor ls alone we gat lr er t h( : diller eD( e
I it t r i' , a m a n { a rn i l i a rw i th th c c o n c e pt of " di sti ngui shi ng"di f' -
bctrr,ecnthe oricntation of Broussais's work and that ol this other
ferent tvpcs ofexplanation (he ref'ersto "Bichat's great distinc,
phvsicianrFrangoisMagendic(1783-1855).WhercaslJroussais ha<]
tion" betrveenoccult and irrcducible gualities), rvasthus able to
r.orkcd f ir st in m ilit ar y and lnt cr in civilian hospit als,M agendic
observein 1865that "s hile theory in medicine once \4ras suspect
\\' asn man ol t he labor at or v. r su'cll as a hospit alphvsician.For
and serred onh as a target, so to speak,fbr the facts that demol-
him, experinrcrrtalphvsiolcr{Iv rvasthc study of rhe ph'-sicsof ital
ished it, today,orving ro its subordinationto phvsiologicallans,
phenomenasuch as absorption.He conducted svstematicexper-
it has become an effective instrument of researchand a faithful
iments rvith animals to test the pharmacodvnamicpropcrties of
rule of conduct."l6No doubt Claudc Bernardu,asright to saythat
ne* l v i solat edclasscsof chem ical com pounr Jssuch as t he alka-
Broussais'sphvsio)oqicalmedicine "rvas in realitv bascdonlv on
l ,ri < i s.A s ear lvas i821, Nlagendie'rFor m r lor ycar r iedt he subt it le
phvsiologicalicleasand not on the essentialprinciple of phvsiol-
"For the Use an<lPreparationof Variousl\{e<.lications Suchas Nux
ogv."l7 Yct Broussais's
idea was rvell suited to become a progrcm
V rmi ca, M or phine, Pr ussicAcid, St r vchnine,Ver at r ine,I odine,
and to justifv a medical techniquequitc different from the one
and the Alkaljs of Q uinquinas"( t hat is, t he quinine of Pellct ier
or iginalll a s s o c i a tc d
$ i th i t. F ra n q o i s , \l agendir()ol
e B roussai s' s
anrlCaventou).
doctrine and transfbnnedit into a method. That is rvhy Brouss.ris's
l n shor t , l\ lagcndie'scxpcr im ent al m c<licinedif f cr ed f iom
svstem brought about a different kind of revolution fi.om other
llroussais'sphysiologicalmcdicine in three lvays:it wascentered

rl 6
tl 7
in t hc l a b o ra to rvra th e r th a n rh e h o s pi tal ;i t expcri mentedon
lnim alsra th e r th a n o n mc n ; a n d i n s tc adof C al eni c pri nci pl esi t
15cdextractsisolateclbv pharmaceuticalcht'nristrv,for examplc,
r epl. r ci n go p i u m rv i th m o rp h i n e a n d qui nqui nr rvi th qui ni nc,
O l r hes (th re c d i ffe re n c e sth
, c s e c o n duar i ni ti al l r grccted * ,i th
t h. t r ( a te s ti n c o n rp re hc n s i o na n d c ri ti ci snt.Il ,rgendi e' svi vi scc-
r ilr r nro L l s e dh o s ti l e p ro te l t .rn d d e monrtrati ons, no doubt l br
rris()nsmore profound than conrpassionfbr animal suff'ering.
For (o rcason lrom anintalsto man $ils r,t abolish the clistance
brr\\ecn the t\vo.'fhe practicc was held ro stcm fiom a materi-
alistphilr-rsophv,
and successu.ould rcsultin thc tempration to
errendthe expcrimentsto man. When accused of experimenting
en hum a n s .M a g c n d i ed e n i c d th e c h a rgr.B ut i f admi ni steri ng
unpro!endnrgsis experimentation(asClaudeBernarrihimself rvas
ont ol t h e l l rs t to a d mi tl e ), th e n Ma gcndi erJi rlexperi mcnt on
hlr nJ ns ,p ,rti c n tsi n h o s p i ta l s ,u h i c h h e.r)nsi (l erc(ja vast l abo-
rvhcre pitieDts corrl(l bc qrouped rrrd stricliedcompara-
...r141r'
onrl Rdtiona]it.v,
tir.h'. [/rlcolo1ir pp- 58-59
CluJe Bernord
[5t)l A vcaf befbrc his death, Claude Bern.rrd, u'riting the intro-
drction lbr a planncd Traiti de I'expiricncetlanslessciencesmiLlicales,
took litcrallv a u'c]l-kno*n quip of Magcndie's. Bcrnarclrepcated
hii pred('cessor's sclf-characterization:"lle uas the ragpickerof
phrsiologr. Ilc rv.rsmerclv the initiator of erpcrinrentation. Todav
ir i\,rdiscipliDethat hasto be crcated,a mrrhorl."{)ForBernard,a
5111-snlecl ragpiclcl r,trsno <loubtsupcriorto a dognrati(.svstem-
burl,ltrrl h,r did not r:vcnrealize th.rt he s.rsbuilding a systcm,
lil,, Brouss.ris.But n'hat are we to nt.rkeitf Bernard'srepeatcd
in\i\tencethat onlv he apprcciatesthc trur requiremcntsof tie
er pr r ime n tam
l c th o d ?
I ns u ffi c i e nat te n ti o n h a sb e e n p a i d, I rhi nk,to tw o conceprs
r l8
in Bern:C'smcthodological writings that $'erc fbr him inscpa-
rablc: tl orv and progrt'ss.Experimentalmulicine is progressive,
he argu, , becauseit elaboratestheorics and bccausethosc the-
ori cs arr - hcm sellespr ogr essive,
t hat is, open. Benr ar d'sr ieu is
summccup in tu,o obitr'rr/icto: 'An cxPerimentalistneler otrt-
l i veshi , vor k. I le is alr r ar : sr t t he levcl of pn>gr r ss, "r nd "\ \ 'it h
theoric lrerc are no nror( scientitic rct'olttiont.Sciencegrorrs
A<ldt o t his t he t wo ( oncePt sof ( l( t er -
graduall1111st e. r dilr '. "{l
minism,rd action - kno\1le(lgeol thc one being cssentirlli)r itrc
ccssof t ,: other - an(l vou havcthe lbur componentsol a medical
ideolog that clearh' mirrored the progressivcidcologl'of mid-
ni netec'h- ccnt ur vEur opcanindust r ialsociet v.I n light of m or c
recent r ncepts, such as Bachclard'sePistcmologicalbreak and
K uhn' s, r uct ur eof sci( nt ilic r evolut ions,Bcr nar cl's
colt cpt ol'
theory r t hout r evolut ion hasdr ar vnunder st anclab]ant e l lcgit i-
mate cr cistn. ln Bcrnard'sdar'.physicistsstill IoLrnrlin Ne\r'ton
rncl P i t : - Sim onLaplacer casonst o bclievein Pr inciplesol con-
sew ati r Ru<lolPhlt r lius lim m anucll Clausiusha<lvet t o at t r act
the attc'l6n 11f2 1.119.
part ol the scicntilic comntunitv to Carnot's
princip , of u'hich philosophers*erc a t'ortioric\'(n lessa\\'arc.
Nlichae:aradav'stxpcriments, Andr6-Maric i\mpi'rc's larrs and
l ames[ 1li M axr , vell'scalculat ionshad vet t o r evealclcct r ical
currentr a possiblesubstitutelor coal asthe nrotor of thc indus-
tri al m; r ine. I n 18?2,t he G er nr anphvsiologistEm ile l) u Bois-
Rcvmo-r(of rvhom Bernardhad on sevcraloccasion\exprcssecJ
a rathe "ont em l) t ur >r ropinion)
s displavedsulTicicntc, r nlidcnce
i n Iapl ian det er m inisnrt o pr e( ] ict r vhcn Englant llloulr l bur n
i her last,ieceol ctr.rl({/6cr dic (lrcnzenr/ci Norurcrlrnrtcnr ). Birt
in that me ye.lr,rhc Actr(l6miedes Scicnccsin P.rris.consulted
{br thc'cond t ir ne . r bout t hc invent ion of an clect r ic. r lr 't or kcr
named .:nobcGranune. finallv acknorvleclgecl
that practice hacl
racecla a<lof thcorl and autlrcnticatc(l.1rcvolution in ttchnol-
I l')
 ogy . I n s h o rt, th e c o n c e p to fa th e o rv rvi thout revol uti on,u.hi ch
Bcrnardtook to be the solid basisof his methodology, \4,aspr:r-
hapsno m o re th a n a s i g no fi n te rn a l l i mi tati ons i n hi s ou.n medi -
cal theor"-:e:,perinrentalmedicine, rctive and triumphant, rvhich
Bernardproposed as .r definitive model of what medicine in an
industrialsocietyought to be. He contrastedhis model rvith that
ol contemplative,rl,atchlirlmcdiciDe.a model appropriareto agri-
cultural societicsin rvhich time wasgovernedby q uasi-biological
rather than industrialnorms. The son ofa vine grorverlvho main-
taineda deep attachmentto his nativcsoil, Berrrardu,asneverable
to apprcci.rtefullv that science requiresnor only th.rr the scien-
tist abandonidcasinvalidatedbl facts but also that hc givc up a
personalizerlstlle ofrcscarch,rvhich rvasthe hallmark of his ou,n
uork. In sr:ience,it rras thc same as in agriculture, rvhere eco-
nomic progresshad uprooted manv from tht soil.
Paradoxicallv,the internal limitations of Bcrnard'stheorv of
r lis c ar c( rti o l o g r a n ,l p a th o g e n )r rre rer l ut r,, thr i ni ri l l * ,,.." ....,
of his researchas Magendie'ssLrccessor.For he had discovered
the inf'luenceof thc svmpatheticnervoussystemon animal heat
( 1852) ;h a d g e n e ra te di,n th e c o u rs eo f researchon gl vcogcnesi s,
a cascofdiabetes by a lesion o{ the pneunrogastricneive at the
level ol the fburth vcntricle (1849-5t ); and had demonstratedthe
selectiveaction of curarcon the motor nerves.As a result,Bemard
concejvedan idea rhat hc neverrepudiated.nanrcJ1,, rhat all mor-
bid clisordcrsarc controlled by the nenous svstem,+2th.rt diseases
are poisonings,and th,rt inf'ectiotrsvirusersare agentsof fermen-
t at ion t ha t a l ttr th e i n te rn a l e n v i ro n m enri n r,,.hi chcel l s l i ve.al
Although rh(.scpropositions$ere lareradapte(lto quite different
experimcntal situations,none can be said to havc been directly
r es ponsi b )e
fo r a p o s i ti rc th c ra p c u ti ca ppl i cari on.W hat i s more,
lJernard'ssrubborn vicrvson the subiect o1'pathogenvprevente(l
him from seeing the practical implications of the .w,orkof ccr-
tai n co nt em por ar icswhonr hc held in cont em pt bccauset hcv
rvcre not physiologists.Convinced of the identity oI the normal
and the pathological, Bernard \!'asnever able to rake a sincere
interest in cellular pathologv or gernl patholog,i.Lldeolo11.v
ond
Rdtionality,pp. 60-63]
The Stotisticol Point of View
Rend-Thlophi I e H yacinthe Latn nec
[51] ConsidcrLaEnnec.FranqoisMagendiemocked him asa mere
annora t orof signs.The in\ ent ion of t he st et hoscopeand it s use
in auscultation as codified in thc De .l'auscu./tation mtdiote of 1819
l ed to t he eclipsc of t he sym pt om by t he sign. A sym pt om is
somerhingprcsentfil ol oflered by the paticnt;a sign,on the othcr
hancl,is somcthing sought and obtained u,ith the aid of meclical
instruments.The patient,asthe bearerand often commentatoron
s!mpto r ns,u'as"p) acedin par ent heses.A" signcould som et im es
revealan illnessbe[bre a symptom led to its being suspected.ln
Section 86, I.adnnecgivesthe example of a pectoriloquv as the
sign of a svmptomlesspulmonarv phthisis,4aThis rv.rsthe begin-
ning of the use of man-m.rdeinstrunrentl to detect alterationi.
accidentsand anomalies,a practice that would grarluallyexpand
n ith the addition of ne*, testing and measuringequipment and
the claborationof subtle tcst protoco)s. Fronr the ancient steth-
oscopc to the most modern magnetic rcsonanceimaging equip-
mcnt, f)'om the X-ray to the computcrized tomographic scanner
and ul t r asoundinst nr m ent , t he scient ilic side of nt cdical pr ac-
ticc is most strikingly svmbolizcd by the shift ficrnrthe medical
officc to the testing laboratory.At the same time, the scaleon
rvhich pathologicalphenomen.rare rcpresentedhasl>eenreduced
lrom the crrganto the celi and from rht'ceil to tlrc nrolecuL:-
Thc task of the physician,lrowever,is to inrcrpret informatirrn
r4l
der iv edf r o n r.r n ru l ti p l i c i ty o fs o u rc L ' s-[
. houghmedi ci nc may set tablr' l.rther of the runrcrical mcthori." It mav berof sonreintcr-
as idet he i n d i v i d u a l i tl o f th e p a ti c n t, i t s go.rl remai nsthe con- (.st to rc call a lit r lc- Lnor \ n judgm cnt conccr ning hint . I lenr v
ques t of < l i s e ,rs cW
. i th o u t d i a g n o s i s ,p rognosi sand trcatnl cnt, I)Lrcrotn vde Blainvill<:said t his in his Hi. st oir cdest t r cnccsde
there is no medicine. Here we finrl an object suitable for stu(ly ol 1815:
I'orylanisation
in tcrms o{ logical and epistcmologicalanalysisof thc construc-
tion and testingof hvpotheses.We also find ourselvesat the dau n Pinelbeganbv applringmathcm.rti{
A nr.rthcmatician. \ to .rnimal
f)occorsu'erejust bt.ginningto become
ol me<licrinr.rthenratics. a phiLrsrphcr,he crrricd on u ith an in rlepthsturirol'
mt-cJr;rnics:
arvarcof an epistemologic.rllimitation alreadl recognizr:dirr cos h< madeprogrcss
n)entrlillness;a nituralistandobservcr, in appll-
m ology an d p h v s i c s :n o s e ri o u sp re d i c ti on i : possi bl ervi thout ing the naturalmerhodto medicinr:randtorvardthe enrlhc l.rpsecl
quantificationofdata. But rvhatkind ofmeasurcmentcould there backinto his carlypreclilcctions
bv cnrbracingthc chimericalicica
be in mcdicint'?One possibilitr $,asto m('a\urcvariationsin the ol ,rpplving
thc calcrrlus to nrcdicinc,or nrcdicalsta-
ol probabilitics
phlsiologicallunctions.This uas thc purposeol instrumentssuch ti sti cs .r s if t lr e nLr t nbtol
r discascs r oLr ldalli'ctt ht inlinit c vr r ia-
asJ ean[ ' oi s e u i l l e ' sh c mo < l y n a mo me te( r1 828) and K arl [-u< l rr.i g' s ri()nsoI tcmper.rlnc rrr, rlict, Iocaleandsoon. rvhichinllrrtnccthcir
kvmograph. Anothcr possi[rility \1asto tabulate thc occurrence andm akcr hemsodiver se
i n< .i d cnce t o inr lividual.
lr om inr lividual
ofcontagiousdiseases and chart thcir propagation;in the absence
ofconflrmed etiologies,thescdatacould be correlatedrvith orher This jutlgment is \r.orthrcmL'mberingli)r the light it shcrlson the
nat ur al an rl s o c i a l p h e n o m e n a .l t rv a si n thi s seconcll brm th.rt srrrrnrvre lat ionsbenvccn Blainvilleand August eCr lm t e and on
quant if ic a ti ()nfi rs t e s ta b l i s h e da fb o th o l d i n mcdi ci ne. [" S tatut to the calculusoI prob-
rhc hostility of the prrsitivistphikrsoqrhcrs
6pist6.mof ogique," Histoirc,pp. 19-20) abilitir:s.The Forticth Lessonof the (ours tle Philosophtc
positive
statesthat mc(lical staristicsare "absoluteempiricism in fiivolous
PhilippeP;nel mathematicalguist"'and that therc is no morr: irration;rl proce-

[ 52] T he s tn l i s ti c a lm e th o d o fc v a l u a ti n g cti ol ogi cal di agnoses
and therapr.utic choices bcgan rvith Pierre Louis's ,lfimoirc on
pht his is( 18 25 ), rv h i c ha p p e a re dl b u r v e a rsbel brethe ptrbl i cari ,rn
in London rrl Francis Bisset I larvkins'sElementsol ,l,ledicalStatistrc:s
(r'hose outlook uas.rs social .rsit lvasmedical), Those rvho cel-
ebr at er he Ii rs t rrs co fs ta ti s ti c si n m e c l i ci nctcnd to l brget [' i nel ,
horvever.In 1802,in his .llidacineclinique,hr u5(\l :taristicalmerh-
oclsto studr the relation betueen certain dircascsand changes
in t hr : wc a th c r.l l t: a l s o i n tro d u c e d s ta ti sti calconsi dcrati onsi n
the revised edition ofhis ftaiti mid;co-philosophique
surI'aliination
mcntalc.Fdu in lleinz Ackurknt'cht savsthat Pinel rvas"the veri-
rl rrrci n ther apvt han t o r elv on "t he illusor l t hcor r ol'ch. r nce. "
()nc ti n<lst he s. r nr chr r st ilit yin CI audeBcr nar d,dcspit ehis skcp-
ti (i sm ab out Com t e's philosophv.[ "St at ut i'pist 6nr r r logi<1ue, "
Hiroirc, pp. 20-2ll
Pi crrc-Cha rles-
Aler o ntlrc Louis
15 3] I ou is uscdsr at i. t icsin a dillcr <nr spir it lr om Pinel.l lir nr ain
go.rls\\cre to substitutea qu.tntitativcindcx firr the clinician'sper-
sonJlj udgm ent , t o count t hc num bel of r vcll- t lef incdsignspr es-
ent or atrscntin t hc t r am inat ion ol a pat icnt nnd t o coDpar c t he
rcsul tsof onc pe'r iodu it h t lr oseobt aintr l bv ot hcr phvsiciansin

t1 2
ot her pe ri o d su s i n g th e s n m eme th o ds.E xpcri encei n mcdi ci ne
is ins t r u c ti \e , h c i n s i s te d ,o n l y i f n u mcri cai rccordr are mai n-
t ained. B u t, o th c rs a rg u c d , ta b l e s a n d charts destroy memorv,
judgm en t a n d j n tu i ti o n . T h a t i s rv h y E mi l e t-i ttrt and C harl es
Robin, both positivists,declaredthcir hostility to "numcrics" in
the articlc thev publishe(lundcr that rubric in the thirteenth edi.
tion of their Dictionnairede mdtlecine,chiuryie et phornacie (1873).
In their vieu', calculationscould never replacc "anatomical and
phvsiologicalkrou'lcdgc, .'r'hichalone rrakesit possibleto weigh
t he v alu e o f rv mp to n rs ," F u rth e rn ro re,the efl ect crI usi ng the
numerical method is that "patients are obseruedin a sensepas-
sively,"As wirh the caseof Laennec,this rvasa method that set
as ide t he d i s ti n c ti v e fe a ru re so f th e pati ent seeki ng i ndi vi dual
at t c nt ion l o r h i s o r h e r p .rth o l o g i c asl i r uati on.
It u'ould be more than a ccntury before "the illusorv theory
ofchance," as Comte called it, u'ould be fullv incorporated into
di. r gnos i sa n d th e ra p yth ro u g h me th o dsel aboraredto mi ni mi zc
er r or s ol j u c l g m e n ta n d ri s k s o f tre .rtrnent,i ncl u< l i ngthc com-
puterizedprocessingof biomedical and clinical dat.r.One recent
consecluencc of this technologicaland epistcmologicalevolution
hasbeen the constructiol of "expert svstems"capableof apply-
ing various rules ol infert:nceto data gleaned f}om examination
and then rccommending possiblecour5csof treatment.
[,,Statut
epistemologique,"H istoirc,pp. 2l-221
t 44
A M edical Revolut ion
Bocteriology
[5.1] The discoverjesof Louis Pasteur,Hcnnrnn Robert Koch and
thei r stud ent squickly led t o a pr of bund epist cm ologicalr evolu-
tion in medicine, so that, strangelvenough,thcseresearchers had
a grcaterimpact on clinical medicine than did contemporan clin-
i cal pract it ioner s,Past eur a, chem ist wit hout m edic; r Jt r aining,
i naugura t eda new cr a in m c<licine,I le f ieed m edical pr act icc
liom its traditional anthropocentrism:his approachhad as much
to do rvith silkrvorms,sheepand chicken aswith human patients.
Pnstcurdiscover!'(lan etiologv unru,latedto organ functions. By
revealingthe rolc ofbactcria and viruses in disease,h<rchangc<l
not onl v the lbcus of m edicine but t hc locat ion ol it s pr act ice.
Traditionally,patientshad been care<llbr at home or in hospitals,
but raccinationscould now be administeredin dispcnsaries,bar-
racksand schoolhouses. 1he object of m cdicine r vasno longer
so much diseaseas hcalth. This gave ne\r, impetus to a medical
discipline that had cnjoyed prominencc in Englandand France
si D cethe cnd of t he eight eent hccnt ur \ ' - public healr h or hy-
gi ene.Thr ough public hcalt h,r vhich. r cquir edinst it ur ionalst at us
i tr E urope in t hc f inal t hir d ol t hc ninet eent hcent un, epidcm i-
dogy took medicinc into the realm of the socialsciencesand eco-
t4 5
nom ic s . lt b c c a n rei mp o s s i b l eto l o o k upon mcdi ci ne sol el vas
a s c ienc e o f o rg .rn i ca n o m a l i e so r c h a ngcs.' I' hc efl ects of the
pat ient ' ss o (i a l i n d e c o n o mi c s i tu a ti o non thc condi ti ons of hi s
or her lifi'nrxv Dunrbcrc(lamong the l.rctors that the phrsici.rn
hac lt o t ak e i n to d c c o u n t. l ' h e p o l i ti c a l p rci Juresstenrmi ngfrom
public hcalth concernsgraduallvresultedin changesin nr<<licine's
objectivesand practices.The accenr \aasshifted from health to
pr c v ent io nto p ro tc c ti o n .' fh e s e ma rti c shi ft poi nts to a change
in t hc m c d i c a l a c t i ts e l f. W h c rc mc tl i c i ne had once respondc< l
t o an app e a l , i t v ra sn o l v o b e d i rn t to I rl emand. H eal rh i s the
cnp<rcitvro resist diseasc;yet thos( uho enjor goc,d hc.rlth arr:
nev er t he l e scs< rn s < i o uosf th e p o s s i b i l i tyof i l l ncss.P rorecti crni s
t he negat i o no l < l i s e a s ea,n i n s i s te n c eo n ncvcr havi ng to thi nk
about it. In rcsp()nseto political pressurcs,medicine has had to
t ak c on t h e a p p e a ra n c co f a b i o l o g i c a l technol ogv.H crt , fbr a
t hir d t im e , th e i n d i v i d u a l p a ti c n t, \\h o seeksthe attcnti ()nofa
c linic ian,b a sl > t,e ns e t a s i d c ,B rrtp e rh rp si nrJi vi cl ual i rv
i s sti l l rec-
ognizcd in tbe notion ol resist.rnce,in the f)ct th.rr sonreorgan-
ismsare mort'sus(:(.ptiblcthan othets to, sav,the cholerabacillus.
Is thc conccpr of resistanceartificirl, serving to cover a gap in
t hc gc r m t h e o rr' s d e te rm i n i s m?Or i s i t a hi nt of somemore i l l u-
minating conccpt yct to conrc, fbr u hich microbiologv haspaved
the u,ay/
if r nc r l i c i rr< h a sa tta i n e d rh e s t.rru sofn sci cn((, i t di < l so i n
t hc er a ol b .rc re ri o l o g vA . p ra c ti c t i s sci enti l l c i f i r provi < l esa
modcl firr the solution of problems and if that moclel givesrise
to ellictive tht.rapics.Such u'as the caservith thc dcvelopment
of s c r um sa n d r' .rc c i n c sA. s c c o n dc ri te ri on ofsci cnti fi ci tv i s the
abilit v of o n r th c o rv to g i v e ri s e to .rn othercapabl eol expl ai n-
ing $. hv it s p rc rJ e c c s s ,rr
p o s s e s s eodn l r li nri tcd val i di tv.[" S t.rtut
epis t 6m ol o g i q
u c ," H i s to i rep, p . ))-)1 1
r.+6
The German School
f55] Yet it was an ext ensior ol m icr oscopict echDiqucsf br t he
studv r ) l cell pr epar at ionsand t hc use ol- svnt hct icaniline st ains
l manu lict ur ed in G er m anyalier 1870)t hat led, lir r t he f ir st t im e
i n rhe hist or y of m edicine, t o a t her apeut ict echni( luet hat ua\
lroth effcctive and unrelaterlto anv medical theorv: chcmother-
. om Wilhelm von
apv, i nvent ed by I 'aul Ehr lich ( 185. 1- 1915)Fr
Waldevcrin Strasbourg,Ehrlich had lcarneclhou'to usc stainsto
cxami n e nor m al and pat hologicalt issue,and at Br eslauhe ha<l
attend t 'dlect ur cson pat hologicalanat om vgivenbr JuliusCohn-
hei m (t 83t ) - 188- 1)a, st udent of I {udolph Lur lr vig[ r ar l \ ii[ chor r ',
rvh,r *ould later shorv that inflammation wrs causedbv tht pas-
sageof lcucocvt est hr ough t he capillar y r vall. Vir chou's icleas
rcachedEhrlich through JuliusCohnhcim. Neverthelcss,if cellu-
l .rr pat hologvplavedan indir ect par t in t hc invcnt ion of chcm o-
thcrapv,the rolc of bacteriologvand the discovirl of immunitv
\\a\ mr)redirect. Thc prob)en that Ehrlich sratrd anrl solvedcan
as f ollor vs: lhr ough r vhar cher nicalcom poun( ls
be for- m ulat ecl
u i th sp ecif icaf linit v lbr cer t . r ininf ect iousagcnt sor cells coulr l
one act dircctlv on the causcrather than on thc st nrptoms of <lis-
casc,i n im it at ion of t he ant it oxinspr escntin var iousser unr s?
This is not the placc to delr.einto thc circumstamccs surround-
i ng thc discovcr r ol im m unit r or t o r evivea dispr r t eover pr ior -
in', an exerciscuscfi.rlldr rerninding us th.rt the constitution o1
scit nrific knorvledgcd()csnot necessaril,v r.'rluire rh( simultarre-
ous erisienceof all u. ho cl. r im t o bc it s aut hor s. r 5lt is of lit t le
i mportancct hat t ht 'Ber lin Schoolpr eccdcdt he Par isSchool by
scverrlmonths, or that I lcrnrannRobert Koch'spupil Emil Adolf
von Behring conclu(le(ll>eloreI'asteur'spupil Pierre Paul Emile
R oux t hat dipht her iacannor be t r eat cd \ \ 'ir h a \ accine but cin
< tnl vbc pr cvcnt cdbv inject ion oI senr m t nkr n lr om a convales
cent pn t ient - pr ovidcd onr . hasa convalesccntllat ient , t hat is, a
sun,ivorol the disease.Roux wasablc to preparethe toxin in vifro.
Von Bchring managedto attenu.rteits virulence with trichloride
ofiodine. Roux rvasmore successfulthan von Behringin increas-
ing t he ac t iv i t) o fth c s e ru m.
Nevertheless,Ehrlich, rvhom Koch put in contact n,ith von
Behring,dreamedthat chemistrv could one day endorvman with
ponr er sf . r r bc v o n c lth o s e o f n .rtu rc .{ { ' H e h i t upon the i dea of
looking for sub!tancesrvith specificaflinities fbr certain parasites
and their toxins on the model ofstains with electivc histological
afTinities.For rvhat is a stain but a vector aimerl at a particular
lbrmation in a healthy or infccte-<lorganism?Whcn a chemical
cnnrpound dircctc(l at a particular cell penetratesthat ccll, rvbat
happensis analogousto the $' , in $,hich a kev fits into a lock.
Ehrlich's first successcame in 190,1,u,hen in collaboration r.r'ith
Kiyoshi Shigahe discoveredthat Trvpan red destroysthe trypan-
os om e t hat ca u s e ss l c c p i n g s i c L n e s s .L a te r came the di scoverv
in 1910of S al v a rs a no, r " 6 0 6 ." a n d N t' o -Sal varsan, uhi ch proved
les sef f ec r iv ei n c o m b a tti n g s v p h i l i s th a n *r.rs[rel i evedat fi rst.
But Ehrlich's real successlay not so much in thc products that
he ident if ied h i m s e l l a s i n th o s e th a t u ,o u l d ul ti matel y be di s-
coveredin pursuit ofhis fundamentalhypothesis:that the affini-
t ic s of c hem i c .rls ta i n sc o u l d b c u s e d a s a s vstemnti ctechni que
for dcvelopingartificial anrigcns.Using the samemethod, in l9]5
Gerhardt Domag discoveredprontosil red, the first ofa glorious
s er iesof s ulfa mi d e s .Its d e c l i n i n g e ffi c a cy l ed to the greatest
of triumphs to this dav, the chemical synthcsisof penicillin bv
Horvard Walter Florev and Ernst Chain. fhis is not to say rhar
t her apeut ic ss i n c e th e d i s c o v e ryo I c h e motherapyhas been rc-
duc ed t o t he a u to ma ti c a n d i n fl e x i b l c a p pl i cati onof chemi c:rl
ant it ox ins or a n ti b i o ti c s , a s i f i t rv e re e n ough to admi ni ster a
remcdv and lct it do its rvork. Gradually,phvsicianslearnedthar
inf ec t ious ag e n tsd e v e l o p re s i s ta n c eto th e drugs used agai nsr
146
them, and that organismssometimesdefendthcmseJves, p.rr.rrlox-
i c.rl l v enough, againstt heir chem ic. r l guar dians.Hence it r vas
necessarvto develop combined treatment regimcns.aT[3ut such
flexibilitv, tvpical of modern therapies,was made possibleonlv
bv the rationalistsim plif icat ion inher ent in Ehr lich's pr ogr am :
si nce cel l s choosebet r vcenst ains,let us ir r ventst ainst hat will
i nl al l i bl v choosep. r r t icularcells.
B ut $ha t does it m ean t o invent a st ain?I t m eansr o change
the posi ti o nsof t hc at om s in a m olecule, t o alt er it s chcm ical
structurc in such a rvav that its color can be read out, as it $,ere,
from its fbrmula. Ehrlich's project rvasnot simplv impossil>le;it
u,asi nconc eivable
in t hc t im c of M agendie.lt r vasnor unr il 1856
that W i l l i am Per kin, Sr . , obt aincd a nr auvedye f r om . r niline as
the outcom e of r esear chdir ect ed t or ", ar dan cnt ir ely dif f er ent
goal . It * as not unt il 1865 t hat F. A.K6ku16publishedhis paper
"The Composition ol Aromatic Comporrnrls."Alter confirming
that the cartronatom is tetrar';lcnt, Kekul!determined thc stntc-
ture ol benrene and {.rve the name "aromatic" to its (leiivatives
to distinguish them ficrm compounds involving thc fittv acids,
rvhich, along rvith the alcohols,rverethc primarv fbcusofchcmi-
cal intt'rest in the daysof Magenclieand Bernard.
l'he theoreticalcreation of new chemical substanccs
\\'ascon-
limrcd on a vastscalebl the chemical industry.Alizarin. thc prin-
cipal component of nr.r<Jder,rvhich Perkin in Englandand Karl
lames Peter Graebc and Edme Caro in Cermanl separatelyand
si mul taneouslvsvnt hcsizedin 1858, uas r vit hin t en year s't im c
being prodrrcedat thc rate ol'9,500 tons annuall,v. Finallyin lt)04,
ani l i ne, thc m ost ( 'labor at eof t he dve com pounds,best ou'cdit s
prestiAiousname on tlre German flrms Baclische
Anilin und Soda
Fahri k1B A5l lr nd Anilin Konzer n.
Thus. trvo of thc preconditionsnecessarylor the devclopment
of chemoth er apvas a r epJacem entlbr r he t hcr apiesassoci. r t ed
| 4<)
\\'ith thc old medical thcorics \\'ere a new symbolic represcnta-
tion firr chemical substanccsand a ne$ technologvfo producing
org.rniccompounds,u,hich supplanteclthe old extractiveproccs-
ses.These \\'erecvcnt! rvith fixcd, ascertainable
dates;their place
in historv coulci not lravcbeen cleclucecl
in advance.Hencc, chc-
mothcrapv could not havc cxistcd rvithout a certain level of sci-
cntillc and industrialsociety.Betu'eenEduard Jcnncrand Ehrlich
c am e t he indi s p c n s a b l d
c i s c o v e rvo fa n i l i n e , n,hi ch no onc coul d
hav clbr es eena t th e b e g i n n i n go fth e c c n turv. In hi s studr ofthe
" r at ionalis m o fc o l o r," Ga s to n Ba c h e l a rdr vrotc, " thc chcmi st
t hink s of c olo r i n te rm so f th e v e rv b l u c p ri n t that gui deshi s cre-
at ion. T her ei n l i c s a c o mmu n i c a trl eo, b j e c t i vereal i ty and a mar-
k et ables oc ia l rc a ]i tv .A n v o n e n h o ma n u f)cturesani l i ne know s
thc rcalitv and thr.:rationalitv ofcolor."a8 lldeolollvand Rational-
it r ' ,pp. 65- 68 1
The French School
[ 56] I n c ons i d e ri n gth e p re c u rs o rso fth e i mmuni zati on tcch-
niqucspcrfcctcd at thc cn(l of drc nineteenthcenturv,I shalllook
.rt the u.ork of Pasteurrather than at that oI Koch, partly becausc
it cam<'firstchronologicallyand partly becauseI'asteur'suork u.as
of morc gcncralimport, fbr "it not onlv modified the relationship
betrvccn biologv.rnd chemistrv but changcrlthc rcpresentation
ol t he uor ld o f l i v i n g th i n g s g e n e ra l l y ,th e rel ati ons betrvr:cn
bcings,and the lunctions ascribedto chemical rcactions."4'l
Frang.ois Dagognetargues,contrary to a u'idclv hcld vicrv,that
it \r'asn()t trccauscof tcchnical problcms raisc<lb,r industrialists,
artisansand aninralbreeders("malaclies"ol beer, * ine, silklvorms
and s heep)t h a t P a s tc u rto o k s o Io n g to d cvcl op " l ' asteuri sm."
Rathcr, Pasteurcncountcrcd technical problems trecause,Iiom
his flrst encounter vvith theoretical chemistrv,he sau.thc <rxper-
imental mrxlification of natural pnrducts as a theoreticaltool for
I5 ( )
analvzingrcalitv.for him, thc laboraton n'as.rplacefbr renorking
subst.rncesgiven bv nature or art and a placc for ficcing dormant
or blockedcausalmcchanisms- in short,a placefbr revealingreal
itv. Hcnce, laboratorv rvork *.as dircctlv aflcctcrl bv what rv.rs
going on in thc uorld of tcchnologv.
'I-hc rcvolution in mcdical thinking bcgan rvith the develop-
mcnt of t\\'o methods fbr studying the propertiesol crystals:ster-
comctry and polarimetrv.l)issatisflcdrvith EibhardMitscherlich's
cxplanationsofthe elfect of polarizcrllight on tartratesand para-
tartrates,Pasteurdiscoveredthe clill'erentorientatiolt of the hc-
ets of paratartraiecrvstals.Aftcr isolatingthc nno clifferentkinds
ol crvstal s,hc obscr vc<lt hat a solut ion m ade r vit h one kincl o1
crl stal rota t cd polar ized light t o t he r ight , r vher easa solut ion
matlc n ith the other rotatcclit to thc lcfi. Whcn the r\\'o cr!s-
tal s w ere com bined in solut ion in cqual par t s,t he opt ic. r lef 'lect
ruasnullifierd. When a solution ol'calcium paratartratcwas fcr-
mentcd bv thc eflcct ofa mold, Pasteurnoted that onlv the right-
polarizinglbrm of thc crystalwasaltcrcd, I Ic thcrefbre inferred a
connectionbetrveenthe properticsof microorganismsand molec-
ular asvmmctrics,Dagognethassholvn horv microbiologv began
u ith this ingeniousreversalof a result in bioclrr:mistrv.A micro-
scopic org.rnism,a rnold or a ycast,\\'Assho*n to bc capableof
di sti ngui sh ingbet r vccn opt ical isom er s. Past eur ismconver t ed
chcmical scparationby bacteriainto bactcriologicalisolation bv
clremical isomcrs.50Thus conllrmed in lris br:lief th.rt thcre is..r
structuralcontrastbetweenthc asvmmctricalliving organismand
the mi neral, and hence just if icd in r eject ing anv explanar ion
receptivcto the notion ofspontaneousgencration,Pastcurlinked
gcrm, fermcnt at ion ancldiscasein a unif ied t hcor et ical f r am e-
rvork. Since my purpose here is simplv to reflect on mattcrs of
hi storv and epist em ologv,t her e is no neeclt o r ecall t hc sr r bsc-
cl uent progr css,doubt s, r ct r cat s or cvcn t cm por ar y er r ( ) r st hat
 Ilowever tempting, it would be a nristaketo vierv this phe-
Pasteurnradc in elaboratingthis theorv. llLleolollrantl Ratlonal-
nomenon as bctokening a rediscovervof the concrctc individual
rr r ' ,pp. 68- 70]
paticnt set asideby the ven medicalscierrcerr hoseprogresseven-
tual l y reveal edt hc cxist enceol t he idiot vpe, AJt houghim m une
An Applied Science
identity is sometimesporrravcd, through abuseof ternrinology,
o f i ts rn i l i t ant sci enti [i ci ty by
[ 57] B ac t er iol o g vp ro v i d c d p ro o f
as i nvol vi ngan opposit ionof "sell" and "nonself , " it is a st r ict lv
g iv ing r is e t o t h c s c i e n c eo f i mrn u n o l o q v , nhi ch not onl v ex-
objcctive phenomenon. N4cdicinenlay sometimesappear to be
tcndccl anclrefined Pastcurianmedical practices but dcvcloped
thc application ofbiological linon l..dgeto concrete individuals,
into an autonomousbiologicalscience.lnrmunologvreplacedthe
but that appearanceis deceiving.The time hasnorv come to con-
Pasteurian rclation of virus to vaccinatc(lorganismlvith the more
sider thc epistemologicalstatusol medicine as such, leavinghis-
gencral relation ofantigen to antibody.The antigen is a generali-
torical matters aside. Given u,hat u,e know about immunologv,
zation ol the aggrcssormicrobe. The histc,ryof immunology has
genetics and molecular biology, or, looking backrvardin time,
becn a searchfbr the true meaning of the prcfix antr'-.Semanti-
about X-raysand cellular staining techniqucs, in nhat sensecan
c allr . it m c ans " a g a i n s t," b u t d o e s n ' t i t a l s o mean " before" ?
w e savthat me dicinc is an appliedscienceor an evolvingsynt he-
l' er hapst her e i s a rc l a ti o n , a s o f k e v a n d l o cL, tretw een these
t\x) DrenDiDgs. [. . .]
si sofappl i ed s ciencr : s?
It is appropriateto describemedicine asan "cvolving synthesis
;\s irnllrr:nologvbecameawarcol its scir:ntificvocation,it con-
ol'applied sciences,"insolir asthc rt'alizationof its goalsrequires
s r.ru g h i ts .rb i l i t ) to nrakeunantj c-
f ir nr ed it s r c ic n ti fi c s t..rtuth
haring not hing t o do wit h ir s
the use oI sci ent if ic <liscover ies
ipat ed dis c or c ri e sa n d to i n c o rp o r.rten e u concepts, one very
i ntri nsi c purpo ses.[ . . . ] ln usingt he t er m "applied sciencc, "t hc
striking examplebcing Karl I-andsteiner's discovervin 1907of the
accent, I thi nk, should f all on "scicnce. " I n sayingt his, I disa-
human blood tvpcs. Consistencyof rese.rrchfin<lingsis another
gree u'ith those rvho see the application of knowlcdge as involv-
criterion of scientillc status.Immunologicalfinclingsrvereso con-
ing a lossof theoretical dignitl', .rsrvell as those who think they
sistcnt, in fact, that immunologv's object ol researchcame to be
are deftnding thc uniquenessof medicine bv calling it a "hcal-
knorvn as the "immune s'stem," where the rvord "system" con-
ing art." The medical application of scientiflc knowledge, con-
notes a coherent structure ol positive and negativeresponsesat
verttd into remedies(that is, into ntcansofrestoring a clisturbed
the cellularand molecularlevel.The immrrnesystemconcept \4as
organi c equi l ibr ium ) , is in no senseinf cr ior in epist em ological
more eff-ectivcat "prescrving appearances"than the earlier con-
clignityto the disciplinesfrom rvhich that knou'leclgeis borrowed.
c t pt of " t er r ain ," In a s v s te mi cs tru c tu re , cvcl i cal efl ' ectscan
The application ofkno*'ledge is alsoan authentic form of exper-
appearto impede a causalityconstruedto bc ljnt'ar.'fhe immune
inrentation, a critical scarchfor eflectivc thcrapiesbasedon im-
s\stenr.morcover,hasthe remarkablepropertvlnot*n asidiotvpy:
ported unders t anr Jings.M edicine is t he scienceol t he lim it s of
an antibodv is specilic ncrtonll to a p.rrticularantigcn but also
the porversthat the other sciences<iaim to conf'erupc.,nit. i. . . ]
to a par t ic ular i n d i v i d u a l . T h e i d i o ty p e i s thc capaci tv ol thc
If the progressofa sciencetan be measuredbv the dcgrcc to
im m une s y s t emto e n c o d ea n o rq .rn i ci n d i v i (l u al i ty.

rtl
tt2
 which its bcginningsare forgotten, then it is worth noting that
assistindividual human beingsuhose livcs are in dangcr,cven il'
u'hcn doctors today need to do a blood transfusion,they verilv thc
that meansr iolating thc requiremrntsof the rational,critic;l pur-
blood- t v p r:c o rrp a ti b i l i tv o fd o n o r a n d reci pi ent rvi thout Inorv-
sui t ofknor vlcgr : ,can it claim t o l. lecalleda science?
ing thar the tests th('t arc ordcring are the product ol a historl'
A c l t' veran<iI ear ncdhist r t t i. r nof m cdicine, K. r r l Rot hschuh,
that can be traced back through immunologv and bacteriologv
hasexanrinc<lthis issuein tcrnrs l)orrow(l fiom Thorn.rsKuhn's
to Ladv i\lontagu and EdrvardJenner,incleedto a typc of medi-
historical epistemologv.In 197?.he askcd*hether Kuhn's con-
cal practice that doctrinaire phvsiciansoncc consideredhereti-
ccpts of " nor m al scicncc, " "par adigm " and "scient if ic gr oup"
cal, That practice startedmedicinc dou n a road that brought it
could be applied to conceptualadvancesin clinical mcrlicine; he
int o c ont a c t w i th a p a rti c u l a rb ra n c ho f mathcmati cs,rhe math-
concluded that Kuhn's lramerrc'rli,rvhile uselul fbr rrnrl<'rstand-
em at ic sol u n c c rta i D ty C
. a l c L tl a re ud n c ertai nty,i t turned out, i s
i ng medi c ine'sincor por at ion of ar lr ancesin t hc basicsciences
not incomp.rtible n ith ctiologic.rl hypcrtheses an<lr.rrion.rldiag-
si nce the e ar ly ninet cent hcent ur v,il inadequat et o. r c<. <r r r nt
lor
nosisbast'don datagatheredrvith rhc aid ofsuitable insrrumcnts,
the cliflicultiesencountcrcdbl clinical medicine,due to thc com-
What cxl)(.rt is qualified to decidc thc epistemologicrl status
plcxitv and variabilitv of its object. He concludeclhis papcr * ith
of meclicine?Philosopherscannot bestorvupon themselvesthc
a quotation from Lcibniz: "l rvish that medical kno* ledge rere
por v c rt o ju d g e n o n p h i l o s o p h i c adl i s c i p l i nes.' l ' hctcrm " epi ste-
asccrtai n a sm edical pr oblem sar c r lif licult . " I n t hc cour seof his
mologv" rclers to the legacv,not to snl the relics,of thc branchof
anal vsi s,Rot hschuhr epor t st hat Kuhn oncc char act er izcdm ccli'
philosophvtraditionalh knorvnas"rheorv of kno* lcrJgc."Because
ci ne asa " plot osciencc, "r uher eashc, Rot hschLr h,
pr cli r s t o call
t hc r elat io n ,rf k n o r,' l e d g ero i rs o b j e c ts has bccn progressi vel y
it arr rrperaticrnal5cicnce (i?.r.-lriond!ellitsenschaIt\.'fhese tuo
r eue. . r led
by s c i c n ri fl c m e th o d s , c p i s tc mol ogv has broken w i th
appellationsare worth pausingovcr. "[)rotoscicncc" is ingenious
philos ophi c .rlJ s s u m p ti o n sto g i v e i ts c l fa neu.del l ni ti on. R athcr
bccauscit is ambiguous. Proto-is polvscnric:it suggcsrr"prior"
than dcduce critcria of scientificity fiom o prion categoriesof
as rrel l as "r udim ent ar v, " but it m av also r cf cr t o hier ar chical
understanding.as wasdone in thc past.it haschoscnto take those
prioritv. "Protoscicnce" is a term that might u.cll be applicd tcr
criteria Irom thc historv of triumpharrtrationality.Whv shotrldn't
an carl i er peliod in t he hist or l ol nr cr licine,but it scenr ssom e-
m c dic ine th r' rc fi rrc b e b o rh .j u d g c ;rn d p artv i n the cascj W hv
horl i roni c t o use it \ 1hensom c physiciar sbclievet hat t he t inr e
s hould it f c c l th c n e e d fb r a c o n s e c ra ti o nol i ts statusu i thi n thc
hascorne t o allor v com put cr s t o guide t r cat m ent s'lr ilc cr t her s
s c ic nt if ic c o rn m u n i tv ?M i g h t i t l re th a t m crl i ci nc has preserved
arguc th.rr pa(ientsought to be allorvedto consult thc machincs
f r om it s or i g i n s a s c n s eo f th e u n i < l u e n e ss
of i ts purpose,so that
di rectl v. )ct "opcr at ional science" sccm s no m or c appr opr iat c
it is a mattcr of some interest to detcrmine rvhether that senseis
a tcrm than "applied science, "uhich som e ninet r cnth- cent u r y
a tenuoussun ivnl or an essentialvocation?To put it in somervhat
phvsiciansthemselvesapplied ro their discipline as thc! beganto
different ternrs, arc rvhat used to I)e d.fr ofdiagnosis, dr'cision
treat pati e nt son t he basisol t heir unt ler st anding ol phvsicaland
and treatment abotrt to bccorne ro,/crrncilhr.y t.) somc c!)nrput-
chtnri calm<chanir m rt xplc'r t t l t r v phvsiolr r gistFor
s. c r nr plt ', t he
c r iz ed nr ed i c a l p ro g ra m?If m e d i ri n e c annot sl ri rk the duty to
rvork ol C a r lo M at cucci, Er r r ilcDu Bois- Rcvm on<l and Her r r r ann

tt1 '
rtt
.':

frl
N
 tr
v on Helm holt z o n a n i ma l e l e c tri c i ty l e d Gu i l l aume-B enj ami n ical choice, neverthelessrcmainspresent.'fhat object hasa human
Duchennc de Boulogneto discovernew w-avsof treating muscu- form, that ofa living individual rvho is neither the author nor the
lar diseascs.llis major works, publishedbet$'een 1855 and 1867, masterof his own life and who must, in order to live, sometimes
bear titlcs incorporatingthe u'ord "application." rcly on a mediator. I lorvevercomplex or artificial contcmporary
An instructivcexampleis electrotherapy.It suggeststhat medi- mslicine's mediationmay be - rvhethertechnical,scientific,eco-
cine was impelled to become an applied scienceby the need to nomic or social - and however long the dialogue betteen doc-
discovermorc ef'fectivetreatments,as if in obedienceto its orig- tor and patient is suspcnded,the resolve to provide effective
inal imperativc. Later, ofcourse, the "scienceofelectricity" led treatment, which lcgitimatesmedical practice, is basedon a par-
to the devclopment not of therapeutic but of diagnosticdevices ricular modalitv of life, namely,human individualitv. In the phy-
such as the electrocardiograph(invented by Willcm Einthoven sician'sepistemologicalsubconscious,medicine is truly a synthcsis
in 1903),the electroencephalograph (JohanncsBerger,192'l)and because,to an evcr-increasingdegree, it applies science to the
cndoscopy.By treating the patient as an abstractobject ofther- task of preservingthe fragile unity of the living human individ-
apy,it rvaspossibleto transformmedicine into an appliedscience, ual. When the epistemologicalstatusof mcdicine becomesa mat-
with the accent now on science.Like any science,medicinc had ter of consci ousqucst ioning, t he sear chf br an answerclcar ly
to evolvethrough a stageofprovisionally climinating its concrete raisesquestionsthat fall outside the purvie$' of medical epistc-
init ial objec t . nrofr:rgv.["Statut 6pist6mologique,"Histoire,pp. 2 ] -291
Earlier,I called medicine an "evolving synthesisof appliedsci-
cnccs." Norv that I have discussedthe scnsein rvhich medicine
is an appliedscience,I haveonly to justily the choice of the words
"evolving" and "synthesis."Surely the reader will grant that any
science,w'hetherpure or applied,validatesits epistemologicalsta-
tus bv developingnew methods and achievingnew results.A sci-
ence evolvesbecauseof its interest in new methods fbr dealing
with its problems.For example,the existenceofchemical neuro-
transmitters u'as acknowledgcd(not without reservations,par-
ticularly in France) u'hen the work of Sir Flenry Dalc and Otto
Loewi filled in blanks in the resultsobtained bv electrical meth-
ods a centurv carlier.
So much for "cvolving" - but what about "synthesis?"A syn-
thesis is not a mere addition; it is an operational unity. Physics
and chemistry are not syntheses,but medicine ir, insofar as its
object, whoseinterrogativcprcsenceis suspendedby methodolog-

156 tt7

ti
tl
-T
P,cRt THnrr,

H i sto r y
 Cs r pt t , n Sr vr N

Cell Theory

Theories Never Proceedfront Facts

[5S ] Is bi ologv . r t heor et ical or . r n e\ per im cnt al scienccl'Ccll
thcorl is an irlcal tcst case.\{i: can seelight u.avcsonlv rt ith rca-
son'seves,but u-c appearto viervthc cells in a plant section \4itlr
thc sanreeves\ve usc t() look at evt'ry<latobjects. ls ccll rheorv
.rnvthingnlorc th.rn.r set of observationalprotocols?With th< aid
,' l ,r nri cr,'scoPr '.
\ r { c. t n \ r e t hat m . r cr "r , ', I ic or ! : nt ) i\ Dtrs, 'n\ i. t
ol cells,just as\rc can seervith thc nakedevethat the sanreorgan-
i sms.rreeicm cnt sof t hc biospher e.Yct t hc m icr oscopccxt cnds
the po\\ers ofintellig<,ncemore than it does the polters crfsight.
Furthernrolc,t he f ir ! t llr enr iscof cell t heor v is not t h. r r living
thi ngs arr com post d of cells but t hr t o, / .living
1 t hings consistof
totfiind bul ce]ls; everv ccll, morcovcri is assumedto col't)elrom
a prccxi sting cell, Such an asser t ioncilnnot be pr ovcn wit h a
mi cr()scopc.At bcst , t he m icr oscope( in ser veas a t ool in t he
taskol rtrilicat ion. Bur r vher edid t he i<lcat r f t he cell conr c t ; om
i n thc l i rst place?l
Robert Hookc is gcner.rllvgiven to() nruch crc(lit fbr the fbr-
mulation ofcell theorv.Truc, he *.asthe llrst to discoverthe ccll,
somc.rvhatbv accidcnt , r s hc pur . _uecl
a cur iosit v ar vakcnedbv
mi croscoPr 'scar liesrI cr <l. r t ions.Alier r nakir r ga t hin slic. ' in. r

t ()t
piecc oIcork, I k-,<-,ke
observeclits compartmentalizedstructure.]
He .rlsocoined the nord "cell" n hile under the spell ofan imager
the section of cork remindeclhim of a honeycomb, the rvork of
. r n. r ni n ra l ,l rh i c h th e n fu rth e r re mi n ded hi m of a u' ork of man,
thc honevcomb being like a building macleup of manv ce.//s, or
lmall rooms. But Hooke'sdiscovervled norvhere:it failed to open
up a new avenueof research.The lvord disappeared,only to be
rcdiscovcrcda ccntrrrvlatcr.
The discovcrvof thc ccll concept and the coining of the vvord
nre \\'orth drvellingon lbr a moment. As a biological conccpt, the
cell is surclv ort'rdctcrminc<lto a considcrabledcgree.The psy-
choanalrsisol knorvledgehas been sufficiently successfulin the
pas tr h n t i t n o \l c o n s ti tu te sa d i s ti n c t genre,to $ hi ch addi ti onal
contril>utir>ns mar bc ,rrlrledas thcy arisc, cvcn u'ithout system-
rtic intention. BiologvcJasscs havefimiliarizcd all ofus u'ith rvhat
is norr a lairl,, st.rnd.rrdinr.rgeof the cell: schematically,epithe-
Iial tissuen'scnrblcsi honc)'conrb,jThc w-ord"cell" callsto mind
not thc prisoner()r thc monk but the bce. Ernst Heinrich Haeckel
pointcd out that cells ofrvax filled with honey are in t'r'err,rvav
analog < rut<
s .rc c l l s o f p l a n ts fi l l e d u i th sap.aI do not thi nk that
this analogvexplainr the appcalof the notion ofthe cell. Yet rrho
can s.rvu herher or not the human mind, in consciouslyborrou-
ing lrom the bechivethis term lbr a part ofan organism,did nor
uncon5ciou!lvborrorv as uell the notion ofthe cooperativelabor
t h. r t pro d u c e s th e h o n e v c o m b ?J u s t as thc al vcol a i s part of a
structure, becs arc, in Maeterlinck's phrase,inclividualswholly
absorbcdbv the republic. In lact, the cell is both an anatomical
and a functional notion, refarring both to a fundamcntalbuild-
ing block and to an individual labor subsumedby, and contribut-
ing to. a largerprocess.What is certain is that affectiveand social
valuts of cooperationand associationlurk more or lessdiscreetly
in t hc b a c k g ro u n do [th e d e v e l o p i n gc el l thcorv.
162
A feu' vear s af t er llooke, in 1571, M ar cello lUalpi{hi and
N ehi :rn iahG r eu' sim ult aneouslvbut indepcn<lcnt lvPUblishcd
their *,ork on the microscoPicanatomvof plants. Althcrughthev
clid not mention llooke, u'hat thcy discoveredwas thc sanrething
Irc had discovered,evenif the rvord las diflbrent. Both nrcn found
that l i ving t hings cont ain r vhat we nor v call cells' but neit her
cl ai med t hat I iving t hings ar e not hing but cells. Accor ding t o
l\larc Klcin, moreovcr, Greu'subscribeclto the thcor,vthat cells
arc precededby and groru out ofa so-calledrital lluid. l-he his-
torv of this biological theorv is u'orth exploring in greatt'rdetail
lbr u hat it can teach us about scientiflc reasoningin gcncral.
As long as people havcbeen interestcdin biological nrlrrphol-
ogv, thcir t hinking has been dom inat ed bv t \ r r ) cont r ndict or l
inrnges- continuity Ycrsusdiscontinuitv.Some rhinkcrs inragine
l i vi nn thingsgr ou, ingout of a pr im ar v subst ancet har is cont inu-
ous and pl. r st ic;ot her s t hink r il or ganism sas com posit esol dis'
( rctf pnrts,of 'brganic atoms" rtr "seedsr.,llilc." Continuit\' \'('lsus
cont inuunt ver susP. r lt iclc:r he nr ind im posesit s
< l i scont inuit v,
1,,.611nI 'i, r logrju\ t . r \ it ( loe\ ir r nI t ir
'.
Thc tcrm "protoplasm" now rcfirs to n constituenrofthc c<ll
c,rnsi de r edasan at om ic elem entof a conr posit eor ganism .( ) r ig-
inally, horvever,thc rvord ref'erredto the vital fluid out ol n'hich
aJl lifi' presumablvarosc. l-he botanist Ilug<r von l\lohl, <rneof
thc fi rst t o obser vct he bir t h of neu cells bv dif ision ol exist ing
ones,proposedthe tenn in l8,ll: in his mind, it rcferredto a fluid
P rcsentpr ior t o t he em er genccof anl solid cclls. I n 1315,l- clix
I)ujardin had suggcstcdthc term "sarcode" fbr the ,iamcthing,
namel v,a living jelly capableof subsequcntor ganizar ion.Even
Thcodor Schrvann,the man regardedas the fbunder of cell the-
orr', rvasinlluenced bv both imagcs:he belieled that a structure-
l esssub st ancc( t he cvt oblast em e) gives
r isc t o t hc nuclei . r r ound
uhi ch cells f br m . I n t issues,cells I br m u'her evcrt hc nut r ient
r6l
liquid penctriltes.This theoreticalambivalcnceon thc prrt of thc
aut hor s1 r' h o< l i dmo s t to e s ra b l i s hc e ll rhcorv l ed Marc K It' i n t< r
make.r remark that has considerablebc.rringon uhat I rvirh to
argue hcrc: "What rve fincl, then, is thar a small numbcr of basic
idcas rt'cur insistentlv in the rvork of authors concerncd rvith a
rvidc varir'tvofobjects fronr a number of dif-terentpoints of vit'\1.
'fhe,- cerr.rinlydid not t.rkc thesc idt'.rsliorn
one.rnorher. These
f ir ndar n e n tahl v p o th e s c sa p p c a r to rc prescnt pcrsi stcnrmocl cs
im plic it i n th c n a tu rc o l s c i e n ti fi ce x p l anati on."tansl ati ng thi s
cpistcmologicalotrscrvationinto philosophicalterms, it f'ollou's
that tlr.oricsnetcrprocecd Jrontfo.tr, a finding that conflicrs rvith
t he er np i ri c i s tp o i n t o f l i e n rh a t s c i enri i rsofi cn adopt uncri ri -
callv when thev trr to philosophizcabout thcir cxpcrimenr.rlfind-
ings.Theoriesariseonlv out of carlicr thcorics,in somc cascsvcrv
nld oncs. l'he ficts are merelv the path - anclit is rarell a strnighr
path - br rvhich one theorr' leaclsto another. Auguste Contte
shrt'rltllvc.tllcrlittention to this relationof therrrr to theory \\'hen
he rerrrlrkcd that sincf .rn cmpirical obscrvation prcsul)posc5a
t heor v t (J l o c u s th e a tte n ti o n , i t i s l o g i cal l r i nevi tabl ethat fal se
t lr c or ie sp re c e d etru e o n e s .[...]
T hus , i l rv c * i s h to l i n d th c tru c ori gi ns ofccl l thcorv. .,r,e
nr lr s tno t Io o l to th e (l i s c r)\c l .\o f c e rtai nmi croscopi cstructures
in liv ing th i n g s .l C o n n a tts o n cpc p, .4 7 -5tl ]
Comte Buffon, or the Discontinuous ImoBinqtion
[59] In thc rvork of BufILrn,rvho, asN4arcKlein points out, nrade
lit t le us e o f th e m i c ro s c o l > eu, e fi n c l r theorv of the composi -
t ion ol li v i n g th i n g s- i n < l r,c <a1s. v s te nr,i n rhe ei ghreenrh-ccntury
s c ns cof th c tc rm. B u tT i rnp ro p o s e cal seri esol -rxi oms to crpl ai n
certain f.rctshaving to do chiellv rvith rcpro<luctionand herecl-
itv. In Chiptcr Trvo ol thc Ilistoirenaturellcdcsonimour (t;^-18),
he set forth his "thcorv of orqanicmolecults." In Bul'lon'srvords,
1 6 .1
" ,rni rralsand plant s t hat can m ult iplr an<lr t pr ocluct jn , r ll t heir
I).u-ts .lreorganiTedln,lies compctscd,rl other, sinrilarrrtganicltorj-
ies, rvhoseaccuntulatedquantitv rre can disccrn rvith rhc cvc but
* hoseprimitive parr! \\'c can percciveonlv rvith thc aitl of reason."
Fron this, Bufion deducedthat there arc infinitelv manv org.rnic
l)art\, cach conrposecl <rfthc samesubstanccas"organizcdbcings."
Thcse or ganic par t s, com nr on t o aninr alsa, r d l) lnnt s,ar e pr im i-
ri !' ( .rn( lincor r upt iblc. What is called "gener at ion"in biologv is
nrtrel v t he conjun<: r ionof som e num t r cr ol pr im it ivc or ganic
parrs;s ir nilar lv,deat h is m er elvt he disper sionof t hosc par t s.
Thc hvpot lr esisr hnt or ganiTedbcingsconsistof pr im it ive or -
1.rnicprrts is thc onh onc. Buflirn nrgucs.c(rpableol arrridin{ the
rl i fl i cu lt ics encount er edbv t r vo car lier t heor icst har claim ed t o
cxpl ai n t he plr enom enaof r cpr ocluct ion,nam el\ ',ovi5m and ani-
mal culism .Bot h ol t hesc t heor iesassum ccl t hat her cdit l is uni-
l areral:ovist s, f bll, r ', r 'ingRegncr dc Cr aal, claim cr l t h. r t it was
matcrn,rl,u hercasanirralctrlists,follorring Anthonie ratrLrcu* en-
hoecl ,11gu, , ,t1hat it r r aspat cr nal.But lbn,alcr t t o phcnonr r naol
hvbri clizat ion,
believcdt hat her edit vm ust be bilat er . r l. , r is
s clear
fron Chapt crf ivc of his *or k. l'hc lact sr cinf br cedt his bclicf : a
chi l d could r cscm l) l( 'r : it her his f it hcr or his nr ot lr i r . Thus, hc
rvritcsin ChapterTcn, "Thc fbrmatiorrof the letus occrrrsthrough
crtmbi n. r t ionol or llanic m olcculesin r hc m ixt u|c com poscdol'
rht sem inallluids <r fcllo individuals. "[. . ]
In Buf lbn'svie\ \ ',Ne$t onian m cchanicsexplicit lv had jur is
cl i cti onover t he or g. r nizat ion
of living t hings:
It i s obrioust h. r rneit hert hc c ir cLr lat ion
oi t hc t 'Lxxlnor r hr m or c-
l ncnt ol t hc m usck. 'nor r hc anint . ll[ unct ionrcanbc cxpl. r inecl in
tt:rmsol im pulseor anr ol t he lar vsoI or r iinr r vm cchanics.
I t is just
rs obviousthat nutrition,(lcvelopmcnt .rnrlrt productir:,notrevothcr
la\s. Whv not .tcLno(lerlge,thfn, tltrt therc arc lirrccspcnetral-
r 6t
 ing andactingupon the maslesol bodics,sincerre haveexamples
oI lb rc c si n th c s u b s ta n coef b o d i e si n magncti cattracti onsand
chcmical.rffinitics?5
C)rganicmoleculesattract one another in obedienceto a lar; of
morphological constnncy,constituting an aggregatcthat Buf'fbn
called the "internal mold." Without thc hypothesesof intcrnal
mold and organic molecule, nutrition, development and rcpro-
duc t ion rv o u l d b e u n i n te l l i g i b l e .[...]
Thcrc can be no doubt that Buffon hopcd to be the Nervton
of the organic lorld, much as David Humc at around the samc
time hoped to bccome the Newton of psvchology.Ne*,ton had
demonstratedthat the forcesthat movc the starsare thc sameas
thosc that move objccts on the surfaccofthe earth. Gravitational
attrnction explained horv simple massescould fbrm more com-
plex svstemsof matter. Without such a forcc ofattraction, real-
it v uou l d b e n o t a u n i v e rs cb u t j u s t s o much dust,
[:or Buffon, the hvpothesisthat "mattcr lost its forcc ofattrac-
t ion" u ' a se < l u i v a l c n to
t th e h y p o th esi sthat " obj ccts l ost thei r
cohcrcnce."6A good Newtonian, Buffon believed that light i{as
a corpuscularsubstancc:
'I hc smallest
moleculcsofmatter,thc smallestatomsrveknolr,,are
thoseol light... . t.ight,thoughscemingly
blessed
rvith a qualitvthe
cxactoppositeof weightiness,
n irh a volatilitvtlratmightbe thought
essential
1{)its nature,is ncvertheless
ashcavyasanvother matter,
sinceit bendsrrhcnit passes
ncarorherbodiesandlindsirscllrvithin
rcachof their sphereol attraction.. .. And just asanvform of mat-
t c r c a n c o n v e rti ts c l f i n to l i g h t rh roughextremesubdi vi si on
and
clispcrsion
throughimpactof its infinitesimal
parts,so,too, canlight
be convertedinto anyother firrm ol ntattcril, throughthe attrac-
tion ofother bodies,its componentpartsarcmadeto coalesce.T
I ight, heat and fire are diflircnt modes of existenceol the same
common material.To do sciencewasto try to {ind out ho$',"rvith
this singlc source ofenergy and single subject, nature can varv
its rvorks ad infinitum."s If, moreover, one assumesthat living
mattcr i s not hing but or dinar y m at t er plus heat , a cor Puscular
conccption of m at t er and light inevit ablvleadst o a cor PUscular
conceptionof living t hings:
All the cflicts of crudemattcrc.rnbe relatedto attractionalone,
all ol the phenomena oi living martcrcan bc rt'latedto that same
l;rcc ofattrnctioncouplerlrvith the lirrceol heat.By lit'ingm.rttcr
I orcannot onl'r'allthingsthat livc or vegctatcbut all livingorganic
rnolcculesdisperscd andspreadaboutin thc dctritusor residucol'
organizedbodies.LI ndert hc headol livingm at t erI also includc
to trt to be
light. lirc and heat,in a nord, all marterthat aPpcars
rctivetrr itscll.e
Thi s, I believe,is t hc logic behinclt hc t hcor y of or ganicm ol-
ecul es,a biological t heor l t hat owed it s exist encet o t he pr es-
tigc ol a phvsicaltheory. The theorv of organic molccules is an
exampl eof t he analvt icm et hod in conjunct ion r vit h t hc cliscon-
tinuous imagination,that is, a penchantfbr imagining objects bv
analogvu ith discreterather than continuousmodels,Thc discon-
ti nuous im aginat ionr educest he diver sit vof nat ur e t o ur lif or m -
it1,,to "a singlc sourcc of energyand a singlc subject." That one
elcment, the basisof all things,thcn fbrms compoundsu.ith itself'
that produce the appearanceof rliversitv:nature variesits norks
.rcli nfi nit um . - f hc lif e of an indiviclual,u'het hcr . r n anim al or a
plant, is therefore an efl'ectrather than a causc,.rproduct rather
than an essencc.An organismis a mechanismrvhoseglobal cllect
is the nccessarlconscqucnccof thc arrangcmcntofits parts,Truc,
l i vi ng i n dividualit vis m olecular ,m onadic.
t67
 'l h c lili oi
an . n, nr "t . r . pt . - "r , r 1 s c c m s . i s m e r e l , -r h c
rcsujt of all
th e n c t ion\ , of all t he lit t le. indiv idua l) i v e r ( j f I l er e , th e i d ta Ih a t o r g a n i sm s <) r eco m p ( ) \i tL ,s 1 ) f.e l e m cn ta r l
I nra\ plrr it thar rra.!
) lili' li-rrrnsis merclv a Iogic.rl crrnseclutnce ot a rrl()re b.rjic lrotion,
ol each ol irs .rctivcmcrle<uics, ,r.hoseIilc is
pt inririvc and rpparently
(nnnor [)c drstrovtd. \,\,r have l h i c h i s th a t tl te e l e r n cn ts o l l i fc a r e r cl e a se cJw h cn th e
firund there living molecules in afl larger
li! ing ()r vcgcraringthings: rvc are certain l o r m s to u h i ch b e l o n g ( l i si n tcg r a t( ,. Th c u .h o l e to k", p r "_
r h tl
that all thcsc organic rnol_
cculcs lre equalll.cssential ro thc nutrjrjon c c d ( n ( e ( ) \'e r th c p a r t5 . K l e i n sta tcs r h i s cxp l i ci tl \.;
ancl thercl.irrr to the
.cproducrion ol animals and pl.rnrs. It
is not difl.icult to inraginc,
rhert'lbr'c,rhat n.hen a ccrtain number oi.thcsc t h<,.rssociation
oi primitirc anirnalsin the grriscot lir ing llcsh shorrlcl
nrolcculesare joinerl
togcther, rhe\ ti.rnna living thing: sincc nor br' thought ol rs a rrechanjcalcoupling ol orrc rnim.rl
thcre is lil.e in each ofirs to rn.rhcr,
parts. lile can also bc lbund io the r,rholc. rs in a pilc ol srnd rr.hr.rctbc onh rcl.rtirrnrmong thcgr;insol.rvlrjch
that is, in anv rssemblagc
ol tbose p.rrts. it i\ c{).npo\ed is onc ol p;e*1n,1,r..
Justar orr{cn anrl hvdrogcnrlis_
. t p p c,1 rf n \\'r tcf, j u \r a s m ( r cu r \ .r n d su l l i l d i ;.r p p e a r
i n ci n n a b a r ,
s hat rrkt.splacc hr:r(.is a truc in
fCo n na is s anc cpp.
. 52- S6l
rrniric,,ri'n'1
;r,h"",.,",.,."r"::''i":l;';]H,:i:l::l'l;:li:l:l
n,'lr l. , r l r l, , . jr , r r r r .lll. r r ,
Lorenz Oken, or the Continuous Imagination 1, lr , , . , lr rr lr , \ , r r i, ( , , j r l, ilh, . r , , r l. r , ,
irnrandrrorLrrrvarrl.runiqrrraorlcornmonl.Llncti()n. orperh)rmrhrr
[60] Charles Singcr and N,larc Klein, asircil as Ernile
Gur(rnor, l i rnct ionin pur suingt hcir or vnt ndr . ller e,no
tlrou gh to a les s el dc gr c c , t jid not f ail inr lili<lLris , r spar
l ocl;
to norc rhc.."al, au",u
Okcn fbr rhe fbrmulation of cell theorv. nl l n r c r r cr ilicc( I llut . t hc l. r nguagt .ris r lislt , r cling.
Oken bclonged to the |r r r hc com hina_
Romnnric ti oo ol inr lirjr lr nlir jesiir r nt slnor hcr jnt lir jr lr r . r lir._r l .
schoolol narurephilosophcrs fbuna",lby 5i;"11;n".ru he lir r r nt 'rar t ,
Thc spcculations tkrtr'orctl,rnd tbc lattcr.rpprars <rnh.r,.rll.sultr,l thar<i(.\tfu(
of rhisschtnl harlasnruchinttu.,n." on ri(Jn.rl
nin( t ( , . n l h -(c n rU r\ C trm .rn ians ""iiy
l rh rri r Jn,l bi oi ogl \t. n.,,n,r," ,,
ol I r ( t ( r .. T h ,.r,.i r n o ru p ru rc o l (o l r(i ul ri L\ \\rc.rrc , along uar lr onr Bt r llir n.The or ganism
hetrr..n r)k,.n.rn,l is not a st r ntol. elc_
rncntar vbir , logicalcnt it ics: it is. r at hcr ,
the firsr biolo{ri\tsthat u.ould offer deliberate a hi- qht rent it r . r rhose
emplrical sufport cl cmi n f s ar c subsunr ed.\ \ r jt b t , xcm pJan.
tbr ccll thcorv. j\,lathias Schleiclen, pr ecision,O Len anr ici_
Jacob rlho f;rst t;._rt","
patcd t hc t her . r r ol r clcgr <. cs ol indir i( llr alir \ .-.lhis *as nr or e t han
l ,rr p l ,rn r.i t l ti s fl a 1 1 7 4,u,17apfrr.roycnc,rs ( t8 .t8;,rarrghr
.: r: ,t 1,
lhr' t.: l.lln
i i \e r.i r\
o l J rl l a . rrh e rc me m,r (,\ ol ()Lcn,. Justi ' ll )r clcnt im cnt , t hou{h it di( l aDt icipat ($, lr at t cchniqucs
ol
teJch:ng ccl l an clt issut .cul r ur cs, r , oulr l t cach
\\'erestill fresh.Theodor Schrvann,rvho cont cm por ilr . . lr iol<, . 11ist s
bctu.een lgig an,l lg,li abor:td if f i'r . enccs
gener aliz e dc e l l th e o rv to i l l l i v i n g th i ngs, bcr ucc. nr lhr t Hat s pct er scncllled t hc , . inr li_
had seena good dcal l i rJLraIlili ", r r r r l t hc. ', pt olcssional
of Schleiden and his tcacher, iit e', ol. ct lis. O ken r hought of
Joharrnes,\liiiicr, ,, h., hud be"n a thc org anism . r sa kin<l of societ v,
nat ur eph i l o s o p h e ri n h i s r..ru th .rrS i n g er Dut t hat s( ) clct \ .\ 1. asnot an
i s rhus l i rl l v j usti fi cd i n .r' .,' ri ,rr i, r noi r r r , lir i, lr r . r l. . r . , , , r r r r ir e, l
remarking that Okcn .,in a senscsou,erl h. , .r 1, , .1, , , liii,r l 1, f r i1, , , , ,
the irjeasof the authors phr' .oft hc Enlight enm cntbut ,
r eg. r r dedi n h i s s tc a da s th c r at hcr ,i conr m lr nJt r . r sconc. cilt , r l
fo r.rn d c ri l l thcorr.,,f...]
o fc e I' r tIr, I', , I ir jr . r I
1, lr il, , . o1, Jr r f. t, , ,f nr , r r r r i,
i. r n. . . -
r()t{
i{'9
 his deat h bv
(tu\ onilt t ou\et our ligdr our ' publishcdat t er
Comparisotris inc!itnl)le betr'een Okcn's biological thcories n)Ltns
"an J! t 'r t Pat -"f ' lc.
t h'' "r {Jniim J\
and t he po l i ti c a l p h i l o s c ,p h vo f th e Gc rm an R omanti cs
rvhonr ,tr' ,r. ," ttt U- t o. r le'cr ibcd
Pr ln( ll'l( 'r I
Novalisinfluenccd so dceply.Novalis'sGlaubeund I iebe:der
Kdnig l n(nrJr\ (i ll\ or or gani: 'm : . ''lher cbt 'lllir m ingt hr
const ir uent s' This is t ant aDloulltt o
un<ldie Kdnil]inappearcd in 1798; his Europo odet dic Christenheit Jutonomy f br anat om ical
bcha't
itt", a.tt' behavein association iust asrheuI'ould
rvaspublislretlin f800; C)kcn'sDie Zeugunllcanteout in 1805'The ".r..,itg for them
\lere lhr s^me as that crcated
first t\r'o rvorksarc vt hementlv criticai of levolutionarr thinking' ,,r ,r"f"it"" if the rnilicu
rvorcls'
pulvt'rizcdthe popular rvill .*.,,it" *" organismbl thc action of nealbt cells ln other
Nov.rlisallegedthat univcrsalsLrffrage Notc' though'
os th?' do in societ)"
and tailed to give due w-cightto social, or, more preciselr' com- ..1f. ,,rrl,J li"e in libertvetoct\'
srrbstanccs that control the lilL'
mun.rl,contitruitv. AnticiPating tlegel, Novalis(like Adam Hein- ,; O"rr;"*, that it the regulaiive
and inhibit ion at e t he slm e ln n
lich MLiller a ieu yearslater) consideredthe state to be a reality ,,t th" ." l t t hr ough st im ulat ion
int cr nal envir onm entof t he or gan-
l illed bv Crxl, a fict surpassingindividual rtason to
.-hich the .,,t,ur" nl t ; . ". "il' o' in t hc
cclls I ive in liber t v' Never t hcless'
indi, nir luam l u s t s .rc ri Ii c ch i ms e l l Ifth c re i s an anal ogvbctueen ,r-,' ,,n" .. nn, r , saYt hat t he
bv meansof a colllPalison'
these sociologicalviervsand bioloqical thcorY. it is' as has often n".n.rd, L.,ping to clarif,vhis meaning
r lr inq "'r t J- (r t \ \ \ ilh il' '^r n
been remarkcd,becausethc RomanticsinterPrctedpolitical cxpe- .r.k. u. t" c onr ir letJ ( om l) lc\ lir ing
t ni''r I h( \ Jm ( r ( lentr ( Jr
r ienc c in t e n n s o l a " v i ta l i s t" c o n c c P ti ol lofl i l e' E venas French \l ( r i al \l Jm l) , " r r rr r hit h int li' i'lr r 'r l'; r ll
vet contributc.to sociill life
p,-rliticalthinkers rvcrc offering thc idcasof the social contract innd nn,l th.i rorrr"generalcaplcitics
labor and skills'
and universalsufliage to rhe F.uroPeanmind, thc l italist school t,,-atti " * ., uaYst h; oush t hcir specialized
ur ot c"'Thc cells ar c t r ulv
of Frenchmctlicine rvasproposingan imageof lifc as 11115csnding In 1899,Em st Heinr ich Hacckel
ot r r l) odv' t he
cit izens,billions o[ 'r '] r ichcom pose
. i ta l i s ts c l e n i cdthat organi smscoul d
anaht ic al u n d e rs ta n d i n gV i ndependr . : nt
the "assemtrlv<rtindcpcn-
bc under s to o rla s me c h a n i s n l sl;i l e , th e v argued,i s a fbrnr that ctllular state"{1 Pcrhrpstnrrgessuclrls
more than iust mct'1-
c annot be re tl u c c dto i ts ma tc ri a l c o mP oncnts'V i tal i st bi ol ogy <knt citizens" cotrstitLltinga "statc" r{erc
(lominatebiological theorv'
provideda totalitarianpolitical philosophyl ith the meansto Pro- phors. Political philosophvsccmsto
becausehe bclieled in
pos ec er t a i n th c o ri e so fb i o l o g i c a l i n d i v i dual i tv'though P hi l oso- What man could sal that he rvastepublic'rn
he rrasa rel>ublicatl?
phy $, asun d c r n o c o m p u l s i o n to d o s o . Il orv true i t i s that the ccll tlteorv or a bclie"er in ccll thelrrvl>ccausc
rr -f,, fr" sure' Bernardan<lllaeckel rtere not altogetherimmune
problem of indiiiduality is indivisiblc fConnainoncc, pp 58-63]
philosophicalsin'
to phi l osophicalt em Pt at ion or {xcm Pt t iom
Bouin and
fhl s"..,nd chapttr of l\Iarcttl Prenant' I'aul Andrd
End uring Thcmes lhich Nlar c
that i nspi redthesespec- l .crui sC a m illc Nlaillar d's 1901 lt Lt it ; d'hist olollic'
[ 61] l) id t h c c o n c e p tso l i n d i v i d u a l i tv sur I o
K l ei n crc<iit s,alr r ngr vit h Felix llennegr r v'sI egons 'clluie
ulationsabout thc comPositionoI organisrnsdisappealaltogethcr
(1896),$'ith being thc tirst cLrssi<'rl uork to inrroducecell theorv
;rmongbiologistt tntlv sorthv of llcing calleclscientists?APPar-
i n thi : tc . r chingof hist ologv in Fr ance'15 r vasr T'r it t cnbv Pr enant '
c nt l] not .
The auth or 'ssvm p. r t hies lbr ccll t heor v dit l not blind him t o lact \
Claude Bcrnard,in his lcqonrsur /esphinominesde Ia vie com'

tJl
 :i
= = = ii,- '1:27+iiiiiz +i::2::,i
= i i i ;2;;,:,t:=1
: i==i 1=:=TZt Z Z i+
i : =: ai: = iirzz;;=_ i=i;= : il ?ii:==,
?-=-j ..j,+t E=i r=l= 7 = :, :2=? : s ; : ' r : = = rt 1
?
iiii:ii
liEi:
zi:Eij;t =;;
=1ii1:,ii
zil::iil,=;::=rti::i:
=+ii,1:=,;1j =;7
i * ; i, _i i i 7 i = - , i l= 1 I 1 =r 7; i
: , =,
: ,| 2 1=:
=ia
i :i'i: :i j ; ; l t: : i :i; ii
==21,==2{==
i ;=i Z :i =; i ::: 1 ;t1i i 1 =, +i 2! ; i: i
u ilZ=.i
iz:iii i:ii1=11;, :j1t=
, =: i:=2- : ==+i ::1t1 =:=1 = i 1=i=:11
=: 1i, 7 :i=: j. i ; z i;i ,t:Ii t i z ' ,' zii. i
ii: "=i i +i :,= : 1i= :-:== ,;,
z:+:=:!=Z
: ii : z =Z ; z i: =ti l = i : = = :i = Zi t;
=!i
=i:!= -,ii ;;:
7 =r = i==i = i 7 i ==:i :; = i :
 . is t he m u s c u l ,l rs \' s tc n to r o f s u c h l o rnrati onsas pl asnrodi aor
s v nc it iac o n s i s ti n go l c o n ti n u o u srn a s ses
ofcl topl asm u.i th sc.rt-
t er ec lnu c l e i . In th e h u ma n b rx i v , o n l v the epi thel i a are cl earl v
cellularized.Betweena ficc ct'll such asa leucocyte and a svncv-
t ir im \ uc h a s th e c a rd i a c rn u s c l c o r t he surl i ce ofthe chori al
v illos it i e s o f th e fe t.rl p l a c e n ta ,th e r e arc i ntermedi ate fbrms,
s uc h as th c g i a n t m u l ti n u c l e a r c c l l s ( pol vcarvocvtcs),ancli t i s
dillicult to savu,hether syncitia dcvelop through firsionofonce_
indc pc n d e n tc e l l s o r v i c e re rs a . Bo th ntechani smscan. i n fact,
bc obs crv e < I. E v e ni n th e d e v e l o p n re nofan c egg. i t i s not certai n
that cvcry cell comesfiom the divisiono[a preexistingccll. Emilc
Rhoc lev v a sa b l e to s h o u i n 1 9 2 3 th a t i ndi vi dual cel l s, i n pl anrs
as r v ell a s rn i ma l s , fre q u e n tl v rc s L rl rl i om thr subdi ri si on ofa
pr im ir iv e p l a s mo d i u rn( n ru l ti n u c l e a rem ass).
B ut t h c a n a ro mi c a l.1 n do n to g e n c t i caspectsol thc probl em
are not thc rvhole stor.v.Even authors u,ho, like llans petersen,
ac k nonl c d q eth a t th r rta l b a s i so f c e l l theorv i s thc devel opment
< r l m e r . rz o a ,a n d * h o s e e th e p ro d u cti on of chi rl eras - Ii vi ng
things crcatcd by artificiallv combining cgg cells fiom different
spccies- assupportingrhc "additive" compositionof living things
arc obliged to admjt rh.rr the explanotionof the of these
Junctions
oqdnisnlstontrudictsthc e\pldnatlonol thcir genuir.If the bodv is
r c allva co l l e c ti o no fi n d c p c n d e n tc e l l s ,hou,doesonc cxpl ai nthc
harmoniousflnctioning of the largerrrnit? If the cells arc closed
svstems,h(^! can thc organismlive arrd.rct as a $,holei One wav
t c r r c s olv e th e d i fl i c u l tv i s to l o o k l i rr a coordi nati ng mecha-
nism: thc ncrvous system,say,or hctrntonalsecretions.But the
connection ol most cclls to the ncrv()ussl,stemis unilateral and
nonr ec ip ro c a l a
; n d ma n \ r i ta l p h e n o 6 q pl , especi al l vthoseasso-
c iat ec lr v i th re g L n e r,rri o na,r( ra rh e rd i f fl cul t to erpl ai n i n terms
of hormonal regulation,no matter ho\l. complcx. petersenthere-
fbre remarkcd:
t 71
in which
onecansarinagcnelalr l. r t t hr t . r ll t he pr c, cesscs
P crh aps
asa whole ( andin pat hologvt her car c le*'
thc bodl'par t icipat cs
in
processcs whercthis is not the case)arudillicult to understand
oroan-
terms of tic ccllular stateor the thcor.vol cellsas inclcpcndent
( Jir cn shich or qanism
[ , eh; r ves,
i vnr. [ - . . 1 t he wav i, r r he ccllular
livcs,\1orks,maintainsitscll againstthe attacksof irs cnvironment
anrlrcgainsits equilibrium,the cclk arcorganso{ a unil;rm brxlr.
Il crc tbe pr oblem of individualit v com t s up a{ain: a t ot nlit v, ini-
ti al l y resist antt o division of any kind. t akes pr ior it v over t hc
aromistic vicrl dcrived fiom an attcmPt to subdividc the u'hole.
P (tcrse nquit e per t inent l) quot esa r em . r r km aclebv JuliusSachs
i n 1887conct r ning m u) t icellularplanr s:"Whct her cclls seemt , r
be cl cment . r r rindcpendcntcr r ganisnror s sim plv par t sol a * hole
tlcpentlsentirelv on hov se look.rt thingt."
In rc ccnt vcar s,incr ( asing<loubt sanclcr it icism s havebccn
roi ccd a boutcell t hcor ! in it s classical{br r r , t hat is, in t he f lr cd,
l t t xt bookr , evcn t hose
rl ogmat iclbr m in r vhich it ir pr esent r 'tin
intendcdfbr aclvancccl studcnts.rT Tlrcre is f;r lessobicction todaY
to nonc ellularcom poncnt sof or ganism sanclt o m echanism sbv
rrhi ch c clls c, r n be f br m eclout ol cont inuous m asscsol pr ot o-
pl asrnth an t her e *as n'hcn Rudolph Vir chon, in Cer m anv,cr it i-
ci zcd Theodor Schuann's icleaof , r cr t oblast em c and Char les
Robin, in Frincc, rvaslookcd upon .rs.r cantankerous,old-laslr-
iont'<licoroclast, In 1941,Tivid.ir Huztll.r shorveditr his luischcn
Zcl [enO r 11ont sat ion
t har int er cellularr elar ionsanr l e\ t r r cellul. r r
i ubstan ces( such as t hc int cr st it ial lvnr ph and noncellular ele-
nl ents ol'conncct ivet issue)ar c jr lst as im por t ant biologicallr . r s
thc cel ls t hcnr selves.
The int er cellularr oid t hat or r c can scc iD
thosc pr epar at ionsm at le t o be vicr r cr l t hr ough. r nlicr oscopcis
bv no meansdevoid ol hist ologic. r fl t r nct ion, I n l9- 16,I '. Busse
(i raui tz concluded on t hc basisol his r cscar cht hat cells can
t 7t
 ')

appearin b a s i c a l l la c e l l u l a rs u b s ta n ces.lAsccordi ng to cel l thc- ari sc, ofth e t r ot hv uave t hat bor e \ t nus ot t it s f ir am ?Char les
orr, lunclamcntalsubstances (srrchasthe collagenofthe tendons) N aucl i n,a Fr ench biologist r vho canlc close t o discover ingt he
n'lustbe secrctedby the cclls, evcn if it is not possibleto savpre- marhcma t icallaws of her edit v bcf br e G r cgor Nlendcl,t hought
cisell horv the sccretion takesplace. Ilcre, ho*ever, the ordcr is that thc p r ir nor dial blast cm c was t he "cla\ " m cnt ioned in t hc
rcverscd.Of cout sc, the cxPerimcntnlargument in such a theorY Biblc. r')This is u,hr' I haveargutrdthat thcorics clo not .rriseli om
is ncgativcin naturc: thc researchertrusts that sulficient Precau- thc licts thcv order - or, to Put it more preciselv,f)cts r/o act
tions havc been taken to Prevcnt the migration of cells into thtr as a sti mulus t o t heor v,bt r t t her neit hcr cngenclcrt he conccPt s
lcellular substancein rvhich cclls arc seento cmerge' In Francc, that provide t hcor ics r vit h t hcir int er nal coher encenor init iat e
of a rabbit cm- thc i ntcl l ect ualam bit ions t hat t heor ics pt t t . sueSucham bit ions
JeanNageottc had observecl,in the dcvelopment
bryo, that thc corneaof thc eve first appears to bc a homogcne- come to u s f r om long ago,and t he num bt r ol unif i ing concePt s
ous substancccontaining no cells during thc first three davsof i s smal l .That is uhy t hcor t 't icalt hcm cssur vivcevt n alt er cr it ics
grorvth - vet, in light ol Virchou"s larv, he bclieved that those are pleascdto think that the thcories associatcdu ith thcm have
cells that appearcdsubscquentlvmust havcarrivcd there through p, 791
becn refirterl.lConnoissonce,
migration. Yet no such migration rvasever observed.IConnois-
s anc e,
1> p .7 1 -7 6 1
i s procecdi ng
f 6ll It i s n o t a b s u rdto c o n c l u d c t hat bi ol ogY
torvar<ta svnthetic |icrv of organic structure not unlike the sYn-
thesis that uave mechanicsbr-oughtabout betn'een concepts as
sceminglv contradictorv as \\'aveand particle. Ccll anclplasmo-
clium are among the last incarnationsof the contradictorv de-
mandsol'discontinuity and continuitY u'hich theoristshavefaccd
$c r s in c c h u m a n b c i n g s b c g a n to th i nk. P crhapsi t i s true that
scientiflc theorics attach their fundamentalconcePtsto ancient
images- I rvould even bc temPted to savmyths, if the rvord had
not bee n s o d e v a l u e db .r' i tsrc c e n t u s c i n phi l osophi esobvi ousl v
createdfor purpoies of propagandaand nrystification.Folw'hat,
in t he e n d , i s th i s c o n ti n u o u s i n i ti a l pl asma,thi s pl asma that
biologists havc used in one fbrm or another ever since thc prob-
lem of identifvinga structurccommon to all living thingsrvasiirst
of the
pos c d in o r< l e rto d e a l rv i th th c Pe rcei vcdi narJequaci es
corpuscularcxplanation?Was it anvthingother than a logical ava-
tar of thc mythological fluid fr.om 'vhich all life is supposedto

t 76 t77
 C rr a p r r tt E I c H r

The Concept of Ref lex

Epi st emol og i co I Prej u d i ces

[6'1] Broadlyspeaking,the varioushistoricsofresearchinto rellex
nrovrmcnt havefiiled ro discrirninatcsuflicientlv anrongdescrip-
ti on of aut om at ic nr ur onr uscularr esponscsjexpcr im ent alst uclv
ol .rnatomicalstructurc! and their lunctional interactirrns,and fbr-
mtrl ati onol't he r ef lcx cl. r r r r . cpt
and it s gener alizat ionjn t hc f br m
of a theorr. l'his f)ilure accountsfbr thc surprisingcliscrepancics,
* hen i t com cs 1o ; r var r lingcr . edit lbr an or iginal ( lisco\ er v . , r
anti ci pat iont o a par t icularindividual,am ong hist or iansas r vell
as bi ol o gist scngagedin lr ackingt hc claim s of cer t r in of r hcil
col l eag ues.
Fl ereI pr oposer o dist inguishpoint s o1 r . ier vt hat ar c all t oo
olien confbundcd. ,\1r'purposeis not to right u,rongs,lil<esonrc
scholarlvavengcr,but to clrarvconclusionsof potential v.rluc to
epistemologvand thc hisrorvoi'science.Indccrl,the ultim.rte rca-
son l br thc exist enceof diler gent hist or icshas t o do u, it h t r vo
rathcr $.idespreadprejutJices.One of these involvesall thc sci,
encesrpcop]c are disposr:dto heljevethaf a conccpt caDoriSiDate
onlv n ithin the franrervorkol a thcorv - or, at anv ratc, a heuris-
ti( - honpgeneousrr ith the theorv 1)rheuristicin tcrms of rr hicir
the obscrvcd ficts \\'ill latcr be intcrpretecl.The other involvt,s

t79
 biologr i n p a rti c u l .rr:i t i s rv i d e l v b c l i cvcd that, i n thi s
rci ence,
tlrc only thcories rhat have led to fnrjtful appJicatiorrsand if one substitutcsfbr logic somecurrentlv more prestigioustem,
p<.rsi_
t ir . cadv a n r.t'isn k n o rv l e d g eh a v eb e e n mcchani sri c ;n stvl e.l ...l the essenceof the caserernainsunchanged.Inclcccl,cv<,nif tlreo_
In rhc rineteenth century, the mechanisttheorv, based ri t:seng t 'n<lt rone anot hcr <lialcceic. r llv,
t he n6r nr sol scient if ic
on the
g<ncralizationol a concrpt rvhoseb.rsicoutlirre x.asclcar theorl r r c not t hose of nr yt h. clr eamor f ajr l t ale. Evenif yir t u_
bv 1g50,
pnrduccrla rcrr.)actireellbct on the rva,!in which its origins al l v non e o1 t he pr inciplcsof a t hcor r r cm ain jnt act , t he t heor v
rvsye
c onc eiv e ri ,It s c c m c d o n l 1 ,l q g 1 q 1 1th a t a phenomi ,non c.rn b, c. r ll, . , llr ls, , , nlr in r . r m \ r , l a jr r , lgm cnrh. r r - , 1, , n r ho. e
u,hi ch,
along r v ith m a n y o l h e rs , p ro v i d e dj u s tifi cati on fi rr a pri nci plcsand t heir cons( . qucncc\'f. hus, t he elem ent sof a doc_
mechani cal
c x planat i o no f a n i ma l l i fc c o u l < lh a v ebcen di scoveretl trin< arc supposc<lto lit together in a rvar th.rt is not haph.rzarcl;
and stud_
ier l only b v a m c c h a n i 5 tb i o l o g i s t. tfth c l ogi c of.hi story i ts conc cpt s ar e sr r pposcrtlo conr bine in sont e $. lv t hat is not
thus
pointcrl trlvarrl o nrcchanist,thc history of phrsiologv m( r ,. j u \ I Jp, , \ iri, , n or . r ,L lir ion.
proli<le<l
a name - I)escartes.-fhjscoincidenceseemedto fbrec]ose \Ve ntust, acco1dingl1,, lrxrk in somc ncu.direction lbr concep_
funher
discussion,though no one knerv or cared to knou.rvhether tual l i l i at ions.R. r t her - t han askl. ho r hr auf lr orot . r t hcon. of . invol_
the
iogic confirmed rhc hisrorvor the historr inspired the untarvtnov( 'nt entt hr t pr eligur edt he ninet eent h- cent un.t heor v
logic. From
the incontcstable lact thar l)e\carrcs had proposecl ol thc reflex rvas.rvr.ask lvhat a thc6rr.6f muscular1n,rr,,rr-r.,na
a ntechani_
cal theorv rrf-involuntarr. movemcnr an(l cven provided al excel- ,ln<lrlr'rveaction must inc()rporatcin ordi,r firr a notion like ref.lt,x
lent description of certain instanccsof rvhat s,ould jater. mo\'(m( nt, involving as ir does a comparis.rnbetln.eena biologi_
in the
ninc t c ( . n thc c n tu rv Jb c c a l l c d ,.re fl e x e s,'i .t u.as ca) pJrenomenonand an oPtical one
dgduqed,1n5uy- {ref)ection), to makc sense
reptitious irnticipariono1-$.har$.asto come. that ljescartes (u hcrc "rnaking scnsr"'mcansthat th(, D()ti()n6l rcflcx
hacl nr.,"r.ntcnt
described,named and {brmulaterlthe concel)t of the must bc I ogicallvconsist cr )wit t h 5om ( , sctof conccpt s) .I f . acon_
rellex be-
c aus ct hc g e n e ra lth e o rl o l th e re l l e x vvasel aborated cept outlined or iomulllqd in srrcha contert is subsequentlv
i n order cap_
t o ex plain rh e c l a s so f p h e n o m (,n ath a t hc had cxpl ai nerl tur< ti br.. r r heor \ t hnt ust . sit in a r lif t lr cnt c( ) nr ext
i n hi s or wit h. l
o*' n las hi o n . di fl i ' rcnt m er ninq, it ( locsnot lir llo*, t hlt t hc conccpt
as ur ed in
L\4,v
own vierl is that, in the historr,of scicnce, )ogic pcr se the ori!]iDaltbt'orv is nothing but a nrcaninglcss
rvorrl.Somc con,
ought to takc preccdcncc over the logic of historr-. cept\i srrchas the reflection and rcfiaction of.light,
B"f*" lu" are tlreoreti-
relnte theories in terms o1 logical content an<l origin, rve cal l v poi r valt 'nt ,r hat is, capableoi being incor por at ed
must inr o bor h
ask hor1'contenrpordricsintcrpretc(l the concepts ofrvhich l).lrticlctheorr antl rrare theorl..Furthcrmole,the iict that a con-
those
th(\)rics i{ere conrposed- lirr ifrve do not inrist on internai con_ ctrpt pl al s a st r ong r olc in a cer t ain
t heor et icaldont ajn is bv no
sjstcnc\'.\\'c risk falling into rhc parador rhar logjc is mr' ,t| r\\ f li( i, n1t 1nLln1l.t or lr r ir ing r cs( , ll. i
ubiquitous lt inlo r lt e or igin. , , l
except in scicntjfic thought. There n-ravbe a logic, more.)ver,in that conc ept io sir nilar lv( . onsr it ur ed
dom ains.
t h( s uc c c s s i o no fd o c tri n e s i n th e ms e l .r,es R r adhcr ingt o t hcscm e( hodologic. r l
i l l ogi cal . E vcn i fone . pr <r <. eptIs,canl( , nl) tt o
hol<lsthat thc principic of noncontr.rclictionir ob;olctc, alrl even rl i scoverThonr asWillis -
I ; r s( ) m oninr . t cent h- cenr un, physioJo
gi \ts a\\' ar eof t hc hist or v of t hc r cf lcx
conc( , pt6. r d n- , "n, ; , r n", l
l8 o
his nanr e- b u t to c o n fi rm h i s l e g i ti matc ri ght to a ti tl e that had
previouslybeen opcn to doubt or challcnge.lFormotiondu r,lflexe,
P P . l- 6l
Rend Dcscartes Did Not Formulote the Reflex Concept
[ 65] W he n D e s c a rtc sp ro p o s e dh i s g e neral thcorv ofi nvol un-
tary movemcnt,he, like many others befbrc him, associatedsuch
movemrnts with phenomcna that we todav refer to as reflexes.
Does it lbllou, then, that he belongsamong the naturalistsand
phvsiciansrvho helped to dclineare and dcfine the conceptof
rcflex? l he anslvcr to this historical and epistemologicalques-
t ion m u5 t, I th i n k . b e d e fe rre c lu n ti l detai l ed,cri ti cal study of
the Cartesian.rnatomy and physiologvofthe nerveand muscleena-
bles us to rlecidervhethcror not Descartcscould havcanticipated,
horvcvcrconlusedlr',rhe essentialelementsofthe concept.
Dcscartes.of course. lrelievcdthat aJlphysiologicalfi_rnctions
c ould be e x p l .ri n e di n p u rc l l me c h a n i calterms. H encc, he saw
onlr a linri te d n u m b e r o l p o s s i b l ei n tc r acti onsanroD gan organ-
is nr ' spar t s :c o n ta c t! i mp u l s e , p re s s u rea nd tracti on. The i mpor-
t.rnceol t]ris lict cannot be overemphasized.Dcscartes'srvhole
conception of animal movement deriveslrom this principle to-
gt ' t hc r uit h rv h a t h e c o n s i d c re da s u fll ci cnt set ofanatomi cal
observations.lFormationdu rit'lexe,p, 3Ol
l66l ID Article l0 ol The Possions ofdc Sou./,Dcscartesclaims
t hat t he a n i ma l s p i ri ts , b o rn i n th e h e art20and i ni ti al l y carri ed
by t he blo o d , b u i l d u p i n th e b ra i n a s pressurebui l ds i n an ai r
chamber. Whcn releasedbv thc brain, thesespirits are transmit-
t c d t hr oug h th e n e rv e sto th e m u s c l e s(other than the heart),
'w'herethcv determine the animal's movements. Descartessays
t hat m us c l e sl re b a l l o o n sfi l l e d w i th s p i ri ts,rvhi ch,asa rcsul t of
their transvers.rl
expansion,contract longitudinally,thus moving
thc articulatedlronestructurcsor organssuch asthc cye in $'hich
r8 2
rht' y are inser t ed. r rNlor phologicalJv,
t his t t 'lls r : s lit t lt ', but t hat
little sufficcsfor Descartes's physiologvofmorerneDt. Everynene
is a bundle offibers containedrvithin a tube, a marro\1con\isting
of fine thrcads extending from the cerebral marro\\ an(l rather
looscly sheatheclin an artervlike tubular skin.l2 One rnight sav,
borrorving an image fiom moclern technologv, that l)escartcs
envi si onedt he ner ve as a sor t of elect r ical cable r un t hr ough
a conduit . As a bundle of llir es, t he ner ve ser ved. r sJ sensor y
organ,l l r lhile as a conduit it ser veclas a m ot or or gan. ll'[ 'hus
Descartcs,unlike Galenand his lollowers,did not <listinguishst'n-
s()rvnervesfrom motor nerves.Evervnerve was both serlsoryin(l
motor, but bv vir t ue of dillir ent aspcct soI it s st r uct ur c. r ndlr v
rl av of d if llr ent m echanism s. r The
t cent r ipr t al scnsor yc\ cir . r -
ri on $.a snot som et hing t hat pr opagat eclalong t he ner ve l) ut ,
r.rthcr,.1nim m ediat eand int egr al t r act ion of t he ner vouslil) er .
j t nst cs,t hc sr . r r f r ce
\l hcn thc. r nim al sccs,f ccls. t ou<hcs,hcar , or
ol i ts bo dr shakest he hr ain bv ur v ol t ht ' ner , , elibcr '. l he ct : n-
tri fugal nr ot or r eact ion, on t he ot hel hand, is a pr op, r gat ion,a
tran\port . The spir it s f lor v out t hr or r gh t he por esol t he br ain,
optned u p in r esponset o t he pulling on t he libcr s. r nr l int o t hc
empt) spacebet ueen t hc f lbcr s and t hc conduit t hr ough uhich
tht:y run . I f pr esser l,t hcv pr css;if pushed,t hev push, llence t lr e
muscl esr vells,t hat is, cont r act s. 16 lnvolunt ar vm ovem entis t hus
difli'rent from action in all of its elements and ph.rses,lFornra-
tion tlu rillexc, pp. 3+-l5 ]
[67] Basical$ the concept of rcflcx consistsof more than just
a rucl i m ent ar vm echanicalcxplanat ionof m uscularm ovenent . I t
al socont ainst he icleat hat som ekinr l of st im ulusst em m ingliom
the peripher vof t he or ganismis t r ansm it t edt o t he cent er and
thcn rcf lect cd back t o t he per iphcr v.What dist inguishesr ellex
moti on is t hc f act t hat it <loesnot pr occcd dir ect lv liom . r cen-
ter or central repositorvol immatcrialporverof an.r'kind. fhetein
r f'J
lies , u it h i n th e g rn u s " m o \e D re n t," thc spcci fi c di fferencebe-
t \ \ ' c c n inv o l L l n t.rrva n tl ro l trn ta rr,.N o u , accordi ngto C .l rtesi an
t hc or y , m o v e m e n r th a t n r.rn i fe s tsi ts e lI at thc peri pherv,i n the
musclesor visc('ra,ofigiutrs in.r ccntcr, thc center ol all organic
centers, namcl\', the c.rrdi.rcvessel.This is a material center of
action, to bc surc, not a spiritualone. The Cartesianthcorv is thus
c c r t ainlr m e c h a n i c a l ,b u r i t i 5 n o t th e t heorv of the refl ex. The
vcrv image that suggestedthc u'ord "rcflex," that of a light ray's
rellection bv a mirror, rcquires homogeneity betlveen the inci-
clentmovement and thc rcllcctecl movement. In Descartes's
the-
ory, though, thc opposite is tlue: the excitation of the sensesand
t hc c ont ra c ti o no f th e mu s c l e sn rc n o t at al l si mi l ar movements
'rvith respectto either thc nnturc ol the thing moved or thc mode
ol motion. What docs pulling on.r [rel]cord havein common with'
blorving .rir into the pi1>eof arr org.rni Both arc mcchanicalphe-
nomcna. fF.)rDtdtiDn tlu iJlttc. p.11)
[ 68] To s u m trp , rv h i l c i t i s tru e th.rt D cscartes' snork con-
t ains t lr c th to rt ri c ,rl t< l u i rrl e n t o l c e r tai n ni netecnth-ccnturv
attcmpts to lbrnrullte.r generalreflcxolog),r-igorousexamination
t ur ns up n c i th c r th r' tc rm n o r th e c o n c ept ofrefl ex, Thc dorvn-
fill ofCartcsianphvsiologr',on( cannot overemphasize, lay in the
explanationof the movenrcntsof rhc hcart. I)escartesliiled to see
W illiam H a rre l ' s th e o r' \'.r\ a n i n d i v i s i b l c u hol e. To be sure,he
rvasrT'cllarlarc that thc cxplanationofthe he.rrt'sl-novcments was,
centur-\'tthe kev to the problem ol'movement
fbr thc scvcr-rtccnth
gencrallr'.lt-fhisrvoulclcontinue to bc thc cascin the eighteenth
centurv. One f)ct turncd out to be crucinl in the Baconiansense
for anv theon purportingto crl>lainthe neuromtrscular causesand
r t ' gulat io n so f m. e mc n t - i rJ D )e l \'L, he movcmcnt of exci sed
or gans ,c s p c c i ,rl l \th e h e a rt, l l th t' l > r' ai ndi d not causesP i ri tsto
llou into thesc organs,rrh.rt c.rusedth('D)to contract?Dcscartes
from thc body'
did not ha v cto c o n l i o n t th i s rl te s ti o rt,R cntovecl
In .1
rhc heart r et aineclit s heat , anr l t r aceslr f blor r t l r et r ainit lg in it
uut f ol t hosc *ho held
coul (l vap or ir er nd c. r uscit t o er par r r J. lN
that thc h ear t was a r nusclc. it bec. r m cdif f ic( r lt t o. r r g( r ct hat t he
brain was the cssentialcentr.ll controller ol .rll crrganm()vcmcnts.
l-hus, it becamenecessarvto look to pl.rccrother than thc brain,
i 1 not l or t he causet hen at lcast lir r lact or s go! er ning cer t ain
rnovements.lFormationdu rillctc, p.5)l
Thomos Willis DeservesCredit for the Reflex Concept
[69] W hat dist inguishedWillis f iom [ ) escar t es\ \ 'er e his con-
ccpti ons of t he m ot ion of t he hcar t an( l t he cir culat ion of t he
blood, rvhich hc took *'holesalc fiom \\iilliam Ilarvev; namelv,
l ri s conce pt ionsol t he nat ur c of anim al spir it s and t heir m ov( -
ment through t he ner ves;of t hc st r uct ur eol ner 'es; anclof m us-
ru l ar con t r act lon.
;\ccor ding t o Willis ( and Har vcr ') ,t hc hear t is a nr uscleind
r t he ot her t nusclcs,it
D ()thi D gr) r or c.I f ir is t hc pr im um m ovcl-ol
i s srronl v bv vir t ue ol t he r hvt hm of it s lut r cli<r n;it s st r r . t ct r . t is
rc
i rk.nti cal."lt is not a noble of g. r n, f ir st in t he hicr ar chy,but a
mere muscle."l')Thc onlv possiblcc.ruscof the circulatorv move-
mcnt of t he blood u, ast he act ion of t he spir it s on t hc hear t , as
on anv ot her m usclc:t hat act ion nr adcr he hear t int o a hvdr aulic
machi ne. l0Willis dist inguishcdbet r r '. en t hr cir culat ior rof t he
blood, a mechanicalphenomenon,an(l it5 fcrmentation,a chemi-
cal onc. Fermentationhcatcd thc bloorl, u hich then impartcd its
heat to the hear t* not vice ver sa, JlI n Willis's m ind, t his clist inc-
ti on r,r' as
shar p:cir culat ioncxist sin al] anim als,r vher easf cr m en-
tati on, he believed,is lbund onh in t he highcr anim als. r rWillis
descrvcscr edit llr st of all lbr nor f ecling obliged, as Dcscar t es
di<1,to correct Ilarvcv on.r fundamentallx)iDt ol'cardiacanatomy
and phvsiologv,as u'cll as lirr not granting the heart a privilcged
l ol e and p r cem inentnnt nr ein com pnr isoDt o, r t her m r r sclcs.I r or
rfit
 Willis as lor Haney, thc hcart uas simplv a hollow muscle.
As fbr the animal spirits, Willis looked upon them asdistilled,
purificd, sublimated, spiritualized blood. All fbur terms, listed
in ordcr ofincreasingdignity, are fbund in his rvriting. The brain
and cercbellum functioned as stills to separatethe animal spirits
fiom the blood, a separationthat occurred now-hereelsc in the
body.ll Functionally, the spirits florved along nervcs and flbers
from the brain to thc periphery - membranes,muscles,paren-
chyma - and fiom the pcriphervback to the brain. On the u,hole,
horvevcr,ifthc flow olblood rvasa circulation, the flow ofani-
mal spirits\r'asmore in the natureofan irrigation:emanatinglrorn
the brain, thev w-ercdispersedat the peripherv. In this respect,
therc rvas no differcnce between Willis and Descartes.Willis,
horvever,distinguishedbetrvccn the causeof the blood's circula-
t ion and t h a t o f th e fl o u ' o fa n i ma l s p i r i ts,and he acknou,l edged
that the spiritsflorvedthrough thc nervein both directions.Above
all, he sau,the animalspiritsquite differentlyfiom Descartes.
[...]
According to Willis, the animal spirit rvasa potcntiality in
necd of actualization,Ir u,asfull ofsurprises. 1'hough it seemed
t o be m ere l v a ra y o f l i g h t, i t c o u l d b e expl osi ve,and w hcn i t
cxplodcd its eflects rvcremagnified in accordanceu,ith rules that
rr.ercnot those of either arithmetic or geometry.ll Descartcsheld
that the spirits u,erccxpelled from the heart and sped torvardthe
m us c lesin th e m a n n e r o f a c u rre n t o f ai r or stream of w ater,
rvhereasWillis arguedthat they u'ere propagaredfrom the brain
to the muscle in much the samc u,ayasheat or light. Slowedand
transportedby a Iiquid juicc filling thc intersricesof the nervous
structure, the spirits, upon reachingthe peripheral organs,drew
encrgy and heightcncd motor potential from the arterial blood
bathing them. This energv camc liom thc addition of nitrosul-
Iurousparticlesto thcir o$ n salt spirits, igniting the mixture and
setting offan cxplosion, asofgunporvder in a cannon.This intra-
r 86
nuscular cxplosion causedthe musclc to contract and thus Pro-
rluccd movement.rt lFormotiondu rdJlexe,
pp.60-63]
What distinguishesWillis fiom Dcscartes,horvever,is
f70]
nor simply his greaterfidclitv to Hanev'sphvsiologvor his notjon,
more chem ical t han m echanical,of t hc anim al spir it s. Unlike
l)cscartes,Willis does not assumethat thc structureol the nerves
them to play dif'ferentroles in thc scnroryanclmotor func-
allor,vs
tions. Thc nerves,he argues,havc a single structure, fibrous and
porous.Thcv are neither conduits enclosingthin strandsnor solid
rods. Thcy contain gaps,cmptl spacesinto w hich animal spirits
may entcr. 'fhey are prolongedby libcrs, rvhich are not their onlv
capi l l ar r ext cnsions;som e of t heseor iginat c out si( le,and inde-
pendcnt of, the nervcs,through epigenesis.Just asanimal spirits
flou through,or residein, the ner',es,so too do thcy florv through,
or residc in, the flbers. Thel mav flou in cithcr direction, ancl
in uavelike motions. Thev florv llrst one \r'a\',then the othcr, in
pathsradiat ingf iom a ccnt cr , t he br ain. 16
Thcse anatomicaland physiologicalconccpts \1'crenecessarv
conrlitions for Willis to do u'hat Descartcsu,asprccluded from
doing as regardsthe problcm rvc are acldressing. Though neccs-
sarv,however ,t hev $er e not yet suf f icicnt . Willis's or iginalit v is
more ap par entin t he por ver sof im aginat iont hat causedhim t o
pursuethe ultimatc consequences
of the explanatorvcomparisons
ht'cmplovecl. Becauselre conceivedol thc anatomicalstructurc
of the ncrvous systcm as radiant rathcr than ramified, $,ith the
brai n emit t ing ncnes as t hc sun cm it s r avs,Willis t hought of t he
propag.rtionofspirits in terms of radiation.ll Norv, thc cssenceol
thc ani malspir it it self could not be explainedent ir elyin t er m sof
anv knorvn chemical substancc.Sincc it originatedin the "flamc"
ol thc bloocl, it rvascomparablc to a rav ol light.ls I'his analogv
is pursueclto thc cndi thc ncrvousdischarge\\'asinstantancous,
j ust l i ke t hc t r ansm issionof light . Evcn t hc f inal st ageof t r ans-
t87
m is s ion,t hc ex c i ta ri o no f th e m u s c l eb v th e n erve,srrpportedthe
comparison.Just as light corpusclesproclucedlight onlv if thev
enc ount er ede th c rc a l p a rti c l e sd i s s e mi n a te di n the ai r, thc ani -
mal spirits rcleasetlthe pou.erin them onlv ifthc! nrqt sulfurous
or nir r ous par ti c l c sd i s s e m i n a te di n th e i n t ersti ti al bl ood. The
rcsulting sp,rsmrxlicintranruscularcxplosion causcdthc nruscle
r ( ) c ont r ac t .T h u s , th e a n i rra ls p i ri t u a s l i g h r onl r unti l i t l )rcame
fire. Its transportrvasanalogousto illunlination, *,hercarits ct-fect
\ \ ' asin. t logousto .rn e x p l o s i v ed e to n a ti o n .In thi s phrsi ol ogythe
nervesarc not stfings.rr conduits but fuses(Junit ignarius).t9fFor-
nation <luriJlexc,pp.65-56]
[71] \\rc knou that rve have encountercd a conccpt bccause
lc hav c hit up o n i rs d e l i n i ti o n - a d c fi n i ti on at oD cc nomi nal
and rca]. The tcrm ,rotu.trcJlexusis applicd to a certlin classof
m ov em ent s ,ol n h i c h a fa m i l i a r e x a mp l e i s provi ded: rhe auto-
m at ic r eac t io n o l s c ra tc h i n g .In a d d i ti o n r o rhe obi ecr bei ng
def lned. t r e hr re a d e fi n i n g p ro p o s i ti o n , rv hi ch fi rr:s i ts mt-an-
ing. \\t have .r rvor'dthat establishesthc a<lcquacvoI thc defin-
ing proposititrn to th( objcct defined (sci.lircr).The definition
itself requiresfbrv rvorcll:it is not a firll-blou.ntheon bLrta pr6cis,
It is a definition th.rt rvorksbv division, fbr it is asrociatcdrvith
t he pr ior dc f in i ti o n o f d i re c t mo v e tre n t, th e tuo togethercov-
cring the entire rangt'of possiblccausesof movement. Civen the
clcarlv statedprincipJe(guoadm otusotigincm seuprin.ipium), the
div is ion is ex h a u s ti | c :c v c ry m o v e me n t o ri g i natesei ther at the
c c nt er or at t h e p e ri p h c rv .T h i s b i o l o g i c a ld el i ni ti on rcl i es on a
phls ic alanr i, in d e c d ,a g e o m e tri co n e - In \u m. w c fl nd i n \\ri l l i s
t hc t hing, t hc r to rd a n d th e n .,ti o n .' l ' h e th i n {, i n the form crfan
or iginal obs er v a ti o na, c u ta n e o u sre fl e x o f th r' ccrcbrospi nalsvs-
tem, the scratch reflex; the rvord, rcflcx, lvhich hls improperly
entercd the languageboth as an adjcctivc and a noun;1(landthe
not ior r ,t hat is , th e p o s s i b i l i tvo fa j u d g me n t,i ni ti al l v i n the form
rlJll
ofan i denti fi cat ionor classif icat ion in t he br m
and subseguent lv
of empirical
of a principle intcrpretation. lFormationdu ille:.e,
P P . 6 U-5 9 1
The Logical ond Experintentol Consequences
' l homasWillis asst r nr ed
t h. r tall m uscularm ot ir ) nsar e cnused
172]
l n a centri fi rgalllur of alim al spir it sf iom t he br ain, but hc r lis-
tinguishedbcrrvccnrrrluntarvmotionsgovernc(lhv the cetcbrum,
suchas l ocomo t ion.and t r at ur alor involunt ar vnr ot ionl q( ivcr nc( l
bv the cercbcllum anrl rnt.dullaoblongata,such asrespiration.rncl
l rcartbcat.l l en ce, he alsodist inguishedbet r "eennvo souls- onc
sensi ti veand re asonablc,f ir und in m an alone,t hc ( ) t hcr s(nsit ive
and vi tal , l bun d in bot h nr ananclanim als. +l
In rnan both souls \\'ere situateclrvithin the striated lrodics,
tontntuneof thc rcasonablesoul. I his rr.as
tlrr: seatofthc sensorium
the stagcat n h ich a cliscr ininat ionuls m ade bet r lr cn t hosc scn'
sorr inrpressionsthat \v('rc rr'llt'cteclinto m()tion\ \\ ithr)ut rel:
( r(' nceto consciousr lcss
an<lt hc, seexplicit lv pcr ccivcd. r ssuchbr
the soul .[...]
It shoul d c om r ns no sur pr isc, t hcr cf ir le, t h. r t Jc. r nAt f r uc
(1684-1766)o f M ont pelliel locat cdt hc seatol com m on scnscin
tl re u hi te mat t er of t hc br ain. I his localizat ioncnabledAst r uc
t() proposean cxplanat ionof svm pat het ic phcnom enat hJt con-
taincd, fbr the flrst timc sincc Willis, the notion of reller nrotion
(,7n s_t
mp.tthid pdrtitm d L.rlo D.rvorumpositurdin intcrno \rntorio?,
1736). tl orv \1 asit t hit . r st ir r ulus or injur v t o onc pnr t ( ) l an
otqani snrgal e r ise t o a r c. r ct ionin anot hcr pir t : 'Asr r u( r cject cd
l he cxpl anati on,conlnr on. lt t h( t inr c, t hat cer t . r int ibcr sol cor n-
munication connectedthe nelves.He arguedthat .rll nerlc fitrers
arc separateanclindept 'ndentf iom t he br ain t o t hc pcr ipher vof
thc organi snr .Ast r uc cr plaincd svm pat hct ic r cilct ion in t er m s
ol a phl si cal r cllect ion of im pr essionst hat he lr cliclcr l t ook
r 89
place in thc medulla, When animal spirits, stirred bv some stim-
uJus,rverc carricd to the brain by the nervc, they encountered
fibcrs in thc tcxturc of the meclulla, so that, "being reflected
r v it h an a n g l c o f rc fl c c ti o n e q u a l to thc angl e of i nci dencc,"
thqy might enter thc orifice of a motor ncrve siruated at that
l
pr c c is cI oc a ti o n .[...]
Like Astruc, Robert Whytt of Edinburgh rejected the expla-
nation of svmpathiesin tcrms of extracerebralcommunication
bctwccn nerves, vet he could not accept Astruc's mechanistic
ideas ,nor c o trl d h e e n v i s i o n ,a s Il a l l e r d i d, a muscul ari rri tabi l -
ity distinct from sensibility.ile u'astherelbre fbrced to propose
a truly novel conception of the functions of the spinal cord. In
his Essa.yon the Vitdl and Other Involuntary llotions of Animals
(1751),Whf,tt attemptcd to prove bv observationand experiment
that all motions are causedby the soul, in responscsometimes
to an explicit perception, sometimesto a confusedscnsationof
a stimulus applied to the organism.The central idea of his the-
orv of involuntary motion is that every involuntarv motion hasa
manifestpurposc,namell, to eliminate the causesof disagreeable
impressions.For example, u.hen thc pupil of the e,vecontracts
in r es pon s eto l i g h t, i t i s n o t th e e f]e c t o f a di rect acti on ofthe
Iight on the iris but rather ofan importunate bedazzlementtrans-
mitted to the retina and the optic nen'e. "The gcncral and wise
intention of all involuntarv motions is the removalof everything
that irritatcs, disturbsor hurts the bodv." It is this vital senseof
all m ot ion s (rl ' h i c h W h y tt d o e s n o t h c s i tate to compare to an
immediate, prclogicalmoral scnsc)that precludesunderstanding
them in tcrms of purelv mcchanical causes.Whytt nevertheless
deniest ha t h e i s a " S ta h l i a n ,"o n e o f th o se " w ho hol d that one
cannot explainthcsemotions in terms of the soul $ ithout accept-
ing the u,holc of the Stahlianvicw." The "sensitiveprinciple" is
not the "rational and calculating" soul. (lr, rathcr, it is the same
soul - fbr there is onlv one - insofar as it esche$,scalculation
and reasoningand conf incs it sclf t o im m ediat e, hcnce uncon-
scious,sensibilitv.Phvsiologicallv,this rneansthat musclescon-
tract onlv if innervatcdand scnsoriallvstimulated, which mcans
that they must be connected to the seat of the soul. Of course
Whytt vvasnot unmindful ofthe argumentsthat Haller, rvith the
aid ofhis theories,drerv from the observationofmuscularmotions
in decapitatedanimalsand scparatcdorgans.This led him to sus-
pect thc r ole o[ t he spinalcolum n as a sensor ycauseof m ot ion,
" becauset he spinal colum n does not appcar t o bc exclusivelv
an cxtension of thc brain and cercbellum. It is probable that it
preparesa nervous fluid of its ou,n, and this is the reasonrvhv
vital and other movementspersistlirr severalmonths in a tortoisc
rr.hoscheadhasbeen severed."[...]
Johann August Unzer (1127-17991wascritical of Whytt on the
groundsthat nervoussensationis distinct from sensibilitv pcr sc
.rndthat movementin living thingsis not necessarily
causedbv the
soul, cvcn if it cannot be explainedin terms of a mechanicalphe-
nomenon.Thc animalorganismis indeeda svstemofmachines,but
those machinesare natural or organic, that is, they are machines
cvenin theirverv tiniest parts,asLeibniz had cxplaincd.An animal-
machinenced not havca brain and a soul. It doesnot follow lrom
this that the ncrvous fbrce in a brainlessorganism is merelv a
nrcchanicalaction. l he ncrvous fbrcc is a fbrcc ofcoordination
and subordinationoforganic machines.For this firnction to oper-
ate, i t i s e nough f br ganglia,plcxi or junct ions of ot her sor t s t o
make it possiblefor a nervousimpressionliom an externalsource
to bc refl ect edin t he f or m of an int er nallyor iginat edexcit at ion
destined fbr one organ or another. l'hc movementsof thc brain-
l esspol vp , f br inst ance,can bc cxplaincdin t his wav.The expla-
nation also explainsmovcmcnt in a clecapitatcdvcrtcbrate."Such
a nenous act ion,due t o. r n int er nalscnscim pr ession,not accom -
panicd hv a rcpresentation,stemming ti.om thc rcflection of an
cxtcrnal scnseimpression,is what takcsplace,lbr example,when
a dec apit at e dfro g j u m p s i n re s p o n s eto a pi nch of i ts di gi t." 12
llnzcr's originality shr.'uldnou be apparcnt: he relirrcd to iden-
r ilv . lnt im c c h a n i s mu i rl r a n i mi s m,l n d h e decentral i zedthe phe-
nom enon of re fl e c ti o n o I s ti mu l i , \4 ,h i c hW i l l i s and A struc had
bec n ab] c t o c o n c c i v co D l y i n te rms o f a c erebralseat.
Ccorge Prochaska,prolissor of anaromvand ophthalmologv
at Prague.rndVicnna.r11rulcl
succeedin combininll Wh\ tt's obser-
vations on rlre functions crfthe spinal cord u.ith Unzer's hvpoth-
csesabout cxtcnding the refler function outsidc the brain. In De
lunctionibtr y,stematisncnosi commentoth(178,+),Prochaskaargued
that the 1>hlsiologv
ol thc n<n ous slst<,nrharlconfined itsclf too
narro*lv ro thc brain, ignored comp.rrativeanatoln\',and there-
fbrc, until Unz:r, l)iled to recognizcthat thc r,lsreriord, or ner-
v ous lor c e (n o mo rc ta l k o f a n i ma l s p i ri ts), requi red onl v one
thing: an intact connrction ol the nerle fiber to the scnsorium com-
m une,r t is r in c tl i o m th e b ra i n , E v e nrv i th o ut a connecti onto the
brain, a scnsoryncnc can link up, through the.rensonum commune,
t o a m ot or n e rv e i n s e rte d i n to m u s c l e , a nd thus transfbrm an
im pr es s ioni n to a mr)\' e r)re n r. E v e n i l P ro chaskadi d nor defi ni -
tivelv rejecr th(.opinion that the spinalcorclis a bundle of nenes.
he m.rclethe rarlicalasscrrionthat it, rogether l'ith the medulla
oblongata, is the seat of thc sensoriuncommunc,the necessary
and s ullic ic n t c o n < l i ti o n,rl th e n e rv efu n c t i on.In di vi di ng,more-
orer, one dividcrl thc ncnous lbrce rlirhout abo)ishingit, therebl,
c x plaining t h c p c rs i s re n c co f c x c i ta b i l i tv and movemcnt i n the
liog uhose mrrlulla harl bcen sectioned.It wasat thc levelofthc
m edulla, P r o c h a s k aa rg u c rl ,th a t i n rp re s s i onuas rcl l ected i nto
r ) r ov c m c nt .t l D l i k c A \trL r(. Pro c h a s k a(l i d not bel i t' ve that thi s
rcflcction \\.asa purell, phrsical phcnomcnon governeclby a larv
s im il. r r t o t h e l a v v o l o p ti c a l re fl e c ti o n ; i n thc samc spi ri t as
r 9l
W h\tt, rather , he ar gucd t hat m edLr llar rr t f lect icr n of ncr \ 1) t r s
impressions\\'asgoverncdbv a biological larv of the co[servation
of living things. l'he cxamplcscitcrl bv Prochaskawerc thc same
ones that L)e scar r esr nd Ast r uc had descr ibcd:occlt t sionol t he
evel i dsand snee/ ing. Pr ochaskat leI ined t hc r elat ion ol r t 'f lex
moti on to co nsciousness bet t er t han anYof his pr cdecessor s: he
cxplicitlv distingrrishcdthe aspecto{ obligatoryautomatismfrom
thc aspectofo pt ional, int er m it t cnt u nconsciou\ ncss,and he sup-
ported thi s clist inct ionr . r it hat {t r t t r cnt sf iom conr par at ivcanat -
omy. As one ascendstiom louel to higheranimals.a brain is ad'lecl
to the rn.roriumcommuncln man, soul and bodv havebcen jointtl
bv C od. N ever t heless.t hc soul "pt o<lucusabsolut clyno act i( ) n
that depcndst 'holh and uniquely or r it All ir s act i( ) nsar e Pr o-
"
rl ucctl , rathcr , t hr ough t he inst r r . t m cntof t hc ner r ot t ssvst ent
'fhus Prochaskaend5whcre l)escartcsbegan:in the caseol invol-
untarr moti ons, t hc soul uscsan apPar at us t hat cln alsof unct ion
rr i thout i ts co oper at ionnnd pt r m ission.But r hc r t lat om r r pllvsio-
logic.rl((,ntcxt of thir asscrtionis (luitc diflll-ent' since l'roch'rska
concei vesof the ner voussvst cmnot "in gcner al'''like l) escar t er ,
but as an incrtasinglv comPlic.ltedhierarchical serics,ot rvhich
the hunranbrain is the highcst rJcvelopmcntthorrghnot thc ch'rr-
.rcteri\tic tvpe. ["Phvsiologit .rninralc"' Hrtoirt llinirale. vctl 2'
pp.6l l-161
usc( lt he not ion of a
173] In th c eight eent hccnt ur - v,Ast r uc
refl ccti on of t hc ncr vou5 inf lux, l>ascdon t hc phvsicallar v of
rel l ecti on ol light , ir r . t m c( haDist i( t hcor | of sr r t Pat hiest hr t
assunrcrlthe br ain r o bc t hc uniqt t e cent cr of le[ lect ion \ \ 'hvt
descti bcrl the r ef lcx phcnom cn( ) n\ \ 'it hout using t he r vor clor
noti r)D .but t hc lau s govcr ningt hat phenom cnon\ ! - er eassum cd
n()t t() bf pur elv Pl) \ 'sical,r luc t o t h, . 'connect ion bct wcet ) t hc
rellcr leaction an<lthe instinct <ll sellprcscrrirtion.\Vhvtr at'11rte<l
that thc rel at ion bet r veent he s, . nsor vand nlot or f inct ions \ \ Js
'9 t
not c ent r aliz e db u t d i l l u s e a n d n o t mc c h a ni calbut psvchi c,and
he thercfbre saw no reison to ascribeit to any specific anatorni-
cal structure. Unzer alsobclievedthat the l.rw governingthe phe-
nonlenon rvasnot strictlv mechanical,but he svstematicallyust'd
the ternr and the notion of reflection in r decentralizcdtheorv
of t he s ens o ri mo to rre l a ti o n s h i p ,$ h i c h h e ascri bedto a num-
bcr of anatomical structurcs (the nervousganglia and plexus as
rvell as thc brain). Prochaska,finally, retained both the rvord
and the notion of reflection but treated its physicalmechanism
as suborclinateto the organic entitv's senst'crf self-preservation,
<lcccntr.r
lizeclthe rcflex function bv locating its explicit anatonri-
cil support in the rnedulla oblongata and spinal cord (and also,
pr obably , in t h e s y mp a th e ti cg a n g l i a ),a n d w as apparentl ythe
first to note that not all automatic reactions$'ere unconscious.
Legalloisthen \r,enton to provc something that Prochaskanever
did, namtly, that thc spin.rlcolumn does not havethe structureof
a nenc. \\rithout using the term reflex or thc notion, hc located
thr.'reflex function in the medulla, n hosc metameric division he
c s t ablis hc dex p e ri m e n t.rl l y .
T hus , bv 1 8 0 0 th e d e fi n i ti o n o f th e ref' l exconcept w as i n
place,a definition ideal when considercdas a rvhole but histori-
cal in each o[its parts. It c.rnbe summarizeclas follorvs(with the
namesof thc authors u'ho first formulated or incorporated cer-
tain basic notions iDdicatcdin parentheses):a reflex movemeDt
(\\'il)is) is one \1hoseinrmediatecauseis an anrccedentsensation
(Willis), the effect of t'hich is detcrminedbv phvsicalla*-s(Willis,
A s t r uc , Unz e r, Pro c h a s k a -) i n c o n j u n c ti o n w i th thc i nsti ncts
(Whytt, Prochaska)- bv rcflection (Willis, ,\struc, Unzer, Pro-
chaska)in rhe spinalcortl lWhvtt, Prochask.r,Legallois),u'ith or
nithout concomitant c()nsciousness (Prochaska).{llFormationdu
re//r'rc,pp. 130-311
r 94
Corrections
74 l aki ng rhir Jclinit ion as, , ur \ lar ling point . r r e cr n \ ee Pr e-
ciselvrvhatelementsstood in need ol correction. One of the best
rcl'crcnccterts is JohannesMtillet's Handbuchder Phrsiolollie des
rvherethc illustriousGcrman phvsiologi5tcomPareshis
.Ilcnschcn,
ideason rcllex movement rvith thosc of Marshall I lall.{4 Miille r
makcsi t cl ear t hat in 1813,'r hen bot h Hall's paperand t he f ir st
cdition of the Handbuchwcrc publishcd, thc rcflcx conccpt was
a principle ofexplanation, a thcoretical instrument tor interprct-
ing phcnomenadefined as"movententsfollor"'ingsens.rtions." The
thcoreti calcont cnt o[ t his conccpt consist cclof lu'o elem ent t .
onc positire, the other negati\'('incgativelY,thc corccPt rcjccted
thc theon ol anastomoses betrT'eensensorvand motor fibers;posi-
tivelv, the concept rcquircd a ccntral interme(liarr between the
scnsorvimpressionand the dctcrmination of thc motor reaction.
It rvasfbr th! expresspurpose ol denoting the true ltrnction of
the mc<lua spintlis,or spinal nrcdulla (rathcr than spinal cord ).
that N l arsh.r llllall coined t bc t er m "diast alt ic" t o indicat e t hat
the medullr could providc a linctional connection [.letrveensen-
sory and motor nervesonly if situatedbetrveenthem asan authcn-
ti c anatomi calst r uct ur e r list inct lr om t he br ain. The cliast alt ic
(rel)ex) function of the spinal nrcdulladeterinined its relation to
the esodi c.o r anast alt ic,[ unct ion of r he lcnsor v ner veand t he
cxo(l i c,or ca t ast alt ic,f unct ior rol't he m ot or nene.
On this fundamentalpoint ,\lLillerand Hall agrcr:d.In Mtiller's
words, "thr phenomcna I have described thus far on the basis
first of my o*,n observationsand thcn thosc of lr'larshallHall's
have one thi ng in com m on, nam elv,t hat t he spinal r nedullais
the i ntermed iar vbct r veent he st 'nsor vand t he m ot r r r . lct ion of
thc nervousp r inciple. " Beal in nr ind t hat t he t \ \ 'o phvsiologist s'
agrecmcntabout t he specif iccent r al lunct ion oi t hc spinalcor d
uas the result of tlventv ycarsof researchand controversvcon-
r 9t
c er ningt he v a l i d i ty .rn di n te rp re ta ti o no ft he B el l -N l agenclliarv
c onc ought t o consider t hc cent r ipet al ( anast alt ic)im pr cssion
( 1811- 22).
[...1
Thc t3ell-Magendie lau' rvasa necessaryingrcdicnt fbr the for-
mulation of the reflcx concept, insofar as that concept incJudes
t hc s pec if ic l h n c ti o n o f th e s p i n a l c o rc l . W hat l l al l cal l ed the
diastaltic (or cliacentric)function rvasconccivablc onh in con-
junction rvith t\l.o mutually indepenclentproperticsof thc nen'e.
Onlv if thosc two propertiesexisteduas a nenous center rcqtrired
t o div c r t t h c n c rv o u s i mp u l s e to a n e u , desti nati on.[...] The
coursethat Mriller fbllorvcdfrom 182.1to 1833shorvsthat it rook
Bcll's idca and Magcndie'sexperiments to relate the rcflcx con-
ccpt to the phvsiologicalfunction ofthe spinalcord.
The seconclrespectin rvhich thc nincteenth centurv rectified
the eightt'cnth-ccnturvconcept hacl to do w-ith thc rclation of
reflex movcmcnt to consciousness,that is, rvith ps]chological
matters.It wasexpresslyon this point that Miiller clisagreed u ith
Hall. In dcscribing a reflex as a movement that fbllorvs a sensa-
tion, Mriller, likc Willis, Whvtt, Unzer and Prochaskabcfore him,
$'asin a senseobliging himsclf to unravela mvstery:ho$. could a
movcmcnt depend on a sensationrvhen the ncrvous circuit had
trcen broken bv decapitation,thus rcmoving the interconnecting
sensoryorgan,the brain?Although Miiller disagreedrvith Whytt,
r r ho believe d th a t re fl c x mo v c me n tsi n vol veclboth consci ous
sensationsand spontaneousreactions, and although he praised
Prochaskafbr havingpointed out that a ref'lexmight or might not
be accompanicdby a conscioussensation,he rcgardcdthc rcflex
asthe effect of a centripetal action propagatedtou.arclthe spinal
cord bv the sensorvnerve, rvhich thcn might or might not con-
rinuc on to the common sensoriumand, thus, might or might not
become conscious.Rcflcx movement \ras therefbre one species
r v it hin a gc n u s c o mp ri s i n g a l l m o v e me ntscondi ti oncd on the
ac t ion of t he s e n s o ryn e N c s . Il a l l , o n th c other hancl ,fcl t that
196
rvithout relerencc to the brain or to consciousDcss, and that the
conccptsof sensationand cvcn sensiti!itv ought not to enter into
the conccpt of a reflcx. l he reflex function dicl not evcn dcPend
on scnsorvor motor nen'esbut, rather,on sPccificnervousfibcrs
that Hall called"cxcitorrtotor" an(l"rellecto-motor" llbers. Ilall's
l8I I RovalSocictvPaPeron "Thc Rellex Function of the N'ledulla
Oblong.rtaand the N'tedullaSpinalis"exPlicitlYdistinguishesreflcx
movement not onlv fi'ornvoluntarvmovement directlt controlled
bv the brain but also from the resPiratorYmovcment controllcd
by the mcdulla oblongata,asrvcll as fiom involuntarv movement
i ni ti ated t r r clir ect st im ulus of ner vc or m uscle f iber . A r ef lex
movcment is not a spontancous,direct rcsPonseemanatinglrom
a centrals our ceiit pf esum esa st im ulusappliedat som c dist ance
fiom the reacting muscle being transmitted to thc sPinal cord
and fiom thcrc rellected back to the periphcry.Ilall orienteclthtr
reflcx concept to\4arda scgmentaland cxplicitll mechanisticcon-
ccpti on of t he f unct ionsof t he ner voussyst em .
Thi s rvasdif f icult f br M iiller t o acccpt . To be sur c, he uas
u.ith Prochaska,anrl he ascribedall
open about his clisagreement
rellex movemcntsto a teleologicalprjnciple ofinstinctivc organic
sell:prescnation. But as Fearinghaspointcd out, Nliillcr's interest
in the phcnomcnaof associated movementsand radiantsensations
and his elaborateatternptsto explainthc latter in terms of a rellex
lirnction ofthe brain and spinalcord show that hc *as a Iong rvav
from conceivingofreflexcs assegmcntaland local mcchanisms.In
lact, Miiller's obscrvationsof associatedmovemcntsin narcotized
ani mal sand gener alr ef lex convulsionsled him t o t uo sim ult a-
neousconclusions:reflcx movcmcntscan involve the entire bodv
in responseto the most insignificantlocal sensation,and thc nrorc
extensi vea r ef lcx nt ovem entis, t he lessit is slnchr onized.
Mi i l l er's concept ol'r ef lex, u. hich m aint aincda connect ion
t97
$'ith sensation- that is, with the brain - as rvell as the possibil-
ity that a local sensationmight produce reflectedeffectsthrough-
out t he o rg a n i s m,s i d c s tc p p e dm o s t o f the obj ecti ons that had
been raisedagainstI lall's ideas.Ha]l had scandalizedmany physi-
ologists by attributing to the spinal cord a power to regulate
movement still rvidcly bclieved to be an exclusive province of
t he br ain .[...]
I t u. asi n 1 8 5 J , fb u r Ie a rs b e fo re H al l ' s death, that E duard
Pllilger pubfishedDie scnsorischen Functionen desRtjckenmarks der
llirhcltiere.The rvell-knou'nlarvsof reflcx activity (homolateral
conduction, symmetry,medullarv and ccrebral irradiation, gen-
er nliz at io n )c s s c n ti a l l yre c a s t,i n a p p a r entl vmore experi menta)
lbrnr. l\liillcr's notion of the associationof movementsand the
radiation ol sensations.In lict, Pflnger follou'ed Mriller in using
t he r ef lex c o n c rp t to c x p l a i n s o -c a l l e dsympatheti cor conscn-
su.rlphenomcna,u hoseirtcrprctation had previous)vdivided pro-
ponent so l th e p ri n c i p l e o fa n a s to m o s i sol rhc pcri pheralnervcs
( - [ hom asWi l l i s , R a v mo n dV i e u s s e n sP, aul -Joscph
B arthcz)fi onr
bc liev c r r i n th c p ri n c i p l e o l a c o n fl u e n ceol i mpressi onsi n the
\.nsoriunl.ommunc(.leanAstruc, Robert Whvtt, Joh.rnnAugust
Unzer, George Prochaska).According to Prochaska,the rellex
conccpr prcscrvedthc cxplanationof svmpathiesin terms of the
tcnsoriumco munebut located the latter outside the brain in thc
meclullaoblongataand spinalcord. Unlike Wh,vtt, Prochaskadis-
tinguished thc Jensorium communefrom the soul but continued
to credit it n ith a teleological function, according to $'hich the
reflcx action rvasa fbrm of self-preservinginstinct (no.tffironser-
y at io) . S o i t i s h a rd l v s u rp ri s i n gth a t Pfl ti ger i n 1851 fel t that
Prochaskahad had a better understandingof the nature of the
rcf)ex processin 1784than Hall had managedin 1832-33.For the
samcrcasonsthat had persuadedProchaskato hold on to the con-
ccpt of a sensoriumcommuncPfliiger believed in the existcnceol
soul (Rtckenmarhsseelel,
a nrcclrrllary rvhich enabledhim to cxplain
the purpose of reflex actions. Hall, on the othcr hand, drer" a
sharp dist inct ion bet u'een adapt ivcor int ent ional m ovem cnt ,
deliberateand stemming fiom thtr brain, and reflcx movement'
rvhich hc characterizedas"aimless."Lessmechanisticthan I lall,
,\4n1lcrhad raised the rigidity causcd bv certain generalizedre-
llcxcs as an objection againstProchaska'sview, though it is true
that N4iillcrn ascareful to notc that this occurred onl,v"in a suit-
ably prepared animal." Pfliigcr's concept of the reflcx must be
regarde das a m isleadingdialect icalsvnt hesisiit s cxper im ent al
basisrvasas old as Marshall Ilall, whereasthe philosophicalcon-
tc\t that made it meaningfulrvasas old as Prochaskarvould havc
been.ha d hc not died in 1820.
In l a ct , Pf higerdid not succecdin 1851 in f inding a st r ict lr
phrsi ol ogicalsolut ion t o a pr oblcm t hat Hall, r at hcr t han r eall'-
l aci nu, h at l sidest eppcdb, r at t r ibut ing r vhat hc called "er <cit o-
motol po\1ers"to ncne fibers.The problcm lav in the rerms"scn-
sation"or "lensit)ilitv" as ther rvercust<lin the earliestdcflnition.
,rf the re llex. Willis had said t hat "r ellex m ot ions inr nle( liat eh
lbllow sensation"(notus rellexusest qui d ttn\ioncPrueviaimme
illico retorqueturl,whereasProchaskahad said
diotus dependens,
that " one of t he com m on scnsor vf unct ions is t o r cllect senst
impressionsas motor imptrlscs" (prcecipuaJunctio scnsorilcom-
munisconsistatin reJlcxioneimpressionumscnsoriorumin mototid\).
Nliiller beganhis chapteron rcflex movcmcntsbv saying,"l\1ore-
ntents that fbllow scnsationshavc alvvavsbcen knorln." As long
as pcople continued to speakof "sensation," thev remaineclon
thc terrain ol psvchologv.It rr.aslogical to look fbr a seatof thc
psvche,and r vhv not suspectt he spinal cor d? I n 1817,Richar cl
DugardCraingcrcorrectlv noted that contcmporarvphvsiologists
appearc dt o bclieve in t hc cxist cnccof t uo kinds of scnsat ion,
onc con scious,t he ot hcr unconscious.Eclr var cl G eor gc Tandr
LiddeJpoints out that \1henCharlesTodclcoined the term "affer-
cnt" in 1839, .r major step rvastaken touard distinguishingbe-
t $een t he tw o k i n d s o fs e n s a ti o n . Ye t it mav be that the trul v
major step came only later, when the subjectiveconcept ofsen-
sibilitv (/e senrdc /iqf./ur) rvasreplacedbv a purelv objective one
defined in tcrms of the histology of receptors.
What is interesting about thc history of thc rcflcx concept
between Pfltiger'srvork and CharlesScott Sherrington'sfirst pub-
lications is its importation fiom physiologv into clinical rvork,
rvhich bcgan rvith Ilall. Thc lattcr was thc first to use the dis-
ruption or disappearance
ofcertain reflexesas cliagnosticsvmp-
toms. The concept of the reflex arc gradualll took on meaning
beyond that associatcdu ith the schcmatic structure introduced
bv Rudolph Wagncr in 184'1;incorporatcd thus into svmptom-
atologv and clinical examination,it inlluenced therapeuticdeci-
sion-making.But as the reflex concept passedlionl the laboratory
int o t he h o s ;ri ta l , i t d i d n o t g o u n c h a n ged.W hi l e most phys-
iologiststcnded to look upon reflcxcsas ftrndamcntal,unvarying
mechanisms,a ferv clinicians,among them Emil .lendrassik,who
lbllo*cd up thc uork o[Wilhelm Heinrich Erb and Carl Friedrich
O t t o W es tp h a l(1 8 7 5 )b v l o o k i n g s y s tc mati cal l vfor tendon re-
f'lexes,llere surpriseclto cliscoverthat such reflexesrvereneither
constantnor unifbrm, and that thcir abscnct'rvasnot necessarily
a pathological symptom. It rvould not be long bcfcrrcphysiol-
ogis t s uou l d b e o b l i g e d to a b a n d o n the i de.r of a refl cx as a
s im plc ar c c s ta b l i s h i n ga o n c -to -o n crc l ati onshi pbctw cen sti m-
ulus and muscularresponse.
T he ge n e ra l i z a ti o no f c e l l th e o rv , th e i denti fi cati on of neu-
rons untler the microscopeand technologicaladvancesin histo]-
ogv dcmonstratcd,o1-coursc,that ncrvescould be decomposed
analvticallvinto smallcr- in somc scnscatomic - structures.The
concept ofa scgrncntalref'lex ruastherebv corroboratcd. New
cl i ni cal obscr vat ionst hus f br ce( l phvsiologist st o considcr scg-
mcnts i n t hc cont cxt of t he or ganismasa lvholc.
When Shcrringtondiscovcrc<lthat the scratchreflex nas not
r vit h a st r ict lv def lned r ef lcxogeniczone,
i nertri ca blvassociat cd
hc laid thc groundrvork fbr a ncu' rtctification of the conccpt.
'fhe rcllcx \\'a! no\\' seen not so much .rs the reaction of a sPc-
ci fi c organ in r esponset o a st im ulus as an alr eadYcoor dinat ed
movcmcnt dctennincd in p.rrt bv stimuli in a certain part of thc
organismand in part [r1 thc organism'sglobal state.Reflex movtr-
mcnt, ev cn in it s sim plest ,m ost . r nalvt ic. rflbr m , r Tasa f ir t m ol
bchavior,thc rcaction of an organic v' hole to a changcin its rcla-
ti on to the envlr onm ent .
Although thc *rrrd "integration" did not aPPcarin Sherring-
ton' s vocabular l unt il af t er t hc ninet eent hcent ur - vhad endcd,
the conccpt ol integrationw.1!thc cro$ ning achieventcntof ninc-
tecnth-c{.'Dturvneurophvsiologr.Sherrington'srvork on rigidity
duc to <lcccrcbration(1898), rt'ciprocal innervationand svnapses
convergedon a tlemonstrationof thc lict that a basicreflcx inrclvcs
mcdul l a n'int cgr at ionof a nr usclcbundle int o an ent ir c m cnr bcr
through conver genceol af f er ent inf luxcs and com binat ion of
antagonisticrenctions.'l-helirnctionsof thr: brain Arcan cxtension
ol the medullar vint cgr at i( ) nnf t he par t s t o t he cnt ir r or ganism .
In adaptingHughlingsJackson'sconcept ol integr.rtion,Sherring-
ton \\' asint cr cst ednot in it s evolut ionar vinr plicat ionsbut onlv
i n i ts str- uct ur al
oncs,
It sc cm sr casonablet o sav t hat Slr cr r ingt on. r clr ieved,
in t hc
fi el clofphvsiologv,t he dialect icalsvnr hesis of t hc r cf lex concept
ui th thc conccpt ol- or ganict ot alit v t lt at I ir st Pr - ochaska. r nd
t hen
l\'ltillcr had sorrghtanclthat I'lliiger.haclmisle.rdinglvachicveclbr
i ntcrprc t ingt he r esult sof his phvsiologicalcxpcr im cnt sin m et a-
phvsi calt er m s,
B l th c enclof t hc ninct eent lrcent r r r \ ,t hc r elJcxconct : pth. r cl
thus been purged of anv teleological implications, u'hile it had Cuapr r n Nr n r
alsoceascdto be seen- asHall had sccn it - asnothing more than
a simple mcchanical reaction. Through a scrics of corrections, Biological Ob jects
it had become an authentically phvsiologicalconcept. IEtuder,
pp.296-30a)

,l

A Principle ol Thematic Conserv.ttion

[75] The historv ofa sciencervoulclsurelv fail ofits goal ifit did
not succeedin representingthe succcssionof attempts, impasses
and repetitions that resultcd in thc constitution of rvhat the sci-
cnce todav takesto be its object of interest.Unlike geometrvand
astronomy,terms that are more than trvo thousandvcarsold, the
term biologv is not yet nvo hundred vcarsold. When it u'aslirst
proposcd,gcometrv had long since ccaseclto be the science of
figurcsthat can be drav'.nn,ith a straightedgeand compass,while
astronomvhad onlv recentlvexpancledits scopeofinterest bevond
the sol arsyst em .I n bot h cases,t he signif ierof t he scient if icdis-
ci pl i ne r cm ained t hc sam c, but t he discipline in quest ion had
broken r vit h it s past . Bl cont r asr , t he concept of biologr , was
inventedto characterizc,in retrospecr,a disciplinc that haclnot
yet broken with its past.
The *.ord "biology" occurs fbr thc flrst time in .Jean-Baptiste
Lamarck's Hvdrogdolollie
(1802). When he mentioned the rvord
again,in the prefaceto his Philosoph;c rcologiguc(1809), it $,asin
allusion to a treatiscro be entitled Ito./ogic,$'hich he neveractu-
allv rvrote. Strikingly,this prefaceis concernedrvith generalprob-
lems of animal organization"as one travcrscstheir entire series

201
liom rhe most per{act to the most imperfcct." fhe idea of a hier-
ar c hic al sc ri e so f a n i m a l s ,a c h a i n o f b ci ng, i ndi catesthat the
objec t of th e n c rv b i o l o g v \\' a sth e s a m c as that of A ri stotl e' s
Ilistorid onim(rliumanclDe partihusanima,lium.llence, Lamarck's
ou,n invention- modiflcation in the organsthrough force ofhabit
and under th c i n fl u e n c eo [c h a n g i n ge n ri ronmcntalcondi ti ons-
rvasexplicitlv intendcd to reestablish"thc verv ordcr of nature"
bev ondt he l a c u n a ca n d d i s c o n ti n u i ti c si n the svstemof cl assi fi -
c at ion pr o p o s e db l n a tu ra l i s ts- i n o ther w ords, to cstabl i sha
clear progressionanclgraclationin organizationthat could not be
ov er look e dd c s p i tca n v " a n o ma l i c s ."
As fbr the other invcntor of the term and concept of biology,
Gottfiied Reinhold Trcviranus,the verv tidc ol the book he pub-
lished in 1802, Biolollieoder Philosophie der l.ebenclcn
Notur lir
Nctturlorscher unrl,'lrztc(r'olumc 2 in a six-volumc scries,the last
of q, hic h \ 1 a sp u b l i s h e di n 1 8 2 2 ),i n d i catesthat he had no w i sh
to separatcor distinguish thc naturalist from thc phvsicianas to
t heir philo s o p h i c a lo r g e n e ra lc o n c c p tion of the phenomenao[
lif c . I hus , a t th e trl rn o f th e n i n e te e n thccnturv, a new w aY of
looking at tho studv of Jir.ingthings, which r.:ntailecl
a ncw logic,
rvasin fact limitcd by the tradition.rlassociationofthc standPoint
ol t hc nat u ra l i s trv i th th a t o f th e p h v s i ci an,that of the i nvesti ga-
t or wit h t h a t o fth c h c a l c r.[...]
S inc e t h e tu rn o f th c n i n e te e n th c c ntury, horvevcr,defi ni -
tions ol biologv'sspecificobjcct havebeen purgcd of valueJaden
conceptssuch as pt'rfiction or impcrlcction, normalitv or abnor-
malitv. l'herapeutic intcntions, tvhich once informccl or, more
accuratclv,deformed,thc biologist'svieu of laboratoryuork, have
sincc trct'n lirnitetl to tht applicationsol biological knorvledge.
llence, it rvould sccm that the clucstionof"normalitv" in the his-
torv of biologv ought to be classcdasa mattcr of historicalrather
t han c ur r e n t i n trrc s t. Is h a l l a tte mp t to P rovethc contrarv.To
)<)4
rhat cnd , I dir ect t he r eaclcr 'sat t cnt ion t o t he cnd of t he his-
tori cal pr ocess.For cont em por ar ! biochem ist s,t he lir nct ionsof
sclflpreservation,self'-reprocJuction .rnrJsclf:rcgulationarc char-
actcri stic pr oper t ies of m icr oor ganism ssuch as bact cr ia. l- he
modt' l of ien pr oposedby scicnt ist st hcnt sclvcsand not just bv
popul arizcr sof t heir r vor k is t hat of t h( "f t r lll aut om at edchcm i-
cal l act or v. "ai The or ganic f ir nct ions ar c acknor vlcdgedt o be
supcri ort o t heir t echnologicalcount t 'r par t sin r ciiabilit v, if not
i nl al l i bilit y,and in t he exist enceol m echanism fsbr dct cct ingand
correcting reproductiveerrors or l'lals. Thcse facts make it rca-
son.rbleto ask rvhether there is not some principle ol thcrn.rtic
consen'ationat *.ork in thc historicalconstitution of biologv.On
thi s vi c*, which cont r ast suit h an idca of - scicncccl. r bor at ecl
bv
hi stori a ns. r ndphilosophcr sin t hc cr a u'hcn phvsicsdcalt u'it h
macroscopicobjects, biologv is diflerent liorn the other sciences,
anclthe historv of biologv ought to rellect that tict in thc tlur:s-
tions it asksanclthe rvayin rvhich it answersthcm. Iror thc allcgcd
pri nci pleof t hcm at icconscnat ionin t hc hist or vol biologvis per -
hapsonlv a r cf lect ion of t he biologist 'saccept ancein one r vavor
anothero1 t hc indisput ablef act t hat lile, u hat everlbr m it m ay
takc, involvc:ssclf:prcscrvationbv meansof self:regul.rtion.l/r/c-
oloq) ontl Rationalftr',
pp. 125-28]
Various Monilestotions of the Biologicol Object
In anLiquit.t'
[76] l hc f unclam cnt alconcept sin Ar ist ot lc's dcf init ion of lif c
are thosc of soul .rndorgan.A living btxJvis an animatcand organ-
i zed bodv. I t is anim at ebecauscit is or ganized.I t s soul is in f ; ct
act, lbrm and cn<l."Supposcthat the eve .rvercan .rnimal - sight
rvoul <l r avebcen it s soul. . . . Wc m ust no. r rcxt
. cnd our consicler -
ati on fro m t he'par t s't o t hc uhole living bor lv; f br u'hat t hc
2{] t
departmentalscnscis to the bodily part rvhich is its organ, that
the rvhole facultv ofsenseis to the rvholc sensitivebodv assuch."a6
'fhe organsarc the instrumentsof thc soul'senrJs."The bod,r too
must somcho* or other be madc fbr thc soul. and each part ofit
f'or some sul,ordinate function, to n'hich it is rdapted."a?It is
im pos s ib l e to o v e rs tn teth e i n fl u e n c e ol A ri stotl e' s use of the
tcfm o.rtdnonto designatca lirnctional part (nrorion)oIan animal
or vegetal body such as a hand, bcak. u'ing, root or vvhathave
vou, LIntil at least the encl ofthe eighteenth centurv, anatomy
and phv s i < rl < rgpyre s e rv e d ,rv i th a l l i ts ambi gui ti es,a term that
Aristotle borrorr.edfrom the lexicon ofartisans and musicians,
$,hoseuse indicatesimplicit or cxplicit acccptanceof some sort
ofanalogv bctwccn naturc and art. life and technics.
As is rvt'll knou.n, Aristode conceivedolnature and life asthe
ar t of ar t s , b v * h i c h h e m e a n t a p ro c csstel eoJogi calbv i ts very
nature, immnnent, unpremeditatcdand undcliberatcd- a process
t hat ev er! te c h rri q u ete n d s to i mi ta te , a nd that the art of medi -
c ine appro a c h e sm o s t c l o s e l yrv h e n i t h eal sby appl yi ngto i tsel f
r ult s ins p i rc d b y th e i d c a o f h c a l th , thc rcl os and form ofthe
living orgrnism. Aristotle, a phvsician'sson. thus subscribedto
a biologic a l n a tu ra l i s m th a t h a d a l fi n i ti es rvi th the natural i sm
of llippoc ra te s .
Lifc's tclcological proccssis not pcrfcctlv cflicicnt and infal-
lible, houer'gr.'l-heexistenceofmonsters shorvsthat nature does
m ak e m is ta k e s ,a 8 rv h i c h c a n b e e x p l a ined i n terms of matter' s
r es is t anc eto l o n n . F o rmso r e n d sa re n ot necessari land y uni ver-
s a) lyex c n rp l a rv a
; c c rta i n c l c v i a ti o ni s tol eratecl The
. l brm ofan
org.rnisntis expressedthrough a rouglr constancy;it is \ahat the
orq.rnisntappearsto bc most of the time. Hence, *,e can consider
a fbrnr to bc a norm, compared to u,hich the exct:ptionalcan be
characrcrizcdasabnormal. ldeologv antl Rationalitv,pp. 128-29)
206
and eighteenthcentuties
In thc scventeenth
by
[77] D escar t escont r adict cd Ar ist ot le's pr oposit ionsPoint
poi nt. Fo r him , nat ur e was ident ical u'it h t he laws o{ m ot ion
and conservation.Every .rrt, including meclicine, r'as a kind of
machinc-building.Descartcsprcserveclthe anatomicalanclPhvs-
i o)ogi cal concept ol an or gan but elim inat ed any dist inct ion
A living bodv could ser ve
betl l eeDor gani, / at ionand f . r br ic, r t ion.
as the model fbr an automaton or vice versa. \'et therc was an
ambiguity in this reversibility.fhe intention behind the construc-
tion ofan automaton tvasto coPynature,but in the C.rrtt'sianthe-
i,
t,j ' orv of fife the automaton servesas an intelligible equivolcntol
nature. There is no rcrom in Cartesianphysicsfbr an ontological
tr diflerence betwcen nature and art. "[S]o it is no Iessnatural lbr
,W a clock constructcd!vith this or that sct of rvheelsto tell thc time
than it is lbr a tree wh:ch grcw from this or that sced to produce
the appropr iat eliuit . "a'q[ . . . ]
i ' tb be gin uit h, t ht C. r r t esian\ 1at ch is no lesssubjer : tt o t he
l l vs of nr cchanicsit it t ells r he t im c incor r ect lv t h. r n if it t ells
the ti me cor r ect lt . s(5im
l ilar ly, it is no lessnat ur al f cr ri m an t o
bc si ck than t o be healt hr , anclsicknessis not a cor r upt ion of '
nature.5 lYet t hc t hir st t hat dr ivest he vict im of dr opsy t o dr ink
is a "\'eritable error of nature," evcn though it is an eflcct of the
substantialunion of soul and bodv, r vhosescnsat ions,such as
thi rst or pain, ar e st at ist icallvvalid indicat or sof t hings or sit ua-
tions favorablcor hamrful "to thc consenationofthe human bodv
rvhcn i t is f ullv healt hv. "; :This idea is conf ir m ed at r he end of
the "Conversationsrvith Burnran"(1648), in rvhich thc metlicirrc
ol the ph ysicians,not baseclon sound Car t esiarr ncchanics,is
dcni gratcd. r nclr idiculed in lavor of a coulse oI conduct am en-
abl e, as a nim alsar e, t o t hc silcnt lcssonsof nat ur e concer ning
" sel f-res t it ut ion. ""Et er y m an is capableof being his or vn physi-
cian."5l Evenfbr Descartes,sellpreservationrcmainsthe primary
)07
dis t inc t i v ec h a ra r:tc ri s tioc f th e l i v i n g bodv.l .l
Llndoubtedly it vr,asGcorg Ernst Stahl t ho most stubbornly
delcnded, inhis De divct.ritote (l?06), tht
orqdnisnlier nrc.drlrtn?i
irreducibilitv ofthe organism,that is, thc idea that a ccrtain ordcr
ol> t ainsi n th c te l a ti o n so fth e p a rtso 1 ' amechani smto the rl hol e'
A living bodr is both instrumentcdarld instrumcntal.lts t'fficient
structure lstructurLt, constructio, ordinotio,disttibutioare all used
in paragraph19) revealscoopcration on thc part of mediate or
im nc dia tc rg c n ts ,-fh e n ra tc ri rl c o trs ti tuti onof the borl v i s sub-
jecr to rapid corruptior, Stahl observcs,horvever,that discaseis
an r x c e p ti o n a l c o n c l i ti o n .I Ie n c c , th r' re must bc some pol er ol
conservation,some immaterial pou'er ollering active resistance
t o dc c o m p o s i ti o n ,p e rD ra n e n tl la t u ork i n the bodi cs of l i vi ng
things. Sclf:prescrvation of the organism is achicvedas a result
.]
not of s o n re n re c h rn i c a bl u t o fD a tu ra l" autocracr." 9a[..
It is not onlv the histon of anatontv and physiologvthat bcgins
u it h A r i s to tl c b u t a l s oth e h i s to rv o l * ' hat l ong cal l ed " nat-
' uas
ur al his to rv ," i n c l u d i n g th e c l a s s i l i c ati on
of l i vi ng thi ngs, thci r
or c ler lva rra n g t' n re n itn a ta b l c o f s i m i l ari ti cs and cl i fl i rences.
s t udv of th e i r k i n s h i p th ro u g h mo rp hol ogi calcompari sonand,
llnallv, studv of thc compatibilitv ol diflereDtmo(lesof e\istcncc.
Nat ur al h i s to ry s o u g h rto c x p l a i n th c cl i vcrsi tvol l i fc fi rrmsabl e
t o c oex i s t i n a g i v e n e n v i ro n n rc n t.In 17' 19C arol rrsLi nnaeusre-
fer-redto this coexistenccas the occonomia ndturdc.l...f
ln t h e c i g h te c n thc e n tu r\, th e s tatusol speci esw as l he l bre-
mclst problem oI the naturalists,as can be leen most clearly of
all in the r'ork ol Conrte Btrffonand I innaeus.fhc latter did not
ex per ir:n c ea s rn u c h d i i c u l tv a s th e tbrnrcr i n hol di ng that the
specicsucrr: fixc(l at creatjon and pcrpctuntc(l from gencration
to gcnerrtion. Buflbn .rttemptcd to resolvethe problenr rr itlr his
theorv of "intemll molds" and "organic molecules."Organicmol-
rl re
c c ulc s , h c ma i rrta i n c d ,rv e re i n c l c s t ructi bl e;tl rev sur-r' i vctl
2()6
r J.r,,,e.r r, l r cpr odurlir , n lr "nr qt 'n,r Jt ion 1, , ! r nr 'r ', r li^n. . r cr
i n
l .rti ng t he bodies ol living t hings in specif ic lbr m s shapcr lbv
internal nolds. Thc latter, (letermined bv the firrrn ol thc org.rn-
unr u-
i sm, dj ct at eclt hc uar in u'hich t he par t s had t o be ar r angedin
,rrdr:rto lorm a rvholc.
Considerfor a moment the intelnal mold metaphor.l\'loldsarc
rrsLcli n s m elt ing and nr asonr vt o inr posc. r ccr r ain t hr cc- dim cn-
sionalshapc.Etvmologicalh,the qrrrd is rclated to "modulus"ancl
"rrodel." In con'rmonusage,it indicatc! a structural norm. ln liv-
ing organisms,horvever,the structural Dorm cin nccommoddte
i rregul ar it ies,t o nhich Bulf ir n r eler son nr or e t h, r nonc occasion
asanonralies(ltresonomaur).An organic.rnomalyis n()t thc satne
rs .r phvsicalilr egular it v, hr lvevcr . I nit iallv, Buf lbn conct 'ivcd
of gencrat ionas analogoust o cr vst Jllir at ion,bLr tult inr at ell hc
c.rmcto think of crystallizationasa lbrm of organization.I Ic was
unabl eto avoid associat ing. r nom alies r vit h degener at ion,hcnce
u i th the pr oblem ol t hc m Lr t abilit vof specics.O n t his point ,
B Lrffbnrr a sncr er ablc t o achicvecr r f ainn. I le did not r egar dt ht :
i rl caofdc r ivat ilc speciesasabsur clon it s lict , br r t hc believcr lor .
prol esscdt o believet h. r t olr scnat ionconlir m cr l t hc t cachingsol
thc B i bl e.t 5
l'ierre [-ouis ]Vloreauclt l\4aupertuisrvar bold<r in thcorizing,
pcrhapsbecausehe possessetllcss extcnsivecmpirical infbrrn.r-
ti on. For him , it r uct r lr al v. lr iat ion\ \ 'asr he r ule ol or ganic pr c
gtessi on.ln par agr aph] 1 of t he Sr sr dm rc/ c/ o nalur e( 1751) .hc sct
lcrrtha theor\'()l genrration bascdon thc existencr ol'elcment.rrr
lhrticlcs of mnttcr t'nclolr,crlu ith appetitc and memorv, \\,hose
" arrangc m ent "r cplocluccst he posr iblr m ir aculoussr r uct ur c ol
I thc fi rst individuals.The phcnom en. rof r escnr blance, m isccge-
nati on nn d nr onst r osit vcoul<lbc cxplain<<1,
hr , r r gueci,in r cr m s
ol thc compatibilitv or incoDrpatibilitvof "ar.rangemcnfs" in seeds
nri ngkti thr oughcopular ion.I hus, I : r t cr ,in lt ar r {r aph- 15,he. r sks,
2 ().)
 sc not explainin this llay how liom just trvo individualsthe
L--an
nrostdissimilarspecicscould havemultiplied?Originallvthe; may
havcsrcmmcdlrom lbrtuitousproductions
in rvhichthe elcmentary
partsdid not retainthe orderthevoccupiedin the lither andmother
animals.liachdegrecoferror could havcprorluceda nrw specicsl
andrepratedcrrorscould havcgivcnriseto thc infinitecliversity
of
that rvesectodav.
aninrals
It is tcmpting to read this text \'\,ithspcctaclesprovided by con-
temporary biochemical and genetic theorv. Orderand errorocctJr
both here and in contemporaryaccountsofhereclitary biochem-
ical defects .rsground and cause o[ both normality and abnor-
m alit y . B u t to d a y b i o c h e mi s trv a n d g e n eti csoffer us a rvay of
interprcting org.rnicabnormalitiesthat was rvorkedout in coop-
c r at ion l{ , i tl r tl re D a rrv i n i a nc rp l a n a ti o nofthe ori gi n ofspeci es
and t he a( l a p t.rri o no f o rg a n i s ms .H e n c e Maupertui s' sproposi -
tions should be legardcd more as Iictions than as anticipations
of s c ient if i c fh e o r-i e sto c o rrrr. H e rv a sunabl e to ol crcome the
rlifficultr poscd bv rhe naturalmechanismfbr nor-malizingdiffer-
eDces.Both he and Bullon believed that human intervention -
t hlough t e c h n i rl u c so f h L rs b a n d rv
o r a g ronomv- r' as the onl v
!r'a} to stnbilire rariations * ithin species.lldeolog.v and Rotionol-
it r . pp. 129 -3 5 ]
ln thc ninctccnthcentury
[78] Thc pubf ication of On the Origin of Species
b.v.l,leansol Nat-
ural Selection;or the PrescrvationoJ FavouredRacesin the Struggle
for Ltlein l8 59 occasioneddoubts in the minds of somc carlyread-
crs becauseof the traditional mcaning of certain concepts men-
tioncd in the titlc and frequentlv alluded to in the bodv of the
work, The thtory ofnatural selection statcsthat ccrtain devia-
tions liom the norm can be seena porfcriolito provide a tenuous
l.
it
fl
aclvantage fbr survivalin novcl ecologicalsituations [)arrvin thus
substit ut eda r andom f it f or a pr cor dainedadaPt . lt ion'Nat ur al
sclcction is eliminative. Disadvantaged organisnrsdie; the sun'i-
vors arc all different in one degrcc or another. Thc reader u'ho
takeslitcrallv such DarrT'inianterms as"selection," "advantage,"
"adaptation," "favor" and "disfavor" may Partially overlook the
fict that telcologv hasbeen excludedlrom Darrvin'stheory Does
this mcan that all value-ladenterms havebecn excluded fiom tht'
i dea oflif e? l. if e and deat h, successor lailur c in t he st r ugglelbr
js
survi val- ar e t hese value- neut r alconccpt s' even it st lccess
reducc<lt o not hing m or e t han cont inued exist encel'l) oes[ ) 'r r -
r cv, al hir r hc, ughtor does it \ ( r gg( \ t t hr t ( \ ( n lof
rri n' . l angr r . r ge
I)anvi n a causalexplanat ionof adapt at ioncould not abolisht he
"r ital nreaning"ofadaptation, a meaningdetermined trv conrPlr-
ison of thc living rvith the dead?As [)aru'in otrserved.\'ilri'rtionr
i n nat ur t r t r ul<l have r cm ained nit hout cllect hat l it not lr t 'en
tbr rrat ur . r \l elect ion. Wh. r t could lim it t he . r bilit \ of t his la'r ',
r)pera t ingr x, era long pet iod r ll t in] c lnr l r igor ouslr s(r t t t iniTing
thc \tr uct ur e, ovcr all or ganizat iollanr l habit s ol ever l cr eat ur ( ] r
to promote good and rcject evil?;''
A n d l) ar r vin's\ \ 'or k ends \ \ 'it h a coDt r ilst :"uhilc t his planet
hasgone circling on according to thc fixed larv ol gr;vitl, lrom
so simplc a beginningendlcsslbrms most beautifuland most \\1)n-
derlul havebeen arrdarc bcing evolvcd."
In suggestingthat individual variations,deviationsiD \tructure
or i nst inct , ar c usclul becauset hcv vield a sur vivaladr . r nr agcin a
$orld in rvhich rclations of organism to organismarc the most
i mpor t ant of all causcsof changein living beings,l) ar r vin int r o-
duced a nervcriterion ol'normalitv into biologv, a criteritln bascd
on thc living creaturc'srclation to lil'e and dcath. Bv no means
did he eliminatc moralitv fi"omconsiderationin dctelmining thc
object ofbiologv. Beloret)aru in, dcath u.asccrnsiclereclto lre thc
regulatorof the quantitv of lifii (Buflbn) or the sanctionimposed
lbr infiactions of nature's ordcr, thc instrument of her cquilib-
r ium ( l- inn a e u s ).Ac c o rrJ i n gto D a r$ ,i n ,death i s a bJi ndscul ptor
ol living lbrms, lbrms elaboratcdwithout preconceivcdidta, as
tleviationsfkrm normalitv are convcrtcd into chancesfbr sun ival
in a changedenvironmcnt. Danvin purged lrom thc concept of
adaptationanv rcfcrenceto a preordaincdpurpose,but he did not
separatcit complctelv from the concept of nomalitv. In thc spirit
of Danvinism, horvcvcr,a nonn is not a flxcd rule but a transi-
t iv e c apac i ty -fh
. c n o rm a l i ty o fa Ii v i n g thi ng i s that cl ual i tvofi ts
rclation to the environmcnt $hich enablt'sit to gcnerateclescen-
dant s ex hi b i ti n g a ra n g eo fv a ri a ti o n sa n d standi ngi n a nerv rel a-
tion to their rcspcctiveenvironments,and so on. Normalitv is not
a qualit v o fth c l i v i n g th i n g i ts e l l b u t a n aspectol ' the al l -encom-
pas s ingr c l a ti o n b e tn e c n l i fc a n d d e a th as i t afl ccts the i ndi vi d-
ual lifi firrm at a given point in rime.
T hus , t h e e n v i ro n mc n t d e c i c l e s ,i n a nontel eol ogi cal u.ay,
rvhich variationsrvill sun i,r'e,but this docs not necessarilymean
that evo]ution does not tenrl to create an org.rnicorder firm in
it s or ient a ti o n i l p re c a r-i o u isn i ts i n c a rnati ons.Il crcdi tv i s an
uninterruptecldclcgationol'orclinalpou.er.What diflcrcncc does
it makc if, in SalvaclorLuria's rvorcls,"evolution operatesrvith
t hr eat s ,no t p ro n l i s e s " ? 5 7. f.
.]
The plrvsiologists took thcir inspirationliom a distinction flrst
m adc br Xa v i e rB i c h a t:
Therearc tno kindsoi lili phcnomcna: (l)the st.rtcol hcalth,and
(2) tht statcofsickness.
Ilence,thcrcarctrvodistinctscicnces:phvs-
iologv ,rrh i c h i s c o n c e rn c d
rv i th p h c n o mtnaof the l i rst state,and
pathologv, s lrichis conccrncdu ith thoscoi the scconci.l'hehistory
ol phcnomcna
in w hich thc vital lbrceshavcthcir naturaltypc Ieads
us to that ol phcnomcn,r
in * hich thosclorccsaredistortecl.
Norv,
onh t hc lir st hist or vcxist s;t hc secondis
scicncr : s,
i n thc phvsical
to be Phvsiologv
lbun<|. is to thc motion of living bodics
norvherr:
drnanlics,hvllraulics, hvdrottatics andsttfbrth. . .
\r'h.ttastronomv,
.1reto the motionsof incrt bodies.The l:rttcrh.rvcno scicnccthat
to thcm ls PathologlcorrcsPontlr to thc Ibrmer.l8
corrcsponds
s eed it h Bichatt hat t her e exist vit al
B ut not a ll phvsiologist agr
fbrcesnot subjcct to thc lan'sof Phvsics.Here I must citc Claude
B ernarcloncc m or c, l) ecausehis posit ion is so up t o r Jat e.He
admi tted, lir st ol'all, dr at vit al Phenom enaar e sub, cct onlY t o
phvsi caland chem icalcauses,but hc alsoheld t hat t hc or ganism
cl oel ops f iom t hc egg accor dingt o an im m ancnt design,a plan,
a rcgul.rritv,u'hich is responsiblelbr its ultimatc otganiz.rtion,for
its h.rrmonv,pcrsistenccan(I,il neetl be, rcstoration.
What Bcrnard dcscribed in imagcs is todat cxplained bv the
theoremsol macromolcculat-biochcmistrv. Like thc mct.rphoro1'
the " i ntcr nal m old, " t hc im agesof "dcsign, " "plan, " "guiding
idoa" an<l"or<ter"are gircn rctroactivelcgitimacv bv the trrnccpt
ofa prog r amcn( o( le( lin sequcnccsof nucleot idcs. ; 'r l: or t he lir - st
ti me i n t he hist or vof biologv, . r llt he pr oper t icsol living t hings-
r epr oduct ion,her edit ar ycont inuit ! - can
gro\\' th,or ganiz. r t ion,
bc cxpl . r inedin t er m sol m olecularst m ct ur e,clr em icalr cact ions,
enzymcsand genes.lltlcoloo.varu1Rationalit.v,
1>p.lj6-)91
ln lhe t*enticth ccntur.t
[79] l hc level ol'object ivit \ nt $hich t he opposit ion bet uccn
normal .rndabnormaluas lcgitinrrtc uas shilied lionr the surf.rce
to the dcpths, lrom thc <lcvelopcrJ organisnrto its germ, from thc
macroscopict o t he ult r am icr oscopic.Nou it is t hc t r . r nsm ission
of thc htreditarv mcssage, thc procluctionof thc gcnetic progranr,
that (l et er m incs. what is nor m al an<lr lhat is a dcviat ionlr om t hc
norntal.Somehum.rnchromosornalanomalit:ssuclras mongolism
2rl
c an be obs e n e dd i rc c tl v i n th e c l i n i c . Others,suchas K l i nefcl tcr' s
s r ndr om e , a re to l e ra trd rv i th o u t a p p a renti l l efl cct and mani -
lest rhemselvesonh in spccial ecological circumstances.As for
gcnetic anomalies,I shall mention only "innate errors of metab-
olism" - to usc the phrasethat Archibald Edward G.rrrodcoincd
in 1909 - that is, specific biochemical lesions that result from
thr presenceof a mutant gene, which is called "abnormal" not
ro much becauseof its statistical rarity as becauseof its patho-
logic al or e v e n fa ta l e l fe c ts (fo r e x a m p le.hemophi l i a, H unri ng-
t on' s c hor e a a n d s o o n ). A n e w n o m e n c l atureol di seasei s thus
established,referring diseasenot to the individual consideredin
its totality but to its morphological and functional constituents:
diseascsol the hcmoglobin, hormonal diseases
(such as hypcrthv-
roidism), musclediseases
and so forth. Gene murationsthat block
chcmical svntheses
by altcring their cnzymecatalystsare no Ionger
intcrpreted as deviations irr l\,laupertuis'ssenscbut as crrors in
r c . r dingt hc g e n e ti c " me s s a g e ,"c rro rs i n the reproducti on crr
c opy ing of a te x t.
The term "crror" docs not implv that scicncehas rcturned to
the Aristotclian and mediet'alnotion that monstersare errors of
nature, fbr the failure here is not somc lack of skill on the part
of the artisanor architect bur a mere copvist'sslip. Still, the nerv
s c ienc eof l i v i n g th i n g s h a sn o t o n l v n o t el i mi nated thc contrast
beoveen normal and abnormal but it hasactuallv groundt'd that
c()ntrastin the structure ol livinq things themselvcs.no [/deolog,r,
ctndRotionality,pp. 140-4l]
A New Historical Crux
[80] Perhapsthe epistemologistmav norv be allo*'ed to remain
skepticalabout dogmatic rcductionist viervs,given nvhatcan be
lear nedif r v c l o o k a t th e h i s to rv o f b i o l ogv, w i thout any si m-
plif y in{ a p ri o l i a s s u mp ti o n s ,i n l i g h t o f the vari ousm.rni festa-
2 r4
ti ons of r r h. r t I h, r vepr oposeclc: r lling t he pr inciplc of t hcm at ic
conser\'(rtion.
I anticipat cone possibleobject ion, hor veverI' n looking lbr a
clistinctiveconcept of normalit) in biology, have I not confuserl
the i ssu cby consider ingdif f er ent or der s of biological object si
r\stronomersfiom Sir William Herschelto EclrvinHubble rcvoltr-
ti oni zedt heir disciplinebv m agnif yingt heir object t o an unim ag-
i nabl e degr t c, r evealinggalaxiesbevond r lr c solar svst eman<l
mct.rga laxieslr cvond t he galaxies.Bv cor '\ t r dstbioloSist
, sha\ c
di scorer edt he nat ur eo[ lif e b1'r r . r kinqt hcir object ssm al] ( 'r , t n( l
smal l cr :l>act cr iumgene,
, enr vm e. I n t he pr ecedingdiscussion,
am I dcaling rvith observationsat one level and explanations.rt
another ?Nor m alit v appcar st o bc a pr opcr t v of t he or ganism ,
btrt i t c lisappcarrsvhen *e look at t he elem ent st h. lt m ake uP
that organisnr.
At nll lcv(ls, horrever,biologistsh:rveidenrifiedordcring 5truc-
(ur(s th . r t ,r vhilc gcnr 'r alh r eliahle,sot r r et inr es
l) il. The conccpt
to rctrr to th,.'stortlcring structures.No
ofnornralitr is irrrcD<lcd
suchconcept is neededin t he epist er nologvof phvsics,Bv int r o-
rJrrcingit as I havedone here, I in no \1ir! intend to dcnv that biol-
ogv is bascdon phvsicsand chemistry. I do intend to Preventthe
t o hist or r '.I n t he
coal csc ingol $r 'o pr opcr lvdist inct appr oaches
history o{ biologr',the pseuclotheoretic.rl content of prescientific
of st r uct ur al and t unct ional nor m alit \ ' \ t '45
concep t u<r liz. r r ions
abanclc'ncd, but the conccptualizatiorrsthcnrst'lveslrate heen pre-
senerl, in "displaced"fonr, as inclicesol the objectivcuiriquencss
ofthc l iving or ganism .Dm it r v N{endclevev's per ior iict able docs
not j ustilv l) cm ocr it us'sint uit ions . 1 posleot i, bt r t t he decoding
of the gcnetic program cloesproviclea portcriorijustiflcation of
C l audcBer nar d'sm et aphor s.Evenuit hin t he t er r nsof a m onist -
i ndeeda nr at cr ialist- epist cm olog\ ',
phr sicsr em . r insr adicallvclif -
fcrent fr om biolo{v, Phvsicsr "aspr or lucet l,som et im csat r isk oI
2t{
lile and li mb , b y Ii v i n g th i n g s s u b j e c tto si cknessand death, but Pa nr F oun
sicknessand dt'ath are not problems of phvsics.Thev are prob-
lem so1b i o l o g v .
Betseen the bactc'riain a laboratorvculture and the biologists
rr.ho obscn'e them, thcrc is a rvhole rangc of living things per- In te r p r e ta ti o n s
m it t ed t o e x i s t b v th e fi l te r o f n a tu ra lscl ecti on. I' hei r l i vesare
gov er nec lb v c c rta i n n o rm s o f b e h a v i or and adaptati on.(Jues-
tions about the vital meaningof thosenorms, though not directly
m at t er s o f c h e mi s trv a n d p h v s i c s ,a rc questi onsof bi ol ogv. A s
Nt ar jor ie C re c n c p o i n ts o u t, a l o n g s i dethe bi ochemi sts therc
is room in biologv fbr a FreclerikJacobusBuvtcndijk or a Kurt
Goldstein.6rHistorv sh<r.rvs
that she is right. lldeolog.v
and Ration-
alit.v,pp. 14)-141

2 t6
 Crr,qprrn TrN
I,i

Ren6 Descartes

Relotions between Theory and Technology

[81] W hat r lid Descar t esknor v about t echnologv,and uhat did
hc l rop e t o lear n liom it ? I I is cor r espondence,
r er eaclnit h t his
qucstion in mind, givcsa strong imprcssionof a man r",ith a u'ide
curiositv al>outpractical techniques and keen to discover prin-
ciples or larvsthat might account fbr thcir cflicacv. The subjects
that rccur m ost f r equcnt lvin his m cdit at ionsar e, ol cour se,t he
gri nrl i ng ol lcnsesf br opt ical inst r um cnt s,t he const r uct ion of
machi n esand t he ar t of m edicine, Yct he also f bund in t hc r ou-
tincs of peasantsand solcliersand the lore of travelersmaterial
lirr comparisonanclopportunities to put his theoriesto the test.
The influence ol the soil on thc gro\\'dr ol transplantedplants,
thc m.rturation of fiuits, the separationof materi.rlso[ diffi'rcnt
dcnsi tv in t he m anuf act ur eof but t er , t he r vaya chilcl'slcgs f lail
rvhi l e m ount ing a hor sc, t hc r inging of bells in or dcr t o cause
thuncl c rclouds t o bur st - t hcsc com m onplaccsof r ur al lif e pr o-
vi cl cd l ) escar t esr vit h occasionsf br r ellect ion. As a soldier , he
rubbed t he t ip of his pike r vit h oil and not iccd spar ks.And. r s a
rcsi(lentof Amstcrdam, he rvasauarc ofall that a great port had
to offer in the rvavofpractical and luxurv goods,and ofall that a
popu)ation that each day u clcomecltravclcrsfiom the antipodes

2t9
could tca(h .rbout hum.tndivcrsitv.With astonishmentand admi-
r at ion \ 11 \1 a tc h D e s c a rtc sa p p l y h i s ! crupul ousl v methodi cal
int c lligen c c ' to th e m o s t d i v c rs ca n d s pcci al i zrdtechni calprob-
lerns:smoking chimncvs,watcr pumps and marshdrainagc,mcdi-
cal diagnosis,dnrgs,allcgcrllvmiraculouslountains,automata,thc
, e v e l o c i tv ofbul l cts, thc strcngthof
t r ajc c t or yo l c a n n o n b a l l sth
a srtord thrust, thc sound of bells. l)escartes'sinterest in artil-
lerv, mtrlicinc anrl automata lvas, of course, sharc'rlbv many of
his c ont em p o ra ri e si n F ra n c ea n d l ta l t; b ut underl vi nghi s atten-
t ion t ( ) t he m o s t n ri n u te d e ta i l sa n c lp robl emsu,asa comprehcn-
s iv e c loc t ri n ei n c o rp o ra ti n gth e s ma l l estdetai l sand di ffi cul ti cs
of phvsicsand mctaphvsics.Yct his ambition to achi<:r'e
mastery
ofthc natural rvorld scemsalm()stm(xlestin comparisonrvith his
dreams:to rL'storesight to the blind, to vie\i the animalson the
m oon ( i1 a n t), to ma k c me n rri s e a n d happy through medi ci ne,
to llv like a bircl. Nledicalobserv.rtionsare scatteredthroughout
his *or k . H e c o n l e s s e dto th e Ma rq u essof N eucastl e that the
primarvpurposeol his stuclieshaclalrvaysbeen to presenehealth,l
and hc probabll bclir:r'cd,as Constantijn I luvgcnsrcportcd, that
" t hat v t ' x i n gc u s to m ,d e a th ,* i l l o n c d a v di sappcar"(l l , 550). I{i s
t ec hnic alp re o c c u p a ti o n sw i th o p ti c s c a n be l i rund i n hi s corres-
pondc nc crv i th D a v i d F e rri e r(1 5 2 9 -1 6 3 8)as rvel las i n the Opti cs.
As fbr his rcscarchand cxpcrimcnts rvith mar:hincrv,apart fiom
the f:rrit'ltrt'atiscon lifiing cngincsrvrittcn fbr Iluvgcns in 1637,
*c havconlt Adricn Baillet'saccountof t)escartes's relationsw.ith
, e k i n g ' s e n g i n e e r(1 , 2 0 9, 214, 218). B .ri l l etl i sts
V illebr ess i e uth
t hos c of V i l l c b rc s s i c u ' si n v c n ti o n sa l l e g cdl y< l ucto suggesti ons
fiom Dcscartes:a \latcr llump, a * hcr:lcdbridgc fbr usc in attack-
, p o rta b l c fb l d i n g b o a t f i rr crossi ngri versand a
ing f br t r c s s c s a
$agon c ha i r fi rr th c tra n s p o rt o f rv o u n declsol di ers.Thi s bri cf
risumi of l)cscartes'stc'chnologicalinterests,insignificantthough
it mav sct:m, is nt'vertheless\\,orth remcmbcring bccauseit uas
7 zc)
l )cscartc s'sr lillingnesst o "lo*cr his t hought t o t he leastol t he
mechanics'invent ions" ( 1, 185) t hat enableclhim t ( ) ( ( ) ncr ivc of '
the rel at ionbr : t r , ecnt heor l and pr act icein. r t av t hat is im por
tant not o nly lbr under st andinghis t hought but f ir r gr aspingt he
natLrre r ef lect ion in gcncr al.
of phil( ) s( ) Phical
Il orl did l) cscar t esconceiveof t hc r clat ion bet t een t heor y
.rnrltechnologv?lb ans\r.erthis questi()n,lct us turn to the texts.
In anv nu nr berol passages
he clepJor edt hc f iilt r r c ol ar t is. r Ds
to
It'arn fi-om rvhat rvasknou n about thc matrria]s anclphenomena
thcv ust' din daill'pr act icc.All pur posiveact ion, he m aint aincd,
shoul dbc subor dinat et o it s associat edscir : ncc.I I c h. r dcont em pt
l br techniquer lit hout under st (
anding 1, 195)and invent or sr ''it h
out meth od ( X, 180) anr l r vascxt r em elv r var v ol ar t isansu'h<r
rcfi rsedto t ake his clir ect ions( 1, 501,506) . f hc m ost signif icant
passages in this regardare to be fbund in thc Ru/crfor thc Dircc-
tion (t tfu tllind. [:rom thc outsct, I)cscartescontraststhe diversit\
of tcchnologicalskills uit h t he unit v of t hcor ct ic: alundcr st and-
ing and proposesusingtheorv t() achicvctotal knou lcdge.As each
acqui si ti ono1 t r r r t h bccom csa r ule of m et hocl,t hought nr r xt s
lnrm truth to truth, :ln(l it therebvacquiresthe abilitv to act rt li-
abl v and c f licient lv. . l his abilit v is t hc r csult of a susr ainecl
ar t en-
ti vL' ncsst hat t hc speci. r lizedar t isan,I im it cd nnd pnr t inl in his
vi cl s, set 'ksin r t r in t o achicvc.I n Rule Five,l) escar t esm cnt ions
nm()ngthe illt r sionst hat his r llet hod t enclst o clim inat e t hat ol
peoyrlervho "stu<lv nrcclranicsapart fr()m phvsic.san<l,r,r,ithout
anv propcr plan, constructn( w instruDteDts. . . ."1Counteringsuch
prcsumption is tlris a<lmirablcaffirmation <tt Principlcs ol Philoso-
phr' : " i \l l t he r t r lesol N4echanics
belong t o Phvsics,so t hat . r ll
I thi ngs tha t ar e ar t ilicial ar c also nar ur al" ( lX, l2l) . Th. r t is uhv
-l
I "onc must lirst cxplain tr'hatthe la.rr.s ol natureart .rnrlh()u nrtturc
ttsuallvbehavesbcfirreonc can leach lrorv those laus can be madc
to pr(xl uceunusualcf f cct s"( ll, 50) . - li, <louit hout r r n<lcr st . r nr ling
II
the rvhv of w hat he is dc'ing is the lot of the mere technician.To
promise rvithout pcrfbrming is the definition of the charlatan.
'Ib obtain effectsat rvill through understancling
oftheir causesis
the ambition of I)escartes.We learn what is technologicallvpos-
sible bv studving rvhat is theoretically necessary.
Thus fhr, there
is nothing in Descartes's
philosophy conccrning technology that
does not seem obvious, if bv obvious ue mean something that
hasbecome familiar ovling to modern philosophy'slong-standing
intcrcst in a themc that, from da Vinci to the Encyclopedistson
to AugustcComtc and Karl Marx, becamea standardtopos.
In [)escartes's
thinking, howevcr,thcre rvcreimportant restric-
tions on the conversionofknou.ledge into action. I)escartcssaw
obvious "difficulties" in moving from theorv to practice rvhich
not cvcn pcrfcct intelligence could resolvebv itself. Evengiven
perfectknowledge,the technologicalembodimcnt of that knowl-
edge would in some casescontain inevitable imperfections, No
Archimedeanmirror, even one polishcd by an angel, could burn
an object a leagueaw,ayunlcss it rvere made extremelv large (1,
109). Evcn ifan angel were to give instructions,basedon theory,
for building a stcclyardbalancecapableof rveighingobjects up
to two hundred pounds,"it is almost impossibleto be so precise
in all as pc c tso f c o n s tru c ti o n th a t th e re shoul d be no fi ul t i n
t he s c ale,a n c lth u s p ra c ti c c rv i l l d i s c re d i ttheory" (11,.{59).The
instrument must thcrcforc be calibrated empirically, Descartes
rccommends. Five vearsafter formulating a theorv of lenses,he
$,rote Marin Mersennethat in lensmakingthe gap between the-
orv and practicc was so grcat that thcoretical perfection could
nev c r bc a c h i e v e d(l l l , 5 8 5 ). N o tc th a t thc threc cxampl esdi s-
cusscdthus far - mirrors, lcnsesand scales- involve the theo-
ries ol optics and levers,u'hich were among thc earliestsuccesses
ol Cartesianscience.Evenmore explicitly, Descartesheld that if
men could not fly, the problem was not theoretical but practi-
cal : " One can indeed m akc a m achinet hat sust ainsit self in t he
loquendo,for birds themselvcs,in mv
air like a bird, metaphtisice
opinion at any rate, are such machincs, but not ph.vsice or moraliter
logucndo, becausc it would require springs so light yet so pou'cr-
l i rl that hum anscould not m anuf act ur ct hem " ( lll, 163) .
Descartesnever explained his thinking about the diflerence
tretueen scienceand construction, two human activities that his
philosophvseemsto suggestnot only stem liom a common source
but arc convertiblc,in thc scnscthat knorvledgecan be converted
into construction. Hence, it is up to us to clari[v his meaningb,v
l ooki ng at t he t ext s and com par ingvar iousst r andsof his t hink-
i ng. D c scar t esm aint ained t hat onc should bc able t o deduce
empirical rcsults from intuitive principles that he callcd "sceds
absolute]natures."An effect
of truth" or "simplc [or occasionally,
harl not been explaincd,hc hcld, unt il one could sayhor v bv an
act of God it m ight havebeen m ade dif f er ent br lt no lt : ssint t : lli-
gible. The celebratedpassageof Part Six of thc Discourse on the
in u'hich thc impossibilityof completelvdeducingelfects
.l4ethor1
liom causesleadsto acknorvledgmentof the need to "jtrdgc thc
causesin terms of their ef]ects" clearly inrlicatesthat technologi-
callv usefirl "forms or tvpes of bodies" mav bc impcdiments tcr
rnal vti c dcduct ion. Fr om f ir st causcs,t hc scient istcan deduce
"the heavens,the stars,an earth, and even, on earth, \\'atcr, air,
l i re and m iner als, " t hat is, "or dinar v ef 'f ect s, ""com m on and
simplc things." But rvhcrcasscicncc trcats matter as homogene-
ous and r vit hout dist inct iveident it y, t he t echnician,r r . hor elat es
mattcr to "ot r r use of it , " t r eat s it as par t icular and divcr sc -
hence thc need lbr experimcntal trial and crror. I'he passagein
thc l)iscourse
in rvhich Descartesprocee'cls from theorv to tech-
nologv is greatly elucidatcd, I thinL, L)vanother passage, rlris onc
from the Prncrplesot' Pbilotoph.r, u.hich proceeds in the other
di recti o n, f r om t echnologvt o t he( ) r \ ':
2)J

\lcch.rnics
l\lerlir:inc, an<1. in gt ner.rl,all thc artsin w hich knrnrltdge
rrf physicsrnal bc usclulfravebut onegoal:to applvscnsitive tndics
1) onc .rn()thcr in suchJ \'iv that,o\\ ing to natrrralcauses, \cntible
ciii crsar. ploduced.In tlrisue do just as\vcll il rhc scrir\ ol ca(ses
a si fi t .l 1 e rc
r husinag i n c di s f,rl s e tru c ,s i n ccthr scri esi s supposcd
t o bc s im i l a ri n s o l a a
r si ts s c n s i b l e l l i c tsa reconccrncd
(l X . 122).
I1, in manv ca\es,practice "discredits thcory," it is bccause"any
applicationof sensitivebodiesto one anothcr,"or. in other n'ords,
anv t ec hnica ls y n th e s i srv
r i J ln o rm a l l y i n c l ude unprecl i ctabl and
e permi ssi onl rom any t heor ist . But \ r 'her cdo such t echnologies
un.rnti(ipatc(l .'tfects,given that ue are norkirrg .rvithsubstanccs
about r v hic h n o t c v c rrth i n gc a n b e d e d u c e d.
Descartesalsobclievcdthat knorvledgeand construction were
r c lar qi in an ()th e rra \i h o w e rc n th i n g s cotrl < lbc bui l r rvi thout
knolr'leclgeof the theorv ofhorv thcr rvorkcd, anclrhis in turn
c ould pr ov id c th c o rc ti c a lr)p p o rru n i ri e sThi
. s, I thi nk, i s the l es-
son ol the Oprrcr'"hen reread in tht' light of thc problcm that
concernsus herc. Optical thcory bcganu'ith thc invention ofthe
m agnit v ingg l a s s ,w h i c h i n i ti a l l y u a s th e f i ui t of tri al and error,
and luc k . l' h a r i n i ri a l s u c c e s sw a s l a tc r b li ndl r copi cd. Y ct the
nt's inventionstill sufleredliom manv deflciencics,.rndDcscartes
belic v c d in t h c n e t' d fb r s c i e n ti l l c s ru d v o l rvhat consri tureda
good lens. I le proposedto (leducethe propershapeof lensesfrom
t hc lar r so1' l i q h t.T h u s , a p L rl c l l fo rru i ro u stcchnol ogi caldi scov-
er v lr r ov idc d th < :o c c a s i o nfb r " ma n t g o o d mi n< l sto fi nd out a
num ber of d ri n g s a b o u t o p ti c s " (V II, 8 2 ) . In parti cul ar,i t pro-
v ided Des c a rre s$ i th th e " o p p o rtu D i t! to uri te thi s treati se"
( v ll. f t 2, 159 ).
According to the Optr..r,knorvlcdgeof naturcdcpcnclson tech-
nologt in t \ \' o \v J v s .F i rs r, te c h n o l o g r p ro vi desi D stt-uments.
in
t his c as et he n ra g n i fl i n gg l a s s ,th a t l e a d to thc di scovervol new
phen( ) m c n,(rV l l ,8 1 ,2 2 6 ). Sc c o n <al n d morc i mportant, thc i m-
"the occasion"fbr thr'orctical
Pt rfections crftechnoio{v provide
researchai med at r csolving "dif licult ies. " Science,t her ef or e,
grows out of technology,not in thc scnsethat the true is a codi-
lication ofthe useful,a rccorrl ofsuccess,but, r,rthtr, in the sense
that technologicalobst.rclcs,sctbacksand failures lead to qucs-
tions about the nature ol thc resistanceencountered by human
arr. Obstacl c st o pr ogr essar e sc( n t ( ) I >eindependentol ht r m an
desirts,anclthis leadsto a searchfbr-trueknorvlcdgc.Scicncemav
l rter cl ai m to im posc discipline on t echnologiesbor n r vit hout
ori{inateTNot in the l.rculty of un<lerstandinq,
although that fac-
ulft might cnable learned mcn to surpass"the ordinarv artisan"
(V l l , 227), but , r at her ,in t he exigenr : ics
of / / c. Thus Descnr t es,
sho had l onl dr e. r m edol an inlallible nr edicalscjence,lelt an
urgentnced l br it r vhenhis hair beg. r nt o t ur n r vhit c ( 1, 43 5 ) and
hc sensedthat deathmight deprivehirn ofthc "more than cenrur\'-
old hope" that justilied his concernrvith his bodv (1, 507). Befbre
he coulcl u rite the Oprics,moreover.his failin11cycs rvhich rvere
easilvdeceivedhad intcrferr,'drvith his abilitv to pcrceive uselul
rhi n{s. S i nce"le cannotnr akeour selvesa neu body" ( VI I , 148) ,
\1'eInust au{n1entour internal orq.rnsrvith cxternai orgnns(Vil,
148; and supp lcm entout nat ur alones wit h ar t if icial ones ( Vll,
165). 1'he impetus to creire new technologicsstcms fiom man's
neecls,appetitesand wi)l 1lX, Principles of Philovpfir.,123). In his
theorv of tht' union of sor.rland brxlv, l)escar-res rvascareful to
cmP hasi ze the ir r educibilit r of t he em ot ions,and in his t heor v of
crror he stressedthe primal importanceofthe u ill. 1'heseempha-
scssuggesttha t he believcdt hat lif e. uhosc philosophvconsist s
in the desireto live rvell, cannot be apprehendc<l jn lqnns ofpur.
understandi n galone, t har is, r vit hin a slst em ol pur elv int eJlec-
tual j udgnr(nr s. Thus, t he convict ion t hat r echr , iogv cannot be
reducedto scienceand constructioncannot bc rtrluccd to trnclcr-
))\
s t andin g ,to g e th c r \1 i th th e c o n v e rs ebcl i efthat thc uhol e edi -
f ic c of s c i e n c cc a n n o t s i mp l t b e c o n vertedi nto acti on, comcs
do$n t o a b c l i e l i n th e e x i s te n c eo f a uni quc " porvcr." l .i bcrtl
and n il l a re n o t s u b j e c t to th e s a m el i mi tati ons as i ntcJl i gcncc,
not onlr,in thc human mind but alsoin God, For l)cscartcs,tech-
nologv $as alwaysto some degreen svnthetic and, as such, un-
analvzablelbrm of action, but I do not bclicvc that he viervedit
c()nsequentlvas unimportant; rathcr, hc sarvit asa lirtm of crca-
t ion, t h o u g h a d mi ttc d l v a n i n fi ri o r o ne.
If the fbregoinganal,vsis is correct, one (luestion remainsun-
ansrvcrt:d:Why is thcrr.:no theory ofcreation in Descartes'sphi-
los ophrl C )r, to p u t i t a n o th e r u ' a v ,r vhv i s therc no acstheti cs?
()l course,it is difllcult to dra* anv conclusion rvhatsocvcrliom
an absence- but there arc groundsfbr askinglr.hethcr l)(:scartcs
nr ight n r)t h a rc l e l t a n o b s c u res e n s et hat admi rri ng the possi bi )-
it r ol a g e n c ra l J e s th e ti c smi g h t h a vecontradi cted hi s general
t he< , , r\.[o r l )r' s c a rte sth
. e i n te l l i g i b il i tv ol real i tr deri l ed from
m c c han i c sa n < lm a th c mn ti c a lp h v s i c s.Irrrrhi nr, movenrent,al ong
s it h ex te n s i c rna n c ln u mb e r, u a s a l u ndarnental ,i nrui ti vc con-
c ept of n h i c h i r rrts s a l eto n c g l c c t a l l qual i tati vcanrl svnrheti c
aspccts.Anrl althoughhc sa\l.movementas thc sourceol all nrate-
rial varietr',he simultaneouslrprecludedhimself from nising tlre
issueofdiversiflcation,u'hich is one aspcctof thc pr-oblcmol cre-
ation. As wc knorl from the Discoursc on thc .Itethod,he candidlv
h
adm it t c d th a t g .o m c tri c a n a l v s i s a cli ts l i mi ts, but he mav not
havcrvishcdto ackno* lcrlgc,or admit to himsell, that the impos-
s ibilit v o f a " d e fi n i ti v e " n ro ra l i ty(s i n ceacti on normal ]vi nvol ves
des ir ea n c lri s k ) a l s o i mp l i e d th e i m p ossi bi l i tvof a " del l ni ti ve"
analvtic science(as he * ished lris ou n to bc). ["])escartes," Ira-
r aur , pp . 7 9 -8 5 ]
220
The Theory of the Animal-Machine
thcory of the anintal-m.rchine is instTarablt'li"om
Ill2] t)escartes's
his lamoustlicttrm, "l think, therefbrc I am." The radicaldistinc-
ri on bct \ acensot r lan<lbodv, t hought and cxt cnsion,im plics t lr e
substantialunitl ol matter, \'\'hatcvcrits lbrm, anrl thought, uhat-
cver i ts f unct ion. l Sincc judgm ent is t hc soul's onlv f unct ion,
there is no reasonto bclieve in the cxistcnccof an "animal soul,"
since animals,berefi ol languagcand invention, shor, no sign ol
bci ng c apableof judgm ent . a
The denial t hat anim alsposscsssouls ( or t he f icult v of r ea
son) doesnot im plv t hev ar c dcvoid ol lif e ( def inc<l. 1swar m t h in
rhe hca r t ) or sensibilit v( insof ir as t he scnsor vf ict r lt ies depenr J
,rn the disposit ionof t he or gans) . 5
Tht s.rnrelcttcr I citecl abovc rtvcals one ol tht mor,ll under-
Dcscar t st t lr r eslor
;ri nni ngsol- t he t heor v of t he anim al- m achine.
,rni nra lsr . lr lt Ar ist ot lc r li<llbr slaves:lr e r lt v, r luist hem in or der
t{) i ustil\ using t hcnr , ls inst r um cnr s."l\ 1r opinion is t r o m or e
cruel to anim alst han it is ovcr lv piot r st ot r . r r clt lt n, f r cccllr om
th< sup <r st icionscr l t he Pvt hagor eans,lr ec. r use it alr sr t lvest henr
of chc h inr of <r 'im c r vhenever t hcv cat r r r l. ill . r nit n. r ls.St
" r r pr is-
inglr',*e finclthc samcrrgument stood on its hcltl in .r lettcr ti<rnr
Lei bni z t o Conr ing: if r vc m ust look upon anim alsls sonr t t hing
morc th an m achines,t hen wc shoulclbecom e Pvt hagor e. r ns. r n, l
at t it ude is r vpic. r l, r i
gi l e up our dom inion over t he be. r st s. 6'l- his
\\t ster n nr an. The t hcor ct ical m cchanizat ionol lile is inst par -
abl c l i om t he t echnologicalut ilizat ion ol t he aninr al.N4anc. r n
cl ai m p ossession
ol and m ast er vover nat ur c onlr bv denling t hat
naturehasanv pur posein it st : lf ,anclt hen onlv bv r cgar dingall ol
naturc ot her t han him self - even t hat u hich appcar st o be ani-
matc - asa meansto an (:n(1.
S uc h an at t it ude just ilied t he const r uct ion ol a m echanical
mo< l elof t hc living bodv, incluclingt he hunr anbodr ' - lir r Dcs-
2)7
ca rtes, thc hum an bodv , if not m an h i m s e l f , r v a s a m a c h i n e .
Dcscartes fbund the mechanical model he rl'as looking fbr in
au toma ta, or m ov ing m ac hines . T
ln order to bring out the fLll significance of Descartes's the-
orv, Iet us turn now to the bcginning ofthe Ireotise on Man, a
rvork first published in I.cydcn in 1652 in the fbrm ofa Latin
co pv a nd only lat c r publis hed in t he o r i g i n a l F r e n c h , i n 1 6 5 4 .
He rvrote therc:
Thcsc men rvill be composed, as we are, o1 a soui and a body. First
I must describethe bodv on its orvn, then the soul, againon its own;
and linallv I must shorr how these two naturcs woulcl have to be
joined and united in ordcr to constitute men who rcscmble us.
I supposethe body to bc nothing but a statueor machine made
ol earth, u'hich God lbrms rvith the explicit intention ofmaking it as
much as possiblelikc us. Thus God not onlv gives it externally the
colors and shapcsofall the partsofour bodies,but also placcsinsirle
it all the parts requiretl to make it walk, eat, breathe,cnabling it to
imitatc all those lunctions rrhich seem to procced from matter and
to clependsolely on the intcracting movementsofthe organs.
We sec clocks,artificial fbuntains,mills and other such machines
rvhich, although man-rna<le,seem to movc of their orvn accord in
various rvars;but I anr supposing this machine to bc made by the
handsofGod, and so I think vou may reasonablvrhink it capableof
a greater variety ol movcments than I couid possibly imagine in it,
and of exhibiting more artistrv than I could possiblyascribeto it.8
Re ad ing t his t c x t as naiv elv as I pos s i b l y c a n , I c o m e t o t h e
conclusion that thc theorv of the animal-machinc makes sense
only by virtuc of trvo hypotheses that oftcn receive less emphasis
than they are clue. The first is that God the fabricator exists, and
the second is that the existence ofliving things must precede the
2 2tt
construction of the animal-machinethat models their behavior.
In other rvords,in order to undcrstandthe animal-machine,one
must th ink of it aspr cceded,in t he logicalas\ 4ellast he chr ono-
logical scnse,by God, as efficient cause,and bv a preexistingliv-
ing thing, as formal and flnal cause.In short, I propose to read
the theorr of thc animal-machine,rvhich is gcneralll interPrctcd
asinvolving a brcak u,ith the Aristotelian conccPt trl causalitY,as
one in \\'hich all the types ofcausality that Aristotle invokescan
be foun<|,but not simultaneoushand not rvhcreAristotle u'ould
haveplacedt hem .
-fhc text cxplicitly statesthat thc construction ol the living
machinc is to mimic that of a preexistingorganism.The mechan-
ical modcl assumesa livc original. Hence, Dcscartesin this text
mav be closert o Ar ist ot le t han t o Plat o.The Plat onicdcm iur ge
copies Ideas.The Idea is a modcl of rvhich the nattrralobject is
a copt.'l'he CartesianGod, ArtiJexmatimus,trics to equal the liv-
ing thing itself.The living machineis modcled on the living thing.
Thi nk of appr oxim at inga cir cle by m eansof a ser iesof inscr ibed
polvgons,each with one morc vcrtex than the prccc<lingone: in
order to conccive of the passagefiom polygon to circle, onc has
to imagine extending this seriesto inflnitv. Mcchanical artiflce
is inscribed in life in thc same\\'ay: in order to imagine the pas-
sagefiom one to the other, onc has to imagine an cxtrapolation
to infiniti-, that is, to God. This is rr,hatDcscartesappearsto mean
bv the final remarksof the above quotation. Hence, the theorv
of the animal-machineis to life asa sct of postulatcsis to geom-
etrv, that is, a mere rational reconstructionthat onl,vpretendsto
ignore thc existenceof lvhat it is supposedto representand the
prioritv of production over rational justification.
This featureof Descartes's theorv was clearlvperceived,more-
over,b\ a contemporarvanatomist,thc celebratcdNicolausSteno,
'who dclivere<f a Dissettationon the Anatom.yoJ the Brain in Paris
 = ii ; z
i1:zi 1; ='i i!iz ? =z:= :=;i:t+
ii ==
. =,e';:i
i=1 E? , =?:ii
: Z=i
i : t1:'.i:i=
: t:1': : :1=+;tii
: i 1
i i t E: e: E |. .,: -+i
i i l r =
7;.';1!':a!* 1=, : =
:,ii1 : = =l :: : vz': i
' it . .++
n t= zi= i i1 a; t=:i i =':i =i z=1=
=: =i;i-i;tii,:i,
ia ; i i 2 = i - t :
:17 2 : : : ; i ;
; = ,2 +i1;:a,-
a =, =iiiii= ==ii=rZ :
;t ;:-=,i
=, rz=:ti :: i ;=,1z ,at1z =a==:,i 2 ,i ; z
i=
+ ii : i = : , 7: a 2 1r=u= i
1r', ii i-:=i== t =i i,
==_:72 i j i 2 ,;,
=i : i : ; = ,i,
1 zi i : == i i i?ii
7 =i 'z= == it E; t 5t ; =i : "i: t=;:i tif ii : ;
itii i:i:i cii;'iis
ii?ii?ffiZii; ;!'+Z
:i ::y1:7i:iiliiz; i ;!=,i=ii
, liirt
?i=:i7+!zit+:i: ii2 i;i EE:
=Ei,
,:!=1,1;!ii:zi:ii1!i
: *ii i?'iiI i rTt?!:,s
r' 2+i+Ai ;=
i ; =Z:
 It is undeniablvtrue that certain biological mechanismsserve
certain purposes.To take an example rhat mechanisticbio)ogists
often cite, corrsiclerthe broarleningof thc fi,male pelvis prior to
birth. Given that the fetus is l-1.5 centimeterslargerthan the pel-
lic opening,birth would be impossibleil'a relaxationof the pubic
symphvsesanrJa po51s .. m,rvementofthc sacrococc;gianbone
clid not increasethc diameter of thc apertur.e.6ivcn a phenome-
non r v bos eh i o l o q i c a l p u rp o s ei s s o c l e ar, one can Jr:gi ti matel y
refuseto believc that the mechanismthat makcs it possible(and
that is essentialfor it to occur) hasno biologicalpurpose.A mech-
anism is a nccessarl sequcnce of operations, and to verifi, the
prescnceofa mechanism,one must detcrmine u,hat ellcct those
opcrationsproducc. In other words, one must find out what the
intended purposeof the mechanismis. The shapcand structure
of a machine tell us about its use only if we alreadv knou, how
ntachint'sol similar shapcand structureilrc used.Hence, we must
find out horv a machinc rvorks in ordt,r to deduce its function
liom its strucrure. lConnaissance,
p- llsl
The Distinctiveness of the Animo!-Machine
[84] Descartesbegan bv attempting to forrnulateu,hat he him-
s ell c alled a " th c o rl o l n re d i c i n e ," I th a t i s, a purel y \pccul ati ve
anat om ic . aal n d p h v s i o l o g i c a ls c i c n c e a s ri gorous and exact as
mathem.rticalphysicsand.justasreccptiveto conversioi into prac-
tical rpplicarions,or therapies.Bur rvhat rvasto be deducedliom
the phvsicsof the humarrbodv, namely,a determination of,.vital
utility," lvasin fhct present from the beginning in the subjcct's
principfes.ll:ormationdu riflete, p. 531
[ 85] A c c o rd i n g ro D e s c a rte s th
, c d i stri buti on of rhe spi ri ts
upon leaving the brain depen<ison severallactors. First are thc
ctlects ofobjects that stimulate the senses,or excitations,which
Descartescomparesto thc fingersof an organisttouching the keys
112
ol the i n st r um cnr . r l Secondis t he posit ion of t he pineal glan<l
i n tcl ,rtion t o t he br ain, t ogct her r i. ir h r h( st ar eof t hc glan( l's
ourcr surfaceiDescartesdcvotcda greatdcal of tjme to thc rlfects
of thc rvill, m cm or v, im aginat ion and cont m on senseon t hcse
vari .rbl c 5. r The
a inst inct s ar c t he r hir d and last lict or allcct -
ing the animal spirits. To understanriu.hat Descartcsmeant bv
i n.ti rt, t., r cr all hir r jist intt i, - r nbct r r eenr xr t r nt l m ovem ( n( \ an( l
j nternal nr ovem cnt s,or passions- IEr t t er nal m ovcm ent scan be
lirrther brokcn dorvn: rbey arc either expressivc(laughingor crv,
i ng, for cxanr ple) ,and t hus pur elv cir cunr st ant ial,or adalt t ive,
that i s, " u sef ir lf or pur st r inpr icsir ablet hinqsor , r r oiding har nr f l)
on(.s,"1r, which is to lbllou"'thc iD.rrrn.f.r of our nature."tr Thus,
krl l )estar t es,t hc phvsiologicalm cchilnismt hat dct cr m ir ecl t he
di srri burionol aninr alspir it scm an, r t in{f iom t he br ajn dt pcnded
on rl hat can only be callcd a biologicalt clcologr ( t he pur suit of
desi rabl tt hingsan<lt lr e avoidanccof har m lul ones) .This r r asnot
a l a;rse.O t hcr . sim ilar exam plcscan l>elbr ind clser vher ein t hc
Tteetise
on,{|on. ln the P m.tecogitdtionescirca oni-
llcncrctionem
rnalium, I)escartes invokes the connodo and incomrll,o<!o nltLtrdc
ascauscso f var iousaninlalm ovcm ent s,t he m cchanisntof t vhjch
i s crpl ai n cd in t cr m s of anim alspir it s. r rM ar t ial G ucr oult , m or e-
ort r, has poir r t edout t he r em ar kabJcsignilicanceol t h<,. lir r h
l,lcditotion.
To sum up. l)cscarresdistinguishcdthrce rvpesof fictors influ-
encing thc flou of aninralrpirits: erterDnlan<lcontingent lictors
lscttsoryexcirations),acquirtrl and individual factors (menrorv)
and naturalanclspecil) c lict or s ( inst inct s) .ln t his he shor r eda
remarkablealer t nesst o t he biological phenom enon, r f int er ac-
tion betlvccn organism and environm(,nt.
lf:ormotion<lurdflcrc,
P P .l r-l2 l
[86] A vit alist pr inciple of sor t s r hus r em air cd par t of t he
explanation of movcmcnrs thar, according to thc original
proj-
1l )
cct, lvere to bc cxplained exclusivelvin tcrrns of material la,,vs.
Gucroult is correct, then, rvhenhe saysthat l)escartcsbeganlvith
a conceptioDof medicinc as purc phvsicsrvhich he later rejected,
and, firrthcr, that "one ol his chief rcasonslbr confessingthe hil-
ur t ' ol his n e d i c a l p ro j e c t rv a sh i s g rrt rri ng convi cti on that me-
c h,rnicalconcepts rlonr: r,r'ouldncvcr suffice to cre.rter mcdical
s c ic nc cbe c a u s ec h eh u m a ni ro < l vi s n rrt p urr c\ten!i on but i n part
. r ps r c hop h v s i c asl u b s ta n c c ." r'F)o l l rx v i ngC ueroul t, perhaps,but
m or c hol< l l r'I, u o u l d a s k .rv h e th eth r e J ttcnrpt to rcducc ani mal
biologr tt.rmechanicsdid not revealthe resistanceof vital phe-
nomena to lirll cxprcssionin mechanicaltt'rms. I carlier alluded
to thc passagcin the Prrntaeco{lit.rtionesin \\ hich comrnodaand
incommodordtllr.rc\rere secn to influence the movementsofor-
ganic par ts a n d e v e n e n ti re o rg a n i s m s .roTruc. D escartes,* ho
pr ided hi n rs e l l o n t' x p l a i n i n g * h a t rre rroul tl crl l rhc narural
nppet ir eso r i n c l i n a ti o n so f a n i m a l s" s ol el r i n tt-rnrsof thc rul es
of m ec han i c s p o i n fe d o u r th a t " brutt' s haveno knou,l -
" ;,rn ,," l l
edgeof rl hacis a<lvant.rgeous or harmful" - nrcaningthat they are
nor conscilrLrso1 such thingsor ablc to .rrticultrtesuch knou.lcdge,
so thit !r hat r,tcobserveis sintpl\ an associ.rtionbetrveencertain
rnovementsand ccrtaincventsthnt enablcanimdlsto grolr'.21 Here,
horvever,r,r'crouch on vvhatis probablv the limit of mechanistic
ex planat i o n ,fb r. th e th re e a s p c c tso f a ni mrl l i l e and dcvcl op-
ment - consenation,individuationand rcproductionl) - point to
a distinctire dif'ferencebctrvccnanimal-machint's and mcchanical
onts. To be surc, l)cscartescontinuallv insistcdon the identit,vof
t he t \ \ o t v p (' so f ma c h i n e :" Si n c c a rt c o pi cs nature. and peop)e
c an nr ak e v a ri o u sa u trrma to n srth i c h m ol e rri thout thrrught, i t
seenrsr<asonable
that nature shou]<lcvcn pr-crduce
irs own autom-
atons,rlhich arc much more splendidth.rn,tttilici.rl,rncs- namelr,,
the animal5."ll Another passage
expresses the sameirlca:"lt is no
lessnatural 16ra clock constnrctcdrvith this or that set of rvhcels
211
to tell the time than it is firr a trcc rvhich grerv from this or that
sccd to procluccthe ipProPriatc lrrrit-"15But mav \\'e not reverse
the ord cr of t his r elat it >nand savt hat \ \ 'hat everis n. r t t t r , r l.t hat is,
in t hc anim al or ganismis also ar t ilici, ll, given t hat
i nech.r nic. r l,
anim.rl-machincs,'tre itrtontittonsconstnlcted,asit lrerc, br (lod?
r\nd i n const r uct ing t hcse m achines,cliclCiod not lllor iclc f ir r
indilir iLr at ior, r nt lr epr r xlr t ct ionllr t nct hlnical
th(i r conscr \ ', r t ion,
mcans?ln ot her \ vof ds,\ vct c not ccr t ain t elcologicalcnds incor -
poratedinto the assemblage of nlechanicalparts?Sincethoseencls
surpassour undcrstanding,holr'cvcr,cannot ancl:houlcl not the
in
' living t hings leavet hem out ol it s acc<lt t nt l'Tht t s,
sci cnc r .of
posi ti n gm echanic. rcquivalcnt
l slbr living t hings, Descar t esban-
ishc<ltcleologv liorn the rcalm ol human lino* ledgc onl\' to rcin-
statei t in t hc ( im m t r lir t elv f ir r got t cn)r ealmo1divinr 'lno'vlcdge.
11,rnorcovcr,a p.rorlv madc clock obcls thc samel,l\!s ()1nlc-
chani csas r r lcll- m at le one, so t hat t he onlr r val t o dist inguish
bcnvecn t ht t \ \ 'o is t o in\ lr le "t hc m aker 'sr lcsir e"r nt l "t ht 't t se
l br rvhich t lr . 'nr . r kerir lt endc( l"lqhis cr t . r t ionr ,it loll<r r vs
t h. r t , r nr
uorking m.rchincis .rn asstnrblagcol partscttrbodling i P(trll()se.
t hat <lic
W hat d cf inest he t n, r chineis not t hc laus of m r 'ch. r nics
tatc ho r l it wor ls but t he pur Posef ir r r r hich it u'r s bLr ilt .I f an
ani mal t hat livt 'sin t his *or ld is alsoa nr achinc,it nlust [ r t 't hc
embod im ent ol sonr cpur pose.Thc t act t hr t t hc pur poseclucles
both tl r e anim al'sn\ r ar eness does not
and hum an unclcr st ancling
al ter rhis st at c ol all. r ilsin anv lindam ent . r l \ \ 'a\ , lr ) r r ) t her \ \ 'ise
l no dilli'r cnct 'bct uccr - rt he living aninr . r anr
thcre v voulr l>c l l t he
<lcaclanimaf, bcrrlrt'n orrrctfurrircnrium antl tJactclio ortuorunl.
olgan-
C uerc,ulr ,I t hinL. r r . r scle. r r lr. r lat e t h. lr il. ir ) ct . , nsit lcling
i sms,rv eabsr r ltt t r om all t elcologicalconsir ltr . r t ions,r r r ganisnr s
(ci sc to b( int livisibleent it icsr "lf \ \ 'c r cm ole onc hoof lr om a
horse,doesit bccom c l, . r ss'hor selikc't h.ot r nht 'r lt ot ser l"l'-Anr l il,
i n the spt cial caseof nr an.t her c is no r r ir v t o avoi<lr cc( ) ur set ( )
r lt
"God's transcendentpurpose,namely,that the lau'sofmechanism C g ,q l r r n EL L vIN
alone should sufficc to engenderand preservemachines whose
parts are arrangedso as to firlfill the requisite conditions for a Auguste Comte
union of bodv and soul, that is, a relation of meansto end"18-
does this not implv, then, asGueroult suggests,that if rve assume
rhat machineslack this "same organizationand interdependence
of partsand whole,"zewe must acceptan "incomprehcnsibledivi-
sion" betu.eenmen and animals?Indeed, without such interde-
pcndence,u hich allorvsa mechanicalrelation ofstructure to be
transformedinto a teleologicalrelation of fitnessfor purpose,the
indivisible functional unitl' of thc organismbecomesinconceiv-
able. Thc inc om prehensibledivision is tolerable only when pre-
The Montpellier School
sente(lasan "unf;thomable mystery"that situatesman in relation
[87] Afier being banishcdto Nlontpellier fbr his role in the clos-
to Godrs\i,isdom.lo
ing ofthe EcolePolvtechnique,AugusteComte took courscsat the
In short, onlv a metaphvsiciancould have set fbrth the prin-
of Medicine, u'here Paul-josephBarthezhad taught until
Facr,rlt,v
ci p l e sof a m ec hanis ti cb i o l o g v rv i th o u t fa l l i n g a t once i nto con-
his death ten yearsprior to Comte'sarrival.Thc man r" ho actually
tradiction (contradictionthat must in any caseemergein the end).
introducedthe fathcro1positivismto biology uas Henry DucrotaY
Fervhistoriansol biologv havenoticcd this, and eren fewerhistori-
de Blainville,a former professorat the Musdumand the Sorbonne.
cally minded biologists. It is more regrettablc that philosophers
I l avi ng mct hi m at Claude Hcnr i de Saint - Sim on's,Com t c at -
havemaric the samemistake. lFormationdu rdflere,pp. 54-56]
tended Blainville'scoursc in generaland comparativephvsiology
fiom 1829to 1832.He admiredhis teacher'sencvclopcdicknor"l-
edge and svstematic mind. The Cours de philosophicpositive \\'as
in fact dedicatedto Blainville and Charlcs Fourier, and its fbrti-
eth l essoni s fi rl l of pr aisc f br Com t e'ser st r vhilet eacher[.. . . ]
In portravingthe erasthat prececledthe adventof the positivt:
spirit in philosophv,Comte Iikecl to sketch thc historv of biol-
ogv in broad strokes,dralr,ingon a keen awarcnessol the intcr-
relatedness of biological discovcricsthat hc took from Blainville's
lecturcs. A striking example can be found in the fifty-sixth les-
son of the Cours,rvhich concernsthe naturalistsoIthe eighteenth
century.l lC omt e excelledat giving sum m ar vdcscr ipt ionsof t he
contributions ofvarious scicntistsand at rveighingtheir relative

216
217
im por t ance .An ro n g th o s c n h o m h e s i n gl edout as prccursorsof
positivism rlcrc Hippocrates,Barthez,Bich.rt,Johann Friedrich
N'lcckel,Lamarck and, of course, Claude Bernard. Ihc range of
the citations provcsthat Comte uas genuinclv learncdin the sub-
ject, rvhencethc cascvvith rvhich he attaincd.rloftl rtrntageliom
rvhich he uas able to concciv(:of the history ofsciencc a\ a crfticd.l
historv,that is, a historv not onlv oricntcd torvarclthe presentbut
juclgedagainstthc norms ol'the present.Thtrs, in the fortv-third
lcssonComte's account of the controversvbetrveenmechanists
. r nd v it alis ts u a s p l a n n e d to rc v c a l th e "obvi ousl v progressi ve
intent" ol'the N'lontpellicrvitalists,especialllBarthezand Bichat,
rr.hoscuork llas so unjustlv clecriedat the timc in Paris.Ifrudes,
pp.62- 631
[88] In a note in the nventv-cighthlcssonof the Cburr,Comte
haileclthe illustrious Barthezas "a f)r more influential philoso-
pher" than Condillac, and in his prefice to the Nourcouri/dmcnrs
tle I'hommche praiscdit as a tcxt "ol eminent philo-
clela scicnce
sophical pouer" .rnd an "cxccllcnt logical theorv," lir superior
to thc "mctaphvsicirn"Condillac'sTraiti dcss_t;stimes.ln
the fbrty-
thircl lesson,Barthezis praiscdfbr havingcstablished"the essen-
s l ' s o u n tl p h i l o s o p h i calnrcthod, aftcr havi ng
t ial c har ac te ri s ti c o
s o t r ium pha n tl r d e n ro n s tra te dth e i n a n i tl ofanv attcmpt to di s-
c ov c r t hc p ri m o rd i a l c a u s e sa n d i n ti ma te nature of phcnomena
o1anv orrler,as rrell as havingrcduccd all truc scicnccto the dis-
coven of the actual lau.sgovcrning plrenclmenr."There can be
no cloubt rlrat it \\'asfrom a nrcdical treatise published in 1778
t hat Com t c to o k th c fl n d a rn e n ta lte n e tsof hi s posi ti vcphi l oso-
phr',rlhich hc bclicvcclrvereconllnned by Picrrc-SimonLaplacc's
1796 E\positiondu slstdmedu mondeancl Fouricr's l8)2 Thiorie
onalvtique de la chaleur.
It should norv bc clcar rvhv Comte, * ho characterizedGcorg
t:rnst Stahl'sdoctrinc .rs"thc most scientific firrmulation of the
2 J6
metaphvsical stateof PhvsiologY"'meintaineclth.rt Barthez's"r'ital
st at eof Ph) siolog\ lar t hcr
pri nci plc" point cd t o "a n. r ct aphlsical
remoreclfiom the thcological state tlran the lbrmulation uscd bv
Stahlassume<|." Unlike so manl ol his ou n contcmporarir:sand scr
manl ol Barthcz's,Comte rcfuscd to bc misleclbv a mere change
of tcrminologv.Hc did not believet hat Bar t hezhad m er clv sub-
sritutcd a ne\\' namc fbr l hat Stahl had called "thc soul." On this
point, hc nraclea prolbund anclPerrincnt remark: "For so chimer-
ical an ortlcr of idcas,such a chanqc in terminologv alrvavsincli-
cntcsan aut hent icm odif icat ion ol dr e cent r al idea. "
Barthez'sinvaluablehistorian,his fiienclJacqut:sLordat, points
out that Albr echt von Hallclr vas pr im ar ilv r csponsiblef ir r t he
mi si ntc r pr et at ion t hat Com t c avoided. I t r las von I laller r vho
\\'r-otcin the secondrolunrc ol'his.4ncrtonrico/ librart'that Barthez
bclieve<lthat rvhathe callcd the "r'ital PrinciPlt" r.asthc ultim.rtc
sourc,' o f t hc lil'e f br ct : . JrBut in t hanking Bar t hczlbl sendinga
copr ol f r is 1772 inaugur alaclclr ess t o t he Nlont pcllier . Facult ot
r
i \l cdi ci ne, "Dc I 'r incipio vit ali hom inis, " von Haller indicat cd
that he himsclf rvasnot so bold.rs to "accePt,lprinciplc ol a novcl
and unk nol'n nat ur e. "
N ote , m or eoler ! t hat r vhilc Bar t lr ez'sr lor k uas ccr t ainlt one
sourceol Comte'sphilosophr',it is rt le.rstplausiblcthat Barthez's
F.\position r:lcla tloctrinc mdtlicrlc, u h ich Lord.rt publishcd in 1ll l 8,
inlluenccrl Comte's judgmcnt of that rvork. lacqucsl-orclatuas a
profcssorol anatomvand phvsiologvat Nlontpcllicr r''lren Comte'
'rvhonas banishcdto Nlontpellier.in1816,attendtrl courscstherc.
Whcn Comte characterizedBarthcz'scxpression"vital principle"
as a mt: r c "f br m ula, " hc r Tasact r r allvusing t he sam et er m t hat
l -orcl ath ad used in cr it icizing von lllllcr 's l. r ilur c t o undcr st and
that thc phr aseim plieclno belicf in r spccialsubst anccor ent it r
rlistinct f}om bodv and soul. Comte encountcrcdthe teachingsol'
tht N ' l o nt pellierScl. xr olin i\ lont pcllier it sell, anclt hat , couplcd
I l9
rl irh his outspokcn animosiry toward certain lcadinq ligures of
t he P ar i sSc h o o l ,n ra v h a ' c h a d s o me thi ngto do rvi th the admi -
r at ion t h a t e n a b l e dh i m to fo rm a c l e a r pi cturc of Montpel l i er' s
rfoctrine. lEtudes,pp. 7 5-71)
[89] Comte rvasable to pcrceivethe clirect,authentic insight
into biological realitics that lay hidden bchind the abstractcon-
c ept of t h e v i ta l p ri n c i p l e . F ro m B a r thezas r" el l as B i chat, he
Ieatncdof the intimate relationsamong the conceptsoforganiza-
tion, lile and conscnsus.
This debt to Barthezmay explainComte's
tcndencr to prescnthim asthe sole rcpresent.rtive
of thc Montpel-
licr School. He overlooked,or pretendcdto overlook, Thcophile
de B or d c u .T h e i d e a th a t th c l i fe o fa n organi smi s.r synthesi so[
elementarr lives, an idea that delighted l)iderot in D'Alembert's
t)rearn,rvould no doubt havesccmed as unsatisfictory to Comtc
asdid the theorv of organicmolecules- and he rvould lraveraised
againstit the same objections that he lcveled, in the fortv-first
lc s s onof th e C o u rs ,a r th r l i rs t l i rrmul ati onscrfccl l theorv. l f
B ic hat d i s s u a d c dC o m te l i o m l b l l o rv ing Lorenz Oken, B arthez
overshadorved de Bor<leuin his mind. fhc concept ol complex
living things composedof organic moleculesor animalculessug-
gt:steda misleadinganalogvbctrvcenchemistry and biologv. t-ife
is necessarily
a propcrtv of the whole organism:"'fhe clementary
anim alc u l c srv o u l c lo b v i o u s l v b e e v e n more i ncomprehensi bl c
t han t he c o mp o s i tea n i m a l . e v e na p a r t fi om the i nsol ubl t' di ffi -
c ulr v t h.rt o n e r' to u l dth e re b l g ra tu i tc r uslcreate
t < oncerni ngthe
el'Gctivemode of so nronstrousan association,"\'ery much in the
spirit of Barthez,Comte held that "evcry organismis by its very
nit ur e an i n d i v i s i b l e rv h o l e , n ' h i c h w e di vi de i nto component
par t s by m e re i n te l l e c tu a l a rti fi c c o n ly i n order to l earn more
ahout it and al*avs rvith the intention of subscquentlvreconsti-
tLrtinqthe v'holc." The statementrevcalsasmanv taboosasit docs
scruples. IEtudcs,pp. 78-79]
2+ O
Biologicol PhilosoPhY
of t he t er m "bio) r 'gr " r t ilect ed a gr ou ing
[90] The invent ion
on the Part of phvsiciansanrl phvsiologiststhat their
a\l,arcness
subject matt('r was fundamcntallvdifli'rcnt from that ofthc phrs-
ical sciences.The coining ofthe \4ord suggests an assertionofthe
discipline'sautonomv,ifnot ofits indepcndenceComte'sbiologi-
cal philosophyProvidedsystematicjustilic'rtion firr that assertion:
i t connote d f ull accept anccof , as uell as a need t o consolidat e,
" the greatscient ilic r evolut ionr vhich,under Bichat 'sI eader ship,
transfcrredoverall prioritv in natural philosophv{rom astronomv
to bi ol ogr. "lr Com t e was not ent ir elv \ { r ong t o see t he disaP-
pointments he had suflered in his careeras consequcncesof the
fact that he, a m at hcm at ician,had t aken up cudgelson behalfol
the biologicalschool in the struggleto nraintain,"againstthc irra-
tional ascendancvof thc mathematicalschool, the indcpendencc
and di gni t v of or ganicst udies. "ll
C omt('s conccpt ionof t he m ilieu iusr ilieclhis belief t hat biol-
ogv coulcl Dot be a seParatcsciencc And his conception ol the
organi smjust ilied his bclicf t hat biologr m ust be an aut onom ous
sci cnce.The or iginalit v and f br ce of his posit ion lies in t he cor '-
relation- or, somewould sav,dialccticalrclation - bctrveenthcse
t\ro conccPts.
Comte took the Aristotelianterm "nrilieu" fiom Lamarck via
B l ai nvi l l e .Alt hoLr ghit nas in com m on use in sevcnt eent h-and
ei ghteent h- cent ur .rvr echanicsant l t hi phr sics o1 {'luids'it 'r as
Comte rrho. b! reverringto the nord's primarvscnse,transldrned
it into a conrprthensive,syntheticconct'Pl that rT'ouldprove ust-
lil to later biologists and philosophers When he suggested,in
the fbrtv-third lessonof his Coursin 1817,that the first duty of
biologv is to providea generaltheorv oI rnilieus,Comte, u ho mav
not haveknown t he u. or k of William E<lr r '. r r t(ls 1824) or [ t ienne
Geofl i < x Sainr - llilair c ( 1831) in t his ar e. r ,t hot r ght he r "'aspr <, r -
141
cl.riming Lam.rrck'ssuperioritv ovcr Bichat. Bichat'sclistastefbr
the mcthods of the eightccnth-ccntu rv iatromathematicianshad
led hinr to insist not onlv that thc distinction betrveenliving and
incrt \\'as legitimatc but also that the living and the inert rverc
flndamentalll antagonistic.Against this, Comte argueclthat "if'
all t hat s u rro u n d sl i v i n g b o d i e s rc a l l ,vtcndcd to destroy them,
t hc ir c x is te n c erv o u l db e l i rn c l a me n ta l lv
uni ntel l i gi bl e." r;
Comte's successive .judgmentsof Lamarck are revealing,holv-
ever,ol' the deeper meaningof his biological viel s. l. . . ] Bevond
the first conscquenccof the Lamarckiantheorv of the milicu -
n.rmelv,the variabilitvofspeciesand the gradualinccption ofnerv
v ar iet ies- C o m te p e rc e i v e cal p o s s i b l vmoni st, and ul ti matel v
mechanist,tenclencv.Il the organismis conceiveclofas being pas-
s iv c lv s ha p c db l th c p rc s s u rco f th c c nvi ronmcnt, i f thc l i yi ng
t hing is < l e n i c da l l i n tri n s i c s p o n ta n c i t) ,thcn therc i s no rcason
not to hope that the organicmight somedavbe explainedin tems
of thc incrt. But hcrc thc spirit of Bichatrosc up in Comte against
thc thrcat of "cosmologicalusurpation,"16
againstthc shouldering
asideof Larmarck'sinsightsin lavor ol'an uncompromisingmath-
cmatical approach.
Similarlv,Comtc held, like Bichat and follorving his lead, that
t hc t is s ue u a s th e l o rv e s tp o s s i b l el e v e l ol anatomi calanal vsi s;
he therefbre denieclthat the cell, rvhich he calleclthe "organic
monad," could bc thc basiccomponcnt ofall complex organisms.
I t \ 1asnot s i m p l v th a t h c u a s s u s p i c i ousof mi croscopv,u.hose
t ec hni< 1u ewse rc s ti l l rc l a ti v c l vp ri mi ti v r ' ;C omte' sopposi ti onto
cell theorl *.as primarilv logical. For him, an organism rvasan
indivis;blestructure ofinrlilr.lua./parts. Actual living things rvcre
not " indiv i d u a l s " i n a n v s i mp l e s e n s e .N ei ther hi s superfi ci al
knorvlcdgcof Gcrman naturc philosophv,especiallvthat ol Oken,
nor his reariingof Henri Dutrochct (at around the time lle was
prt'paringthc Cours),nor cvcn his readingol Thcodor Schrvann,
21)
to * hom h e . r lludes,enablcdhim t o see,in t he car licstf br m ula-
ti ons ofccll t heor v,t hc lir st glim m er ingsof a t heor l of "cJcgr ccs
" Com t e, t hc vcr v concePtof t hc ccll ir nplied
ol ' i ndi vi d ualit v. For
a nrislcadinganalogvbctrvccn organic bodiesanclinorganiccom-
17
pounclscomposedof indivisiblc molecules. lEtudes,pp. 6 3-65]
[91] Clear lv,t he icleaundcr lvingall ol Com t e's posit ionsor t
bi ol ogv rvast he neccssar vdualit v of lif c and m at t er . I n biologi-
cal phi l osophv,t he eight ccnt hcent ur v bequcat hc( tl \ \ 'o t em Pt a-
ti ons to the ninet ccnt h: m at er ialismant l lr vlozoism ,t hat is, t hc
(loctrine that rnatter is animate(lor that mattcr an(l lile are inscp-
arabl c.C om t e, likc l) cscar t es,bat t lcd on t r vo lr ont s, and his t ac-
tics \vcre, if nothing else,Cartcsian.I'he matterrlifc dualism uas
the positivistecluilalentof thc CartesianmctaPhv:iical clualismot'
extcnsi onan<lt hought . For Com t e, dualismu'asa pr er equisit eo1'
rrni vcrsalpr ogr css,r vhich t o him m c. r nt not hing ot hcr t han t he
subjugationand control ol'inert mattcr bv the universeof the liv-
i ng un< l e rt he guidanceof hum ankind."Wc ar e,at bot t om , t : r 'en
l csscapab lcol conceivingof all bodies. r sI iving, " r vr ot eCom t c,
t he m cr cn( ) t ionoi lilc ir nplits t hc cxist cncr
th.rnasincr t .bccause
ol thi n gsnor endo*cclr r it h it . . . . Lllt inr at clrliving
, beingscanc\ isr
onlv irr inerrmilicus,\l hich prori<Je rbcnr\\ ith both .rsubstr;rtcand
:r di rcct or indir ectsour ccol nour jshm ent . . .I.t evcr r t hingr r cr c
al i ve,no nr t ur al lau sould bc possiblc,ibr t he var i; r bilint h. r tis
rlNa\sinherentin vital sp()ntrDcit\is rcallvlinritedonlr bv the prc-
ponrl c r anccof t he iner tnr ilieu.l8
[:r' eni n bcingsr vher t 't ht onll m anif i'st at ionol lif c is vcget at ivc,
one [i nds a "r aclic. rcont
l r astbet \ \ 'eenliie'and deat h. " Bet ueen
pl antsanc lanim alst hcr c is sim plv . r "r eal dist inct ion, " *her eas
betrvcenplant s anclincr t subst anccst hcr c is a "r a<licalsepar a-
ti on." The t r adit ional clivisionol nnt ur c int o t hr ec kingdom s
24l
( anim al, mi n c ra l , r' e g e ta b l e )a l l o u ,e done to i magi ne a gradual
transition fiom one speciesto another along a chain of being;
Comte therefbre proposedreplacingthat tripartite schemewith
a ncw one consistingof tu,o "empires" (living and inert). He was
convinced that "vital sciencecannot exist u ithout this irreduc-
ible dua l i s m." re
In essence,Comte sau',betu'een Lamarck and Descartes,a par-
allcl that no onc rvould think of disputing today. Perhapsmore
perspicaciousu,ith respectto the future than accuratein his per-
ception ol the present,Comte anticipated the conse<luences
of
the idea that animalscan be conditioned bv their environmcnts-
that is, he fbresarvthc possibilitvoIbchaviorism.Thc assumption
of a dircct muscular reaction to external impressionsis incom-
pat ible, C o mte a rg u e d , v ' ,i th th e i d e a of" ani mal spontanei ty,
which at the verv leastimplies that inner motives are decisive."a0
This rvould lead to a "rcstorationofCartesianautomatism,which,
though incompatible rvith the ficts, continues in one fbrm or
another to mar our leadingzoologicaltheories."al
Norv rve can sce rvhv Comte ascribedsuch importance to the
theories of Franz foseph Gall, u'ho argucd that the fundamental
inclinations and drivesof human and animal behaviorarc innate.
His cranioscopicmethod, so easv- all too easy- to celebrateor
ridicule, actuallv stemmed fiom his principled hostilitv to sen-
sualism.If it could be shorvnthat certain areasofthc brain were
bv their verv nature asrociatcd \a'ith certain psychic faculties, then
one must ascribeprimordial existenceto those faculties.Hence,
nothing could havebeen more alien to Call's (or Comte's) think-
ing than thc l.amarckian idca that thc biological functions are
independentof the organsthat embody them (and may eveninflu-
ence the developmentof those organs).True, Gall did map cere-
bral topographvby studving the mental functions of his patients,
but in doing so his intention lvas to rcfutc, not to corroborate,
244
l -amarck 'sdoct r inc. G all pr ovided Com t e u it h an ar gum entin
favor of innat e apt it udes and, m or e gener alll, of innat c f t r nc-
tions - an argument that Comte elaborateclinto a guaranteeof
continued progressthrough developmentof a preexistingorder.
Comtc claimed to have achievedcomprehensive,critical in-
si ght i nto t he biologv of his t im e. lf I havecor r ect lv ident if ied
the grounds of his self-confldence,it should novvbe possibleto
statehis most important conclusionsin a svstematicfashion.First,
Comte believedthat he, follorvingGeorgesCuvier,had eliminated
ti:leologv from biologv: thc "conditions of existcnce" replaced
thc dogma of final causes,and the onlv relation assumedto exist
bctu ecn an organismand its environment, or betlveenan organ
and i ts fi r nct ions,r vasone of com pat ibilit y or f it ness,im plying
norhingmore than viability."Within certain limits," Comtc statcs
arrangedin such a way that
in the Cours,"everythingis necessarily
existenccis possible."lr'I'heharmonvbetu'eenfLnction and organ
"does not go bevond what actuallilb requires."alSince,moreover,
organismsdepend on their environmcnts, living things arc sub-
jr.:ctto cosmic influcnces.Biologv is thcrefbre relatcd to cosmol-
ogv; lrence, the principle that nature's lalvs are invariable,first
formulateclin astronomyand eventuallyextendeclto chemistry,
could norv bc cxtcndcd to biologv, thcrcbv invalidatingthe beliel'
that variability and instabilitv arc essentialto organic proccsscs.
Finallv,generalizinga principle borrouecl from FranqoisJoseph
V i ctor B r oussais,Com t e held t hat all pat hologicalphcnom cna
could be explainedbv the laus of phvsiologv.Thus, he argucdthat
the dillerence betu.ecnhealth and diseasewas a matter of degree
rathcr than of kind - hcncc mcdicine should bascits actions on
the analvticlarvsof anatomophvsiologv.
Yet, as even thc Coursmade clear, the verv organic structure
of l i vi ng t hings consr it ut ed an obst acle t o f ur t her pr ogr essin
Positive,experimental phvsiologv.An organism,Comte argued,
21t
is a c ons e n s uolfo rg a n s a n d l u n c ti o n s . The harmonv th.rt eri sts
am ong t h e l i n c ti o n s o l th e o rg a n i s mi s " i nti mart' i n a verv cl i f-
lerent scnsefrom tht'hartnonv that existsbcnvccn the crrganism
and t he m i l i c u ." l l An o rg a n i s m , C o m te mai nt.l i ned, i s a uni -
f lc d who l e ; to d i s s c c ti t, to d i v i d e i r i n to componcnt parts,rvas
" m er e in te l l c c tu a l a rti fi c e ." + 5T h e b i ol ogi st, then, must rvork
llom t he g e n e ra lto th e s p e c i fi c , fi o m the uhol e to the parts:
"Ilou can anvoneconceireofthe rvholc in terms ol its partsonce
c ooper a ti o na tta i n sth c p o i n t o f s tri c t i ndi vi si bi l i trl " ' 16B etueen
I r nm anu e l Ka n t.rn c l C l a u d < Be rn a rd ,C omte onct.agai n made
linalit y , i n th e g u i s eo f to ta l i t), a n e s senti alel ement ol the defi -
nit ion of a n o rg a n i s m.
This u'asnot the onlv place rvhere the positivist method vio-
lateclthe principle of rvorking fiom the simple to the complex
.rrrdthe knorvn to thc unknorr.n.In celebratingthe promotion of
nnnt { ) myto th e rl u a s i -p h i l o s o p h i c a
d li gni tv of comparari l canat-
onr . n s \ ' s te mrh a t p ro v i d c d a b a s i sl b r cl assi l vi n!
the nrul ti tude
ol sprcif ic fbrm,i, Conrtc was lcd to reject Cur iet's fbnd notion
that thc animal kingdonrccrnsists
ofa number ofdistinct branchcs
rncl to acceptinsteadLamarck'sand Blainvillc'sth('or\ ofa unique
series.Once again,his grourrdsfor making this choice involveda
s ubor c lin a ti o n
o f th e s i m p l e to th e c o m pl ex, ofthc bcgi nni ngto
t ht end: " l h e s tu d v o l m,rnm u s t a l rv a vsdomi natethc compl ete
s \ s t eDro f b i o l o g i c a l s c i c n c c , c i th c r a s poi nt ,rl rl el > rrturcor as
. qoal, " r ;Th i s i s b c ta u s t th c g r.' n c ranl o ti on of man i s " the onl y
immediate" datum uc hi\'(.rf Comtc thus clainredto be keeping
laith rvith his gcncral program,"uhich consisrsin al\1aysrcason-
ing fiom thc bettcr knorvn to the lesserknolvn," even though he
insistcdon arrangingth< lninral seriesin ordcr of <lecreasing
com-
plexitr - this in order to rca(l thc seriesas "revcaling a devolu-
tjon liom man rathcr than r perf'ectionfiom the spongc."lt rvould
slrin creclulitvto clrarva parlllel betrveenComtc's ipproach here
I4 ( )
and thnt ol Kult ( lolr jst ein,t o lind in r ht kr r ncr a phcnom cno-
logic.rlbioloqv ovantIo lcttrean<lin thc lltt< r a h itherto-neglecte<l
posi ti vi srinspir at ion.I n lict , Com t e had an idea, albcit a cc'n-
fi se< lone , ol r r her e he , "Tas
going. f he int cllcct ualf lnct ion *as
thc di sti nguishingf eat ur eof anim al lif e. To int er pr . etall lif i'as a
sericsdcvolving from man, the perlect emboclimentof that firnc-
tion, \\'asto treat biologv assubordinateto sociologr',fbr thc truc
thcorv ol inr elligence\ \ 'ast o bc f br r nd,Conr t c bclicvcd,in soci-
ol ogv and nr ) t in ps\ chologv.I Er ur icrpp.
, 67- 71]
[!)]] Conr t e's biological philosophr , t hat <dif icr . :oI cr u<li-
ti on and lcar ning,hid an inr uit iveconvi( t ion r vhoscim plicar ions
l verefi r-r eaching.I he im pet usbehind t hat convict ionno doubr
stemmccllionr thc fict that a uto;rianspirit breathedlif'enot onlv
i nto the b old Jsser t ionsol a br ancl- nelscienccbut also int o t hc
ri me-tcst c(tlr ut hs oI a philosophvalm ostasold as lif c it 5elf .Sim -
pl v put, t his \ \ 'nst hr convict iont hat I if i't akcs placebut doesr r ot
ori gi narein t ] r t 'r r r r r lr l of t he iner t . r r hcr e it . r l. anclonst o r lcat h
l ganism st hat st enrllor n elser rhcr c. "Thc collcct ion
i n(l i vi (l u. rot
ol natura llr odiesdoesnot lbr m an . r [ 's<r luruc holc. " l- hisbclicl,
combi ntd r vit h t hc idc. r of a cont inuous,linear ser iesof living
thi ngsculm inar ing,logicallvas vvcllast elcologicallv,in m an, uir s
evcrrtuallvtranslbrmedinto the iclcaol lliocracv asthc necessarv
condition ol Sociocracv.This uirs the positivistcquir'.rlentof thc
ti ol d mctaphvsicr lidca ol a Realnrol l nt ls. f lr udcr , p. 73]
i;
l
Positivc Poli tics
I [9]] The super ior it vol posit ivepolit ir : s"r t sult s lionr t he l. r ct
that it dr.r(or"rJ
i uhat others lnrcnt."Thc ditcovcrv tlrat the inren-
tor ol positivr.poJiricsclaintcd as his orr n \\,asthat "thc natural
la*.s that govcn the m.rrch of civilization" are deriveclfrom thc
J laus ofhuman organization.Tb the t'rtt'rrt that "thc statcol soci,tl
fl
D organi zar ion
is esscnt iallv
dcper r clent
on t hc st . t t col cir ilizat ior r , "
(
! +'l
s oc ial org n n i z a ti o ni s n o th i n g o th e r or morc than an aspectof
human organization"not subject to major t hange" (so far as we
can see).What ne knou.of human organization,moreover,is the
result of a Dethodological decision "to cnvi5lgs rn11 as a term
in r hc an i m a l s e ri e s ,i n d e e d , fro m a s t i l l more generalpoi nt of
v iew, as o n e o l a c o l l e c ti o n o f o rg a n i zedbodi cs or substances."
S('eminglvfiithful to Claude Henri dc Saint-5inron's
terminologl.,
Comte gave thc name "phvsiologv" to thc "general science of
organizc<lbodies." But a diffcrcncc betrveenhis use of thc term
and Saint-Simon'sis alreadvevidcnt. For Crrmte, phvsiologywas
not just a discipline recentlv institutecl lbr the study of man as
living being, onc w.hosemethod could scrvc as a model for the
s t udv of m a n i n s o c i e tv ;m o re th a n th at, thc content ofphysi ol -
ogy wast() b('comethe nucleusofa ncw scicnce.Physiologvowed
it s c onr e n t to n re d i c i n c ,a n c lme d i c i n e taught thi s Icsson:" [-ong
havinghoped that hc might learn to repair anr disturbanceto his
nnd eveDto rcsistanv destructivelbrce, lman] finally
or-qanization
rcalized that his efforts rverc firtilc as lonq as they did not coop-
er.rtc u'ith thorc of his organization,rnd still more fi-rtilewhen
thc nro rverec.'pposed."
And further: "Thc fict that many illnesses
u'erecurcd in spite ofdefictivc treatmentstaught physiciansthat
everv living bodv sp,rntaneouslytakes porverful steps to repair
ac c idc nta ld i s tu rb a n c e sto i ts o rg a n i z ati on."H ence, pol i ti cs i s
lik c m ed i c i n e i n th a t b o th a rc d i s c i p li ncs i n rvhi ch perfccti on
reguircsobservation.And just as there rvert tr*o schoolso[med-
ical thoLrght,so, too, werc therc t$o schoo)sof political thought:
thc "po)itics of imagination" involvcd "strenuous t'lJbrtsto dis-
c ov er r em c < l i c sw i th o u t s u ffi c i e n tc o n si dcrati onofthc natureof
t he dis c .rs c " ;th c " p o l i ti c s o f o b s c rv ati on,"on thc other hand,
k nor r ing " th a t th e p ri n c i p a l c a u s eo fh e al i ng i s the pati ent' svi tal
strcngth [/orce vita]e]," is content, "through observation,to re-
movc the obstaclesthat empirical metho(ls place in the rvayof a
246
n.ltural rcsolution o[ the crisis." The linking of the terms "vital
lbrce" and "crisis" alcrts us to what is going on here: this was
Il i ppocra t ic m ediciner eint cr pr et edin t he light of t he M ont pel-
l i er S chool'sdoct r ine.
l n C omt e'st ext , t hc t r r n "cr isis" t ook on a pat hologicaland
$ therapeu t icsignif icancet hat it lacked in Saint - Sim on.I t uas a
$ tcrnr frei g ht edwit h all t hc *eight and deckcd out wit h ail t he
I maj estyo f . r r nedic. r lt r aclit ion.Thus, "nat ur e" r r as cont inuallv
invoked as the ultimat(: reasonwhv unfivorable political circum-
t;
stancc,ifailed to prevent "the advanccof civilization," u hich in
f)ct "ncarlv alwavsprofits fiom mistakesrathcr than being <lelayed
bv them." This recourseto natureis so basicthat it enablesComte
to naturalize,as it rvere, the most distinctive f'eaturcol human
historv,namely,the labor or industrl rvhcrcbysocietv pursuesits
cnds: this Comte describt'rlas"action on nature to modifv it fbr
man' sbenef lt . " This t eleologicalcnd uas "det er m incd bv nr an's
i rank i n the nat ur alsvst emas indicat ed by t hr lict s, som et hing
:1
of er planat ion. "[ . .. ]
not susce pt it r le
'[ his limitation of man'sporverto kno* ledge ol nature'slarvs
and prcdiction of their effects,hcnce to harnessingnatural lorces
to human designs,has m or e in com m on u'it h t he pr udcnce of
Hippocratic diagnosticsthan n ith the demiurgic dream of <lcna-
turing nature through historv.
But readingbetueen the lines ofthe text is not cnough. What
ol the sourcesthat CoDrtedreu on? fhe text quote(l ab,l'e con-
tainssuch phrasesas"thc political impetus peculiarto the hunran
race" and "t hc pr ogr cssof civilizr t ion, " lvhich "does not nr ar ch
i n one str aight I ine" but , r at her , pr oceedsbl "a ser iesol oscil-
l ati ons not unlike t he cr scillat ions*e see in t hc nt t 'chanismoI
locomotion." And Comte rcrlcrsto "one ol the essenti.rlla* s of
organi ze dbodies, " r vhich can be applied "cquallv r vcll t o t he
human racc act ing collcct ivclv or t o an isolat edindividual" - a
21')
 LNITEFPP!T

cJPacit Yas an jllher cnt

to thc P rcscnceot ocrfect thcm sclvcs.Bv int er pr ct ing t his
lan' t hat l i n k e d th c c J c l e l o p me not f s tr!' ngth 'ir,rp"r,y ot,tt. notr.,..:ut t"gani''trion' hc rvasable to kccp l'rith
that rtcll lrefbre he
rcsistance.Flom this I venturc ttl conclude
and Barthez's \\'ith the PreccPtsof Positivism'
addcd Anthelnrc Richerancl'sElinentsdc ph.vsiologic Fann'-
On D e ccm ber 25, 132'+,Conlt e wr ot t J'r cr lues- Pier r e
,\burtaur dlimcntrrlc la science tlc I'hommeto thc annalsof posi-
srrcietv ttxla,r is a long rrlv
to sal 'rbout ani- \ialat: "The state in rT'hichrvc {ind
tivism, Comtc haclreatl rr'hat troth authorshad statcol crisis" Bcc:ttlsc
movemcnt i n the fiom nom.rl,... Jt is. rather,.rvt'rv violent
m al m ov e mc n f. R i c h e ra n d l v ro tc o f " z i gzag of organisms'he
in his Nouvelle hc vic*ed organizationas a normative propcrtl
spaccbcttleen two Parallcl lines " And Barthcz'
de I'homnrect desonimou\' discussed .,,,,1d,r,r three diflerent occasionsch'rractcrize1>oliricalllrojccts
micaniqueclesmrtuvemcnts on firur tlcc'r-
rvord oscil- ()r ptacticts as"monstrositicS"or "monstrotts" ancl
.r'o"", ond reciltrocatingmotions' Comtc also usetlthe or behalior as"delective Thcsc terms
"
l eadi ng to sionscharacterizec<-rn<luct
lr t ion. An d n h c n h t' s p o k e o f th e p e ctrl i ari mpetus intimatelv-associatcd
to Barthez' r.erc borrorved lrotn tcratology,a science
improvemcnts in the social ordcr, hc again ref'erred Ceollior 5rint-
nttcanique'tricrJ rclute the
to u ith the emcrging lielrl oI enrbrvologti Eticnn'
tc, thc Uarthezrvho' in his Nouvclle humaincsh'rd b<cn published
(han that the ground I lilairc's treatiscon l 6 llonstrLtositis
irlca that animalsnovt {br no other reason a concept ol nor m al
Chap- i n 1822.Com t t ''sphilosophl clcar lv im plics
repels their ftet And again. it rvasBarthez- specificallv' I n lact ' il Conr t e' in t hc
[rorrou'cdthe asopposet tl o pat hologicalt lt velopm ent '
t", F.ru. .rf Nour.nur Uiments- {iom rvhom Comte of things as lre-
Piun r/r'stlrlour scicntjfiguc, invokcs the n'lture
lau r elati n gs tre n g tht() rc l l s ta n c e - he m eanslif cand bv
and pur- < l uentl vashe dt "t ' it i' bccausebt "t hings"
Tu r.,. r.,p,tht:n, Comte left thc Ecolc Polvtechnique ,ilil'",,h" n.""n, a distincrtcapacitvto persistin a ",t,tt,n;11" lircc'
the preflce to thc
suc(l the studv ol biologv' as he indicatcs in bv Fr angois
ti on.' Io bor r ou aD c\ Pr essionf icqucnt lr em ploler l
sixth and final volumc ofthe Cours<lcphilosophie Potirife At that nor m lt ive. ''Bv
P errour,Com t e'sc( r ncePt ualiza( ion is "im Plicit lv
i<lcr o( the organism
time, he rllscoverecland made his orvn an of man into
organi zati on' rcintc{rating the human into thc organil' the historY
t hat bc c a m cth c k c Yc o n c e P to fh i s th eorv ofsoci al ol ncccsslt \
appliquie d I'ani- the hi sto ll of t hings, Com t c best o\ \ 'cda guar Jnt ec
When Saint-Simor pub)isheclDc la phvsiolollic to rlo s<r
tr) on tht moral rlcstjnatirltl o{'tlrc sptcies He rv'rs'rble
t o c ,d l eirn 1 8 1 3,he di d D ot attemP t
lior . t t io nd c s i n s ti l u ti o n -i the positivc
flis concerption of \\'ith()ut contr.rdictirlnrlnlv becattsc,under cover of
imposc a triologicalmodel on socialstructure' an orclcrof meaningon an ordcr
his conception term "nature," hc supcrimposecl
an:',:,.gonir",lbodv" requircd no suchanalogv'and
ol larv.i'A. Comte," EtrrrJcs pfi;L'sophigrcr'pp 29a-91]
.rf "..ir"r" in.rpliedno ntccssarv relation to Pathology Comte'
jn torm'
on tlre other hantl, fbund Barthez'still in a metaphvsical
self-rcgulating The Positi vist DisciPles
the icleathat organizcrlsvstemsat-eto somc crtent Comte rl$cribed
i n l 80l ' f9't] ln the S.vstinrc ,positrIc(1851)'
tle polirttlue
or aut on o mo u s .An rl fi o m a l e c tu re t hat B arthezgave
dreu the tr.o voune phrsicirns, I)t. L,rttis-lugusteScgond;rndl)r' CharLcs
c nt it lc ( l " l )i s c o u rs s u r l e g [:n i c d ' l l i p pocratc" ' C omrt
asComte Robin. ashis <lisciples.In lil'18, the t'r'o men fbun<lcdthc Societi'
HipPocri(ic conclttsionr.rll orgatrisms(or orqaniTations'
to preserl cand cl c B i ologie,an or yaniTJt ionwhcJscr ePor t sand jot lr n'r lsgir e t hc
lik c r l t o c a l l th e m )h a v e a s P o n ta n e o us capaci tv

l (l
I to
most comprehensive and vivid im.rgervehaveofbiological research
in Franceover the p.st centurv or more. The Soci6t6'sfirst gov-
crning boald rv;s chaired by Dr. Raver, u,ho later becamedean
of the Facultv of ll'ledicinel Claude Bernard and Charles Robin
servedasvicc chairmcnl and Charles-Edouard
Brown-S6quard
and
Robin u'ere the secretafies.The group's first charter rvasdrafted
by Robin, and its flrst article statedthat "the Soci6t6de Biologie
is instituted fbr the studv ol the scienceoforganized beings in
the normal state and in the pathological state," The spirit that
animated the fbundersofthe group rlas that ofpositive philoso-
phy. On June 7, 1848,Robin reada paper"On the Direction That
the Founding Membersof thc Soci6t6de Biologie HaveProposed
'fhev
to Answer to the Title llave Chosen." In it, he discussed
Com t e' s c l a s s i fi c a ti o no f th e s c i c n c e s ,cxami ned bi ol ogv' smi s-
sion in much thc rame spirit as Comte had done in the Coursde
philosophie poritirc, and noted th.rt one ol the most urgent tasks
f ac ing t hc d i s c i p l i n erv a sto i n v e s ti g a tethe nri l i eusi n rvhi ch l i fe
cxistt'd. Robin evenhad a narnelbr this proposerJsubdiscipllne-
"mesologv."When the Soci6t6cclebratedits filtieth anniversarr
in 1899,t h e p h v s i o l o g i s E
t m i l e Gl e y rcad a report on the evol u-
tion of the biological sciencesin France,in which the impetus
that positivismgaveto thc subject is frequentlyalluded to. Gley's
rcport still makesinterestingreading.ae
In 1862, Charles Robin became the first person to hold the
chair in histologvat thc FacLrltyo[Medicine in Paris.l0From that
position he remained faithful to one tenet of Comte's biological
philos op h v i n h i s re fu s a lto tc a c h c e l l theory i n the dogmati c
fcrrmin rvhich it had been expressedb,vRudolph Virchor.. Robin
taught insteadthat thc ccll rrirsonc ofmany anatomicalcompo-
nents rathcr than the fundamentalcomponent of living organ-
is m s . I n 1 8 5 5 ,a s tu d c n t i n R o b i n ' ss c h ool defendeda thesi son
"The Gcncrationof Anatomic.rlElemcnrs."Its author, q'ho rvould
2t 2
Comteantl Positit'ist
l.rtertranslateJohn StuarcMill's book ,'1u1;ustc
v o Fr ench. subsequcnt lvachjeveda lim e t hat has
P hi l osophint
rcnded to overshadowhis earlv interest in biologv. His nnme was
CeorgcsCl!menccau.
R obi n u'asalso, along u'it h Enr ile [ . ir t 16, r he aut hor of t he
Dictionnairede m'ldecine,uhich in l87l supplantedthe seriesof'
revi sed edit ions of Pier r e lluber t N\ 'st en'sDict ionnair e.This
reminds us that Comtc's biological philorophl, also left its mark
on the developmcnt of lexicographyin Franccas rvell as on the
producti on of cr it ical edit ions of m edical t ext s and on t hc his-
torv ofmed ical scicnce.I Er udes, pp. 7l- 1) l
[95] With an author as careful about tlre meaning of r+ords
as rvasLittr6, one must take literally rvhat he said about his per'
sonalrel ationslvit h Com t c. O n at lcastt wo occasionshc st at cd,
"l srrbscribe
to the positivcphilosophv."sr e alsosai<ithat hc had
chosenComte's great book as a "model," ..rdding,"There, hap-
pi l r' , I tccl t hat I am a disciple. "t r He descr ibedhis allegiancer o
posi ti vi sm as a kind of conver sion:"H. 1\ 'ingbeen a m er e I r ee-
thi nker, I b ecam ea posit ivistphilosopher . "; lWhen Lit t r e cliecl,
his journal, La Philosophie pos;tilc,sought to counter rumors that
l re had con ver t edr o Cat holicismbt publishingit s lat e edit or - in-
chi ef' s fi nal edit or ial undcr t he t it lc "For t hc Last Tim c": "Tht :
positivcphilosophvthat kept me fiom being a mere negatorcon-
tinues to accompanvme through this final ordeal.";a
ll there u,asonc principlc of thc positivc philosophyset fbrth
in the Cbursabout which Littre neverexpressedthe slightestrcs-
ervation, and l'hich he tirelesslvdelended, it was the hierarchv
ofthe six fundamentalsciences,expressingthc historicalprogres-
si on of hum an knon ledge. What int cr est cd him , of cour se,n'as
the rel ati o n of biologv t o it s pr edeccssor s.
phvsicsand aboveall
chernistry but he mav havebeen even morc intcrestcdin the rela-
ti on of soc iologvt o biologr . This uas t he sour ccof his r lis. r gr cc-
25]
mcnt \\'ith Herbcrt Spencer,'r'ho arguedin the "Classificationof
thr: Sciences"th.rrhierarchvought to be replacedbv interdepen-
dcnce. Littr! held that no changein the relatire rankingol the sci-
c nc es \ 4, a sp o s s i b l e ,5 ;1 n dh g l a s a b l e to pt' tsuadeMi l l on thi s
point.5.'An immediateconsequenccof the hir:rarchicalprinciple
was that importing a mcthod lalid fbr the stu(lYof a lorver level
into a disciplinc at a highcr level $as "the
or stageof phenotmcna
greatestthc()reticalmist.rle one could nrake"!? Littr6's philoso-
phl of bio l o g y , b e n c eo f m c rl i c i n ea s rvel l ,can br: summcd up i n
one briel passagc:"Biological facts must first obev the larvsof
chcmistry.Anv correct interPretationmust respcctthis principle'
But the rcvcrseis not true: chcmical facts nced not obcv the laws
ol biologr, lirr rthich ther lack one thing, nanrelt' the char''rcteris-
tic of life."5"'-fhat "one thing" rvould Pcrsistto thc cnd of Littr6's
lifc: fbr him it \\'asan incontrovertible obstaclc,"the crucial dif:
ferencc bct* een mcchanismantt organism."l''Littri * as, to use
a modern tcrn, .rn implacableentnlv of "reductionism " In 1846,
lbr examplc. in a studv ol JohannesMiiller's Hondbuclrder Phvsi-
l-ittre cnnlc to the dcfcnse of thc "irreduc-
ologie des,l'lcnschcn,
ible": "lt is imPortant to dcterminc thc irreduciblc ProPerticsof
t hings . . .. Irrc d u c i b l e m c a n s th a t $ h i ch one cannot el l ecti vel y
r educ c . I n c h c trl i s trv .{ o r i n \t.rn c e .e f fecti tel r i ndecomposabl e
c om poun c l sa re c a l l e d i rre d trc i b l e ." 6l0n 1856,i n a maj or al ti cl e
on F r an q o i sl \{ rg e n c l i e ,L i ttre l o u n d that N l agendi ehad been
m or e an o PP o n e n tth a n a d i s c i p l e o l ' X avi cr B i chat l n essence'
Nlagencliehad lailed to distinguish bctrveen rhc occult and thc
, c i n l ma n c n t l l ro p e rti e sof l i vi ng matter' rvhere' rs
ir r edLr c i b l eth
tlichat harlrecognizecl the irrcdrrciblervhile crorcisingthe occult'
N{ agend i eh a d b e e n u n a b l eo r u n r,i l l i n g to stntca cl ear P osi ti on
on thc reclucibilitv olbiological phcnomenaro the la\a'sofPhYs-
ic s and c h e m i s trv o r o n th c i rre d u c i bi l i tv of vi tal organi zati trn'
Lim r i ua s a l s oc ri ti c a l o f l .((tn R o l ta n . thc author ol the medi -
25.+
cal thcorv knon n as "organicisnr,"firr ncglecting thc irretlucibil-
i tl ol the pr oper t iesol living m at t ef . Not c, bv t he r , 'av,t hat bot h
Litrrc's Dicriorrxrircde lo longut fron6oireand his Dittionnairedc
contain artic]eson thc rvord irr1ducti6lc.
rnr'r/ccine ["] ittrc,",4crcr
du ColloqueEm;lel.ittri, I 80 1- l,\ El, pp. 27 l-7 )l
[c)6] ln rvhatrt'spcctsdid Xavicr Bichatinflucnce Emile Littri'
.rndother posit ivistphysicianssuch as Char lesRoLr in( not onlr
b ut also t hr ough August eConr t c) ?To bcgin u it h, t hcr c
rJi l ectl l .'
.rlashis celebratccldistinction betr,.eentu<r fbrms ol lif c, vegeta-
ri vc ancls ensit ivc( or anim al) , t he lat t cr being subor dinat et o
the l ,rrme r . Lit t r c alluded t ( ) t his dii: inct ion in his. r r t icle on
Fl anqoi sN{agenclie,r T'her e
he cr it icizt d his subjcct lir r nor having
rcspccterlt hc or clerin r vhich t he luDct ior ) sought t o be st udicd:
in Phsiolollie,N'lagenrlic had taken up thc sensor\llnctions bciirrc
consi deringnut r it ior r . 6rllut t hc m ain t hing t hat t he posit ivist s
tqrk trom Bichatuas his contcntion that thc tissuesrrcrc the ulti
m.rreel enr ent soI anat onr icalan. r lr sis,
a vicu' t hat t cn<lertlo push
thc nervscicnceofhistol,rgv irr ont- rJircctionratherthan Jnother.
l 3i chl t' svien s, r epent edbv Com t c ir r t he li) r t \ - f ir st lessonof t he
C oars,cxplain t hc pcr sist entskcpt icismol I : r cnch phvsiciansin
the l i rst ha lf of t he nir r ct cent hcent ur '\ '\ ! it h r espcctt o cell t hcor v
rncl mi cro sclr pict echni<1ucs,
*hich r r cr c dispar ag<<l in lir or <r l
ruch hi rtologicalnt et hodsas r iisscct ion,r lcsiccat ion,m accr at ion
and treatm entr vit h acicls.liuc, t he m icr r scopesavailablcat t he
ti mr * cre m cr liocr e,an<lLouis Ranvicrnot er i in his 1876 inau
gural l cctur c at t hc Colldgedc Fr ancet hat Bichathad been r ight
to be rr' .rr vof t hcm . Never t hclcss.
posir ivistpht sicianst lisplavcd
P ersi sl enthost ilit v t o m icr oscopr ,par t lr in olt cdicnt c t o I I enr l
l)ucrotar rle Blainvillr's authoritativ('Cous de ph.vsioktgie ctinenlc
(lll29). Rcn6-1hi:ophile llyacinrhc I-ainnecalsonumbert'clamong
thc instrument'scletrectors.Th.rnksto N,larcKlcin's rrrrrk on thc
hi st,rrvofc cll t heor r . r helc is n<rnec<lr o ht l. r t r <rfrt c, bin'soPpo-
l5t
 I
sition t() anv lorm of researchthat claimed to go beyond * hat he
took to be the basicconstituent ofthe anatomv(tissue).Evenas
late as 1869,ten yearsafter the publication ofRudolph Virchow's
cefebrated $'ork, Robin n,rote in la Philotophiepositive that the
ccll r*ar a metaphysicalconstruct and conmented ironically on
"thc allcgcdlv tl pical or primordial organic ct'll."6l When Littr6
reviewe<fRobin's .lnatomie ct physioloqiecellulaitesin rhe s,lne jour-
nal in 1874,he acceptedhis lriend'sdoubts as facr. Yet in an l8?0
articlc on the "()rigine de I'id6.ede justicc," Littre had discussed
trl'o kinds of brain cells, affectiveanclintcllcctualr Wasthis a the-
oretical conccssionor a merc stylistic convenience?61
In u hat respects,moreover,did Frangois-loseph-Victor
Brous-
saisinfluence Littra (either directlv or through Comte)? Surely,
[ . it t r i' in h e ri te d Bro u s s a i s 'sstu b b o rn ness
i n defendi ngthe theo-
ries of physicrlogicalmedicinc, l'hich were b.rsedon a bclief in
the identitv ol thc normal anclthc pathological.as rvell as on a
refilral tcr vierv diseaseas introducing lnl nerv lunctional pro-
cessin tltt organism (a casemade even beforc Broussaisby _lohn
Hunter). Litt16 thus acceptedand championedwhat Comte called
"Broussais'sPrinciplc." In the prelace to the second edition of
llddecineet midecins,Littrd stressedthe nccd for medicine to
r ev is e it s th c o ri e s i n l i g h t o f p h y s i o l ogy' shavi ng attai ned the
positivestageof development.Pathologvhad thus become "phys-
iologv o f th e d i s tu rb e d s ta te ," a n d thi s, I i ttre argued, w as an
"essentialnotion." This Broussaisist dogma would later prove to
be onc of the obstaclesto undcrstandingnricrolriology.But for
the moment, let us ask ourselvesrvhat thc practicaleffectso[this
revolution r1'crc.lD an 1846article containing a nevr translation
of Cels u s , I i ttre u a s n o t a fi a i d ro \i l i t e that " so l ong as physi ol -
ogv lrns r)ot fullv constituted as a scietrce,there remained gaps
in which hypothescscould emcrge.But no'r, rhat it hasbecome,
almost bt'fore our eves,a science, cvcry nredical system is dis-
2t 6
-
credited in advance."6il"Littre," Actesdu ColloqueEnilc Iixri,
t 8 0 l-1 88 p
1p, .271-751
[97] L it t r 6 set f ir r t h his vier vson hvgienein a com ncnt ar !
<tn the Traitd <l'h.v11iine puhliclueet privdc b.t l\4icheI Livv, the lbr-
mer chi ef phvsicianof r hc Alm 6es <l'C) r ier rand t ( lir cct or of t he
V al -de-G r icehospit al, *'honr Lit r 6 descr ibcd as r n "r nr incnr
author," althoughJcan-Nlichel(luarrliasa* him rs nrcrrer.'la rher
ori ci an than a scholar . Public hcalt h had been a lir elr m er licll
subspecialt vin Fr ancc sinct t he vvor k of Jcan- Not l llalld and
Franqoi sEm m anuel Fodi'r d ear lv in t hc ninet eent h ccDr ur v; it
ha<lprolitcd from the cxpcrience ol such militarv phv5iciansas
\iillerm6, rvho had servedas surgeon-majorin Napoleon'sarmr'.
Thi s medical subsp{ci. r lt vhad no doubt lent cr cdence t o r hc
noti on ofmilieu, f ir st put f br u. ar din t lr e r vor ksof Blain. '. ille
and
Iamarck. I I vgiene,accor <lingt o Lit t r i, is t he science<r f '. r t t ions
and react ionsbet r veennr ili, : us. r ncl
or ganism s,hum anr includer l.
,\s fi rr mi lieu, Lit t r ( i nor cd in lii58 t hat t he t er nr har ln r r clr nicr l
rncani nga, nd hc gavca det ailcdr lcllnit ion in nr anvr r specr sr cm i-
ni scentof t hc t able ol phvsicalagent st har Blainr ille h, r r lt allcd
" rxternal m odif ier s. " l'hr : scient il'ic clabor at ion ol t ht r vor r i
" mi l i cu" in t hc ninet et 'nt hcent ur v r equir cclt he par t ici; >at ion
of
a number of scienccst hat had achieveclt he st ageof "1>osit iv-
i t\" ' - phv sics,chem isr r v and biologv. Thc t er r n also scr vcd in
Partasan ideologicalsuLrstitute
for thc notion ol "climat(," !1.hich
h.rdbeen used extensivelvbr c,ighteenth-centurv authors, p.rfric-
ul arl v Mont esquieu.Accor ding t o I it t r e, hou'ever t, he st ut lt ol
ntan' sorvn m ilieu uas r he pt ovir r ceol sociolcr gras m u<lr . r sof
pl l si cs or biologr , so t hat r hc pr escr ipt ionsol "pr ivat ehr gienc"
coul d cl aim onlv r hjst or ical r r r cm pir ical r at hcr t haD , r t her )
rcti cal b1s i5. c5
H, r vingr lr it t t n sevcr alar t icleson t he clr oler aol
l l l 32, the cont agiousDess , ) i equincglanclcr and
s t he t r ansm ission
of thc pl a gue, Lit t r i' c, r uld har dlv liil r o com m cnt on L6r 'r 's
2 tl
obs c r v .rti o nosn c n d c m i c i n (l e p i d c mi c di seases. N ot a w ord \vas
s ai<a[
l x ru tc ri o l o g i c ! i n v o l v i n g n \i c ro org.rni snrs,
al thoughthe ar-
ticlc on "l cptothrix" in the Dicfionnairc'rJcrnldeclnereported on
Casimir l)avaineand Picne FrangoisOlive Raver'srcscarchon the
anthrax bacillus, and Littrd surelv knc\4 about this vvork orving
t o his r e l a ti o n srv i th R a v e r.It $ ,a sn ot unti l 1880,i n an arti cl e
ent it led " T l a n s ra ti o n a l i s n re ,"
th a t L i ttri nrcnti oned" the ci rcu-
lat ion o l i n l l n i tc s i ma l l r s ma l l [c re a turcs]that causci nl ecti ous
dir"ur".",unbut bv then it uas no longcr possibleto ignort' l-ouis
Pasteur's*ork, Nevertheless,Littre's rcmlrks on public hvuiene
in the third articlc are g'orthy ol attention. l:or Littr6, historv.rnd
s oc iolog t s e rv ea s i n s tru mc n tso f a n al \si s.I i ttri sccmsto harc
been particrrlarllalert to sociomedicalissuesassociatcdrlith the
r is e ol in tl u s tri a sl o c i e tl . l l c s tri k e so f f a fi l e phrase,rcmi ni scent
of S aint -S i mo n": C i v i l i z e d m a n ... h a sassunrcrJ rcsponsi bi l i tvfbr.
adm inis te ri n gth e e a rth , a n d a s c i v i l i zati on rdvances,that ardu-
ous administrationdeman<lscver more inge'nuitl and industr\."6?
I lur r r n l i l i , tl ro u g h , s u ffc rs fro m th e unanti ci patcd vet i nevi -
tablc efti'cts of thc conllict bctrveen rvork and nature. "ll.rving
bccome so complex, industrics cannot do rvithout thc oversight
of a higheragcncvthat appr-eciates thc dangers,prescr'r'esthe envi-
r onm c n t. a n d d o e s n o r l e a v es u c h i mportanr i ssuesto thc scl fl
interest ()l l)rivnteirrdiriduals."r'3Thus, I ittri' had some pcrtincnt
remarkst() offer on thc subject of ccologr, rcars before the word
rvascoinerl."')And no one can deny the claritv or couragc rlith
\\'hich he cxpressedhis astcrnishment
that no civilizcd nation had
v et s eenfi t to e s ta b l i s h.r mi n i s trv o f publ i c hcal th.70[" Li tt16."
.4(?sdu ColltrqucEntlc Littti, lll0l-l8E/, pp. )16-i1)
f 98] We c a n n o l o n g e ra v o i d a b ri e Isunc] of the re.rcti onsof
Littr6's contemporaricsto rhis biological philosophv.I ittle atten-
tion ncc<lbe pai<ito the inevitablv biascdjuclgmentsof ofllcial
spiritu.rli\tssuch as Paul lant't .rnd Fdme Caro; horvever,gre.rter
2 tlJ
i m p()rt.rDce must bc .rtt.rchtrlto varitrtts.rrticlesthJt .rPPeiredi n
Clrrrles Renouvit'r'sjournal, Io Critiquepbi.lostT,irigue the vcrr
'
. l8?8, t he iour nal pr r blished
ti tl t ofu 'hich \ 1asar r t iPosit ivistln
thrL'carticlesbv Pillc,non biologv an<lpositivism,two ol rT'hichsct
Bcrnartlup trr Comtc's judge. In thc samclear Renouvier
Cl.rr,rde
poserl,and answeredin the ncgativc,rhis qucstiot't:"ls the Cours
$as
lc phlotophicpositirc\rill abrcalt of st icrrceJ" Clltrde Ber.D,lr.d
proposcdas an ir lc, r logicalant idot c lo Ciom t e.No I t r iel account
c.ln (lo iusticc to tht rt'lationsbetrveenl.ittr6's biological positiv-
isnr and Bcrnard'sguiding philosophv.On the onc h.rnti,Bcrnartl
fi r undcrof anclpar t icipantin t he Soci6t 6de Biologiealong
' r' a,.r
rvith R.rler,Loui:-AtrgustcScgonclanclCharlcsRotrin' r.'hodr.rltetl
i ts ch.r r t crin a lianklv Posit ivistspir it at r <lt onc. I it t r 6's jour nal
Lo Philosophic po.rJtivc sho\r'e(lgreat interest in Bern.rtd'srlork,
publ i sh ing, in t ht 'r 'ear ol his deat h, a ver r 'lr alanccdar t iclc bv
N l arhi asl) ur al ancl. r n ar t iclc br ' [ . it r e on dt 't cr m inisnr . f hese
l actsrn. r l m u<ldrt hc ! r 'nt (r s, b( t t t her t lo not just ilv anr '[ r llt r r inq
of rhc I ines,lir r , r sr t t ent ive r eat ler s, r lBer nar clalr cat lr knolr ',hc
sc.r'celvconcealedhis hostilitv to Corr)te'sdogmatisrl. That hos-
tilitl is cxprcsscdopcnlv at thc cnclol Bern.rrcl's most tritlelv read
\,,ork, thc lntroductioni I'iludc de lo ni<lccinectpirimentcrlc:"Posi-
ti \i snr, \ \ 'hich in r he nr nr e ol- sciencer eject sphilosophit al svs-
l cl l rs. er r t ils t he\ ( lo br being suclr a sr st cm . " l) cslt it e t hese
reser\at ions,of \ 1. hi( hLit t r ir r v. r spcr icct lv $c] lauar c. he sever al
times praisedBornarcl'smethods an(l the principlcs that inspirecl
them. llis 1855 ar t iclc on Nlagcndiccn<lsr vit h . r n acknor r 'lct Jg-
mcnt ol Bcrn.rrd's\ul)criority orcr his rcachcr.l lrc thirteenth cdi-
tiol rrf thc I)i(ienndirc tlc nitlrin,: corrtnirrsn nuntl)(r ()l ,trticles,
obl i ,ru slv ur it t en ll I it t r c, \ r 'hich r el; r im plicit l\ or ( xplicit lt '
to B ern ar r l.While t hc ar t icle on "( ) bser vat ion" seem sr at hcr
to sum m ar izet hc r icr r s ol Conr t t . t hosc on "Expeliencc" and
" E rpcrinr ent at i<r n". u- ccond. ns, 'r t i( ) ns
of t lr t ' r 'ier rs ol ller nar d.
l 5e
"Experimentation" ends rvith the sanreconrparisonthat Bcrnard CH, r t 'r r x Twt t ! 'F
borrorved from GcorqcsCuviel the observer)istens,tht'cxpcri-
, h c a rti c l e o n " M e d i ci ne" menti onsB ernard' s
m c nt c r q u c s ti o n s T Claude Ber nar d
nam c in th c ri i s c trs s i o n
o f e x p e ri m e n talmedi ci ne. In B crnard' s
tcaching and conc('ption ol lifc, Lirtr6 no doubt saw argumcnts
c apablco fs u p p o rti n g h i s o rv n p e rs o n alconvi cti on that bi ol ogi -
cal phenomenacould not bc rcduced to physicsand chemistry.
["Littr6," ,4ctesdu ColloqueEmileLittti, ]801-1881, pp. 279-80]

A Philosoph ical Physiologist

[99] A philosophicalphvsiologist:arr.rnsedin that order, thc t\ao
* .ords cr y out f br an im m cdiat c cor r ect ion. Philosophicalher t r
doesnot meaninclined torvardmetaphvsics. Clatt<leBernardnevcr
cl ai med - as a phvsiologistand in t hc nam e ol phvsicr logY- to
q.r bclontl expericncc.He h.rdno Patiencewirh thc itleao{ rrleta-
phrsiologv,mcaningthe clainr to kno* nor jttst tht lar,s,or invari-
ants,of t hc or ganiclunct ions[ ) ut t he ver v cssenceol t hat plast ic
l brce * h ich r vc r cf i'r t o as lif e. But neit her did hc cvcr int end t o
l i mi t biological sciencct o t he nr er c r cPor t ing of expcr im ent al
resul ts.Rat her , bv "philosophicalphr siologist "I m ean a phvsi-
ologist rvho, at a given stagcin the e"olution of a rvell-established
science,cxplicitJv rccognizesthe fact that sciencc is aboveall .r
method ofstudy and research,and w.hosets himsclf the exprcss
task, thc per sonalr esponsibilit vt hat can be assignedt o no onc
cl se,ofpr oviding t hat m et hod r ', it h r f bundat ion.I n t his sense,
thc philosophical rvork ol the phvsiologistClaude Bernard pro-
vi dcd t hc f bundat ionlir r his sci<nt if ic r vor k. lust as ninet ecnt h-
centurv m at hem at icians s<. t hem r clv( st he t . r skof explor ing t he
loundationsol mathematics,r<-r too did a phvsicrlo{isttake it upon
hi mself t o est ablir h t hc lir undar ions, r f his disciplinc. ln bot h
cases,scicntistsassumedrcsPonsibilitvlbr u'h.rt h'rd prcviouslv-
in the tinre of Descartcsas rvell as of Plato antl ''\risrotle- been
th e t as kof philos o p h v .Btrt th e fb u n c l a ti o n aul ' o t k of tht' mathe-
nrari(irns rvasvetl difli:rent from that of Bcrnarcl.\\brk on the
l i runr lat ionsoi m ath c m a ti c sh a sc ,rn ti n u c d tv e r si ncei i t hasbe-
comc an integral part ofmathenraticsitseJf By contrast,the trail
blazcrl bv ClauclcBernardhas been ncgJcctr:dbv latcr phvsiolo-
gisrs - so ncglectcd, in fact, that rvhcn phvsiologiststodav feel
rhc r r t ed t o jus t ilv d i s ti n c ti v e a s Pe c tso f th c i r rvork, thel fi c-
q l rent l) , and s om e ti mc sa n a c h ro n i s ti c a l l l ,ro l v on the l ' ork of
Bcrnardhimsclf. ["Claude t3ernard,"Diologue,pp. 556-57]
clevotcdto Francis
[100] In the feu lines that ClaucleBcrnard
Bacon(laudaton bv conventjonand critical bv conviction' though
lessso rhan Bcrnard'scontemPorarYvon Liebi{)' he noted that
"there itcrc great exPerimentalistsbefolc thefe lvasa doctrine
<rler pc r im ent . r lis m."fh e re c a n tre n o d o tttrt th r t he mcant thi s
max im t o applv t .r h i ms e l f. An e x p l a n a ti o ntrn he l bund i n hi s
nc'tebools:"Lrervonc follou s his ou n prth. Somcundergolengthy
preparatir,,n anrl lbllou'thc path Jaidout for them. I took a tu'ist-
in{ r()ute t() science.rnd,abandoningthc l)eatcnPath, exemPted
nrvselllromall thc rulcs."What rulcsdid this rran rvho had learned
th e ex per im ent alm e th o d i n th e s h a d o u o l F rr ngoi s N l agendi c
'l-heans\lcr can be gleaned
think hc had cxcmptcd himself from?
fiom thc namcsof trvo phlsiologists u hom llc quotes on scveral
occ.tsions:Ilemann von Helmholtz, torvarclrrhom hc rvasalu'ays
respectfirl,and Emile Du Bois-Reymond,krr u hom his admira-
tion rlrs lessunalloled. Thc rules Bernaldhad in nrind rvercthose
of m.rthenr.rticalphtsics:
I t h. r sbc c n s r ic lth .rt l l i rtrn < l* h a t I" a s n ' t l o rr ki ngl i r' . rvhercrs
llc lm holt r liunr l o n l v * h .rr b c l ,ro k i n ul i rr. Ihi s i s crrrrcct.but
' .,rs
t'xr'lusionarr prcscript;ons ;rrch,rlnrlirl.\\'har is phrsiologri' Phvs-
icsJChcmistrvlWho knorrs?Ic is [x ttcr t(l tlo anatonlr.fiohannes]
trl nl l er,IFri edr ich]Ticdcm annan<lI l) : r oielFr ier lr ichlEschr icht
turnc(lto anitorn\.
r(rre disgustcd.rnd
rvhat Bcrnarclrvantedtas a rvav,rftl,ring researclr
tn orher u'c-,rds,
in phvsiologvbascdon assutrrptions.rn<lprinciplcsstcmming from
phrsi oJogvi tscl f, f iom t he lir ing or qanist r ,r at hcr t han on Pr in
ci pl cs, vi ervsanc lm ent al habit s im l) or t f ( l lr om scicncesas pr es-
ti gi ous,and as i nd ispensablet o t he r lor king phvsiologistas
, evcn
phvsi csand chem ist r v.
l here i s a chr onological {ict $ hosc im por t ancc cannot be
over-stated: C Iau dc Bcr nar dalludeclr o r hc dist inct ivc char a( t cr
of phvsi ol ogi calexpcr im cnt at ionin public f ir r t hc f ir st t inlc or r
L)(cembcr 10, 1 85'+,in t he t hir d l( ct t r r . cr ) f . l cour seon exper i-
nrent.rlphysiologvapplied to ntedicinc,rvhich he cleliverecl
at thc
Colli{e de Francein his la.f.rppearancetherc as l\lagcndic'rsub-
sti tutc. l n rh.rtl t' c t ur e.he r et ier r eclt ht 't r pcr im er r t slr t <lt he con-
( lusir)nsr( porte(l in the doctolal thcsishe harl delendedthe vear
l>elirreon a ner,vlvdiscovere<liLnction ol thc liver in humans.rnd
rni mal s - thc ab ilit v t o synt hesir eglucose. "lt is sur pr ising, "
Brrnard noted, "that an organic lunction ol such impor-tancc.rn(l
The reasonfor this
so rt:adilvobsen'eduas not discovcrcrlsocrner."
f.ri l urc,hc shoued,las t hat ncar l- vall pr cviot t sphvsiologist har
s l
attempted to studv dvn. r nr icf t r nct ionslvit h m ct ho<lsbor r or led
fiom anatomv,phvsicsanclchemistrv:suchmctlrotls,though, rverc
i ncapabl cof l i el d ing ner r knouleclgca[ , out phvsiologicalphc-
tromena.The onlv $av to cxplain an,rrganichtnction is to obsen'e
i r i n.rcti on i n the onlr plac<'uhcr <it nr cr ninglullvexist s,t o uit ,
rl i thi n the orgarr ism Fr r lt 'r ir t r l . r pr - inciplrol
. om t his, Bcr n. r r <l .
rl l ri cl r tht' l ntroduct ion,
publishc<lt leven r car s Lat cr nr
, ight f . r ir lv
l re cal l edthc el ab or at ion:
26 ]
 Neitheranatomynor chemistrvcanans\,\'cr
a questionof phvsiology.
What is crucialis experimentation
on animals,rvhichmakesit pos-
sibleto obsenethe mechanics
ofa functionin .rlivingcreature,
thus
ler din gto th e c l i s c o v e ry
o f p h c n o mcna
rhat coul d not havebeen
xhich cannotbe studicdin anr other\\nv.
Prcclictcd.
Thc lccturesat the Colldgede Fr.rncefirllo*'ed Bernard'scom-
plc t ion o 1 * ,o rk o n h i s d o c to ra tc , s o t h! asserti onthat " there
rveregreat experimentalistsbcfbrc thcre rvasa doctrine ofexper-
im ent alis m "a n d th c i n s i s te n c eo n h a v i ng l el t " the beatenpath"
\\'ere more than literarv flourishes;thev rveregeneralizationsof
the lessonsBernardhad drawn from his orvn intellectual adven-
turc. Nothing else is worthv of the namc "nrcthod." As Gaston
Bachelardhasrvrittcn in I6e,\ter Srientrfc.Splrrt,"Concepts and
m et hods a l i k c d c p e n d o n e m p i ri c a l re sul ts.A ne$' experi ment
m av I c ad to a l u n d a rn e n tacl h a n g ei n s c i enti fi c thi nki ng. In sci -
enc e. aDy ' d i s c o u rs co n n c th o (l ' c a n o nh l te provi si onal ;i t can
nev erhop c to < l c s c ri b cth e d e fi n i ti v e compl exi on of the sci en-
tific spirit."rr NcrtnithstandingBachelrrd'sdialectic,llinsistcnce,
it is bv no me a n sc l e a r th a t B c rn a rdh i n l s(' 11(l i dnot succumbto
t he bc lief th a t h c rv a sd e s c ri b i n gth e " d efi ni ti ve consti tuti on of
the scientific spirit" in phvsiologv.Yet he clearlv undcrstood,and
taught, thnt physiologyvvouldhaveto changcbccauseit had seen
somethingDe\\r,somethingso ncrv that it lbrc,.'dBernarclto agree
rvith thc jurlgnrentthat somehad uttered in cliticism of his rvork:
that he had forrnd he $'asnot looking l'or.Indeed.one might
'r'hat
evengo so fir asto savthat hc had lbund thc opposite ofrvhat he
rvaslooking tbr. IFtucJci,pp. 1-+a-a6]
The lmplicqtions of a Porodoxicol Discovery
[ 101] 1h( i m p o rta n c e ,th e n a n d n o rv ,ol the l eqonssu l et phd-
nominestlc la vic communsou\ dnimau\ cl dur r'1gy'f.?u.,r stcms first
161
of al l l i om t he f act t hat , behind t his plain t it lc, Ber n. r r dsvst em '
iltically pursued the consc<luences of a discoverYthat rvasa sur-
That discoverv
l)riscto him and a paradoxto his contemPorarics.
uas sct f br t h in t he doct or al t hesis hc dcf 'encled r r n, \ 1, r lch 17,
185l : "Recher chcssur une nouvclle lbnct ion dt t loie consid( 'r d
' oduct et t rdc m at iir e sucr i t chez I 'hom nr c ct
commc or gaD( Pr
chcz l e s anim aur . "'f his t hcsisr let hr onedt he do- qm aaccor r ling
to uhi ct r . r nim als,being incapableof sr nt ht 'sizingt hc nut r i( nt s
tht:v nced, must ingestvegctablematter in orclcrto obtain them.
Bcrn.rrd,in his uork on glvcogenesis, showedthat that thc liver can
sl nthcsir e glucoseand, t hcr cf br e, t hat anim alsneed not obt ain
thjs substancefiom plants. IPrcfice, 1.cqons, p. 9l
f102] For our pur poses,it is not im por t ant t hat Ber nar dob-
tai ncd his r esult bv dint of f lar vsin his chem ical analvt ict cch-
ni qucsand r ough apploxim at ionsin his m casur em enr s, Tl- r cf ict
that he dct ect ed t r o glr r cosein t hc por t al vein bt t t r lir l r let ect it
r ein led hinr t o conclude- an( l t hen t o ! er -
i n thc sr r per hepat i<
i l v - that r hc livcr not . , nlv ! c( r ( t es bile but also pt oduccr st he
gl ucos et hat is t 'ssent ialt o 5ust ainingliving t issueand cnabling
variouspnrts of .rnimal organisms,in particul.rr th(' muscles,to
liir h in his ver ilicat ion pr ocedur e,
cl o thcir r vor k. \ et Ber nar <l's
thc fimous "clean liver" cxpcriment, rvas.rlsogreatcr than the
accur.rcvof his methods \\'arrantcd.His genius, horvever,rvasto
Itavegraspedat on( c t hc signif icancc,im plicat ions and consc-
quencc sof his disco't 'r r .
Fi rst , he ur r r Jr : r st oor l lr e had t aken t he lir st st ep t ouar d
t hat
thc solut ion ol r 1>r o[ r lenr r hat dat ed back t o t he t 'ight eent h
<enrurr: \\'h.rt \1'.rsth{ firrlctiori ,rf the so-ca)lcdductlcssgland-.
(or.bl ood lesselgl. r nds)such as t hc t hvr oid?Bcr nlr d solvcdt his
probl cm t hr , r ugh. r ser iesol exper im cnt s int ende( l t o det r r on-
strate the ne\ \ 'concept of "int er nal secr et ion"11855) ,a phr ase
that onlv a 1c\\'vcitrstrrlir:r'rvould havclrccn takenas.rcontradic-
265
t ion in t er m s , a n i mp o s s i b i l i tya s u n th i nkabl eas n squareci rcl e.
Second,and morc important, Uernardunderstoodthat he had
lrit upon an argumcnt c.rpableof exploding a theorv flrmlv estab-
lishcd in the minds of contemporarvchemists.Whatevermisgiv-
ingr or r e ma r h a r, ,rl ' ,.ttti l l u s tr.rti v c( o m pJri \on:\,.r comprri ron
her e is ir r e s i s ti b l e ,Wh c n Ga l i l c o o b s c rv cdspotson the sun, he
dclivcrt'cla clecisiveblorv to the old Aristotelian distinction be-
twccn the sublunarvrvorld, supposeril,-susceptibleto generation
and corruption, and thc supralunarvrvorld, supposedlvcternaland
incorruptible. Hc taught mankind to scc analogousthings in anal-
ogous uays. Similarlv, rvhcn Claude Bcrnanl discovcrerlthc gly-
cogenic lirnction of the liver, he deliverecla clecisiveblorv to thc
old dis t inc ti o n b e tl e e n th e p l a n t a n c la n i mal ki ngrl oms,accord-
ing t o u' hi c h p l a rrtsc a n a n d a n i ma l sc annot synthesi zesi mpl e
or ganic c om p o u n rJ si,n p a rti c u l a rh y d ro carbons.l l c taught thc
human t'vr.:to scc lifc in a nc\\ rvav,rvithout rlistinction betrvccn
plant and a n i m a l .
In thc fbrtieth fessonof the Courstlephilosophiepositivc,Auguste
Com t e had \\' ri tte n i n 1 8 1 8 th a t rv h i l e t he:rt'ncrc hun< l rcdsof
*av s t o liv c , th e re \\' a sp ro b a b l v o n l v o ne \1i v to cl i e a natural
dcath. In 1851,Cl:rudcBernardproved tlrat there rvasno clivision
ol labor am o n gl i v i n g th i n g s :p l a n ts rv c rc not csscnti alas suppl i -
c r s of t hc g l u c o s en i th o u t rv h i c h a n i mal scannot l i ve. l he trvo
kingdoms do not lbrm a hierarchl, and there is no teleological
subordinationol one to the other. l his discovcrvpavcdthc rvay
fbr a gcncral phvsiologv,a scicncc of the lif'e lunctions, and this
clisciplineimmecliatelygained a place in thc academvalongside
comparativephvsiology.From Bernarcl's
doctoral thcsisto the last
courseshe gaveas prolessorol generalphvsiologvat the illusa'um
(published in 187ti as Leqonssurlesphinomincsde la vie communs
du\ onineux ct ou\ villdtdu\\, his *ork rvasall aimed at proving
t he v alidit v o l a s i n g l eg u i d i n g p r.i n c i p l c,rvhi ch rni ght be cal l ed
philosophical,or, to usc a term Jesssuspcctto thc scientillc mind,
logical.That ideacan bc summeclup in a scntcnccfirst
n.rctaphvsio
\\' ri ttcn i n 1878:"Thcr c is but one uav ol lif e, one phlsiologv,
fbr all living things." ["Claude Bcrnar<l,"Diologuc,pp. 560-621
1103] I n t he eight ccnt hcent ur v,I m m anuel K. r ntar guedt hat
thc condit ions undcr *hich phvsicalscicncc \ \ 'asPossible$cr c
the trrnscendent alcondit ionsol knowlcdgc in gcner al.Lat er ,in
Part Irlcr o{ thc Critiquc oJ PracticalRcoson,entitled "The Criticlue
ol -l el col o gicalJudgm ent , " he m odif lcd t his vieu, acknouledg-
i ng that or ganism sr ver et ot alit ics lvhoseanalvt icdccom posit iot t
and causalexplanationrveresubordinatt'to an ideaol'finalitv, thc
governingprinciplc of all bioJogicalrcscarch.According to Kant,
thcre coul<lbe no "Ncrvton o1 a blac]eofgrass." ln other rvords,
the scientific statusof biologv in thc cncvclopediaof knou ledgc
could nevercompare*ith that ofphvsics. BelbreClaudc Bcrnar<|,
bi ol ogi st s uer e f br ct 'd t o choose bet ueen idcnt if ving biologv
ui th phl s ics, in t hc m annerol t he m at cr ialist sanclm echanist s,
or raclicallvdistinguishingbenvcen thc tuo, in the manncr ol the
frcnch naturalistsand (lerman naturc philosoplrers.Thc Nervttln
of the l i ving or ganismr vasClaucleBcr nar r l,in t he senset hat it
llas he rvho realized that living things providc the kt:v to deci-
phcring their o* n structurcsanrl firnctions.Rcjcctingboth mech-
ani sm .rn clvit alism , Ber nar duas ablc t o clevelopt cchniquesol'
bi ol ogi cal cxpcr im cnt at ionsuit t 'd t o t lr c specilic nat ur e of t hc
obj cct ol st udv.I t is im possiblenot t o be st r uck b! t hc t or t r ast ,
pr.obablvunrvitting,br.:tuccnthe lblloll ing two p.rssagcs. In 1c(on.t
sur lcsphinomincs ph.rsique; dc la yie (l-csronsof Dcccmber 28 and
10, l 8l 6), I - r anc; ois, \ lagendie
r vr ot e,"l set t he lung r s a bellous,
the trache. ras an air t ubc, and t hc glot t is as a vibr at ing r ecd.. . .
We h.rvean optical .rpparatusfirr orrr eyes,.r musical instruncnt
fbr our voiccs,a living r et or t lbr our st om aclr s. Bcr
" nar d,on t hc
othcr han d,in his Colr icrt / cnot c. rwr
! ot ct "The lar vnx is. r lar lnx,
1\i7
and rhc lcns of the eve is the lcns of thr cvc: in othcr rvtrrds,the
mcchanicaland physicalconditions ncc('ssaryfor thcir existence
arc satisfledonlv rvithin thc living organism."Thus, rvhile Bemard
took {rom Lavoisier and l-aplacc bv u'ay of l\lagendic *'hat he him-
s elf c alled th c i d c a o l " d e tc rm i n i s m," hc * as the sol e i nventor
ol the lriologicalconcept ol the "internaI cnvironrrrent,"the ton-
c c pt t hat fi n a l l v e n a b l e dp h y s i o l o g vto become a determi ni sti c
s c ienc eon a p a r w i th p h v s i c sb u t w i th out succumbi ngto fasci -
nation with the phvsicalmodel. [Erudes,148-49]
The Theorcticol Foundotions of the Method
[ 104] lhe u n u s u a l ,rn d a t th e ti m e p a r adoxi cal natr.rrc
, of11hat
Bernarclhad "inadvertently"discoveredvvasn,hat enabledhinr to
conceptualizehis earlv resultsin such a way as to cleterminethe
courseofall his fLture rcscarch.Without the concept ofthe inner
environnrent, it is impossible to undcrstaDdBernard'sstubbon
adv oc ac vo t a tc c h n i q u c th a t h e d i d n o r i nvent but to rvhi ch he
lc nr nc v r 'i m p e tu s r rh e te c h n i q u e o fv i v isecti on, rvhi ch he w as
obliged to del'endagainstboth emotional outragc and the pro-
tcsts of Romantic philosophv."Ancient sciencervasable to con-
c eiv c only o f th c c x te rn a l e n v i ro n m e n t, but i n order to pl ace
biologicalscienceon an experimentalfboting one must alsoimag-
inc an interndlenvircnmcnt.Ibelievethat I rvasthc first ro express
this idca clearlv and ro stressits importancc in understandingthe
need lbr experimentationon living things." Note that the concept
of the intcmal cnvironm('ntis given here as the theoreticalunder-
pinning ofthe technigue
ofphvsiologicalexperimentation.In 1857,
Bernard$ rote, "The blood is made lbr the organs.That much is
true. But it cannot be repeatedtoo olten that it is also madc by
the organs."What alloued Bernard to propose this radical revi-
sion ol hematologvu'asthe concept of internal secrctions,wlrich
he had fbrmulated trvo vearscarlier. Aficr all, there is a consid-
cr.rblectlerence bcnveen the blood's rclation to the lun(s .rnd
its relatrn to the liver. In thc ltrngs,the organismintcracts \\ ith
thc inorlanicworld through the blood, rl hereasin the liver thc
organisnintcractsrvith itself. Thc point is important cnough that
it bcarsepeating:rlithout the idea of intcrnal secretions,rherc
coulrl bt no ideaol an internalenvironment.,rnds ithout thc idca
ot an i n: r nal cnvir onm ent ,t her e could bc no aut ononr oussci-
ence of:hvsiologv.Iftudcs, pp. 1,17-,18]
[l05 The concept of the intcrnal envinrnmentthus dependul
on the I ior fbrmulation of thc concept ol internal sccretions;it
a)sodep : ndcdon cell t heor v,whose cssent ialcont r ibut ion Ber -
n.rrdacc:ptedcvcn as he greu' incre.rsingivskepticalof the thc-
orv oItl , : lbr m at ivebl. r st cm e.Cell t heor v'scr ucial cont r ihut ion
wasils irsistcnceon the Jutonomv of the anatomicalcomponents
of comJex or ganism sand t heir f unct ionalsubor dinat iont o r he
morpho ogicalr vholc, Bcr nar clsquar elvcnr br accclcell t heon:
"This ct I thcorv is more than just a word," he \1rote in his lcqors
sur ltr piinomines alt I(1| ie communsau.\ (1nimau.\et aut riqitoux.
Bv so dtrng, he rr,asabl<rto portrav phvsiologvas an experimen-
tal sci en er vit h it s o* n dist inct ivem et hods.I n lict , cell t heor v
made it rossiblcto undcrstandthe relation betrveenthe part and
the uhr e, t he com posit e. r ndt hc sim ple, in a r vayt hat dilleled
sharplr:-om tlre nr.rtlrenratical
or nrechanicalmodel: the cell rc-
vealeda.vpc ofmorphological structurequite diflirent liorn that
of carlie "artifacts" and "machines."It becamepossibleto irnag-
i ne rvay,ol analvzing,dissect ingand alt er ingliving t hings using
mechnn-'al,phvsicalor chcm ical t echniquest o int er vencin t he
econom ol an or ganjt u holc *. it hout int er liling *'it h it s esscn-
ti.rl orgaricnature.The fifth of thc I4ons de ph.rsiologic
opiratoire
contai nra num bcr ol cr ucial passagcs on t his ne$ conc( 'pt ion
of the rilation betrlccn the parts and the ruhole. First, Uernard
expl ai nrthat "all or gansand t issuesar e not hing but a com bina-
z1,9
tion of anatomicalelements,and the life of thc organ is thc sum
ofthe vital phcnomenainhcrent in eachtvpc of element."Sccond,
hc points out that thc converseof this proposition is filsc: "ln
attempting to analvzclifc bv studying the partial lives of thc var-
ious kinds ofanatomical elements,wc must avoid an error that is
all too casy to make, rvhich is to assumethat the nature, form
and neeclsof thc total lif'e of thc individual are the samcas those
of the anatomical clements." In othcr uords, Bernard'sgcncral
phvsiologvgrervout of a comtrinationof the concept of the inter-
nal c nv ir on me n trv i th th e th c o rv o f th e c el l , rvhi ch cnabl edhi m
to dcvelop a clistinctivccxpcrimental method, onc that vvasnot
Cartesianin stvlc yct conceded nothing to vitalism or Romanti-
cism. In this rcspect, Bernard rvasradicallv dillerent fiom both
GcorgcsCuvicr, the author of the lctter to Nlertrud that sen'erias
pref)ce to Cuvier's I elonsd'anatornieconrpar&,and Auguste Comte,
the author of thc fbrtieth lesson of thc Coursde philosophiepositive
and a fiithful disciplc ofBlainville's introduction to thc Coursde
ginircle et comparie. For all three of thcse authors -
ph.veiololTie
Cuvicr, Comtc and Blainville - comparativcanatomv $'asa sub-
s t it ut e f or e x p e ri me n ta ti o n ,rv h i c h th e v hel d to be i mpossi bl e
llecausethe arralvticscarchfbr the simple phenomenonino itablv,
or s o t hc y b c l i c v e d ,d i s to rts th e e s s e n ccof thc organi sm,rvhi ch
lir nc t ionsh o l i s ti c a l l v .N a ttrrc ,b v c x h i b i ti ng (i n C uvi er' srvords)
" near lv all p o s s i b l ec o m b i n a ti o n so f o rg ansi n al l the cl assesof
anim als , "a l l o rv e dth e s c i e n ti s tto d ra r, " vcry pl ausi bl econcl u-
sionsconcerning the naturc and use ofeach organ." Bv contrast,
Bcrnard sarvcomparativeanatom! as a prerequisitefor develop-
ing a gencral phlsiologv on the basisof cxPerimentsin comPara-
tivc phvsiologv.Comparativcanatomy taught physiologiststhat
nature laid the groundrvork lbr phvsiologvbv proclucinga vari-
ctv ol structureslbr analvsis.Paradoxicallv,it wasthe incrcasing
inc liv idua ti o no f o rg a n i s m si n th e a n i mal seri esthat macl ethe
) 70
analvticalstudv of firnctionspossiblc.In the Principes
de mitlecine
c\peimcntdle,Bcrnar<J nrote, "For analvzinglilc phcnomcna, is
it bettcr to studv higher or lo\\ er animals?The cluestionhasbcen
e\anrincdfiequentlv.Somc savthat the lor,er animalsare simplcr.
I do not think so, and, in anvcase,one animal is ascomplcte asthc
ncxt. I think, r at her ,t hat t hc highcr anim r ls ar c sinr plerbecause
rhcy are morc lirllv differentiated." Similarlv, in Notcsdiroclies
he obscr vedt hat "an anim al higher up t he scaleexhibit s m or c
highlv difli:rcntiateclvital phenomena,rvhich in somc wavs arr
sinrplcrin naturc,\4hereasan animal loller dou'n thc organicsc.rlt:
cxhibits plrcnomennthat are more confiscd, IcssfLllv cxprcssed,
an< lmore dilllcult t o dist inguish. " ln ot her r vor ds, t he m or e
compl cx t lr e or ganism ,t hc m or ( 'dist inct t he phvsiologicalphe-
norncnon.I n phvsiologv,r list inct m eansdiller ent iat ed,and t hc
firnctionallvdistinct must be studicd in thc morphologicalllcom-
plex. In thc clementarvorganism,evcn'thing is cor-rfirseri because
m
e' ervthi n g is conf bunded.ll t he I awsof Car t csian cchanicsar e
best stud icd in sim plc m lchincs, t he lavvsol Ber nar dianphvsiol-
ogv are b est st ucliedin com plcx or ganism s.I Fr ur lcr pp.
, l4c) - 51]
Life, Deoth and Creotion
ll06] All of llernarcl'slork bearstracesol thc stru.qglrthat \r'cr1t
on in his mind benr,eenhis profbundbut not unconditionaladmi-
rati on fi ) r Xavicr Bichat and his sinccr cgr at it ude lbr t he lessons
hc hacllcarnedfronr FrangoisNlagenclie. llt Bcrnardlbttnd a rvav
to reconcile t he t r vo m cn's conf lict ing philosophiesof biologv
u ithout compromisingcither. Ilc did this trl pcrsistentlvcxploit-
ing his ou n firndamcntalexperinrentsand the ncrv concepts he
hatl been obliged t o lir r nr ulat cin or dcr t o int cr pr ct his r esult s.
-l ' ht:
upshot r las a "f undam t 'nr alconccpt ion of Jile" incor por at -
i ng tuo lapidar vpr oposit ions:"lif i is cr cat ion" ( I t t 65) and "lif i'
i s < l eath"( 1875) .
271
 Lile is dcath. Ily this Bernard meant th.rt a rvorkin{ organism
is an organismengagcdin the processof dcstrovingitself, and that
it s f unc ti o n s i n v o l v ep h v s i c a la n d c h e mi cal phenomcni that can
be unde rs to o di n te rmso fth e l a w so f(nonl i vi ng) matter.
Wasthis a mechanistpositionTAbsolutclynot. Norv that chcm-
istrv rvas.rpositivesticnce, the variousfornrsofenergr had been
unif ied b v a l a n ' o l c o n s e n a ti o n ,a n d thc erpl anati onofel ectri cal
phenomenahad nccessitatedthe formulation of the new concept
of a " f iel d " - i t u a s n o l o n g e r p o s s i bl eto be a stri ct nrechani st.
l\lore than th.rt, Bernardfbund in his concept of the internal envi-
ronment vet another rcason not to be a mechanist. lrlechanisrn
implied a geometrjc representationof things: the mcchanistphv-
siciansof the eighteenth ccnturv had rcpresentedthe organism
asa machinecomposedof interkrcking parts.But Bcrnarddid not
think of organismsasmachines,althoughhc continued to use the
phrasem.rciine rivonte(n'ithout in any rvar being bound bv the
nr et aph o r). fh e i n tc rn a l e n v i ro n n re n trvel dsthe parts together
in a who l c i m m e d i a tc l va c c e s s i b l eto e achonc. The organi smi s
not rooted, as $.c representit, in metric space.lndecd, the exis-
tence ol thc internalenvironmentnssurcsthe "highcr" organism-
s o- c allc c bl c c a u s ei t p o s s e s s ern
s i n ternal envi ronment - of an
" obv ious i n d e p c n d e n c e ,"" a p ro te c ti v emcchani sm," .rn" el asti c-
itv."72Thus, the relation of the organismto the environment is
nDt one of passivedepenrJcnce.
What is morc, it u'asbecausr Bernardrvasnot a mcchanist-
and knerv that he was not seen as one - that hc alrvavsinsisted
t hat s c ie D c ei n g e n e ra l ,a n d h i s p h v si ol ogvi n parti cul ar, w .erc
detcrntinistic,and firrther,that he rvasthc [irst (asindeed he was)
to introduce thc tcrm "determinism" into the languageofscien-
tists and philosophers.Thc macroscopicorganism'srelativeinde-
pcndence of thc enr ironmr'nt was cnsured by the determinatc
<lependence
of its microscopic elcmentson the intctn:rl environ-
172
nrcnt. Bcrnard thus rtjected any attcmPt to Portravhis doctrine
as.r ki nd of vit alism or as som ehor vim plving t hat I if e'is exem pt
l r' ,,mtht la'r r ol'physir . anr lchent ist r v.
Lilc is crcation.I{ Bernard 1lnsnot a nrcch.rnist,rvashe not a
materialistinsofarashc attemptedto basethc lar"'sof living things
crnthose of inert mattcr? Thc ansu'eris no, l.lecaust'he insisted
that " l i l e is cr cat ion. "What dir l he m can bv t his?
The phrase"life is death" acknorvledgetlthe porverof phvsi-
cal .rnclchemical laws over what is org.rrrcin living organisms.
The phrase"lif'e is creation" ackno" ledgcd thc distincti'enesso1
thc organism'sorgani/qtion.Vital crcation, organizingst'nthesis-
theseterms referredto that asPectof lif'e that Bernar<lalso callecl
"cvolution," though not in the Darrviniansensc,sincc it reti'rrccl
onl v to cr n( ogcnet ic<le. elopnr entI.t was t he onc l) henonr enon
of life u'ith no nonorganicanaloguc:"lt is uniquc, peculiarto liv-
i ng thi ngs. 'I his cvolut ionar ysvnt hesisis nhat is t r ul\ vit al in
l i ' i ng things, "TrBer nar r applicd
l t hc t er nr "or ganic cr e. r t ion"t L)
l roth chc r nicalsvnt hesis,or t hc const it ut iot rol pr ot oplasm ,and
morphological svnthesis,or the rcconstitution of substanccsde-
strovedb v t he f ir nct ioningof t ht or ganism C:
. r cat ionor . \ olut ion
r,rasthe living cxplessiono1'tlrcorganism'snt c<lto strttcturenlat-
ter. ["Clau<lcBernard," Dtdlofu,r,pp. 566-68]
[107] ln Bernard'smost carefullv 'ritten tcxts - thc Introdttc-
tion. the RdppottanclL,r Scienrcetpirimcntolc- he distingLrishcd
bet* cen / . r r , s,u hich ar e gener aland applicablet o all r hings,anr l
lormsor proccsses, rvhich are spccilic to organisms.-l.hisspccilicitv
is somctimcstermerl "nrorphological,"sometinrcs"evolutionarv."
In fact, i n Ber nar cl's
lcxi<on,er olut ion r ef cr st . r t he r cgul. r rdevel-
opment ol an inclividu.rlliorn inception to nraturity.Tlrc mature
lorm is the sccret imperativcol the evolutiorr.In thc /ntroduction
ht statesr hat "ep(cilic, er olut ion, r n,phlsiologicalconr lit ionsar e
rhc qukl prop um ol [riologicalsci(nc(i,"and rhc Aapporrconfirnrs
) 7)
 t his r iel: " l t i s o b v i o u sth a t )i ri n g th i n gs, br.narureevol uri on-
.rrv and regenerative,diffel raciicailvfiom inorq.rnicsubst.rnces,
r n( l t he v ita l i s ts .l rec o rre c t to s a vs o ." 7 1Ihc di fl crcncc betrveen
biologv an d th c o th c r s c i e n c e si s th a t bi oJogvtakcsaccount of
the guiding principle of vital evolution,of thc "idca that expresscs
thc naturc of the living being and the vcry clscnce ollife.",-t
The notion ofan organicguiding principle mav vlell havcbeen
t he guidin g p ri n c i p l c o l C l a u d eBe rn a rd' sphi l osophyof bi ol ogy.
Th,rt nrar be uhv it renraincd sonrervhatvague, maskedbv the
1'cryteflns it used to e\pfcs5 thc idca of organiz.rtion- vital idea,
v it al < lc s i g n ,p h e n o me n .rlo rc l e r,d i rc c t cd order, arrangemcnt,
orclering,r'ital prcordering,plan, blueprint, anclfbrntation,among
others. Is it too audaciousto suggestthat with thcsc concepts,
cquivalentin Bernard'smind. hc intuitivelv sensedrvhat rvc might
nor r adav sc a l l th c a n ti ra n d o mc h a ra c tcrof l i fc - anti rancl omi n
t he s ens cn o t o l i n d c tc rmi n .rteb u t o f n cgati vcentropri A notc
in t hc f iop p o rrs c c msl o s u p l )o rtth i s i n tc rpretati on:
Il spccialmarerialconditionsilrf nccr'ssarv to crclte spccilicphc-
n()mcn.tot nutrition or er()lritiou,that docsnot meanthat thc Iarv
th.rtgivcsmcaningt(), ()r crcatr!,rel.rtions
ol ordcr andsLlccessi()n
lmong phcnomen,r
conteslrom mattcritscll. lb argucthc contrarv
u ouic lb c to l a l l i n to th t c ru d cc rro ro l th e rnateri al i srs.
In anv case,therc cnn bc lo doubt that Bcrrr.rrd,in thc lnlrorluc-
tl<rn,identificd phvsicalnature l ith disor<lcr,.rnd rhar he rcgarded
rhc properties of lifc as irrprobable relative to thore of martcr:
"l Iere asalrvavs,evcrythjngcomcs from the idea that createsand
guidesall t h i n g s . A l l n a tu ra l p h e n o m e n aexpressthemsel vcsby
phr s ic oc he m i c a m
l e a n s ,b u t th o s e m e a n sof cxJl ressi on
arc di s-
rritrutedhaphazardlv likc charactcrsofthc alphabctin a bor, lrom
r r hic h a lir rc c e x tra c tsth e rn i n o rd e r to e xpressrhe most di vcrse
171
thought or t nechanism s. "tRecall,
6 t oo, t hat her edit v,uhich u, r s
still ln obscureconccpt an(l ber'ondntan'sreachin 187(r,neltr-
thelessscenteclto Bernarrlan essenti.rlclcmcnt of thc lar,'sol nrttr-
phology,of ontogeneticcvolution.tt Am I stretchingu'ortls,then,
ordi stor t ing Ber nar d'sm caning,il l suggestt hat , in his onn r T'ar
and i n delianceof t he r cigning supr . em acv of phvsicalconcept s
i n bi ol ogr , he uas f br m t r lat inga con( . ( pt sim ilar t o r vhat t odar 's
bi ol ogist s,educat cdlr v cyber net ics,c, ] ll t he genet ic cot lci'Tht '
\\'ord "co(le," after all, hasmultiplc mcanings,anclrvhcn Bernarcl
\rrore that the vital fi)rcc haslegislati|el)(,rers, his mrtaplror nr.r\
onlv a
l ravebcen a har bingcrof t hings t o com e. [ 3uthc glim psr : <l
part ofthe tirture, for he docs not seem to haveguessedthat evcn
i nfi rrmat ion( or , t o usc his t cr m , legislat ion)r er luir esa ccr t ain
quanti tv ol ener gv.Alt hough he called his ( loct r ine "phvsic; r l
vi tal i sm, "ls it is lcgit im at e t o ask r vhet her ,givcn his not ion ol
phvsi calI or ce anr i his f iilur e t r i gr ant t he "vit al idca" t he st at us
ol a l brce, he r eallr uent ber ond t hc nr ct Jt ) hvsic.vit
r l alism t hat
he con<lcnt nedin Bichat .I f r ulir . pp. 158- 6{] l
The l deo ol f t pcr im ent ol M edicinc
[108] Just is cer t ain philosophcr sbelie'c in an et cr nal phjlor o-
phv, many phvsicianscven today Lrclic'r'in an etcrnal anclprimor-
cl i .rlmedicine. t hat of llippocr at es, - f o\ om e, t hcn, it m r y seem
rlclibrratclr pr)\'()cativethat I datc the I'eginningol modcrn mcrl
i ci ne fr om t he I r r onr cntr r hcn cxper im r nt ll nr edicinc r lcclar er l
\\' ar (JDt hc Hillpocr at ic t r ar lit ion. lb do s<-isr not t o ( lir ip. r r . r ge
l l i ppocr ar cs.I n f ict , Claude Ber n. r r dm . r clef r ee ust 'ol Conr r c's
larvof tlrree stagesol'lruman clcvcloprncnt.He acknonledgcd rhat
" thc stageol exper im ent alm eclicinedcpent ledon a pr ior evolu-
ti on." ' - ')Yet , while hist or t showsllippocr . r t c! t . ) havebccn t he
founder ol olrscnation.rlmt:tlicint.,cor-rctrn tirr the firturc is lblc-
i ng mer licir r enot t ( ) r cnounc( llilt pot r . r t csbut t o <livestit scll ol
)l\
his m et h ,6 1 j . T h e tl i p p o c r' rti cm e th o d rl as to rel v on nature; ilcst themselvesin pathologicalPhenomena."85 "Whatcvcr cxists
,,rb...r'", ion, lnedicine ua: Passive, contemplative and descrip- pathol o gicallym ust pr esentand explain it sclf phvsiologically. "86
tive. Ex[)cril-.,ntal medicin, is aggressive science'"With the aid fhus, it follou's that "the experimental phvsicianshall bring his
,rf th. .ri ,i r" . 'rrr^"ntol uir 's' man bccomes an inventor of phe- in[]ucnce to bear on a clisease once he knorvsits cx.rct dctelrnin-
-a
the fa.loryof creation and there is no limit Irm, tha t is, it s pr oxint at e cause. "87I t uas indecd t im e t o sal
nomena, 1 man in
to the p\ow( h.rt hc may t'ltain ovcr naturc "8L BY contrast' an fireu,ell to expect.rnrnrt'dicine. Pierre lean (ieorge C.rbrnishad
obs er v at j .rn rc i e n c e " p re i i c ts ' rv a tc hcs'a\oi ds, [rut acti vel Y c;rrlierdistinguishctllretrveenthe Ancicnts' art oI obsen'ation.rnd
ahorg.r rr.r,- rg."8lln Ptrt).trlar' "observationalmedicine exam- the lVloderns'artof exPerimentation.Bernardsarvthe historl' of
ines, obs."r.r,. explainsiliresscs but does not touch riiscase " sci cnti fic m er licine in sim ilar t er m s: "Ant iquit r does not seem
'nd
W hen I l; l i p ..ra te s ] a b a n dx. e dPu re e xP (' ctati onto admi ni ster to havec onceiveclof t he idea o[ exper im cnt al scicnccor , at anv
r em r . die .- i .r. to ( o u ra g (n J turt' \ .' \tn tcndenci cs.ttr r.ate,to have believeclin its possibilitv."stlBut insteaclof linking
" l * to u .'
t r o. , " n . t i i ." ,.. rh ro u g l ri ts r.: rl a r P h a s e' " ' ^'[r' rnard appl i ed the mcdicine and obscrvationto the Ancients,asCabanisdid, Bernard
, l. , . ig. r " 1 .1 o n fi p P o c ra ti c "r' 'a n y .mo dcrndoctor uho fai l ed to urgc<lmedicine to set out on the Pathof experimetrrationtou'ard
p ri o ri ty , and rvho $as concerned a l i rture of dom inat ion and por ver ."To dom inat c living nat ur e
. u, ,.i n ,.,, Pa ti e n th i s :' P
- ok . diseascs - rvho chosediagnosisancl
above all 1 al',rincand .1.rr'.' sci enti ficalh, t o conquer it f or t he bencf it <, fm an: t hat is t he
' (\' \\e rc ( l te n" rsol ol i ' ts: Thomas The idca of '
nr oqn( , \ j i - d l r< J l l n e n l . fi rndament alidea of t hc cxpcr im ent alph\ sician. "8'r
S 1d. . nho ,r,.,,'rn ' . q o i s B o i ' s i d e Sa u v a gerrl c l a C r' ri r' P hi l i ppe crpcri m cot al m eclicine,t he dom inat iou of living nat ur e, s'as
P i, r t . l. . , * .r-.n r.." -fh tro p h i l ,l ta c i n tl rr laFnnl c' anrlal l rhe oth- the opp osit cof t hc llippocr at ic icleaas expr essedin t hc t it le o1'
ers u h() hellhat (liseases .xrc essencesthat manifestedthem- Toussaint( luindanr 's 1768 t r eat ise,"l- a Nat ur e oppr im ee par la
selves mraortrilcn tlran not imPure fbrnr' In;ddition, Bernard m6decinemoderne."eo[Etudes,p. l3l]
brancle.l , asoft naturalistsrthc phvsicians,including Rudolph [109] Bernardtook from FrangoisMagendienot onlv thc namc
Vircho*...7, uiusince the 5;r' ofGiovanni BattistaMorgagni and of the ne* discipline he r vasabout t o cr eat c but also a cer t ain
Bichat, . pai,nked fcrr e116lical relations bctn'een changesin icleaof u'hat its content should be: namel-v, that the subject mat-
anat om ir i o a l ,c .rtc tu rc a sn d .:l e c ta b l es y nl P tomsi n thc hope of ter and m et hod of phvsiologvshould bc t he s. m e as t hosc of
rhe basisof a scicnce of dis-
mokin. f,[,gic.rl anator .nerr
pathologv.ln one ol his legont sur lesphinomincsphrsiquesdc lo
case. F q , - 7,/f "l "dara rd ,
r < 1 ' u l rr)rl i , ' t
h c l i e v e i n the eri ' rencc ofdi s- st at eclt hat "pat hologl is. r lso
vi c(l )ec em ber28, l8l6) , Nlagendie
zaq ti ri rr, rh e u tr-rte g o a l o f cxperi nrcnt.rlmedi ci ne
t inc t di-.. li. . ;4 P hvsi ologr ',For nr e, pat ho) ogicalphenonr cnaar e not hing but
\ ^J \ lo L ,f!' tl s
n i )\' ,1 r. a n d rl ' r .rrr,rrrr i th parh,,l ogi cal modified phvsiologicalphenomena."As a thr.'t'reticalproposition,
" tt
r n. r ( onr \ . /f' a ,l ,,1,l i s 'a ' :h e r" ' rreonI r' rg' rni sm'i n normal this rvasnot a nerv idear in the earlv part of thc nineteenth cen-
or abnor,/ l ' n d i ti o rrs ' 1 1 J i s e a sics j ust I di stLrrbancc i n the tury, even a modestIycultivateclphvsicianrvoulclhaveassociated
)\i.,logicJllirr.::)ns. Experimentalmedicinc is the the idea that pathologvis a subsetol physiologyrvith the still pres-
or ganis n rl
[l,yri.rltll ,,f-. m.,.bid. "PhvsiologicalIa'r'sman- ti gi ous n am e of Albr echt von Llallcr .I n t hc pr cf act 't o his 1755
cxpcri r.ttr1,

)7 6 277

,t.

fl
 f:rcnch transfation of von Haller's De pdrtibut corporishumani
sentientib$ct itritabil;bus(1152), l\'1.Tissot rvlote, "lf pathologv's
dcpenclenceon phvsiologv\\'ere better knortn. there ll'ould be
no need to lre]aborthe influence that the rre\l discoveryought
t o ha\ e or) th e a rt o f h c a l i n g . B u t u n l b r runatel yue l ack a u' ork
'[hcory
entitled ./hc,lpplicotionol to Procticc,so I have ventured
to c\pfes\ a feu thorrghtsconccrningrlrc prncticalbcncfits ofirri-
t abilit v . " ' l h i s i ta t(m c n t i s l i rl l o rv c db v .r scri esof obscnati onson
t he adnr in i s tra ti o no f o p i u m , to n i c s , p u rgati vesand so forth. To
be sure, this \\'asa mere "system," rvhereasl\lagendicclaimcd to
bc able to rcad, and to te.rchothers to reacl,the nntural identity
of phv s io l o g va n d p a th o l o g v i n th c fa c ts thcmsel ves,i ndepen-
c lentol an r i n te rp re ta ti o n .Ye t i t to o k a mtrl i r.alsvstem,i ndeed
the last ol'the medical svstemsaccordingtr) B('r|-|ard,el to reveal
t hc ir lc aol c rp tri me n ta l me d i c i n c ,th a r i s, the i denthat the meth-
orls of thc lal'rrr,rtrrryand thc methods ol thc clinic are one and
t b( \ alr lr ' . Bu i l t o n th c ru i n s o f rh e g re l t D osol ogi es,thi s i dea
t t t r r t ,d r r t ,,l i , i n r' l ro n r .r .p e c u l .rri v es r i rrnr i nr,r a prrrgrqrsi ve
s c ienc e. ' lh e s v s te mBc rn a r(lh a d i n mi n d. rhat w hi ch pavedthe
uav for a medicine \\'ithout svstems,v'as Franqois-Joseph
Victor
Broussais's. [ftudcs, p. 135]
[ 110] ln re c o g n i z i n gth a t Bro u s s a i h s ad demol i shedthe i dca
of pat holo g va s a s c i e n c eo l ' c l i s e a s de i s t i nct l i om thc sci cnceof
phv s iolog i c a lp h e n o me n a ,Be rn a rc d l i d nor r(' l i ncl ui shhj s o\\' n
c laim st o o l i g i n rl i tv , * h i c h l a v i n h i s h a l i ng been the fi rst to pro-
pos t bas in ga s c i e n tj fi cm c d i c i n e o n a n experi nrentrJphysi ol ogy,
lJ ur r v hat rl i d h e n rrl e o l ' M a g e n d i e l ' In 185-1,r' hen he Il l l ed i n
I dr . Nl. r ge n d iaet th c C o l l r)g ec J c[i r;rn c t' h, i s fi rst * ords rrere that
" t he s c ien ti l i c m e c l i c i n eI a m s u p p o s e dr o teachdoesnot cxi st."
I n 1865. h c n o te d tl ra t " e x p e ri me n ta lor sci cnti fi c mcdi ci ne i s
nou' c onr i n g to g e th e ro n th e b a s i so f p h vsi ol ogv,. . thi s cl evel op-
mcnt is no\1 certain."')lIn the Princrpcs, he sutnmeclup the tlvent)
)7 8
vcari th at had passcdsince his f ir st cour se. ') lHe r vassur c t hat
progresshad been ma<le:"l anr the lbunclerof cxperinrcntalmed-
i ci nc." Nlagcndichad blazeda t r ail, accor dingt o Ber nat d,but he
had neithcr set a clestinationnor tlcvelopecla mcthod. Nor coulcl
hc hrve, bccausche l. r cled t he m canst o build a br idge bct uccn
the l abo r at or t anr l t he clinic, t ( ) pr ovc t hJt r llect ivc t r cnt nr ent \
coul d be d<r lucet llt onr t he r csult sol 1- lbr r iologrWhlt
. sust ainr 'r l
B crnardin his pat h- br eaking of just
<nt cr pr ise\ \ 'ast he ar lar cnt - ss
such a possibilit r ',of just r uch. r r calit \ : "1 t hink t h. r t r her c ar c
no\l cnough facrs to pr<rurcleJrlr that phvsiologvis rhc baris ol'
mccl i ci nc,in t he senset hat . r ccr t ain num ber ol pat holot icalphc-
nomenacan nou be traceclb.rckto phvsiologicalphenonrena,.rnd
it can be shovvn,mr)reovertthat the salrlc lar,s govt:rn both."'r1
Statedmorc clearlr, Bcrnard'scl,rim to havefounrlcda tlisciplinc,
o.cn though hc cretlirsothcrs u ith h.rring thc idca lirst anrl,rl,tain-
i ng thc e ar liestr r sult \ . r cr t s ( ) n t he phvsiop. r t holoqlof <lialr t 't t 's,
that i \, ult im at el! , or r t hc di\ ( ( ) \ ( r l ol t he glr cogcnic lir nr t iolr
ol thc livcr-f...1 For [Jernard,thc expcrir.rrc nt.rl crpl.rn.rtionol thc
mechanismol di. r bct es<lcm , r nst r at eclt he validir r oi t hc pr inciplcs
o1 1865:t he pr inciple ( r f r hc iclent it v
sct fbrth in t hc / nr r r r iluct ion
o1 thc l ans ol hcalt h and disease;t hc pr inciple of t hc <let er r r in-
i sm o1biologicalphenom cn. rand ; t hc pr incipleol t he specilicit v
ol bi ol ogicalf unct ior r s,t h. t t is, t hc dist inct ionbet *een t he int er -
nal .rn(lc xt em al en\ ir onnr cnt s.I o f 6und exper im cnt , rnr
l eclicine
\ras to dem onst r at et he consist o) cvanr i com pr t ibilit t ol t hese
pri nci ples.Jhat r lonc. Ber n. r r dr venton t o r c5cLr tehe r r eu t lis<: i-
pl i nc fro m it \ ( l( t r act ( ) r s,t he olr l- f ashioned
\ \ '\ t em at ist sincr it r i-
<.rbl! rrerltledt'irhcr t,t onroi<rg)r,r to vit.rlisnr,bt slrrlrvingthern
that thc ses. r nr epr in<. ipl<
s cr r ulr lcr plain t he r er \ , phenonr enaon
rvhi ch t hcv bascd t hcir object ions. 1\ lagcnt lie's ! r \ l( \ \ as ver \
dillcrcnt fiom Bcrnarrl'r:l\'lagcndieh.rd asscrtcdrrurhs, rcllrte(l
crrors, pr onouncet ljudgm ent s- lir r him , ] if e uas r nr <, chanical
27't
 phcnomenon and vitalism an aberration.The discovervof inter-
nal secretions,the fbrmulationofthe conccpt ofthe internalenvi-
ronment, the demonstrationofcertain regulatorvmechanismsand
stabilizedparametersin the composition of that environment -
thcse things enabled Bernardto be a detcrminist rvithout being
a mechanist,and to understandvitalism as an error rather than a
fbllv. In othcr rr.ords,he found a u,ay to change perspectivesin
the cliscussion of phvsiologicaltheory.When Bernardproclaimecl,
wit h a s e l f-c o n fi d e n c eth a t c o u l d e a s il ybe mi staken fbr smug-
nes s ,t hat th c re r+ ,o u l db e n o m o re re v ol uti onsi n medi ci ne, i t
r v asbec a u s eh e l a c k e d th e m c a n s to d escri be phi l osophi cal l y
what he r+'as consciousofhaving achieved.He did not know rvhat
to call his idea of expcrimental mcdicine; he did not knorv how
to savthat he had brorrghtabout a Copernicanrevolution. Once
it could be shou'n that the internal environment aflbrdcd the
organisma ccrtain autonomvrvith respectto changingconditions
in the external environment, it also becamepossiblenot only to
refirtethe misconceptionsofvitalism but to explain horv they had
come about in thc first place. And once it could be shown that
the proccssesresponsiblefbr thc svmptoms ofa diseasesuch as
diabetescxist in thc normal as well as the pathologicalstate, it
bccame legitimate to claim that the proper approachto under-
standingdiseasewas to understandhealth. At that moment, the
culture'sattittrdc tolvarddiseascchanged.When peoplc belicved
that diseases\i,ereessenccs with a natureall their orvn, their only
thought r+,as,as Bernard said, "to be warv of them," that is, to
strike a compromise rvith thcm, But rvhcn experimental medi-
c ine c laim c d th e a b i l i tv to d e te rm i n e t he condi ti ons of heal th
and def in e d d i s e a s ea s a d c v i a ti o n fi o m those condi ti ons, atti -
tudcs torvarddiseasechanged:mankind no.rvrcjccted illnessand
s ought t o s ta mp i t o u t. T h u s , c x p e ri mental nrcdi ci ne w as but
one f or m o f th e d e m i u rg i c d rc a m th a t al fl i cted al l the i ndus-
28o
tri al i zedsociet iesof t he m id- ninet cr : nt hccnt ur y, when science,
rhrough its applications,becamea social fbrce. That is rvhv Ber-
nrrd rvasimmediately recognizedby his contcmporariesas one
of those *,ho symbolized thc agc: "ile \r'asnot lmerelv] a great
phvsiologist,he was Physiologv,"Jean-BaptistcDumas told Vic-
ror L)uruv on the day of Bernard'sftrneral,thcrcby transfbrming
thc man i nt o an inst it ut ion.
It may even be that Bernard,in all modestv,identified him-
si:lf u ith phvsiologv.When he stakedhis claim as the firunder of
cxperi me nt alm edicine, hc sim ply clem onst r at edhis alvar eness
that it was his own researchrvhich had cnabledhim to refute the
vari()rlsobjcctions raisedagainstthe nerv disciplinc.
Bcrnardkneu'that he had invented neither the term nor the
project of experimentalmedicine but, by reinvcntingthe content,
he had made the idea his or+,n:"Modern scirntiflc medicine is
thcrefbre basedon kno* lcdge of the lile of the elements in an
Thus, it relies on a diflerent conception of
internalenvironment.
tht: human body. These ideasar e m ine, and t his vier vpoint is
essenti allvt hat of exper im ent alm edicine. "etllowcver , no doubt
remcmbcring that he had written in the Intrcductionthat "art is
1,scienccis rve,"he addcd: "Thesc neu'icleasand this nelv point
of vi crv d id not spr ing lull- blown f r om m , vim aginat ion. l'hey
camc to me, as I hope to shorv,purelv becauseof thc cvolution
ofsci encc. M y ideasar e t her ef or ef ir m or c solid t han if t hev had
bcen mv or vn per sonalviewsand not hing m or e. "[ . . . ]
At severalpoints in thc forcgoingaccount, I haveu rittcn that
"Claude Bernard did not know how to say" this or that. Some-
onc might object that I am substituting for.r,r'hathc actuallv said
rvhat I th ink he should havesaicl.I am per f 'ect lvuilling t o con-
cede that I do not shar et he adm ir at ion of som c com m ent at or s
lor Bernardas a \\,riter; pcrhapsmy critics u.ill concedc that, in
attempting to situate Bernard'slntroductionhistorically and con,
28r
 K
c ept unliz e i t e p i s te m o l o g i c a l l vI, h a v cgi vcrr hi m prcci sel vthe
credit he dcscn'cs,sincc cvcrvthing I say is lrorrorvc<]liom him.
As Victor (-ousin,a philosopherI do not customarilvquotc, onct:
put it , " l- a n rc i t n e v e r u ro n g . T h c o n l v pnrbJcnri s fi ndi ng out
uhat c ons ti tu te sa c l a i m u p o n i t." [[ru d cs,pp. ]l E -.+ l ]
The Limits of Bernardian Theorv
I lll] T hc re c a n b e n o d o u b t th a t th e a ccunrul ati onofknorvl cdge
in s uc h ba s i cd i s c i p l i n c sa s p a th o l o g i (al.rn.rtom\,hi srol ogvand
his t opat h o l < rg vp,h v s i o l o g va n d o rg a n i c chemi stry nccessi tatcd
painlir l r e v i s i o no f m a n v o f th e a tti tu d estotl ar(l di seascthat thc
cightccnth cr:nturl bcquc.rthcdto the niDeteenth.Olall the dis-
c iplinc s , i t rv a sp h v s i o l o g vth a t mo s t d i rcctl v chal l engedthe nat-
uralisticpalarligm,rvhich rightly or rvronglvclaintedrhe authority
of a llipPoclatic tradition revampeclto sUit contemporarytastes.
W hilr ins i s ti n go n th c fu n d a m e n ta li d enri tr ol -the normal and
r he par ho l o g i c a l;>
, h v s i o l o gpvro m i s e dro ri etl ucemodt' sof.trcat-
Dren(fronr knorr ledgeof their pracricalt'flc<ts. Being an cxperi-
m ent al s c i c n c r:,l i k e p h v s i c sa n d c h e n ti st , rvhoseresul tsand
techniques it usecl,physiologv rvasnor onll not antagonisticto
t hc idc a o f a s c i e n ti l i c a l l y b a s e dm e d i ci nc but actual l y cal l ed
f br t he r ati o n a l i z a ti o no fm c d i c a l p ra c t i ce.The term " rati onal -
is m " las i n l a c t rv i d e l vu s e c tol c h a ra c tcri zcthc medi ci neofthe
future; one of the flrst to usc the term in this $av was Charles
Schiltzcnbergerin Strasbourg,u'ho in 184.1.rdlocatcdthe appli-
c at ion t o n te d i c i D eo f* h a t h e c a l l e d" e rperi rl ent.rlr.rti onal i sm,"
u hic h as l .rtec s l E 7 9 h c s ti l l p rc fi ' rre dt o B ern.rrd' "serpcri men-
t al nt c < lic i n c ." ' r(' , c Gc rm a rrj rkob H enl e publ i sheda
In 1 8 .1 6th
I lan<lhuchdcr ratrcncllenPotholoSlie. Ar thc time, Claude Bernard
r T ass r ill . r rrru n g d o c to r, a n d i t rv a sn o t unti l thc l U 60sthat he
took up thc ternr "r.rtionalism," fbr cxarnPlein his Pincipet de
midecinccrpirimentoic(1irst published in 1947) anclin his notcs
252
firr a proposcrJwork on problems raisedbv the practice of mcdi-
cine (preservedat the Colltlgedc France)."Scientific cmpiricism
i5 the oppositeof rationrlismand radicall_v
dif'ferentll.om sciencc,
S ci enccis baset lon t hc r . 'r t ionalism
of t he f act s. . , . N4cr Jical
sci-
rnce i s thc sciencein uhich u'c r at ionally anclexper im ent allv
cxpl ai n <liseases
in or cler t o pr cdict or alt er t heir pr ogr css. "qt
r\norhcr lbrmularion is cr'('ncl('irer: "J\'ledicineis the art ol heal-
i ng, but it nr usrbecor net hc scicnccof healing.The ar t ol he. r ling
i s empi ricism ,Tlr c scienceol healingis r at ionalisnr . "J8
ln a r vor k
(l evotedt o cpist t nt olcr gv,
t he aut hor uill pcr hapslr c lllor led t o
cxprcssa prefercncelirr thr: ternr "rationalitv" ovcr "rationalism,"
rvhich is out of place bcvond the historv of philosophv. In .rnv
case,Emile l-ittri and Charlcs Robin's Dictionndirctlc rnidecine
contai nsan ar t icl( '( ) n "r at ionalism " t hat is r callv a r lclinit ion o1'
" rati ona l, " r vhcr t it is st at eclt hat a r . r t ion. r lt r cat m ( nt ol an ill-
nessi s o ne l>. r sed on plinciples of physiologyand r nar ont r '. . r nr l
not on mer e cm pir i<isnr . l his del'init ionol a r ar ionalt hcr apr is
rcpeatedlertratint in the lUTtl [)icLionndirc
Jt ltt lttnqutJranqoisc
undcr " ra t ionalil'. "[ . . . ]
There is no er enr pl. r r vf igur c, no classicr lper iod, in r hc his-
torv of rat ionalit v.Thc ninct ct 'nt hcent ur v t aught t he t \ \ cnt iet h
that everv problenr requiresan appropriatc mcthod lilr its solu-
ti on. In mcdicinc as in ot hcr f iclds, r at ionalit vr . eveals
it sclf af icr
thc l act; it is not gilt 'lr in advanccbut r ellect edin t hc m ir r or ol
succesr Bcr
. nar dsom et iDt eslbund it dif ljcult t o acccpt t hnt not
evervrationalm et hod lr Jd t , r r csem blehis, r vhich ht : consir ler cd
paradi g m at ic.His cf it i( i\ nr s of lt udolph Vir chor r anr l cellul. r r
P athol o {\ 'r t er t h. r r sh.Alt h, r ugh lr . a1>plr r r t rof
l Louir P. r sr er . r r 's
rclitation of rhe rhettrl oI spontaneous gener.rrion,hc nr.r'(r imlg
intd hovv fiuitlirl gernr rhcorv .rvoulclprovc in rrr.rring <liscase.
i \n obsc ssionr vit h t ht <lognr lt hat all discascs
ar e no- vr r r r in
s or i
gi n proved t o bt 'an obst aclet o r at ional unr Jcr st ; t nt ling
ol inlt 'c
2Rl
 r
t ion. r nd c o n ta g i o n .Wh i l e i t i s c o rre c t, as B ernardcl ai med,that PRRr Flvr
thc ncrvesexert an influcncc on infectiousclisease, it would have
becn bcttr:r if he had ncvcr '*'ritten that "a nervousparalvsiscan
produce .r septic discasc."ee
I lere the physiopathologicaltvpe of
rationalitv leadsto an explanationof symptoms,but it wasPasteur Pr o b l e m s
and Heinrich FlermannRobert Koch rvho developeda different
t v pc of r a ti o n a l i tv c a p a b l eo f a n s rv e r i ngquesti onsof eti ol ogy.
E x t r em e p h v s i o l o g i s mh a d i ts l i mi ts r for proof one nccd onl y
considert he rear-guardaction u,agedbv Elie de Cyon againstthe
triumphalt P.rsteurians
in his study of Eticnnc-JulesMarev, the
author ol a fittle-known rvork entitled Essaide thiorie phsiologique
du choldru(18651.t00Marey rvas perf'ectlyrvell an'are that "the
searchlbr an absolutelr ef'fectivemedication or certain prophy-
lax is " llou l d re g u i re th e i d c n ti fi c a ti o n of rvhat hc sti l l ca]l ed a
microscopic pnrasitc.r{)r Thc advcrb "absolutell" and thc arJjec-
t iv e " c c r ta i n " rc fl c c t th e Be rn a rd i a nc o ncepti on of rati onal i tyr
the vcner.rtionof <lcterminisnrlcd to outrigbt rcjcction anrlscom
[br .rttempts to introduce concepts of probabilitr' .rnd sraristics
into nredicine.But at leastMarel nas fullv arvarethat knou.ledge
of the role of rhe vasomotornervous svstem in circulation and
c.rlcrriticationuas not enough to suggestan anticholera therap)'
m or e " ut i o n a l " th a n th e m a n y me d i c ati onsal readytestedem-
piricallv on the intestinaland pulmonary lorms ofthe disease,
The publication of Marey'sarticle may be taken asa recogni-
t ion ol t h e l i m i ts o f Be rn a rd i a nra ti o n a l i ty.Meanrvhi l e,the man
* ho boastcdof its univcrsalvalidity could rvrite, "l do not believe
that medicine can change the lar'r'sof human mortality or even
of the mortalitv of a nation,"l0.lanclelservhere,"Mcdicine must
ac t on inr l i v i d u a l s .l t i s n o t d e s ti n e dto act on col l ccti vi ti esor
pc oplr s . "r0 r[E tu d e sp, . 3 9 3 -9 6 ]

284
 C u a Pr r tr l) l tl r l N

Knowledge .1nd the Living

\ cir nt r ' . r n, l lilt

The Vitolist I mperqtive

Il l 2] V i talismasdcf incr l by t hc eight ccnt h'cent ur vN{ont pellier
phvsicianPaul-Joseph Barthezex1>)icithclrimtrl to lrc r continu.r-
ti on o1 tlr e Hippocr . r t ict r adit ion. This llippocr , r t icancc5t r yu, as
;>rob.rblv morc important than thc rloctlirc's other ibrebear,r\ris
totel j nnism ,lbr uhile vit a] ism bor r or r cr lnr uch ol it s t cr nt inol-
ogt from Ar ist ot le, it s spit it \ r 'r s. r l\ r '. 1\llippocr
'\ at i<. Bar t hczput
it this rvavin his r\rour'caur
1[lnurts dc Ia :cicncedc I'homne(1778):

B v nran's"r 'it al pr inciple"l nr cant hc causc, r all

l t he phenl) m {na
ol lile in the hunranbodr'.Tht n.rnrc11ivr.n co rhat causeis ol rel.r-
ti veN lit t le im por t ancc
and nr avbc choscnat will. I pr cli: r"r it : l
principlc"becausc
thissuggcsts
I lesscitcumscribed notionthanthe
rcrm iLnpctum (ro
ldcicns svopuov)that I lil)pocr:rtes
uscd or th.rnanv
ol thc other tcrmsthat havcbeenusr,l i() (lenl)tcth(' causeo1 thr
l i l i ' l i ncr ions.

\ri tal ismr vasin one r cspcct . rbiologr lor phvsiciansskept ical
of thc he aling pouer s of m t r licar ion. ; \ ccor djng t o t he llippo-
crati c theor v of ndt ur c m e( lt Lot nrt,he dclensivcr enct ionof t he
organi smis m or e im l) or r nntr har rdiagnosingt hc c; r usct t f t hc dis-
eas e.B \ th e s a meto k c n , p ro g n o s i s ,though dependenton di aq-
nos is . is rh t rl o mi n a n t a rt. l t i s a s i mportaD t to ar)ti (i patethe
c our s eo l a d i s c a rca s to (l (tc rmi n c i t s causc.B ecausenature i s
thc first phvsician,therapv is as much a nt,ittcr ofPrudence asof
. ta l i s m a n d n a tu ra l i s mw erc thus i nextri cabl yassoci -
boldnes s Vi
atcd. Me(lical vit.rlism rcllcctcd an alnrostinstinctivervarinessof
the hc.rling.rrr'spo\\'erso\ei lil;. There is 4n analogvto be drau n
her ei t h c c o n tra s tb e trte e n n a tu rea n d art i s rcmi ni sccntofA ri s-
t ot lc ' s c ()n tra s tb c trv e c n n a tu ra l mo vement and vi ol ent move-
ment. Vitalism lvas.rn expressionof the confldencc among the
living in lry', of thc nrin<l'sc.rpacitr', asliving consciousness
<-rfli[e,
t o identi l \' rv i th th e l i v i n g a s l i k e rv i th l i ke.
T hes e re m a rk s s u g g e s tth e fb l l o n i ng obscrvati on:r' i tl l i sm
of l i v-
r ef lc c t c d a n e n d u ri n gl i [e -i mp e ra ti v ein thc consci ousness
ing hum a n b e i n g s .-fh i s w a s o n e re asontbr the vaguenessand
nebulou s n e s th s a t m c c h a n i s tb i o l o g i stsand rati onal i stphi l oso-
pher ss a ' r' a s< l c fe c tso f i t.rl i s rd o c tri ne. l Ir' i tal i sm u' asabove.rl l
an im pt ' ra ti v t, i t rra so n l l n a tu ra l th r t i t shoul d havesorre di f-
ficuftv expressingitself in determinate formulations. fConnais-
ronce,p. 86]
I J l3l In d c c d , E m a n u e lR a d l rc c o g ni zedthat vi tal i sm \r' rsan
impcrarile r.rther than a nrcthctdand more ol an ethical slstem,
pc r haps .th a n a th e o rv .l M a n , h e a rgued,can l ook at nature i n
t\\'o uays. lle feclsthat he is a child of n.tture and has a senseof
belongi n g to s o m e th i n gl a rg e r th a n hi mscl f; hc sceshi msel f i n
nature and nature in himself. But he also standsbelorenature as
bc f br e. rn u n d e fi n a b l ea l i c n o b j c c t, A sci enti stu' ho fecl r fi l i al ,
s\mpatheticsentin]cntsto\\'nrdnature rvill not regarrlnaturalphe-
nomen.iasstrangeand alien; rathcr, hc n ill lind in them lil-e,soul
and m c a l i n g , Su c ha ma n i s b a s i c a l l ya vi tal i st. P l ato,A ri stotl e,
Calen, all medieval and nlost Rcnaissanccscholarsrvere in this
scnsc vit.rlists.Thev rcgarrledthe univ<rscas an organism, that
288
is, J harntoniouss,-stenrobetlient to cert.rin larvsand dcclicatecl
l ,) | rrl Ji n. r ds. Tht ", r . nccir cr l , 'l t ht ln* lr c' a' ln or glni, 'r r lpar t 1
ui l l )i \ u ni\ ef \ ( . a r , 'r t , 'l , , ll in llt l unir er . r i or g. r r r i'm .r ll ol I
l h,rst' cells u, cr c unilicd bv . r n int cr nal sym Pat hv.I t t ht r cf ir r c
scenre(lDaturalto thcm that the fate of the Partial organ should
bt: t,ound up vvith rhe Irtovementsol the heavens.
Such an inrerprct.trionmat rTcll bc l<-'drlrtlbl the ;rsvchoanal-
rsi s ol knoulcdgc. l- hat it m av havt 'som cr ncr it is st r ggcst cd
bv
its convcrgenceu'ith Walthcr Ricsc's contmcnts on C()nstantin
von N1rrnakovr"s biological theories: "ln von Monakort''sncuro-
bi ol o{r' . r nan is a chil<l of nat ur c lh<t nevcr lcavcsit r nr ot her 's
hrt,rsr."l fhere can [.c Iro doubr that, fcrrthc vitalists. the lunda-
nrentalbiologicalphenom enon\ {asgener at ion,u hich conjur ed
up ( rrtain imagcsanrl poscdccrtain problemsthat, to onc rJcgrcc
or anoth cr ,inf lucnced t hc r cPr cscnt at ionof ot her phcnom cna.
A \i ral i s t , I r voulclv. 'nt ur e t o suggest .is a per son \ vho is m or e
likcll ro pondcr thc problcntsol lifc trv conrcnrplatinq.rncqg rhan
br trrrninga udncJror opcrating tlrt bcllrurof a fdrgc.
V i tal ist suer e conliclentof t hc spont aneit l of lif i: and r eluc-
tant - i n som c cascshor r if icd - t o t hink of it . r s spr ingingf iom a
natureco nccivcdof as. r ser iesof m ech. r nicalpr ocesses, r nd, t hus,
pararl or icalllr cduced t o . r conger iesol devicessim ilal t o t hose
rr hi ch hunr anbcingshad cr eat eclin t hcir ( luestt o r ler conr e t he
obstaclesthat naturt-had placeclin theil uav. Tvpicalol thcscatti-
tudcsua s a m an like JeanBapt ist evan I lclm ont . f . . . 1
\i an l lclm ont t lcnied l) cscar t cs's( ont ent ion t hat t he lbr ces
ol narurcar c unif ied. Fver vbeing, he. r r - qucd,h. r sb, r r h ir s or , , n
i ndi vi du allbr ce anclt he f ir r ccol it s specit s.Nat ur c is an t 'ndlcss
hi crarchvof f ir r ces. r nd f ir r m s.This hier ar chvcom pr iscssccds,
l cavens,pr inciples. r nd it icas.The lir ing boclvis or ganizedas a
hierrrchv of orcliCr.'lhc tcrm rir<hc,Iirsr principlc, borrorr.cdfiom
f'aracclsus,describ,..<l
an organizing,corrrmanclingpowef, some,
2l l 9
 thing rather nrore akin to the generalol an army than to a work-
man. lt marks a return to the Aristotelianconccption ofthe lrody
assubordinateto the soul in the samesenscas the soldier is sub-
ordinateto his captainor rhe slaveto his master.lViralismattacked
the technologicalversion of mechanismat least as much as, and
perhapseven more than, it did the theoretical version. IConnais-
sance,pp. 88-89]
Ill4l It may scem absurd to argue that vitalism rvasin fact a
lertile doctrine, particularlvgiven the fact that ir al\1a.isportrayed
it s elf asa re tu rn to a n c i rn t b e l i e fs- a tendencyqui te evi dcnr i n
the naive penchant of nrany vitalists to borrorv Greek terms for
the rather obscureentities thev felt nbliged to invoke. The vital-
isrr of the Rcnaissancewns in one sensea retum to Plato intended
to counter the ovcrly logicized medievalversionof Aristotle. But
thc vitalism of van Helrnont, Georg firnst Stahl and paul-.loseph
Barthezhasbeen calleda return beyondDescartesto the Aristotle
t>fDe anima, For HansI)riesch, the caseis patenr. But ho*, is this
return to rhe Ancients to bc interpreted?Was it a revivalof older
and consequentlytimeworn concepts, or rvasit a caseof nostal-
gia for ontoJogicallyprior intuitions, for a more direct relation
bct{'een inrention and objr'ct?Archaeologvstemsis nruch from
a nostalgiafbr original sourcesas fiom a love ofancient things.
We are more apt to graspthe biological and human significance
ofa sharpenedflint or adzc than ofan electric timer or a camera.
In the realm oftheory, one must be sureofa theorv'sbackground
and developmentto interprct rcversionas rctreat or reiection as
reaction or betraval.Wasn'tAristotle'svitalism alreadya reaction
againstthc ntechanismof l)emocritus, and rvasn'rplato's final-
ism in thc PrSoddoa reactioDagainstthe nt('chanismofAnaxagorasi,
In anv case,there can be no doubt that vitalists rvt'rcafter a cer-
tain pretech nological,prelogicalnaivetdofvision, a vision oflil;
as it uas befbrc man created tools and languageto extend his
29.J
rcach.Thar is rvhat Th6ophile de Bordt'u, the firsr grt'at theorist
of thc Nlont pcllier School,m cant u hen he called van Helnr ont
" onc o f t hose ent husiast st hat ever y cent ur v needsin or der t o
irsroundthc scholastics."ilConnaissance, pp. 91-921
The Technological Model
[115] The r r or d "m echanism "com es f iom t he Cr cck unxqvn,or
device,rvhich combinesthe trvo sensesofruse (or stratagem)and
nrachint'.Ptrhapsthe trvo meaningsare actuallvone, Is not man's
i nl cntion and useof m achines,his t echnologicalact ivit y in gen-
eral, rvhat l{egel calls the "rq5q of reason"in Section 209 ofhis
I-ogic?-fhis ruse consi!ts in accomplishing one's or",n cnds bv
mcansof int er m ediat cobjcct s act ing upon one anot her in con-
tormi t v uit h t heir o$n nat ur es,The essenceol . r m achineis t o
bc a mediation or, as mechanicssay,a Iink. A mechanismcreates
nothing, and therein lies its inertia (trc..r),vct it is a ruse u hosc
construct ionnecessar ilrinvolvesar r . As a scient if icDt et hodand
phi l os ophv,m echanismis t her ef or ean im plicit post ulat ein. r nv
useofmachines.The successof t his hum an r usedcpcndson t hc
Iack of any similar rusein Nature. Natlrrecan be conquercdbv art
onl y i f sheher selfis nor ar t : only a m an nam cd U) r 'r ses( No- M an)
is capableoI devising .r schemeto get the uoodcn horse insidc
the gatcsol Trov, and he succeedsonly becausehis cnemies are
forcesof nature rathcr than clcver engineers.l he rusesbr rvhich
ani malsavoid t r aps ar e olien adducedas objecr ionst o t he Car -
tesiantheoty ofthe animal-machine.In the lbrervorclto the N.'$,
Essa,vs,
Leibniz oflers thc easelvith \a,hichanimalsare trappcd as
evidencelor Descartes's contention tbat thev are capablconly ol'
respondingt o im m ediat esensat ions( \ 1hat we would t odal call
" condit ionecl r cf lexes") . Convcr selr ',I ) escar t es'shypot het ic. r l
description in the Mcditationsof a deceptive Goci or evil gcnitrr
eff'ectivelvtranslbrmsman into an aninralsurroundeclby traps. If
291
(iod rrscshunranruses,rgainst humankind,man descendsliom the
s r . r t usof liv i n g c re a tu rero th .rt o f me re i n ert obi ect. Is the the-
( ) f \ ' of t hc liv i n g ma c h i n ci u s t s u c ha h u m a nruse,rvhi ch.i f taken
liter.rlh, rvould prove that there is no such thing as lili ? But rvhy
t hen, if anim a l sa re m c rc ma c h i n c s ,i fn a tu rc i s mercl v one vast
machine,does thc domination of animalsand nature cost human
beingsso much et'fort?[Connairsoncc, p. 87]
lllt ' ] Nlc c h a n i spt h i l o s o p h e rs ,rnbdi o l o gi ststook machi nesas
a or . i I th e ,vs tu d i e d rh c p l o l ' l c n r o f machi ne-l > Lri l di ng
at
- 11iv en,
all, s , r lv e<itl b v i n v o k i n g h u n ra nc a l c u l a t i on.Thev rel i ecluP on
t he enginee ro r, u l ti m a te l r' ,a s i t s e e m c dt o them, the sci cnti st.
Mislcd bv thc ambiguit,vof the tcrm "mechanical," thcv looked
upon machincsasnothing more than Jeifi-edtheorems,theorems
made concrete bv thc relativelvtrivial opcration of construction,
nhich. thel bclioecl, involvcdnothing more than the application
of k no*ledqe i n fi .rl lc o n s c i o u s n e sosfi ts l i mi ts and l i -rl lcertai ntv
of it s ellec t s .l n m l v i e rv ,h o u e re r, th c b i ol ogi calprob)err ofthc
or-q.rnism-machinc cannot bc tr(ate(l separatelvll-om tlrc techno-
namcl y,the probl em
logic alpr ob l e m rv h o s cs o l u ti o n i t a s s u mes,
of t he r c lat i o n b e tw c e n te c h n o l o g ya n d s c i ence.The usualsol u-
t ion is t o s a y th a t k n o w l e d g t i s p ri o r to i ts appl i cati onsboth
logicallvand chronologically,but I shall try to show that the con-
s t r uc t ioDof m a c h i n e si n v o l v i trqa u th e n ti c al l vbi ol ogi calnoti ons
c annot bt ' un c l e rs to o dru i th o u t re ri s i n g th i s vi c$ ofthe rcl ati on
bet r r . een
s c ie n c t a n d te c h n c ,i o g r.
1 ...]
T , r a s c r u p u l o u so b s e rv e r,l i v i n g c re a t urcsother than vertc-
br . r t esr ar c lv e x h i b i t s tru c tu re s l i k c l y to suggcstthe i dca of a
m ec hanis m( i n th e te c h n i c a l s e n s e ).T o b e surc, l ul i en P acottt:
notes that thc arrangemcntof the parts of the c,r'cand the movc-
mrnt of thc eveballcorrespondto rvhatmathcmaticiansu ould call
a m ec hanis m.5Pe rh a p sa l ' e * d e l i n i ti o n s a r c i n orcl er.A nrrchi ne
is a r lan' nr a d eo b j c c t th a t d c p c n d s .l b r i ts esserti alfi rncti on(s).
192
on one or m ot e m cchanism s.A m echanisnris r conf igur at ionol
nol i ng so lidsr Thoseconf lgt t r at ionis nr aint aincrtl hr ot t qhoutit s
ntovemenr;or, to put it anothcr rvar',.rmcchanismis an assenr-
blv of parts rvhoscrelation to one anothcr changcsover timc btrt
i s peri odicallrr est or cdt o an init ial conf igt r r at ion.Thc assem blv
consistsin a svstem ol linkagcs uith fixed dcgreesof fict'dom:
fbr examp le,a penduJumor a cam - dr ivon"alvc hasonc dcgr eeol
ficedom; a \r'ornl gear shaft has llr>. Thc nraterialcmboclimcnt
ofthcse dcgr eesof lr eedom consist sin gui<les,t hat is, st r t r ct t t r cs
l i mi ri ng th e nlovem entof solit lsin. ont nct . The m ovcnt entof nnY
rrachi ne is t hus a f lnct ion of it s st r uct ur c,and t hc m cchanisnr
i s a funct ion of it s conf igur at ion. f he t ir ndam ent alpr inciplesol
a gencral thcory of mcchanisms(as detinecl herc) can be fbuntl
in anv stantlarclvvork, lbr example Franz Rculeaux'sKinemutics,
(u' hi ch rv ast r . r nslat edf r om G er m anint t ' Fr enclrin 1877) .[ . . . ]
Tht po int ol t his br ief r evie$ of t hc lunr lam ent als ol kincm , r t
i cs i s that it allor vsnr t t o point up t he par ar lr xicalsignilicance
ol ' the foll, r n'ingpr ', r t r lemWhr
: ( li( l scienf ist s usem achinesan<l
mcchani s m sas m odcls lbr undcr st anding( ) r ganicst nr ct r lr esnnd
functions?On< problem lvith anv mcchanicalmodel is its source
of cnergr'.A machine, as dcfined abovc, is not sclflcontaincd:it
must take enclgt fiom somclhcre and translbrm it. We alvlavs
thi nk of moving m achines. r sconnect cd r r it h som c sour cc ol'
cnergv.?
[:or a Ionp t inr e, t hc cncr gr r hat \ et kiDenr at icm achinesin
or aninr als.ln
moti ()n c.lnr ef r cr mt hc m uscularellbr t of hLr m ans
that stage,ir r|ar,:rbviouslvtautologicalt<,rcxplain the movcntent
of a l i vi ng t hing bv com par ingit t o t hc m ovenr entol'a nt achin"
cl ependenton m uscularef br t f br it s sour cc of encr gv. Hist or i-
cal l v, the r elbr c, as has lr equent ll bct n shou'n, t her c could bc
no mcchanicalesplanat ionof lif e I unr : t i<>ns unt il m cn had con'
structednut oDr nt nlt hc vcr v uor t l suggest slr ot h t hc m ir acul, , t r s
j.J
l
quality of the object and its appearanceof being a self-contained
m ec han i s mrv h o s ec n e rg v d o e s n o t c omei i mmedi atel y at any
rate, fi<-rmthe muscularel'fort oI a human or animal. IConnois-
pp. 102-10,11
.sonce,
[ 117] A ri s to tl e , I th i n k , to o k a c u s toD al y w av o[ l ooki ng at
animal organisms,a sort ofcultural a p oti, and raisedit to the
)evelofa conccpt oflife in general,The vocabulanofanimal anat-
omv is fLll of terms for organ5,parts and regions of organisms
basedon technologicalmetaphorsor analogies.8
The dcvelopment
of the anatornicalvocabularyin Greek, Hebrew, l-atin and Ara-
bic shorvsthat the perceptionoforganic lorms rvasshapedin part
bv technological norms.eThis cxplains whv phvslologvwas tra-
ditionallv rcgardedas subordinateto anatomy. For follorversof
Galcn, phvsiologvu'asthe scienceof the use of thc parts, dc usu
portium-Frcm William I larvevto Albrecht voDllaller and beyond,
moreover,the scienceof organic functions !r'ascalled anotomia
onimora.Claude Bernardwas ; Iorceful critic of this way of look-
ing at things. though ofien rvith more rhetoricalenergythan prac-
tical consequences.
As long as technologvservedasthe sourceof
models fbr explaining organic functions, the parts of the organ-
is m were l i k e n e d to to o l s o r ma c h i ne parts.l 0The parts w cre
r at ionall y c o n c e i v e d a s me a n s to th e organi sm' send, and the
organism itself wasconceivedof asa static structure, the sum of
it s par t s .
The standardhistories m;v rvell overemphasizethe contrast
between Aristotelianismand Cartesianism,at leastas far as their
theoriesol lili are concerned.To be sure, thrrc is an irreducible
differenccbetrveenexplaininganimalmovcntentasa consequcnce
ofdesire and giving a mechanistexplanationof desire itself. The
pr inc iple o f i n e rti a a n d th e c o n s e rv ati onof momentum l ed to
an ir r ev e rs i b l c re v o l u ti o n i n n a tu ra l s ci ence: $,i th the theory
ofstored energv and delcrrc<l(rtilii.ation, l)cscartesrvasab)t-to
294
rrfute the Aristotclian conception of the relation benveennature
and art. AII that notwithstanding, it remainstrue that the use of
nrecha nicalm odeis t cr r epr esentliving or ganisnr sim plied t hat
thosc organismswere conccivedas necessarv and invariantstruc-
turcs of their component parts. The implicit idca of order was
th.rt ofthe u'orkshop. In part fivc ofthe Dtucourrcctnthc f,|ethod
l )cscar t csdiscussesa wor k t hat he nevcr published, Le llondc
1"1-hcWorld," though it was.rctuallyabout nran):"Ishorved tht'te
u'hat kind of u'orkshopthe ncn'esanclmusclesof the human bodl'
must constitute in order that the animal spirits havethe strength
ro move the limbs." Later, in discussingthc behaviorof animals,
h< 'sars,"lt is nat ur et hat act su it hin t hem , accor dingt o t he dis-
p<rsitionof their organs."Workshop,disposition:tlrescrveretech-
nological concepts before thcy became anatomical ones, Fron't
AndreasVesalius,[)escartesborrowec]a conccpt that wasactually
in iairlv rvide use iD thc sixteenthand seventeenthcenturies,that
of thc t'abricacorpo s humani.ln a ]etter to Marin i\lersenne,a
rc[erencet o Vcsaliuslbllowed t his st at em enrof pr inciplc: " f he
numbcr and the orclerlvarrangementof the nerves,veins,bones
and other partsof an animaldo not show that natrrreis insufficcnt
to fo6 11"-, providcd vou supposethat in evervthingnatureacts
e\actl r in accor danceuit h t he laus of m echanics,and t hat t hese
l.rvvshavebeen intposcd on it LryCcrd."lLThis inrocation of Cod
the mcchanic,apparentlvintended onlv to rule out anv vital tclc-
ologv,fi-rllvmerits RavmondRuver'sacerbicrcmark thar thc more
pcoplc thought of organismsasautomata,thc more thev thought
ofGod asan lt alian engineer .
1. . . ]
In short, both Aristotle and Descartcsbased thc clistincrion
betu' c en t he or ganismand it s par t s on t cchnologicallvcondi-
tioned perceptionsof macroscopicanimal structrtres.Thc tech-
nol ogi cal m odel r educeclphvsio) ogvt o a m at r er of deduct ion
fiotn aDatoml:an organ'sfuncrion coulrl be deducerlllorn thc vr.ar
29\
 l-
it \\'asput togcthcr. Although the parts \!ere seen, in dynamic
terms, assuborriinateto the rvhole,.justas the partsofa machine
uere subordinateto the uhole machine, that functional subor-
clination led to a vie\\' of the static structure of the machine as
m c r c lv t he s u m o fi ts p a rts .IE tu d e sp, p . 323-25]
The Social Model
[ 118] T hc fb rc g o i n g c o n c e p ti o n l a s n ot scri ousl y chal l enged
until thc first half of the nineteenth century, u,hen two things
happcncd. Iiirst, trvo basic riiscip)ines,embrvologv and phvsiol-
ogv , uhic h h a d b e e n s tru g g l i n gto d e fine thei r o\i n di sti ncti ve
methods and concepts, achievedthe statusofcxperimental sci-
cnces. Sccond,thcrc w'asa changc in thc scalc ofthe str-uctures
studicd bv morphologists;or, to put it anothcr rvav,ccll theory
l asintroduceclinto generalanatomv.
Lealing asidethe regenerationand reproduction ofAbraham
temblev's fimous plant-animalsand Charles Bonnet's observa-
tion of parthelogenesisin plant lice, no biological phenomenon
\l-asmorc difficult fbr eighteenth-centurytheoriststo interpret in
tenns ol technologicalmodcls than that of morphologicaldcvclop-
m ent , or th e g ro w th fi o m s e e dto a d u l t fbrnr. l l i stori ansof bi ol -
ogy ficqucndy associatcthe epigeneticvierv of rlevelopmentu'ith
mechanistbiologv; in so doing, thcl ncglcct the closeand all but
obligatorvassociationof mechanismrvith prcfonrationism. Since
m ac hinesd o n o t a s s e m b l eth e m s e l v e s,anclsi nce there arc no
m ac hinesf b r c re a ti n g(i n th e a b s o l u tes e nse)othermachi nes,the
liv ing m ac h i n c m u s t i n o n c rv a vo r a n o thcr bc associ atedu' i th
rvhat cighteenth-century thinkcrs liked to call a machiniste,an
inv c nt or o r b u i l d c r o f m a c h i n c s .If n o such bui l der uas perccp-
tible in the present,then there must havebeen one at thc incep-
t ion: t hc t h c o rv o f a s c e drv i th i n a s e e dand so on, ad i nfi ni tum,
\\'asthus a logical responseto the problem that gave rise to the
296
thcorv of prefbnr.rtion. Dcvclopmentthen bec.rmea simplt'mat-
tcr of incr easingsizc,anclbiologv becam ca kincl of geom et r v,as
Il enri G ouhieronce r cm ar kcdabout t he conceptof cont ainm ent
in Nicolas dc l\4alcbranche.
Whcn CasparFriedrich Wolfl shorvecl(in 1759and 1768)that
thc cl c vclopm entof an or ganism involveclt he em er gt ncc ol a
seriesol nonprefbrmcd stnrctures,honever, it becamencccssarl
to res t or er esponsibilit vf br t he or ganism 'sor ganizat iont o t he
organisnritself. That organismuas not random or idios-vncratic,
antl .rnoma]icswere unclerstoodas liilurt's to dcvclop or to Pro-
gressbevonda normallv intermecliatestagc.I lcnce therc must be
some firrmativetcndcncy',rvhat Wolfl'called a nr.rus
formolivusand
JohanFrie<lrichBlumenbachcallcd a 8i/.luntltl.i.b.ln otlrer rvords,
it \\11snecessarvto assumcan immanent plan of organogt'ncsis.
' I-h eselact s unr ler lie Kant 's t heor v of or ganic linalit v and
totalitv as set lorth in tht'.Critiqueof Judgmcrr.A machine, Kant
savs,i s a $ hole r vhoscpar t sexist f br onc anot hcrbut not bv one
.rnother.No part is madc fiom anv other; in lict, nothing is m.rde
ol things of the sametvpe as itsclf. No machinc possesses its o\\'n
formativeenergv.
A little more Lhana hundr.cdvcar,jago, ClaucleBern.rrcldevcl-
opcd an iclenticaltheorv in his Introduction
i I'ltudc dc la mdtlccinc
expirimennle ; "Wh.rt characterizesthe living mlchine is not the
natureof it s physicochem icalpr opcr t ies,com plex t hough t hcl
mav bc, but rhe creation ol that maclrine,u hich dcvclopsbelore
our evcsunder condit iot r speculiar t o it sclf and in accor dance
rvith a definite iclea,* hich cxprcsscsrhc naturcof tlre living thing
and the essenceof lift itsclf."rr Like Kant, Benrarclgavt'the name
"iclca" tcr the morphological (i ptioi, a\ it \\'ere,that dctcrmines
the formation ancl shapcof cach p.rrt in relation to all thc rcst
througha sort ol rt'ciprocalcausation.An<lagainlikc Kant, Bernard
I
taught t hat nat ur alor ganizar ioncannorbc t hought o{ as being in
197
any \r'ayakin to human agency,Strangerstill, after ruling out, on
explicit grounds,any possibilitv of a technologicalmodel of or-
ganic unity, Kant hastenedto suggestorganic unity asa possible
model for social organization.llBernardused the converseof the
sameanalogywhen hc compared the unity of the multicellular
organismto that of a human society.ffrudes, pp. 325-27]
fl19l Claude Bemard acceptedcell theory, as he had to in order
to make experimentation in phvsiology possible. He elaborotedthe
conccpt of the internal environment, and that, too, r,vasa neces-
sary condition for experimental physiology.The physiology of
r egulat ion (o r h o m c o s ta s i s a
, s i t h a s b e en cal l ed si nce W al ter
BradfordCannon), together u-ith cytologic-morphology enabled
Bernardto treat the organismas a rvhole anclto develop an ana-
lytic scienceoforganic functions u,ithout brushingasidethe f)ct
that a living thing is, in the truc senscof the rvord, a synthesis.
Bernard'smost important remarkson the subjcct that concerns
us here can be found in his Ieqons sur les phdnominesde la vie
communsoux animaut et aut vigdtaux,basedon lectures he gave
at the Mus6um in the final vearsof his lifc. Thc structure of the
organismreflects the exigcncicsoflife on a more basiclevel, that
of t he c ell. T h e c e l l i ts e l f i s a n o rg a n i s m ,ei ther a di sti nct i ndi -
vidual or a constituent of a larger "societv" of cclls forming an
animalor plant. The term "sociery,"which Rudolph Ludwig Karl
Virchou and Ernst llcinrich I laeckel also seizedupon at around
the sametime as Bernard,suggesteda model for the organicfunc-
t ions v er y d i ffe re n t l ro m th e te c h n o l o gi cal model - namel y,
an cconomic and political one. Complex organisms\r'ere now
thought of as totalities comprising virtuallv autonomoussubor-
dinat e eleme n ts ." L i k e s o c i e ty ,th e o rg ani smi s constructedi n
such a wav that thc conditions of clcmentary or individual life
arc respected."ll Division oflabor llas the lar" for organismsas
rvell asfbr societies.Conceivedin terms of a technologicalmodel,
298
an organism rvasa set of strictly rclated basicmechanisms;con-
ccivcd in terms ofan economic and political model' though, an
organismwas a set of structuresthat grew increasinglvcomplex
and diverseas thev assumedspccializedrcsponsibility fbr origi-
nallv undifferentiatedfunctions.Betweenthe levcl of the elcmen-
tarv ce ll and t hat of m an, Ber nar d explained, one f inds euer y
degrec of complerity as organ combines with organ. The most
highlv developedanimals posscssmultiPlc systems:circulatory,
respiratory,nervousand so on.
Phvsiologv$'as thus the kcy to organic totalization, the key
that anatomyhad failed to provide. The organsanclsystemsof a
highlv diff'ercntiated organism exist not lor themselvesor fbr
other organsand systemsbut for cells, the countlessanatomical
radicals, lor u,hich thcy create an internal environment whose
composition is maintainedin a stcadystateby a kind of feedback
mccha nism .Bv joining in associat ionand inst it ut ing a kind of '
society, the basic elemcnts obtain the collective means to live
rhei r se par at clive': "1[ one could at ever r m om cnt cr e. r l(an envi-
ronment identical to that u,hich the actions of nearbyparts con-
stantly creatc fbr a given clementarv organism, that organism
l'ould live in ficcdom exactly as it lives in societv."rsThe Part
dependson a u.holc that existssolelv in order to maintain it. Bv
refcrring all functions to the cell lcvel, general phvsiologv pro-
vided an explanationlbr the fact that the structure of the rvhole
organism is subordinatr to the functions of each part. Made of
cclls, the organismis also madefor cells, fbr partsthat are them-
sclveslesscomplicated rvholes.
The use of an econom ic and polit ical m odcl enablednine-
teenth-centurybiologists to understandrvhat the use ofa tech-
nologicalmodcl had preventedtheir predccessors from grasping.
'fhe
rclation of the parts to the n,hole is one of irretrdtio, (a con-
ccpt that latcr met r',.ithsuccessin neurophvsiologv),r'iith thc
299
 Y
that those
survivalofthe P.rrtsl)eing the ultimatc cnd: thc parts \\'erescen viclualcells n'ere satisfled;l]crnard had hlpothesizcd
uhcn cells wcr e t nkr ll ot t t ol
n9 lqr ngerns i n s tru n re n tso t' p i c c c s b u t a s i t.,i rj dudl J A r a ti me coD di tionscoult l also bc sat isf ied
t hat an aPPr oPr i'lt c
* hcn u hat rvould later become ccll thcorv rvasstill at the stage thri r as sociat ionwit h ot her cclJs,pr ovided
.rrti fi cialenvir onm entr vascr elt ed. Bt r t r vhat did it act uallt 'm ean
of philosophicalspecul.rtionand prclintinarv microscopic explo-
the inhibi-
ration, the tcrm "monad" lvasoficn used fbr the atonlic compo- lirl the cell to livc in freedom, that is, libcr'rted frorr
ti ons a nd st im ulat ionsst em m ing lr onl it s int egr at i( r nint o t hc
ncnt of an organism; it rvasonlY latel that "monad" lost out to
in societ v
" c ell. " A ugu s reC o m te , i tt fa t t, re j tc te d rvhathe cal l ed tl re " the- or{nni s m ?I n or dcr f ir r lif i ir lr cedon r o r cplic'}t elif c
The i ndi rect but th" ccll nould havcto be provided u ith an cnvironmtnt
or v of m ona d s "a n d rv c n o u ' c a l l c e l l th e o rv.16
".r.rctlr', ir r
real influcncc of Lt'ibniz on the earlv Romantic philos<-rphcrs and thl r agcdas it did. t lut t hcn t he lif e 'r f t hc cell nould llr oceed
it \ \ 'ould r ir )t
bioiogistsu ho drcanrerlup cell theorr allolvstrs to sal ol the celi paral l c lr ', it h changesin t ht '. r r t if it : ialcnvir onm ent ;
a cell
rvhat Lcibniz said of the monad, namely,that it is a Parstotalis' be inclcpendent.Iiurthermorc, living in fieeclomrcn<lcrecl
if r evoc'r blY lost it s
It is not an instrumentor a tool but an in(lividuill''l .sublcdin rela- uni i r to r ct ur n t o: ociet v: t hc liber 'r t edPilr t
tion to its lunctions. Bernardficquentll usesthe term "harmonr" chrracter of bcing part ofa u holc. I-tienne \\blfl renrarks:
to convev rvh.rthc mc.rnsbv "organic totalitY." lt is not too diffi-
c ult t o dc t r .' c tth e te i n a l i i n t e c h o o f L ti b ni z' s phi )osophl 'A nd N o nttfm Pt r o a fr r tc a n ;r sso ci a ti o no l p r cti 'r u sl r ti i 'i s'r ci a tcdctl l t

so, .r'ith the recognition of the cell as thc baric morphological hasbet'n ablc to teconstitutcstrttcturalunin' Analvsishrs nevcrbccn

c lc m r nt of a l l o rg a n i z e ds u b s t.rn c e sth, e m eani n{ ofthc concept succectlctlbv sr nthesis.Rv rn illogic'rl ebur( "l langtrage'onc oltcn
lls
oforganization changed:the ,r'hole rn;lsno longer a stl'uctureof . r p pl i csr h e tcr n r "ti ssu c cu l tu r c" t( ' i t) a r cl l i c p r o l i l i r 'l ti o n s o i ct

int er r elat e d o rg a n s b u t a to tn l i z a ti o rr o f i ndi vi < l ual s.17 S i mul - that do not rcllecl cithel thc \truclure or cohcsionol the tissucliom

t aneous l\ ,t h c rl trc )o p mtn t rrl s e t th e o rr c hanged the tl -' l di ti onal r r h i cb th ,r va r , tr l cn .r r

m at lr em at i c a lmc a n i l tgo f th c tc rm " p a rt," j ust as the cl evel op-

m ent of c el l th e o rv c h rn g c d i ts tra d i ri o n alanatomi calmeani ng' In other wot-<ls,Jn otganic elcmcnt can be c'rllcd 'rn clcnlcnt onll
i n i t s un <l i sso ci a te dsta te . Th c si tu .r r i o n r ccl l l s Il cg tl 's o l r scl l a -
, 3 2 9 -3 1 ]
lE r r r r lc spp.
ti<rn in his lo,gic thrt it is thc rvhole I't'hich creatcs the relatjorr

The Orgonisnt Is lts Own /llodcl lntong its pJrls, \o thilt rr ithoLrt thc rr holt thcrc are tro parts'
ol ' expl anted ccl l s' E x pcr i m e n ta l e m b r vo l o g v a n d cvto l o g r th u s co r r e ctctl th e
[ 120] Did th c tc c h n i q u e o { i n v i tto c u l tu re
r " hic h p e rfe c te d b v A l c x i s C a rrc l i n l 9l 0 but i nnentedbl coDcept o{ organic structurc. Bcrnald hatl .rllo*ecl himsell trt lx:
' r as
that thc structure u n d u l v i n l l u e n ce tl l ) \- a so ci a l m o d cl ' r vh i ch a l l i n r l l a m o tr n tcd
J . , \ 1. JJ. olll i n 1 9 0 1 ,o l T e re rp e ri me n ta lprool
of the organismis an rnalogueof liberal socictv?Claude flernard, i t o l i t t l e m o r c th a n a m cta Pl l o r . In r e a cti o n a g a i n st th c u se o f

s ho died thirn vearse.rrlicr,h.rd indee(l suggertedsuch 'rn anal- I m e t h a n i ca l n l o d e l s i tl p h vsi o l o q v' Be r n 'r r d r 'r r r tr .': "Th e l a r r n r i s

ogr, using the societt of his orvn timc asa model The organist't't
to maint.rinthc lile ofindi-
1, t h e l a rvn x. a n cl th e l e n s o f th e e vc i s th c l cn s o f th e e ve : i n o th cr
rrrrql5, 1l-r"mcchanical and ph1'sicalconditirlns necess.rrvfirr their
ensuredthat the conditions nccessarY

l ol
loo
to assertan .lrbitrar.yprcdicateofa given objcct. The flxitv,rfrep-
ctition ol bt'ing constrain\ thought to i(lentirv ot .rssertion.The
natural hicrarchv of cosmic forms rcquires the hierarchvol defi-
nitions in the realm ollogic. The conclusionofa svllogismis nec-
es s an bv v i rtu e o l rh e h i c r:rrc h va c c o rdi ng to xhi ch a spr:ci es
dom inat edb y i ts g e n u sb e c o m e sa d o mi nati nggcnus i n rel ati on
t o an inf eri o r s p e c i c s .Kn o \l l e d g e i s th e refbrethe rvorl d marl e
int o t houg h t i n th < ' s o u l ,a n < ln o t d re s o u l thi nki ng up the rvorl d.
lf t hc es s e n c co fa l i v i n g th j n g i s i ts n a tu ralfornr. i t fol l ous rhat,
things being as they arc, ther' are knon'n as thcy ire and for u.hat
thev arc. The int,:llect is identical rvith thosethinqs that are intel-
ligible. l' h e rv o r' l rii s i n te l l i s i b l e a n d , i n parti cul ar,l i vi ng thi ngs
ar c int eJ lig i b l e b
, e c a u s eth c i n te l J i g i b l ei s i n the rvorl d.
A f ir s t ma j o r d i l ti c u l tv i n A ri s to tl e ' sphi l osophvconcernsthe
r c lat ion be tn c c rr k n o u .l e d g ea n d b e i n g , i n parti cul ar betw een
intelligcnceand life. lf one treatsintelligcnceasa function ofcon-
r em plat ion a n d re p ro d u c ti o n ,i f o n e g i v esi t a pl acc among the
lctrms,howevcrenrinrnt, on( therebr sjtuates(thlt is, lintits) the
thought of order at a particular place in the univcrsalorder. But
hou can knou leclgcbe at once mirror and object, reflector and
r ellec t ioni l I th e d e l i n i ti o n o f m a n .rsi r,rov,\oyrxov,
or reasoni ng
animal, is a naturalist's<lcfinition (in thc samcsensethar Carolus
Linnaeusr l e fi n e s tl re rv o l fa s c a n i sl u p us or thc mari ti me pi ne
a\ pinut no r ti n td \,th c n s c i c D c e a , n d i n p arti cul arthe sci cnceof
lif e, is al a c ti v i tr o f l i fe i ts e l f. On e i s then fbrccd to ask w hat
t he or gan o fth a t a c ti v i tl i s . A n d i t l b l l o $ s that thc A ri stcrtel i an
r hc or r of t h e a c tj \e i n tc l l e c t, a p u re fb rm rvi thout organi cbasi s,
has the r'l}ect of sep.rr.rtingintclligencc from lili:; it lcts some-
thing fronr outside(BupaBev, in Aristotlc'sterms)enter the human
eBrbrv(),,I\through a tlorrrwat, nlntelv, thc e)itranaturalor tr.rn-
s c c ndentp o rv e rto m a k c s e n s eo l th e c ssenti all brms that i ndi -
v idual bein g se m b c ' d v T
. h c th e o rv th u s m akcsthe concepti onof
l')4
conceprseit her som et hingr nor c t han hum an or elsesom ct hing
rransccndinglife ( tuPravitole\.
A scc onddilTicult v,$hich is in l, lct an inst . r nceof t hc f ir st ,
concernsthe impossibilitl of accountingfor mathematicalknovvl-
,.:dgcin terms crl a biological function. A celehr'rteclPnss'lgcol
the .ll,:toplr,tsicsstatesthat mathematics has nothing to do rvith
final causes,l0rvhich is cqtrivalentto iaving that thore ar( intel-
l i gi bl e rhingst hat . r r . enot f cr r nlsin t hc Pr oPersenseof t he u'or d'
and th,rt knou ledqeol thost-things hasnothing to do rvith knorvl-
edge ol lif c. Hence, t hcr e is no m ; t hem at ical r nodcl of t he liv-
ing. Althc,Lrgh Aristode desoibesnature.rsingcniotrs,creatit'cand
i nventi \c, it should not t hen be conllat ed r vit h t he clenr it r r ggof
the linraeus.C)ne of the most astonishingpropositions of Aris-
rotl c' s philosophvol'biologv is t bat ir m akesnot lhe ar t is'r nbut
the art rcsponsiblt f or r vhr t is pr ocluced.What cur cs t he I ) nt ient
i s not th e phvsicianbut ht 'alt h.I t is becauset hc f br m "healt h" is
prcscntin m edic. r lact ivit l t hat m e( licineis, in f . r ct ,t he c'r t r seof
thc cure. Bv art,,'\ristotleneans thc unretlectivepurposcol a nat- I
ural logos.Nieditatingon the exnmPleofthc phvsicianvvholreals
not becausehe is a phvsicianbut becat t schc is inhabit e<l and ani-
t
mated bl t he lbr r n "healt h"'one m ighr s'r ) ' hr t t he pr esenccol
the conccpt in t hought , in t hc f br m ol an encl r cPr cscnt cdas
. ist ot le's anr i- Plat onism\ \ 'as
a mo< l c l.is an e piPhcnom et t on-Ar
rctl ectcr lin his depr eciat ionol m at hem at ics:r llat hen) at icswas
cl eni edaccesst o t hc im m ancnt act i\ it v ol lile, $hich is ( ; od's
( r hat is'
essenti alat t r ibut c, and it ll'. r sonly t hr ough kn<r r vledge
imitation) oi that immanent .rctivit\ thtt llan coul(l hope to lornr
an i deao f G od. I I r u. 7cs,pp. ] i6- ] 8]
N omi no lisnt
[122] A f ir r t herdif ] icult v of Ar ist ot elianismconcer nst he ont o-
logicaland gnoseologicalstarusof individualitv in a scienceof life
lo5
bascdon conccpts. lf the individual is an ontological reality and
Dot simplv an imperfection in thc realizationofa concept, what
is tht' significanceof the order of beingsrepresentedin the clas-
sification bv genus and species?If the concePt ol a living being
ontologicallv presidesover its concePtion, what mode ofknowl-
edge is thc individual capable ofl2A system of living fbrms, if
grounded in being, has the ineffable individual as its correlate;
but an onlological plurality ofindividuals, ifsuch a thing exists,
hasa concept, a fiction, as its correlate.There are trvo possibili-
ties. Is it thc universalthat makesthe individual o living thing as
u,ell as tfrispotticular living thing? Ifso, singularity is to life as
thc cxception is tcr the rule. The exception confirms the rule, in
the senseofrcvcaling its existenceand content, fbr the rule, thg
v iolat ion o I rh c ru l e , i s l v h a t ma k e s th e si ngul ari ty aP P arent,
indeedglaring. Or is it the individual that lends its color, weight
and flcsh to that ghosrlvabstraction,the universal?Without such
a gift, "universal" uould have no me.rningin "life," and u'ould
be an enrptl rrord. The conllict between thc individual and the
universalas to their rcsPectiveclaims on "being" bearson lif'e in
all its fornrs:the vegetab)eas well as the animal, function asrvell
as fonr. illnessas rvell as "temperament." All approachesto litb
must be homogeneous.ll living specicsexist, then the diseases
ol J i' ing t hi n g s m u s t a l s o fo rm s p c c i e s .l f onl y i ndi vi dual sexi st'
then there ,rrc no speciesofdisease,only sick individuals. Ifli[e
hasan inrmanent logic, then anv scienceof lif'e and its manifes-
tations, $hether normal ot Pathological,must set itselfthe task
of discoveringthat logic. Nature then becomesan enduring set
of latent relationsthat must be brought to light. Once uncovered'
ho*.ever,those relations offer a reassuringguaranteeof validity
to the natur.rlist'sef'fortsto classifvand to thc physician'sefforts
to heal. In fhe Hktorv oJ Madnessand Birth oJ the Cltnic, Michel
F ouc ault b ri l l i a n tl v d e mo n s tra te dh o rv t he methods of botany
l()6
st'rvcclas a model fbr nineteenth-ccnturvphvsiciansin develop-
i ng thei r nosologies."The r at ionalit yof u, hat t hr t 'at r nslile, " he
\\'rote, "is identical to thc rationalitv of lif'e itsell-."But there is
ll rationalitv and rationalitv.
! l -he mat t er of univer salsu'as,of cour se, an im por t ant issue
lr
I in medieval philosophy,thcologl and politics. Here, horvever,I
shallapproachthis questiononly indirectly, bv r",ayofa few briel
remarkson nominalism in the philosophyof the seventeenthand
eightccnth centuries.Nominalists ovcr the ageshave relied on a
it
varicd but unchangingarsenalofarguments. Becauscthey n'ere
not alrvaysengagedin the samestruggle, horvcver,diflerent nonri-
nalistschosedifferent \r'eaponsfiom that arsenal.Yet all,rl tht'nr.
fiom Ockham to Htrmc bv uay of Duns Scotus,Hobbcs, Locke
anrl Condillac, sharedone common purpo5c- to show tlr.rt uni-
r'.'rsalsare merely a u,ay of using singular things and not in the
n.rrureoI t hings t hcm selves.O ckham callecluniver sals "supposi-
ti ons" (rlr at is, posit ions ol subst it ut ion) ; Hoblr escaller i t hem
"arbitrarvimpositions"; LocLe called them "rcprcseDt.rtions insti-
ruted assigns."Yet all agreedthat concepts*crc a hunt.rn.rvhich
is to sar',factitiousand tendcntious,processingoferperience. We
sar "human" becauscwe do not knou, if we havethe right to say
"intellectual."Ilolding that the mind is a tabularasadocs not give
one thc right to saythat a tabula rasais a mind. Nominalists look
upon sharcdproperticsof individual things asan authenricequiv-
alent to universals,but isn't doing so tantamount to dor)ning a
mask of falsesimplicity? A trap arvaitsthose u'ho take this path,
the trap ol similarity,A generalidea, Lockc says,is a gcneralnamc
signifving a similar quality perceivedunder a varictv of circum-
stances;that guality is rveighedbv abstraction,that is, bv "con-
siderationof the common asdistinct from the particular." lt can
thcn scne asa valid representationfor all particularideasbelong-
ing to the same tvpe. Unlike Locke, l-lume ascribesto thc f.rc-
 ANO NF

ultl of generaliz.rtionnot onlv n porvcr to rcproducc sensations rhan cx pr cs! ingt he or cleroi nat ur e.I lcnce, in Locke and
I lum e
itt nremor! but .llso to transposcthe order in u.hich inrpressions as i n A rist ot le, t he pr oblenr of hou conccpt s ar e conceived
is
are reccived;this porverbelongs to the imagination. rvhich may sol rcd in a $'ar t har disr upt st h<,pr ojccr of nat ur . alizing
knou, l_
be Lrnfaithfirlto the lessonsofexperience.Nevcrthelcss,
he argues edgeof nature. lfrudes, pp. 339-42]
that sinrilaritvof ideasguidesthe imaginationto\lard certain hab-
its, or unifirrmitics, in dcaling l ith the t'nvironmenr.I labit tele-
Tronscendental LoBic
scopesr{)gerhcra rt'lrolehost of indivirlualcxperieDccs.lfan1,one
[12]] Philosophl.is better rhan thc historv ol scienct,at rcvcaling
o[ t hes c e x p e ri c n c e si s e v o k c db v a n a m e, thc i ndi vi duali dea of the si gn if icanceof t hc dispar it iesbet u. c, t , nt he scient jf i<
that cxJ)eri(.nceconjures up others,.rnd rve vield to the illusion t er li
ni qr:eso1nat ur alist sand r heir im pJicitor cxplicit Lr nder lving
ofgcneralitv. phi_
l osophv .This can be sccn ir a m ast er lul t ext bv K. r nt
(t is easvto sec rhat thcre can bt'no comlbrtablc norlinalist on. it hc
reguLrtilcuseol thc idcasofpure reas()n.t.]Ilerc Kant
introduccd
pos it ion o n th c r-e l a ti o no fc o n c e p ts to l i l e. For tht' nomi nal i st, rhc imnqcof a "Jogicalhorizon" to accourrtlbr the regtrlatirc,
but

j;ilil;::::,il:i;
div er s et h i n g s n ru s t e x h i b i t s o me m i n i nral dcgree of si mi l ari ty
bef or e on e c a n c o n \tru c t th e c o n c c p t of that si mi l ar propcrty
rvhich is supposedto take the pl.rccol univcrsalesscnces.Ilence!
;:i;l:;:::xT
;::i;l'i1;::i::i:::1
gcncra).A logical hr r r izon,accolding t o Kanr , is a concept ual
$.hat those eightt'entfi-ccnttrr.tauthors rr'ho ncre empiricists as ri e\r' poi nt t hnt enconr passcs a cer t ain r egion; r vit hin t hat hor r -
to the cont(nt of tht'ir knou ledge anclsensurlistsas to the ori- ron, thrrc arc multiple viervpoints,eachdetemrining
gin ol its fbrms rcallv give us is a mirror image of Aristotelianism, firr.thtrhori_
zonsol s m alleram bit . A hor i/ on can bc, lecom po. set l
onlv int o
I b".uur" thev sought to find the knorving[/e connaitrelamong the oth(r hor ir ons,just , t s a concept can be
analvzcrnnlv l in t "r m s
kn()$,n,to lcarn about lii! n'irhin the order of lifb. Hunranbeings, ol other conccpts.Td savthat a horizon can
be decomioscclcrnlv
thcr sar,,arc endou.edu ith a porver (r'hich might cquallr. rvell into other horizorrsan<lnot into discrete
poinrs i, r,, ,ov tirat ,p"-
be t ak c n f b r a m l ' a s u reo fi mp o tc n c e ) to i nvent cl asses
and, thus, ci escaDb c cJccom poscd int o subspecr es Dut n( ver int o individu,
to arrangeother living beings in an orderlv flshion, but onlv on al s.Thi s is bccauset o knol, som et hing
is t o knor l, it in t er m s of
condition that those beingsexhihit certaincommon charactersor conccpts,and thc understanding kno$,snothing bI intuirion alonc.
repeatedtfaits. llor! can a nonrinalistspcakofnaturc or naturcr? Kant's intageol a logicai horizon ancl
his dellnition of a con_
Llc can do vvhatFIunredid and invokc a lruman nrturr,, *.hich is cePt ns a Yiervpointcnconrplssing
a rcgion do nor marL a return
to conct'de at lcast that thert'is uniformitl among humans,cven l ' , n,,mi n alijr n.n, , r r l, , lh, . \ r . on( t it ut ( . dn
, r lt lnr pt t o jr r st il_r con.
though llurne held that human nature u.asinventive and. more ( e11\on.the
b. r siro I r hr ir |r r Jlm Jr ic v, rluc in . r rh ir r ing
r conom r
s pec if ic al l v ,c a p a b l t'o f a d o p ti n g d e l i b c rateconventi ons.W hat R, . r s, r niq. , pl1 t lr ( . \ ,r ihc\ \ u( lr ( . (onom \ . . r rt or , lin! r o
does tlris accomplish?lt inrroducesa clcavagein thc st,stemof i l ' .' ]],' :* ,i , :
in. so, l. , ing
." i .l t, l ,],, I r , , , , r il, esr h, . r , lt . . ,r, 1n. r r ur ,n.. ', , , r dingr , ,
living bcints, bccarrsethc narurcofonc ol those being: is defined ir n,, such r hirr g ar . im iJ, rirr r . t , , r jn
) ar :,' ,,i rh. r rr Jst I h( . l, g_
bv an artilicc, bv the possibilitvofcstablishinga conventionrathcr ,, l r\\l n.,,:1". l) r , ir . \ J\ r r , . lj a. r h, .
r r n, l, . r , r an, lintir . r . ll r r . , , r r j,Ij, e

3t r 8
lo9
s im ult ane o u s l \a b o l i s h e d[.,.]
. R e a s o nthus assumesthe rol e of
interpreting the rcquirenrentso[ the un<]erstanding in that realm
uhcre the sciencc of life pursuesthc heuristic task ofidentify-
ing and classifvingspecies.Those requirementsdcfine a transcen-
dt ' nt al s t ru c ru rt' o f k n o w l c d g e . It mi g ht thercl i rre appearthat
Kant's analvsisfinally rnanagesto break out of the circle within
rr'hichall prcviousnaturalisttheoricsol knoulcdge had remained
conflned. The conceptionof conceptscannot bc merely onc con-
cept amongothers,Thr: dichotomv that neither Aristotlt' nor the
empiricist nominalistshad been able to avoid w,asgroundcd,jus-
rified and exaltedbv Kant.
If, hou'ever,we havegained the legitimation ofa possibilitv-
that of knorvlr'rlgethrough concepts - ha'e we not pelhapslost
the certaintv that, among the objccts oI knowlt'dge, there arc
some,at least,rvhoseexistenceis a necessarymanifestationof the
realitv of concretelvactiveconcepts?PLrtdiflerently,havcrve not
los t t hc c c rta i n tv th a t l i v i n g b e i n g sd o i D l i ct number nmongthe
objec t sof k n o w l e d g e ?In Ari s to te l i a nl o gi c, the l brms ofreason-
ing mimic the hierarchyof living lbrms, hcnce there is a guaran-
teed correspondence betut'en logic and life. tanscendental logic,
u hich constitutesnaturc d priori asa svstemofphvsical latvs,does
not in f ac t s u c c e c di n c o n s ti tu ti n g n a ture as the theaterof l i v-
ing organisms.We gain a bctter understandingof the naturalist's
rt'search,but rve do not arrive at an understandingof nature's
r{avs;rvc gain n better understandingof the concept oIcausality,
but we do not understandthe causalitl ofthe conccpt, The Cri-
tique ot'Judgmentattempts to give meaning to this limitation,
* hich the understanding
experiencesasn fact. An organizedbeing
is one that is both its own causcand its orvn eflcct; it organizes
itsclf and reproducesits organization;it forms itst'lfand creates
its orvn rcplica in accordancewith a tvpe. lts teleological struc-
turc, in vuhich the interrclation of the parts is regulatcd bv the
I lo
eremplifiesa nonmechanicalcausalitvol'the conccpt. We
'r'hole,
havc no a priorl knor+.ledqe
of this tvpe of causalitv.Forcesthat
are also forms and fbrms that arc also forces are indccd part of
natureand in nature,but u'e do not know this through the under-
st.rnding;we perceive it. rathcr. in experience.That is rvhv rhe
i cl eaof a "nat ur al end, " u'hich is essent iallyt he idca of a self l
constructingorganism,is not a categorvin Kant but a regulative
ide.r, u'hich can be applied onlv in tht' fbrm of max ims. To be
sure, art providcs an analogl vrherebv nature'smode ol produc-
ti on can bc judged. But wc cannot hope t o adopt t he vieu- point
ofan archctypalintellect lbr u'hich concept and intuition u,ould
be identical, an intellect crpable of cre.rtingits own objects, for
*hich concel>tsrvould bt' not onJyob)ectsofknowledge but a)ser,
frr useLeibniz'sterm, original roots of being. Kant holds that the
line arts arc arts ofgenius, and he regardsgeniusas nature dictat-
ing its larv to art. Yet hc rcfirsesto permit himself to assume,in
rl ognrat icf ashion,a sim ilar vicr vpoinr .t hat of genius.ir r or der r o
graspthe secrctofnature'sopercrl.Kant, in other rvords,reflscs ro
identifv the logical horizon ofthe naturalisrsrvith rvhatone might
call the poctic horit.on ol natura notDtans. pp. 3.+3-.+5]
lEtu<les,
The Berna rdian Conception
[12.1]C laude Ber nar d descr ibedhis r cllect ions as a scient if ic
thcorl, of generalphvsiologv.They are interesting,h,rr"cver,pre-
ciseh bccauscBernarddid not d:vorcethe study ol finctions fiom
that ofstructures. In Bcrnard'sdav,moreever,the only structurc
kno$ n to bc common to tnth animalsand plants,hencethe struc-
ture on which the studv ol life must hcnceforth fbc.us,r,,,as
thc
cell. Bcrnardalso did nor di.orce the stu<lr'ofstructurcs
fiom rjre
rtudy of the or igin of t hose5t r uct ur es.Thus,
his gencr alphvsiol-
t-tgyis full of rcferencesto (:mbrvologv,
which eversincethc rvork
t,l f K arl Er nst von Baer ha, l
ser "e, l as a bcacon f br ninet eent h-
ll I
 use by trro classesof phcnornen;r is without dircct analogucclservherc; it
centurv biologists, a source of concePtsand methods fbr rvhat
is peculiar.specilic,to living This
things. evolutivesrnthtsisis
rr t herdis c i p l i n c s [...1
.
i \ rrulr vilal.
Bern,rrrl'sgcnera)phvsioloqt rvas,iirst o[ al), a theort of the
u'ould
clevclopmcntof org;rns,and his basic conccPtion of Iifc
terms' a prob- l l ence, lbr Bcr nar d, a f unct ioning or ganism r vasan or ganism
resolve,or ,lt anv ratc recast in more nreaningfill
rngrged in dest r ovingit scll. The f unct ioning ol an or gan uas a
Icm that positivist lriologv h.rd avoidedand that mechanistbiol-
phvsicochcmicalphenomcnon, that is, de,rth.Wc can graspsuclr
ogl ha<Jresolvedthrough conllation ofconccpts: to rvit, in what
phenomena,t le can under st and. r nclchar . r ct er izct hem , an<lscr
senscis an ot-qanismorganizcd?The naturalistsofthe cightt'cnth
rvc rrc inclincr i, m isieadinglv,t o t ppl\ t he nam c "lif e" t o uhat
centurv h.rdbccn obsesseduith the qrrcstion lndccd, it tvasnot
is in lact a lbrm ofdcath. Convcrsely,organiccreationand organi-
a (luestionrhat lent itsclf to easYsolution in terms ofmeclranical
zationarc plasticacts ol-svnthcticreconstitutionof tlre substances
models.Pretormationism,the theorv that the grorrth ofthe adult - f his or gnDiccr cat ion,
that th e f unr t ioning or ganismr ecluir cs,
organismh om the original secd is simpl;-a matter of cnlargemcnt
thi s const it ut ion of pr ot oplasm ,is a f br m of chem ical s- vnt hesis,
of structuresalrcadvcontained in miniattlrc in the seed- along
an< li t is also . r f br m of r nor phologicalr vnt hesis,\ 1'hichbr in{s
r it h t he l o g i c a l l r d e ri v a ti v cth e o r' , t hat seedscontai n smal l er
the " i mm ecliar t 'pr inciples"ol living nr at r er t ogct her in a 1) ar -
s eedsc o n ta i n i n g s ti l l s ma l l e r s c e d sa nd so on. ad i nfi ni tum -
ti cul ar kind ol'm ol<1.The exist cnce of an "int er nal m olcl" ( / c
rt,fcrred the u'holc issueoforganizaticln back to Creation The
moul ci nt ir ieur l r vasin l. r ct Bt r llbn'sr "av of cxplaining ho*'an
rise of embr,,rrlotr .rsa trasicsciencc in the ninerccnth centurv
i nv;ri ant lbr r n per sist sin t hc m idst of t hat inccssantt ur bulcnce
nrade it possibleto rcfbrmul;rte thc questiott For Bernard,the
w hi ch is lif c.
quc s t io n o fo rg a n i z a ti o na n d th c o b s tacl ei t poscd to expl ai ni ng
A t fir st sight , one nr ight t hink t hnt Ber n. r r dis her r 'scpar at ing
lile ir phisical antl chcnrical terrns was rvlratmad'' gcnerrl phys-
nvo l or nr s oi r lnt hesis t hat m or lcr n biochenr ist r vhas r r unit ecl,
iologv a d i s ti n c t s c i e n c c .[...]
and that he h.rsfiilql to rccognize the fact that the cytoplasm
Bernard$'as possessed bv one idea: that the organizedliving
jddcc'lirertricc, i tsr.' 11
i s st r uct ur cd.I n<lccd,it is no longer possiblet o agr ccsit h
thing is rhc tcmPorarv manjlcstation of an a guid-
Bcrnardthat "at its sinrplestlcvel, shorn ol all the ancillarv phe-
ing idea. The lan s ol physicsand chcmistrv clo not in thensclves
nomcnat hat m ask it in m ost beings,lif e. cont r ar v t o lr - hatAr is-
explainhort thcy arc hrought to trearon the compositionol a par- totl e bc licved.is indr penr lontof anv specif ic f or m . lt r csidcsin
r ic ular o rg n n i s m , fh i s a rg u n rc n ti s d erei oped at l ength i n the a subst anccdc[ ine<lbv it s com posit ionand not bv it s conligur a-
Lc1ons sur lesphinontines de Ia vie: ti on: prot oplasm . "
a)n t he ( ont r ar \ , nt r r r lcr nbiochcm ist r r is l) ascdon t hc pr in-
r pt r ic nc e h. : s I c d nlc t r ) a c c r t . l j l r c o t l c t - P t i o n o l t h i n g s . ' '
1\'1 er ci P l e th at conligur at iolr and st r uct ur c ar t 'r clcvant cvcn. r t r hc
liv-
Therc are, I belicr'c, oi ncccssitv,t\\'o {)rderso1 phenomcn;rin most basiclevelof chemicalcomposition.I,erhapsBcrnard'scrror,
o1*ital crcrtion or olaanic !r nthesis'and phe-
inil things:phen<rmcna thr)ugh,r,,irsDot astotnl asit nravseem,lbrht savslatcr rhat ";rro
nomcna ol death ur organic dfitruction Onlr the lirst these
'rl

lrl
l rz
 KNOWLEDGE ANI

; .':t a purelYchemical substance' rlith toclav'stheorv of hereditv can be imputed to Bernard,be-

toplasm, howeverb"rt.,
',
a si-pl" im-ediute principle of chemistrv'
It has an origin that causcthe concept of hereditv itsclf u'as totally nern'and unlikc

.,lud". ur. It is the continuation of the

protoplasm of an ances- anv idcas Bernard miqht havc had about generatiolt antl evolu-

tor." In other words, protoplasm has a structure'

and that struc- tion, We n-tustbe carelirl,therefbre,not to seeanalogiesin ternl!
substancc'We onc can st ill ar gue t hat t he
rakenou t of cont cxt . Never t heless,
ture is heredit.rry."Protoplasm itself is an atavistic
qenetic
do not see its birth, only its continuation'"
Now' recall that by Bernardian"message"hasa fLnctionalallinitv with today's

evolution Bcrnarclmeansthe law that determines

the lixed direc- code, That aflinity is basedon their common relation to the con-

tion o[ constant changeithis law governsthe

manifestationsof cept ol'information. ConsiclerBernarcl'srePeateduse of cerlain
For Bernard' rermsand phrases:message, guiding idea' vit.rl design.\'ital Preor-
life both in its inception and in its PerPettration
morcover. nutrition was idcntical with evolution
in this sense' dainment, r'ital plan, directeclprocess.If genetic intormation is

Thus, it can be argued that Bernard did not make

absolute the a coded program for protein synthesis,then Bernard'srcpeated

distinction bct$'eenmatter and fbrm, bctrveenchemical

and mor- rust,rf such conr cr git t g m ct aPhor sr vould appcar t o r cf lect an

phologicalsynthesis.He had at leastan inkling

that the chcmical .rttcnrpt to pinpoint a biological rcality fbr rvhich no ade<luate
protoplasm obeYa structural concept had vet becn formulated.
,n,"ri"ng", occurring within the
imperative. He also sa*'the structure ol the protoplasm
assonre- To put it in slightlJ different terms, Bernard used concePts
- the knorvn concept of informarionto account
r',ith a ps;-choloeical
associatecl
thing *,hose reprt duction requiredsomethingbeyond
ofhercditYrvhich lor phenomenath.rt we now interPret in terms of a phvsicalcon-
lartiof phv.i., und chemistrv' It rvasa product
In his orvn words' this ccpt of inf br m at ion.[ . . . ] Const r uct ion,gr owt h' r est or at ionand
coul<inot be duplicated in thc laboratory'
of a primitive the selfregenerationof the living machine- it is no accidentthat
structurc rr'as"the nranil-estationherc and notn
messocc, n'hich nature repeats rhesc terms occur in combination' Evolution in the Bcrnarrlian
impulse. a prirnitive actioil and
sensc,the fundamentalcharacteristicoflife. is the inverseof cvo-
accordingto.r Patterndetermined in advance'"
hered- lution in the phvsicist'ssense,namely,the seriesof statesassun'ted
Cleariy, Bemard seemsto have sensedthat biological
*e norv think by an isolated systemgoverncd bv the second larv of thermodv-
ity consistsin the transmissiorrof something that
is, scmanticallyspeaking'not nami cs.Biochem ist st odat savt hat or ganic iDdividualit Y,or t hc
of u, c<,,lcdinfcrrmatiotr."N{essage"
to conclude constancyofa svstemin dvnamic cquilibrium, retlects lifi"s gen-
lf,r trom "code." Ncvertheless,it rvould be incorrect
conceptual kin- eral tendencyto slou'the increaseofentropv, to resistcvolution
that this semantic analogy points to a genuine
ln 1865' toward the more probablestatt of unilbrmitv in disorder.
ship. The reasonhast,r do with a simultaneousdiscorery'
de Ia midecine " fhc Ialr of ordtr anrl succcssi()nthat bestowsnleaning lnd
the same,-earthar Bcrnard'slnftodu'tion d l'itude
*'ho order on phenomena": the lormulation is rather surprisingtor a
crpdrimentale appeared'Gregor Mendel' an obscur!monk
like the celeb- biologist rvhom no one rvould accuscof indulgencetolvard the
rvould nevcr in his liletime expericnce anvthinq
his Vercuche, rsc of m.rthematicalconceptsand models in biology.Thc lbrmula
ritv that rvaslavishcdon Claude Bcrnard' publlshed
those associated i s actua llyquit e close t o Leibniz'sdelinit ion of inr lividualsr r b-
trbierPflottzenhvbri,lenNo conccpt analogottsto

I r4 lr t
stance:/..! serieisuarrlmoPerutionum, the lan ofthe sericsin the ;rcknoulcdgethat there is a /ogosinscribcd. preserredanrl trans-
mathcmnticalsenseoI thc tenn, a scriesof operations This almost nri ttcd i n living t hings. l- ile hasalr vavsclone- r vit hout u r it ing,

f ir r m al ( lo g i c a l ) d e fi n i ti o n o f (b i o l o g i cal ) heredi t\ can norv be llng belbrc * riting cvcn existed - n hat humanshavc sor.tghtto

interprete<lin thc light of the fun<lanrental discovt'rvof molccu- <lorvith cngraving,rvriting and plinting, namt'lr',to trrnsmit nlcs-

lar biolog v , th e s ttu c tu re o f D N A, rh e kcr cotrstj tuentof chro- sirgrs.:J-hescicnce of lifi no longer rcscnr[.lesa portrait of life,

mosomes,the caricrs of hcredity, t{hose vcrY number is itself a asi t cou ld r vhcn it consist edjn t he dcscr iplionand classif icat ion
specific hereditarvcharacteristic.[!rudcs, pp 354-60] <,fspecies;.rnd it no longer resemblesarchitectureor mechanics,
.rsit could rr hen it uas simplv anatomv .rrr<1
macroscopicplrvsi-

lnforntotion T heorv ologv. But it r|r,csrcstmtr)cgrn)rmar, s(n'r,rnticsand thc thcor,,'ol'

rn d Franci sC ri ck' rvho ei ght s.r'ntax.If rve.rre to unclerstandlife, its messagcmust be (lc(odcd
[ 125] I n 1 9 5 ' 1 J, a mc sl ). W a ts o n
belirreit can be read.
yearslater rcceivedthe Nobcl Priztrfbr their rvork, shorvedthat
Thi s r r 'ill nr - rdoubt have a num ber ol t evolut ionar v consc-
it w,asthe ortlcring of .r finite nrtmber of basesalong a dotrble
cl uences, and it r vr >r r ldt ake m anr ch. r pt er st o er plain not r vhat
helix joined by phospharcsof strgar''rhich constittrtcsthe genetic
tlrev arr:but \t hat thcv are in the proccssol becoming. To define
infornration or Progr.rmcode dctermining holv tht: cell synthe-
lile asa meaning inscribcrl in matter is to acknorvledged-rt:cxis-
sizcsthe btrilclingblocks ofprotein fbr nervcclls' lt hassincebeen
tt'ncc ofan a prlori objcctivc rhat is inhcrcntlv material .rrrdnot
shoun thrt this synthesistakcsplaceon demand.that is, asa func-
mcrclv fbr-mal.In this conncction.it seemstcrme that thq rrudv of
t ion < r lin to rm a ti o ns tc m n ri n gfrc ,mrh c envi ronnrent- meani ng'
instinct in the nranncrofNiLolaasTinbergenanrl Konrad Lorentz,
of c our s e ,rh c c e l l u l a rtn v i ro n m c n t. In 1 965,anothcrN obcl P ri ze
that is, through the demonstrationol the er,istcnceof innatc pat-
rvasarv;rrdedfor this furdrer discovtrl ln changingthc scaleon
ternsol b ehavi<r ris, a vav of <lcm onst r at ing
t hc r calit v of such o
rr.hichthe characteristicphenomcnaol lifc - rvhich is to sar',the
priorls.To dcfine lifc as me.rnin!is to {irrce onesclf to look lbr
stnrcturationof mattcr and the regulrtion of [unctions, includir'g
ner.r'
rl i scover ies.
ller e, t hc er per ir ncnt alinr 'ent ionconsjsr sonlv
the stnrcturation lunction - are stttdicd, contr.'nrporarvbio)ogv
:has als,raclopteda neu' language.lt has droppcd thc vocabularl in thc scarchlbr a kcv, but or-rccthat kev is rliscoverecl, the mcan-
ing is lound, not constnlcted.fhe modelsuscd in seekingorganic
and c onc e p tso f c l a s s i c am l e c h a n i c s ,phvsi csand chcmi stry' al l
meaningsre<lrrirt'.rmathemaci<s differtnt fiorn that kno\\n to thc
. more or lessdirectlv basedon geomctricalmodels. in favorofthe
' C recks. ln r r r der t o undcr st andlir . ing t hinq\ onr needs, t non, '
1,6(.r[ls)arv ol linguistics anclconlnrunicationstheort illessages'
nerri c thcor v ol space, . rscienceof or cler ,r t opologv;onr needs
inlbmration, Progrants,codc, instrut:tions,decoding:thcscare the
a nonnum cr icalcalculus,a com binat or ics,a st at ist icalm achiD-
. new c onc c Ptso fth c l i f' es c i c n c e s[...1 .
'' crt. In this reipcct to() thert h.rsbeen, in a scnsc,.r return to Aris-
W h" , t $ e s a y th a t b i o l o g i c a l h c rc d i tv i s thc communi cati on
totl e. l l c bclit : vet l r hat m nt hr . m . r t icsn, . r scr l no use in hiologv
of a ctrrain kin(l ()1 intormation. t','eh.rrk back in a \1'aYto the
bccauseit r ecognizedno t hcor r of spact 'ot hr r t han t he geom c-
A r is t ot e l i a n p h i l o s o p h r l i th w h i th u e bcgan' 1" ' ] Ib savthat
trr to rvhich Euclid gavc his nam e.A biologicallir r nr , Alist ot lt :
her c dit v i s th c c o mn l u n i c a ti o no f i n l brnl ati on i s, i n a scnse'to

l t7
] l( )
argued,is not a pattern, not a geometrical form. He *as correct.
Within an organism there are no distances:the rvhole is imme-
diatelv prcsent to all the (pseudo-)parts.Thc essenceof the liv-
ing thing is tlr.rt, insolar as it is Iiving, it is immediatelv present
to itself. Its "parts" (cheverv term is misleading)are immediately
prcsent to one another. Its regulatory mechanisms,its "internal
environment," makc the whole immediately Plescnt to each of
t t s P ar t s .
llence, in a certain senscAristotle rvasnot \\'rong to saythat
a c er t a i n k i n d o f ma th e ma ti c s ,th e onl v mathemati cshe knew
about, r'as of no use in understandingbiological fbrms, fonns
determined bv a final causeor totality, nondccomposablelorms
in r v hic h b e g i n n i n g a n c ie n d c o i n c i dc and actual i ty outrvei ghs
pot enr i a l i ty [...]
. probablyone with human errancy.Man nrakesmistakesbecause
If life is the production, transmissionand reception o[infbr-
mation, then clearlv thc histon ol-life involvesboth conservation
and inn o v a ti o n . F l o u i s e v o l u ti o n to be expl ai ned i n terms of
genetics?The ansrver,of course,intolvesthe mechanismof muta-
tiors, One objcction that has ofien been raisedagainstthis the-
and a fair number
orv is that manv mutationsare sutrpathological,
lc t hal, s o th e mu ta D ti s Ie s sv i a b l e th an the ori gi nal organi sm.To
be sure, many mutations are "mg65119115" - but from rhe stand_
point of life as a rvhole, rvhat does "monstroulj" mean?Manv of
today'slife forms arc nothing other than "normalized monsters,"
to borrow an expressionfrom the French biologist Louis Roule'
T hus , if l j fe h a sm c a n i n g ,\v e mu s t a c c eptthc possi bi l i tvofa l oss
of t hat m e a n i D g ,o f d i s to rti o n , o f mi sconstructi on. Li fe over-
colnes crror through further trials (and b,v"error" l mean simply
a deade n d ).
What, thcn, is knou,ledgci'lf life is concept, does recogniz-
ing t ha t l a c t g i l e th e i n te l l i g c n c ea c cessto l i l e? W hat, then, i s
knowledge?If life is mcaningand concept,hon do rvc conceivcol
lr n
thc activitv of knorving?Earlier, I alluded ro thc studv of instinc-
tive behavior,of behavior structurcd by innate patterns.An ani-
nral is fbrmed bv hereditv so as to receiveancl transmit certain
ki nds of inf t r r m at ion. I nlbr nr at ion t h. r t an aninr a]is not st r uc-
turally equipped to receivemight as well not cxist as lar as that
animal is concerncd.In u,hat we take to be thc universalenviron-
tnent, each species'structuredeterminesits o*,n particularenvi-
ronment , as Alex von UcxkLill h. r sshoun. lf nr an is alsr .lbr , nt ed
l rr he r edit y, how <iocsqnc cxplain t he hist or , r.' f knor vlcdge,
n hich is the lristorv of error and of triumph over error?l\,lustwe
conc]ude that man trccamcu,hat he is by mutation, bv an error
ol her cdit r i'ln t hat case,lif e. nould by cr r cr rhave pr oduced a
l i vi ng t hing capabieol'm aking er r or s. ln f act , hum ar rer r or is
hc does not knou, rvherc to settle. He makesmistakesr,,.henhe
choosesthe \{ rong spor lbr rccciving the Iir)d of infirrmation he
is .rfter. But hc also gathers inlbrmation bl ntor.ingaround, and
bv moving objects around, rvith the aiclol variouskinds of tech-
n,rl,,gv.-Mo.tscientific tcchniques, it can be argucd,are in fact-
n()thingmorc than methods lbr moving thinqs around and chang-
i tU ri rr r elat i'r r s. r m ong, , l'1,
t r ilf f nor t lr dge. r hen, i5 r n r n\ iou\
quesr lor t ht , gr eJt estpossiblcquant ir \ '. r nclvar iet yol inlor m a-
ti orL-llft hc d pt ior i is in t hings, if t he concept is in lile, t hen t o
bc a subjcct c'f knou.ledgeis simplv to bc dissatisfied\,\,iththe
nreaningonc llnds readvar hand, Subjectivitv is thcrcfbrc noth_
i ng othcr r han dissat isl) cr ion.Per hapsr h. r t is *. hat I ili, i\ . I nt er -
P reted in a cr r r t ainr vav,cont em por ar v biologv is, sonr ehor v,a
philosophvof life. [Erudes,pp. ]60-6,+l
lr9
T-
C'HAPTr r r l'<. r uH r r r r

The Normal and the Pathological

l n tr o d u cti o n to the Problem

v k astt r >localize.I or er anr plt , hou

[126] Ir r ct . i( is necessarat
rlo uc take action .rgainstan carthqu.r[eor hurricanel Thc impe-
tus behin<ievervontologicalthcon ofdiseaseundottbtt'rllvdcriles
lrom thcrapcutic necd. When ue sec in cvcrv sick man someonc
rvhrrstbcing hasbccn .ruqmentedor <linrinishcd,ue are some* hat
lbr uhat . r nr an has lost ( nn be r est or edt o hinr . and
rcassur r '<|,
uhat hascntered hinr can also lcavr'.We can hopt't,r conqucr dis-
eas(' cv enil'doing so is t he r esult ol r spcll, or m agic. or posses-
sion; rvc have only t{) rcnlember that discaschappcnsto man in
order no t t o losc all hopc. , \ 4agicbr ingst o dr ugsan<lin( . r nt at ion
ritcs innumerabl<:rcsour-ces stemrninglionr a pro[oun<lltintcnsc
dt'sirefirr curc. Henrv Frnst Sigeristhasnotcd that Eurptian mcd-
i ci ne probablyunit er salizcdt he East cr ncxpcr ienceol par asit ic
di s.' as esby com bining it r , vit ht hc idr : a of clisease- possession:
throrvi n g up wor m i m eansbcing r est ( ) r edt o hcalt h. " l) isc. r se
enrersa nd lcavesm an. ls t hr ougha ( lo( ) r .
A vulgar hielanhr r ) l ( liscases
sr ill f xist s t odn\ . basc( lr ) n t hc
trtent to r vhich sr nt pt om s can - or cannot - be r e. r dilylocal-
i zed, he nce Par kinson'sdiscaseis m or c ol a discaset han t hor acic
shi ngl es,r vhich is, in t ur n, m or e so t h( r nboils. Wit hout r vishing
to detrlct fiom thc gran<lcurof l or.rislt,rsa'ur'str:n(.tr,\\.ecnn sav

l 2l
\f ithoDt hesitntionthat the gcnn theorv ofcontagiousdiseasehas
certainlv o$,ed much of its successto the fact that it enrbodies
an ontological tepresentationoIsickness. After all, a germ can
be s een , e v c n i f th i s re q rri rc sth e c o m P l i cated medi ati on ofa
microscopc, stainsand cultures, while lve lvould nevcr be able
to seea miasmaor an influencc.To seean entit)/ is alreadyto fbre-
seean action. No one rvill object to the optimistic charactcrof
the theories of in[ection insofar as their therapeutic application
is c onc e rn e d . Bu t th e d i s c o v e ryo f toxi ns and the recogni ti on
of the specific and individual pathogenic role of ferrainshavc
destroyedthe beautiftrlsinrpJicitvofa doctrine uhose scientific
veneer fot a long time hid the Persistenceofa reaction to dis-
easeasold asman himself.
lf rve feel thc need to reassurcourselvcs,it is bccauseone
anguishconstantly haunts our thoughts; if rve delegatethc tasl
of restoringthe diseasedorqanismto thc tlesirednorm to tcchni-
cai means,either nragicalor nratter of [.rct lPo.titirc],it is because
we cxpect nothing llood from nacureitsel[.
Bv contr.rst,Crcek rnedicine,in thc Hippocratic u'ritings and
practices,oflers a conception ol diseasewhich is no longcr onto-
logic al, b u t d y n a mi c , n o l o n g e r l o c a l i zati oni st,but total i zi ng'
Nature (pfir'sis),rvithin nran as well as without, is harmony and
equilibrium. The disturbanccofthis harmonv,ofthis equilibrium,
is called "disease."In this case,diseaseis not someu'herein man,
it is evervrvherein him; it is the whole man. Extcrnal circum-
stanccsare the occasionbut not thc causes.Man's equilibrium
consistsof lbur humors, u hose fluidit,v is perfectlYsuited to sus-
tain variationsand oscillatiottsand rvhoscqualities are paired by
oppos ite s(h o t/c o l d , rv e t' d 1 1 );th e d i sturbanceofthese humors
causesdisease.But diseaseis not sirrrplydisequilibrium or discor-
c lanc eii t i s , p e rh a p smo s t i tl p o rta n t, .rn r:ffort on the part ol
naturc to effect a ne* equilibritrnt in nran l)iseascis a gencral-
) 22
jzed rcaction designedto bring about a cure; thc organismdevel-
ops a diseasein order to qet nell. Thcr.rpvnrust llrst tolerateand,
rcinfbrce thesehedonic and spontaneouslytherapcu-
if ncccssarv,
ric reactions.Medical techniqueimitntesnaturalmcdicinal action
naturae).To imitate is not merely to copv an appcar-
(ris medicatrix
ance but, also, to mimic a tentlencv and to extend an intimatc
movem ent .O f cour se,such a concept ion is also opt im ist ic, but
hrre the optimism concernsthe lvav o[ nature and not thc cf]cct
of human t cchnique.
\4edical thought hasneverstopped alternatingbetween these
t\\'o representationsof diseasc,betrvt'r'nthese tllo kinds of opti-
mism, alu'avsfinding some goo<ireasonlbr one or the other atti-
tude in a nervly explained pathogenesis.Deficiencv diseasesand
all infectious or parasitic diseasesf)vor the ontological theory,
rvhi l c cnclocr inedist ur bancesand all discascsbeginning u, it h
,/rs-su ppor t t he dynam ic or f uncr ional t hcor v. llouever , t hese
t\!o (oncept ions do haveone point in com m on: in r Jiscase, or
bettcr ,in t he cr pr : r ienceof being sick, bot h envisiona polem ical
\ituation - either a b.rrtlebenve..nth<:organismand a tbreignsub-
stance,or an intcrnal strugglebetrvt.enoppcrsingforces. Disease
diffirs fiom a state of health, the pathologicalfiom the normal,
as one qualit v dif f er s f r om anot lr er , cit hcr by t he pr esenceor
abscnceof a definite principle, or bv an alteration of the total
organism.This heterogcneity of normal and pathological states
persiststoday in the naturalistconception, rvhich expects littlc
from human cfforts to restorethe norm, and in rvhich nature will
find the wavsto\1,ardcure, But it proveddifflcult to maintain the
qualitati\.emodification separaringthc normal fiom the patho-
logical in a conception that allorvs. indeed expects, man to be
able to compel natureanrlbt,nd ir rr-,his nonlrtive desires.Wasn't
it said repeatedlyaficr Bacon'stime that ()rc govrrns naturc only
l rr obeving it ?'I b govcr n diseasenr <'ans
t o becom e acquaint ed
lr l
\r.irh its relationsrvith thc normal state, \\ hich the li!ing man - cfl cct ivc act ion is such t hat r he conccpr of diseaser r ould f inallr
loving lif'e- wantsto regain.Hence, thc theorcticalneed,dclayed vani s h.The convict ion t hat one c. t n scient i[ icallv r cst or c t he
l,r' an abserceof tcchnologv,to establisha scientific pathologybv norm is such t hat , in t he end, ir annulst hc pat hologicr l.Disease
linking ir trr phvsiologr.Thomas Sydenhanr( 162,1-1689; thought is n,r krngcr the ot)ject ol anguishfbr th.'healthv m.rn; ir has[rc-
t hat in or(l e r to h c l p a s i c k m a n , h i s s i cknesshad to be del i mi ted conrc inst eadt hc objcct of st uclv f or t he r hcor istof hcalt h. I t is
and determined.Therc are diseascspeciesjust as there are animal i n pathologr ',*r it lar ge, t hat r ve can unr avcl t hc t , . 'achingsof
or plant species,According ro Svdenham.there iJ an order among heal th, r '. r t hcras Plat o sought in t he inst it ut ions ol t hc St at e
s i mi l a r to th e re g u l a ri tv Is i d o re C eoffroy S ai nt-[]i l ai re
dis eas es thc Iargerand more easilvrea<lableequiralent of tlrc .r,irtuesand
found amonganomalies.Philippe Pinel justified all theseattempts vicesol tlrc in<lividualsotrl. II6e Nbrmo./and the Pathological
(NP\,
at c las s i fi c a ti o no l d i s e .rs c(n o s o l o g v )by perfccti ngthe genre i n P P .lt ] ] l
philosophique(1797), rvhich CharlesVictor l)arem-
his Nosographie
bcrg clescribedas morc the rvork of a naturalist than a clinician.
(1682-1771)creation
Mean*'hile, Giovanni Battista,\'lorgagni's
l n a to mvm a dc i t possi bl cto Ii nk the
c r la s v s t c mo f p a th o i o g i c a a
lesionsof certain organs to groups of stablesvmptoms,such that
nos ogr a p h i c a cl l a s s i l i c a ti o nfb u n d a substratum i n anatomi cal
analvsis,But iust asthe lbllouers of William Harvcyand Albrccht
von Hallcr "breathcd life" into anatomvbv turning ir into phvsi-
ology, so pathology became a natural extension of physiologv.
(Sigeristprovidesa mastcrful sunrmarvofthii r:volution of medi-
J) l he end r<:sultofthis cvolutionarvprocessis the fbr-
cal cle.rs,'l
mation of a theory of the rclations betrvcen the normal and the
pathological, according to rvhich thc pathological phenomcna
lbund in )iving or-qanisnrs
arc nothing more than quantitatile vari-
ations, grcater or lesrcr according to corrcspondingphysiologi-
c al phen o me n a .S e m a n ti c a l l v th
, e p a thol ogi cali s desi gnatcdas
departing liom the normal not so much br o- or dls- asbv l,1per-
or 14po-.\\rhile ret.riningthe ontological rhcory'ssoothing con-
f idenc e in th e p o s s i b i l i tyo f te c h n i c a lconquestof di scase,thi s
approachis lar from considcring health and sickncssas qualita-
t ir elr opp o s c rl , o r n s l i rrc e s i o i n e d i n battl e. Thc need to rt-
cstablishcontinuity in orcler to gain more knorvledgefor more

I 2. 1 l1t
 1- ht lr l ent it y of t hc Tu, o St at es

Auguste Comte and the "Broussois Principle"

Frangois-
[127] It u asin 1828that AugusteComte took notice of
Joseph Victor Broussais'streatise Dc I'ltritation et de la Jolie .di|cl
adopted the principle fbr his o\r\,n usc. Comte credits Broussais.
rathq: rt han Xavier Bichat , and bef or ehim , Philippe Pinel, r "'it h
havi ngdeclar edt hat all diseases ackno*'ledgcdas such ar e onlY
s\r'r'lpt()nrs and that disturbancesOl rital ftrnctionscoultl not take
pl accr 'r 'it houtlcsionsin or gans,or r at her ,t issues.But aboveall,
addsConrte, "never before had anrone conceivedthe fundamen-
tal relation bet'veen pathology and phvsiologv in so direct and
satisfvinga manncr." Broussais describedall diseases asconsisting
t is-
"in t he excessor lack oI cr cit at ion in t he var i<r us
essent ially
suesaboveor belor',,thedegreeestablishedas the norm." Thus,
e er elyt he ellict s of sir nplechar r gesin int ensit \ in
di seascs. r rnr
the act ion ol t hc st im ulant s*hich ar e indispensablclir t t n. r in-
taining he.rlth.f NP, pp. a7-a8]
[128] The lbrticth lecture of rhc Coursdephilosophie Potititc-
phi l osophicalr cf lcct ions on t he whole of biology - cont ains
Comte's most complcte text on tlre problem norv bcfbre us. It is
conce r nedu'it h shou'ingt he clillicult it 'sinher ent in t hc sim plc
cxten sion of cxpcr im ent al m et h( ) ( l\ , r vhich havc pr oveclt hcir

)17
 r
usel lnessin the plrysicochcmic'al spherc,to the particularchar-
ac t er is t ic so l th e l i v i n g :
to uncoverthc lalvsby
Any cxperimcntwhatevcris alt!rysdesigncrl
which eachdcterminingor modilvinginflucnceol a phenomcnon
and it gcnerall)consistsin introducinga
nflcctsits pcrfbrmance,
clear-cutchangeinto eachdesignateclcondition in ordcr to mea-
variation
surerlirectlvthc corresponding itself.la
ofthe phcnorrenon
N<xr',in biologv thc variationimposcd on one or scvcralof a Phe-
n( ) m enon ' sc o n d i ti o n s o f e x i s tc n c ec n n not bc random but must
be containc'dvr.ithinccrtain Iimits compatible w ith the phcnom-
enon's cxistence. Furthermore, the fict of functional consen.tu.t
pr()perto the organismprecludesmonitoring the rclation, n hich
links a detcrminedclisturbanccto its supposrrll,rexclusiveef'fects,
r 1' it hs r r f fi c i r.:nat n a l v ti c a lp rc c i s i o n . But, thi nks C omte, i f rvc
r eac lilvad m i t th a t th e e s s e n c co fe x p e ri mentati onl i es not i n the
researcher'sartiflcial intervention in the svstem of a phenome-
non u, hic h h e i n tc n ti o n a l l v te n d s to d isturb, but rathcr i n the
comparisonbct*ttn a control phcnomcnonand one altcred rvith
respect to an\' one ol its conditions of existence,it fbllorvs that
discasesmust be ablc to function lor thc scicntistsas sPontane-
()usexperimcnts rvhich allou a comparisonto be madr:betvvecn
an organism'svari()usabnonral statcsand its normal state.
Accordingto thc cmincntlvphilosophical principlew hich w ill scne
lronr no'n on asa dircct, gcncnl basislirr positivcpathologvand
rvhosedcfinitivecstablishmcnt \r'eo$c to thc bold.rndpcrscvering
gcniLrs ol our limouslelLrrvcitizcn,Brorrssais, thc pathological sta(c
v i l l c re n t i ro m the phvsi ol ogi cal
is not . rt a l l ra d i c .rl l d si
statc, th
r e g a r c l to r r h ich n o m a ttcr h o n o n t' looks at i t - i t ci tn ()nl Y c()n-
s t i l u t c a sim p lc cxtcn sio n g o in g m o r e or l css bevond thc hi ghcr or
proPcrto elch Phenonlcnon
Ior.crlimits ofvari.rti()n ol thc norlnal
organisnr,rvithoutcvcrbeingablc to Pr(xluccrc.rllvncrvPhcnom_
cn||1hich \loulcl haYeto a cert.r;ndcgrccanv ptrrclr phrsiologi-
calanalogucs. l5
Consccluentlycverv concePtion of pathologv must be bnsc(lon
pri or k nor vledgcoi t he cor r cspondingnor m al st at c, but con-
vcrselvthe scientiflcstudv of pathologicalcascsttecomesan indis-
pensablephasein the overal] searchfirr the la*'s of thc normal
st.rtc. flrc obsen'ationof pathologicalc.rsesof]ers numerous,gen-
-l
uinc advantageslbr actual cxpcrimental investigation. he tran-
sition fiom thc normal to thc abnormalis slorverantl more natural
i n thc caseof illness,an( l t he r et ur n t o nor m al, r vhen it t akr . : s
placc, spontancouslvflrnishes a vcrifving countcrproo{ ln a<ldi-
tion, astir asman is concerncd,Pathologicalinvestigationis more
fruitlirl than the ncccssarilvlimitctl experimcntalexploration.Thtr
sci entillc st ut lv of m or bid st at csis ( ssent iallYvalid lbr . all or gan-
i sms,e venplant lif e, and is par t icular lvsuit ed t o t he m ost c( ) m -
plcr an<ltherelorcthr.:most dclicateand fiagile plrenomt'naulrich
cl i rectexper im cnt at ion,being t ( x) br usqu( a uould
r clist ur bance,
tcnd to dist or t . I ler e Com t r ' \ \ 'nst hinking ol vit al Phenom cna
related to the higher animals and m;rn, ol thc n(rvous and Ps\-
chi c fi r nct ions.Finally,t he st ur il ol anom alit : sand m onst r osit ics
s h older and lesscur ableillncssest han t he lunc-
concr: ivcd. r bot
ti onal dist ur banccsof vaf ious plant or neur om ot or aPPar at uses
completesthc studv ofcliscascs: the "teratological.rpproach"(the
stu(lvol monstcrs)is acldedto thc "pathologicalapproach"in bio-
Iogi calinvest igat ion. l6
It is appropriateto note, lirst, thc particularlvabstr.rctclualitv
ol thi s t hesisand t ht 'absencet hr ouglr outol anv pr ccisecxam ple
ol a m cdical nat ur ( :t ( ) suit abll illust r at c his lit t r al exposit ion.
Sinceue cannot rclat( th('s('gt'neralpropositionsto.rnv examPlt',

126 I2' l
lrc do Dot knorv from rvhat vantagcpoint Conlte stltes that the as r.el l as int er ior "lq - r vit h t he r esult t lr at t he concept of t he
pat holog i c a l p h e n o m e n o na l u ' a v sh a s i ts anal oguei n a physi o- nonna) or phvsiological,linallv clarified by this concept ol har-

logical phenomenon, anclthat it is nothing radicallv nerv'

Horv mor_r,amountsto a qualitativeand polvvalcntconcePt,still more
is .r sclcrotic artery analog<lusto a normal one, or an isYstolic .rr' ' rhe t i.and m , 'r . r lr h. r n: t icnt ilic
heart identical to that ol an athlcte at the hcight ofhis porvers? As lir as the assertionof identity of the nornral phenontenon

Undoubtedlv, wc are meant to understandthat thc laws of

vital and the correspondingpathological phenomenon is conccrned,

phenomenaare the same for both diseaseand health' 8ut then i t i s c<luallyclear t hat Com t e's int ent ion is t o denv t hc qualit a-
why not sa1-.so and givc cxamples?And even thcn, does this not tive dillercncc between thesctwo adnritteclby the vitalists.l-ogi-
imply that analogouseffectsare determincd in health and disease cal l v to denv a qualit at ive dif f er ence m ust lead t o asser t inga
bv an.rlogousmechanisms?We should think about this cxample homogcneitycaplble of expressionin quantitativcterms. Comtc

given bl Sigeristr"During digcstion the number of rvhite blood is undoubtcdly heading to'r'arrlthis rrhen he dellnes pathologv

cclls increases.The same is true at thc onset ofinfcction Con- as a "simple extensiongoing more or lessbcvond the higher or

s equent l vth i s Ph e n o mc n o ni s s o mc timesphvsi ol ogi cal 'some- lou.cr limits ofvariation proper to each phenomenonofthe nor-

times patholoqical,depcndingon 'vhat cattsesit.''ll mal organism . "Bur in t he cnd it m usr be r t 'cognizedt har t he

Sccond, it should be Pointcd out that dcspite the reciprocal terms urcd hcre, although only vaguelvand looselv quantitativc,
sti l l hale a qualit at iver ing t o t hem . f NP, pp. 19- 21]
natureof the clari[icationachicvedthrough the comparisonof the
normal with the path<rlogicaland the assimiliarionof thc patho'
Claude Bernord and Experimental Pathology
logical and the normal, Comte iDsistsrepeatedlyon the neces-
sit.r of determining the normal and its truc limits o[ variation [129] I n Ber nar d'swor k, t he r cal ident it v - should one sav in
mechanismsor symptomsor lroth?- anrlcontinuitt'of path<-rlcrgi-
first, belorc methodicallvinvestigatingpathologicalcasesStrict)y
knorvledgcof normal phcnomena,basedsoleJyon ob- cal phr:nomcnaand the correspondingphysiologicalphcnornena
spea)<ing,
without knorvledgeof are more a m onot onousr epet it ion t han a t hem e. This. r sser t ion
scr,ration,is both possibleand necessarY
is to bc fbund in thc legonr de ph.vsiololTic
expirimentaleappliqude
<lisease,particularlv basedon experimentation But wc are Pre-
a la n(decine(1855), cspeciallyin the secondand trvcntv-sccond
scnteclu'ith a seriousg;rp in that Comtc provides no criterion
fecturesof \bfume Two, antl in the leqonssur la chaleuranimale
u'hich would allo*'us to knorv rvhat a normal phenomenon is
(1876). We prefirr to choose the lcgonssurle dialtite et la glrco-
We.rre left to conclud<rthat on this point he is rcferring to the
geni seo nim alc( 1877) as t he basic t , . 'r r , r vhich, of ail Bcr nar r l's
us ual c o rre s p o n (l i n gc o n c e P t, g i re n the fact tbat he usesthe
$'orks,can be consideredthe one espcciallvdevotcd to illustrat-
not ions o f n o rma l s ta te , p h y s i o l rl g icalstatt' and natural state
2 s B e tte r s ti l l , rv h e n i t comes to defi ni ng the ing thc theory, thc one n'hcre clinical and expcrimental facts.rre
int c r c ha n g e a b l Y
prcsentedat least as mu<h for thc "mor.al" ol a methodological
linrits of pathological ot. cxpcrimenta! disturbanccs(omP'rtible
anrl philosophicalorder which can be dran'n lrorn it as for rheir
, o m tc i denti fi cs these l i mi ts
\ \ it h t he e x i s tc n c eo f o rg a n i s m s C
i ntri ns icphvsiologicalm caning.
u' it h t ho s e o f a " h a rmo n v o f d i s ti n c t i nfl uences,those cxteri or

Jll
I lo
 B c r nar ccl o n s i d e re dmc d i c i n e a sth c ' jci cnce ofdi scascs,phJ' s- pl arrt r vor ld t hr ough it s f eecling;t hat blood nor m allv cont ains
iologv as t h e s c i e n c eo f l i l c . In th e s c i encesi t i s thcorv rvhi ch sugar,anclthat urinarv sugaris a product gcncrallvelimin.rtcd bv
illuminatesanclclominatr:spractice. Rational therapcttticscan be thc kjdncvs *lrcn the rate of glvcer-njareachesa ccrtain thresh'
sustainedonlv bv a scicntific pathologv,and a scientific pathol- ol d. In ot her r vor ds,glvcem ia is J c( ) nst antplr enom t 'noninde-
ogv must bc baseclon phvsiologicalscitnce. Diabcttrsis one clis- pencl c ntof f bod int ake t o suchan cxt ent t hat it is t hc absenceo1'
caservhich posesproblems rvhosesolution Provesthe preccding bl oo<lsugart hat is abnor m al,and glvcosur iais t hr consequence
thcsis."Common scnsesholts that if rveare thoroughJvacquainted of gl vc em iau hich hasr isenabovt :a ccr t . iinquant it v,scr vingasa
u ith a phvsiologicalphcnomenon, rvc should be in a position to threshold.In a diabetic,glvcemiais not in itsell a pathologicalphc-
, r c c ountf b r a l l th e d i s tu rb a n c c sto w h i ch i t i s suscepti bl ei n the nomeDon- it is so onll in terms ol'its quantitv; in itsclf, glvcemia
patho)ogicalstatc:ph\siologyand pathologvarc intcrmingled and is a "norrnal and constantphenomcnon in a healthyor-gani-sm."Il
are essenti,rlly one and thc samcthing."r0Diabctcsis a clisease that
c ons is t ss o ]e l va n d e n ti re l v i n th e d i s o rderol ' a normal fLncti on. Ther eis onlvoneglvccm ia,it i\ c( ) Ds1. r pcr nt , m nnenrbor , hr lr r r ing
"Fr'<'rl clisersehas a correspondingnormal lirnction ol u'hich it ,l j .r bt t es
anr lout si<lc
t hat m or bir lst at c.O nl. ' it hasr lc3r ccs:
glr c, -
is onlv t h c (l i s tu rl )e (Je. x a g g c ra tc d ,c l i mi ni shcd or ol > l i teratecl mir lrcl,u 3 to 4 pcrccntclocsnot lc.rdtoglr'cosuril;lrrrrabi>rct[rr
er pr t ' s s io n .l f rre .rre u n a b l c to e x p l a i na l l mani l i ' stati onsol di s- ghcosur ia
l r.' r cl r csult s.
. . . lt is ir npossible
t ( ) pcr ccivrlhc o. 1r ) ! ir ir ) n
trsc torl.rr,it is bccauscphvsioJogv is not vct sulllcientlv adt'anccd lr,irnthc nrrrrr.rlti' the p.rthologic.rl st.rt(, .rn(lnr)pr,)blcrn sh'r$\ lx r
anc lt hc r c a r< s ti l l rn a n r n o rm .l l fu n c ti o nsunknou' n t() us." tl In tcr t h. r ')Lliil) et r tshc int im alclir sionr r l phvsiologr, r nrp,
l r t h, r logr . Jr
t his , B ( r r ra r(ltv a so p p o rc < lto ma n v p h ysi ol ogi stsof hi s day,.rc-
crrrclingto * hom <lisr:asc entitv. supcr-
rvasan extraphysiokrgic,rl INP,pp. ](J-l2l
imposcdon the organism.Thc studv ol diabetes
no r .rllorved
lorrge Il 3t] ] Clau<ltBcr
' nar d,unlikc Br oussaisanr lCor r r r e,suppot t ed
s r . r c rhn oP i n i o n . hi r gencr al pr inciplc of pat hologv u it h ver ili. r hlt 'ilr gunr ent s!
protrrc olsol cxper ir nr nt sand, aboveall, m ct hods ldr r lt r . r nt if r -
I n c f li' c t, d i a b rte si s c h a ra c tc ri z cbdv the l i rl l o' r' i ngsvnrP tonrs: i ng phv siologicalconcept s.G lvcogenesis, glvccnr ia,gllcosut ia.
polvtrria.polldipsia,polvplragia, autophagia.rnd glvcosuria. Strictly combustion of firod, heat liom v.rsoclilatation arc not qu.rlit.rtir<
nervphcnomenon,
s peak i n gn,o n co l th e s erv m p to m src p rcscnts.r conccpt sbut r hc sum m ar icsol r esult sobt aincr lin t er m s oI nr t a-
unkn()\r'n to thc normalstate,nor is anYil sPolltJne{}us surement .Fr om her c on \ \ 'ekn( ) \ \ 'cxact lvr v] r atis m cant whcn it
Production
ol naturc.()n thc cl)ntfar\',
all of them preexist,savclor tht'ir inten- is claimcclthat disc.rscis the exaggeratecl or rliminislrcclexpres-
sitr, *hich variesin thc normalst.rteandin rhc discisc(lstatell si(nrol .r normal finction. Or:rt leastuc havcthe rneansto knorr,
i t, fbr in spit e of Ber nar d'sundcniablepr ogr cssin logical pr eci
genius lics in the fact that he
Bricfll, rvt'knou that Bernarcl's si on, his t hought is not ent ir clv lr et f r - omam bigt r it v.

shoueclthat thc rugarlbund in an animal otganismis a Product of First of all, r,r,ithBcrnardas u ith Bichat, Broussais.rnd Conrte,
thcrc i s a dccept ivcm ingling ol quant it at ivcand clualit at ivecon-
this sameorganisnrand not just something introduccd liom the:

lll lll
c ept s in t h e q i v c n d e fi n i ti o n o f p a th o l ogi calP hcnomcna.S onl e-
t im es t he p a th o l o g i c a l s ta te i s " th e d i sturbancc ol a normal
m ec hani s mc o n s i s ti n gi D .r q u a rrti ta ti vevnri ati on, an cxaggera-
t ion or a tte n u a ti o n o f n o rm a l p h e n o mena," l 5somcti mes the
diseasedstate is made up of "the exaggcration,disproportion,
discordanccof normal phenomena."16 Who doesn't see that the
hasa distincrly quantitativcscnscin thc first
term "ex.rqqer-,rtion"
definition and a ratherqualitativeonc in tht' second.I)id llernard
believe that he u'ascradic'rtingthe qualitativevalue of the term
"pathological" bl substituting for it the terms disturbance,dis-
pr opor t io n .d i s c o rd a n c e l
This ambiguity is ccrrainll instructivcin that it rcvcalsthat rhe
problem itself persistsat the heart of thc sr.'lutionpresuntably
givcn to it. And the problem is the fbllor"'ing: Is the concept of
diseasea concept ofan objective reality accessibleto quantitative
scientific knorvledge?Is the differencein value.*'hich thc lit'ing
being establishcsbetweenhis normal life and his pathologicallife.
an illusorr appearanceth.lt the scientisthrs the )egitimateobJiga-
tion to deny?Ifthis annulJingofa qualitativecontrast is theoreti-
c ally pos s i b l e ,i t i s c l e a r th a t i t i s l e g i ti mate:i f i t i s not possi bl e,
t hc questi o no f i ts l c g i ti ma c v i s s u p e rfl uous.IN P , pp ]5-36]
[l3l] B-vrvavof summarv,in the medical dornain,Claude []er-
nard, u ith thc authoritYof-evtry innovator* ho provesmovenlent
by marching,fbrmulatedthc profound necd ofan era that believed
in t he om n i p o te n c e o f a te c h n o l o g y f ounded on sci ence,and
rvhich f'elt comfbrtable in lif'e in spite, or perhapsbccauscol,
romantic l.rmentations.An art of living - as nledicine is in th!
full senseof the word - inrplies a scienceof lil'e. Elficient thera-
peutics.rssumes experimenlalPathology,$ hich in turn cannot be
scparatcdfiom physiology."Phvsiology and pathologv are iden-
tical, onr and thc samcthing." But must it be decluceclfiom this,
r lit h br ut a l s i m p l i c i tv ,th a t l i l e i s th e s a mei n heal thand di sease,
I t4
that it learns nothing in diseaseand through it? The scienceof
oppositesis one, said Arisrotle' Nlrrstit be concludtd lionr this
th,rt opPositesare not opposites?That the scienceol lif'e should
talc so-callednormal and so-calledpathological phenomcna as
objects of the same thcorctical importance,susccptibleof reciP-
roc.rlclarification in ordcr to make itself fit to mcet the totalitv
of the vicissitudesof litc in all its rsPects,is more urgent than
l cgi ti mat e.This does not m ean t hat pat hologvis not hing ot hcr
thrn phvsiology,and still lessthat diseasc,as it relatesto the nor-
mal state,representsonly an incrcaseor a reduction. It is undcr-
sroo(l that medicinc needsan objectivc Pathology,but research
rvhi ch c ausesit s object t o vanishis nor objcct i"e. O ne can denv
thrr rl i seascis a kind of violat ion ol't he or ganismand considerit
as Jn event that tht' organism createsthrough some trick of its
permancnt functions, $'ithout denving that the trick is nelv. An
organism'sbchaviorc.rnbe in continuitv lvith prcviousbehaviors
and still be another bchavior. The progressiveness oIan .rdvent
does not exclude tht originality of .rn evtnt. The lact that a path-
ol ogi cal sym pt om . consicler edbv it sell, expr essest he hYper ac-
tivitv of a function *'hosc product is exactly identical rvith thc
prodLrctoIthe samefinction in so-callednonnal conditirlns,cloes
not nrcanthat an org.rnicdisturbancc,conceivedasanothcrasPect
ol-thc u hole ol-lunctionaltotalit t anrl not asa suntntaryol s,rmp-
tonrs. is not a nerv modc ofbehavior'lor the organismrelative to
i ts cnvir onm ent .
In thc final analysis,*,ould it not be appropriatc to sa) that
the p.rt hologicalcan bc'dist inguir hedas such,t hat ir , . ls an alt er -
atir-rnol thc nornralstatt, onlv at thc lcvcl ol organictotalitv, and
t hen i t concer nst r nn, at t he level ol consciousindividualt ot al-
i t1, uher e diseasebt com cs a kind oI evil? To be sick m canst hat
a man r eallvI ivcsanot herlif c, cvcn in t he biologicalr cnseol t he
uord. [ NP, pp. 86- 88]
ll5
 ? z:;i = = zi : i :;ti ::z
t
c , i =i,= z =
= 1 i=+-i: +=?
ai =: i : =
; zii=i--=
c
i = i ::::=:
! ; ,= i |- i=+t :;:t:
1 i =;+ ti = :i, t:i i : i :=
. ? i =11 =*i =ri t+1-= i =,:7 ,i :
.)
i ; ; : z ;i;?=i i ; ii=:i :;1
:rii l ; Z ? i = = : 2 '; =; : t : i
az:-=:=ii;:Zi:;l
E=i!
i zi+ ^; t i Z a= ?, I -o-| > z=:
:: : t ?i-i :i=,'-' ;j :-i z ::+
5 :.::Ll+:;:'-!

salvation
andsickness rrith sin;andin hisaccountof Ii eorjamctlita
reroStahlhimsclf,dcspitehis intellectual
vigor,availcrJ
himselfmore
t hanhc n c c d e dto o fth e b e l i e fi n o ri g i n asi
l nandthe fi l l o[man.]7
M or c t han h e n c c d e d to ! s a y sth c a u th o r, qui te thc admi rer of
Broussais,sworn enemy at the da$.n of the ninetecnth century
ofall meclicalontologv. The denial o[an ontological conception
of disease,a negativccorollary of thc assertionof a quantitative
idcntitv betrveenthc normal and thc pathological,is first, per-
haps, the deeper reflsal to confirm evil, It certainly cannot be
denied that a scientific therapeuticsis superior to a magical or
mysticalone. It is ccrtain that knou'ledgeis better than ignorance
rvhen action is rcquired, and in this sensethe value ofthe phi-
losophvof the Enlightcnmentand of positivism,even scienristic,
is indisputable.It would not be a question of exempting doctors
from the study ofphysiology and pharrnacology,lt is very impor-
tant not to identify discaservith either sin or the devil. But it does
not fbllou' from the fict that evil is not a being that it is a con-
cept devoid ofmeaning; it does not follo*,that there are no neg-
ativc values,even among vital valucs;it does not fbllou'that the
pathological statc is essentiallvnothing othcr than the normal
state.l,\?, pp. 103-1041
[133] It is true that in medicine the normal stateofthe human
body is the state one \\.antsto recstablish.But is it becausether-
apeuticsaims at this stateasa good goal to obtain that it is called
normal, or is it becausethe interestedparty,that is, the sick man,
considersit normal that thcrapeuticsaims at it? We hold the scc-
ond statement to be truc. We think that mcdicine exists as the
art of life becausethe living human being himself calls ccrtain
dreadedstatesor behaviorspathological(hence requiring avoi<i-
ance or correction) relativeto the dvnamic polaritv ofli[e, in thc
fbrm of a negativevalue. We think that in doing this the living
lld
FE PATtsOLOG CAL
human being, in a more or lesslucid wayrextcndsa spontaneous
eflbrt, peculiar to lif'e, to struggle againstthat which obstructs
i ts preser vat ionand developm entt akcn as nor m s. 'f he ent r v in
rh. Iorabulair ephilot ophiquc
5r cm \ t o r \ \ um e r h. r t . alr r , , c. r nh.
attri but ed t o a biological f ict onlv bv, , him *. ho speaks, "obvi-
ouslv a man, We, on the other hancl,think thar thc fact that a
l i vi ng m an r eact st o a I esion, inf ect ion, I unct ional anar chvbv
meansofa diseaseexpressesthe lundamcntal f;ct th.rt lile is nor
indif'ferentto the condirions in \r,hich it is possible,rhar life is
pol ari t v and t her eby even an unconsciousposit ion of value; in
short, life is in fact a normative activity. Nb/mdtir", in philoso,
phl, meansevcrvjudgment u'hich evaluatesor qualifiesa fict in
rel ati ont o a nor m , but t his m ode of judgm ent is essent iallvsub_
ordinatcto that which establishes norms. Normarive,in the fLllest
senseof t he wor d, is t hat * hich cst ablishesnor m s. And it is in
this sensethat rve plan to talk about biological normarivitv. \A/c
think that wc are as carefirl as anyone as f)r as the tcndencv to
fill into anthropomorphism is concerned. We do not ascribea
human content to vital norms but rve do ask ourselvesholv nor_
mati vi tv essent ialt o hum an consciousncss r vouldbe cxplainedif
it dicl not in somc n,aycxist in embrvo in lifi. Wc ask ourselvcs
hou a h um an nccd f br t her apeut icsr vould havc engcnder eda
meri i ci n e r vhich is incr easinglyclair vovantn, it h r egar d t o t he
condi ti ons of diseaseil lif e's st r ugglc againstt hc innum cr ablc
dangersthreatening it wcre not a permanent and cssentialvital
necd. From the sociologicalpoint of viel., it can bc shou.n
that
therapeutics.w,as first a religious, magical activitv, but this does
not negatethe fact that therapeutic neeclis a vital nccd,
u,hich,
cven in lo.rverliving organisms(rvith respectto vertcbrate
struc-
turc) arousesr eact ionsof hcdonic value or self '- hcaling
or self :
restorjngbehaviors.
INP, pp. 126_27]
ll9
PotholoBy os the Bdsis ol Phyiology
[ 134] Co n v e rs c h ,th e th e o rv i n q u e s ti crnc()nvevsthe httnr.rni st
c onv ic t i()nrh a t m a n ' sa c ti o n o n h i s e n vi ronntentand on hi mscl f
can and must becomc completcll one rvith his knorvlc<lgeol thc
env ir onn o n t a n c lm a n ; i t mu s t b e n o rm al l r onl v thc appl i cati on
r r f a pr ev i < u s l vi n s ti tu tc (l s c i e n c c . I o ol i ng,rt the Lcqons;url c
/i,70&c it is obvious th.rt ifone asseltsthe real homogeneirl an<l
c ont inuit\ o l th e n o rm.rl a n d th e p a th ol ogi cali t i s i n order t< r
es t ablis ha p h v s i o l o g i c asl c i e n c eth a t r voul d govcrn therapcuti c
activitv b\ meansoftlre intt'rmediaryof pathologv.tlere thc f,rct
that human consciousncss experienccsoccasionsol nerv grorrth
an< lt lr c c rrc ti c apl ro g re s si n i ts rl o m .ri nof nontheorcti cal .pr.rg-
To denv technol -
m at ic an( l te c h n i c a la c ti r i ti i s n o t a p p r eci .rtcd.
ogv a v al u e a l l i ts o w n o u rs i d c o f th e k norrl edge i t succeedsi n
inc or por a ti n gi s to re n d c r u n i n te l l i g i b lethc i rrcgul aru,ayof the
ptogressof knowledge and to miss that ovcrtaking of scicncc bv
t he po\ \ ' c r th a t th e p o s i ti v i s ts h a v e s o ofi cn st.rtedw hi l c thev
dc plor t ' d i t. Il te c h n o l trg v ' sra s h n c s su, nnri ndtulofthe obst.rcl es
t o be en< o u n te re d (l , i (l n o t c o n s ta n tl vanri ci patethe prutl ence
of c or lilie d k n o * l c d g e , tl re n u mb e r o f sci cnti l ' i c probl cms to
r es olv e,rrl ri c h a rc s u rp ri s r,;a fte r h a v i ng l rct' n setbacks,rl oul d
be lir li' u tr. l l e re i s th e tru th th a t rc nrri ns i n empi ri ci sm, the
philos op h r o f i n tc l l c c tu .rl n d \c n tu re , $' hi ch rn experi nrcntal
m et ho< 1ra
, th e r to o tc m l l te d (b v re a c t i on) t< -rrati onal i zei tsel f,
f iilec l t o r c c o g n i z e [...]
.
I lcrc again,$'c owe to rhc chanceof bibliographicalrcsearch
t lr e int c ll c c tu .rl p l e a s u reo f s ta ti n g o nce nror(' that the most
appar entl Yp a ra d o x i c arh l c re sa l s oh a v cthci t tradi ti on $' hi ch un-
doubtedll cxpresses thcir permancnt)ogical necessitv.Just u hen
B r ous s a i srv a sl e n d i n g h i s a u th o ri ty to tl re thcory uhi ch cstab-
lisheclphvsi,rlogical medicine, this,i.rmetheon rvasprovokingthe
p h rs i c i a n ,o n e D r. V i ctor P rus,u ho srs
objec t ion so l a n o b s c rrrr:
l.+o
rovarrlt'd bv the Socii'ti' de Nl6decine du Gar<l in l82l lbl a report
e n f e r e d i n a co n r p .tti ti o n !r 'h o sc o b j e ct u a s th e Pr cci s<.<l ( fi n i -
t i o n o f th c tcr m s "p h l e g m a si a " a n d "i r r i ta ti o n " a n cl th ci r i m p o r ,
tancc lor practical nrcciicinc. Aftcr having challcngt'<lthe idca that
phvsiologv bv itscll lorms tlre natural firundation of medicine; that
it rlonr.' can cver cstablish the kno* )erlgc of svmptoms. their rt,la
t i o n s h i p s a n d th ci r va l u e ; r h a r p .r r h o l o g i ( a l a n a r o n l ,ca n e ve r b <
t l r d u c ed l i o m th c kn o r vl e d g e o f n o r m a l p h cn o m e n .r ; r h a t th e
plognosis of cliseascsderivcs fiom the knorvlcdgc ot phvsiologi
c . r l l a r vs, th e a u th o r a d d s:
l l r lc * a n t r o r \h n ( st th r r l r r e sti o n<l ta l t si th i n r h i :i a r ti cl r : w .e
,rould h.rveto shc,s th.rt phlsio/o11r.
f<trfron bctnotht lounlation ol
pathologr,nukl onlr driscin oppositionrlr il. lr is thr()ugh rhc ch.rngcs
l hich the rliseaseol an org.rnand somctimes rhc completc suspcn-
s i D no l i ts.r cti r i l \ t,r D sm i t t( ) i r s l u n cti o n s th a t * c Icl r n th c o r g a n 's
u . e ;r n r Jj m p r r r r r n cc.... l l cn cc.r n t r o sto sj ,;,b r co n r p n 'r si n ga n r l p ;r r -
. r h z i n g th e o p r i c n cr r c, th c b r a ch i .r l n r .r vt's,a n r i th c sp i n .r lco r r 1 ,
rhorrs us thr'ir ustr.rl(lcstination.IlroussonnctLrst his mr'morr.of sub,
s t a nti l c so r d s; a t h i s d ca th a n a b <.r :ss
sa r l i r u n d i n th c.r n tcr i o r p a r t
o l h i s b r a i n .r n cl,r n c w a s Ie r l r o l r cl i o c th a t th a r i s th c ce n tt,r i o r th e
t n c n r o r t o l n a m e ,,.... l h u s p .r r h o l o q r '..r i cl ccll l ;r .r r h o l ,r g i r alln a t
o n r r , h a scr e a te tlp h r r i o l o g r : cvcr r tl .n p a r h o l o sl t l ,,r r s r r p p h r si o l ,
c,rlv'slirrrnererrols and airlsitr progrcrr.l8
INP.PP.10.+-t07]
'l hcrcaresonr(
thinkersuhosr horrorol linalisntlc.rds
illi]
t h c n r t o r e j e ct cvcr r th e [) l r w i n i i n i cl e ao l se l t,cti o n L r t th c tn vi -
r ( J r r m c n t a n d str u g g l e l b r c\i ste n ce [r e ca tr seo f b o tl l th e te r D t
" s e l e c t i o n ," o b vi o u sl r o f h u m a n .r n cl tcch n o l o g i ca l j r ) r p o r t,
in(l
t h e j <l e ao fa cl va n ta g e , u h i ch co m e s j n to tl r e e xl tl ,tn a ti o n
o f th e
m c c h . r Di sm o f n a tu r a l sr 'l cc.ti o n . l h t r p o i n t ( ) l r th n r
n r ( ) st l i \j n {
I '1r
bcingsarc killed bv thc enrironnrent Iong before the inequalities
ther can produceevenhavea chanceto be ol useto tlrem because
it kills aboveall sprouts, embrvos or thc young. Bttt as Gcorges
'leissier has observed,the fact that many organismsdie bcfbre
their inequalitiesservethem does not mean that the Presentation
ol' incqualities is biologicallv indifferent.le This is preciselythe
one fact rve ask to be grantt'd.There is no biological indiflerence,
and conscquentlvruc can spcal of biological normativitY There
are hcalthy biological nonrrs .rnd there are pathological norms,
and rhe secondare not the sameas the first.
We did not refer to the theory of natural selection uninten-
tionallv. We want to dra$'attcntion to the fact that \rhat is true
of the expression"natural sclcction" is also tnte of the old cxpres-
sion vis medicdtrixnsturoe.Selectionand medicine are biological
tcchniques practiced de)iberatelyand more or lessrationally by
nran. \\rhen ue speak of natural se]ection or natural medicinal
. r c t iv it v w e a re v i c ti ttts o f rv h a t l l e n ri B ergsoncal l s the " i l l rr-
sion oI retroactivity" if rve imaginc that vital prehuman activitY
pur s uesg o a l s a n d u ti l i z e s m c a n sc o mparabl e(o rhose of mcn.
B ut it is o n e th i n g to th i n k th a t n a tu ralsel ecti onrvoul d uti l i ze
anvthing that resemblespedigrees,and vis medicorrir, cupping
glassesand another to think that human technique extendsvital
inr puls es ,a t rv h o s es e rv i c e i t tri e s to P l ace svsten' tati know
c l-
edgc rvhich rvould deliver thenr from much of life's costly trial
and error.
T he e x p re s s i o n s" n a tu ra l s e l e c ti o n" and " natutal medi ci nal
activity" have one dra*track in that the-\ seem to sct vital tech-
niquesrvithin the framer.r'ork of human tcchniqueswhen it is the
opposite that seemstrue. All human technique, including that
of li[ e, is s e t w i th i n l i fe , th a t i s , w i th i n an acti vi ty ol i nformati on
and as s imi l a ti o no f m a te ri a l ,It i s n o t becausehumrn tcchni que
is nornrativethat vital technique is judged such by comparison.
t 42
B ecauseI if e is acr ivir v of inlbr m at ion and assinr ilat ion.it is t ht '
ot. r ll t cchnicalact ivit y.I n shor t , r ve speakof nat ur al r nedi-
ro< -,t
ci ne i n quit e a r et r oact iveand, in on<-r cnsc, m ist akcnr vav,but
even if q'e were to assumethat rve h.rveno right to speakof it,
\rc arc still free to think that no living being would have cvrr
doel oped m edical t echniqueif t he lil'e r vit hin him - as r vit hin
evcrvliving thing - were indiflerentro thc conditionsit met rvirh.
if Iife were not a form of reactivity poJarizcdto the variationsol'
the en\ ir onnr eDtin uhich ir develops.This uas seenvcr v r l. cll
bv E rnile C Lr y!not :
It is r 1.rcrthat the organismhasan .rggrcgatc of propcrtiesrrhich
bcl o ngt o it alone,t hankst o which it wir hsr andsr nult iplcdcst r uc-
tivc forcf\. Without thercdelcnsive rrncrions,life rvouldbe rapidlr
r:xtinguishcd.. . . Thc livingbeingis r blc t o I ind inst ant aneouslr
t hl ,
rt,,rct ion shjch is usef ulvis- i- r 'is
sul. lr t anccs
wit h r r hich neit hcrit
nor it s I ind haser erh. r dc, r nt actThc
. r r r ganisnr
is an inconr par abh
chcnrirr-lt ir thc firstamongphlsici.rnr.[-hc1]uctuations
ol thc cnvi,
ronnrcnt<rrcalmostalrravsa mcntce to its existencc. [. .] The liv-
.
i ng beinqcot r ldnot sur viveil it di( l nor posscss
ccr t ainessenr it l
propcrties.livcn injury rvouldbe lital il tissucsrvcrcincapaLrlc ol
lbrmingsc.rrsandblo<xlincapable ol cLrtting.r0
B r rvav, r l sunr m ar v,we t hink ir r er t inst r r r ct ivet o consider
the mtaning t hat t he r vor d"nor m al" assr r nr es
in m cdicinc.and t hc
lacr th.rt th< conceptrsambiguirr. pointed out bv Andre Lrl.rnde,
i s grea t lr clar if ied by t his, \ \ 'it h a <1uir egencr alsignif icancelor
the pro blcnt of t hc nor m al. I t is lilc ir sclf and not m edical judq,
ment that n)akcsthe biological normal a conccpt ofvaluc and not
i l conccpt of st at ist ical r ealit v. For r hc phvsician,lif i'is not an
obi ect b ut , r , t t her ,n polar ize(act
l ivit \ t vhosespont ant , ous
ef llr t
of clck nsr:anclstnrggleagainstall tlrat is oi ncgativevalue is rx,
i+ I
 ol the n vo - physiologvand pat hoJogr- onlv t he lir st involr ecl
t endr d b v n rc d i c i n eb v b ri n g i n gto b c ar the rel ati vcbut i ndi spcn-
l au' sand post ulat cdt he det er nr inisnr
ol it s object , it \ \ as not ncc-
s r ble ligh t o l h trn rrns c i tn c e . IN P , p p . 129-31]
essarvto concludet hat , givcDt hc legit im ar edcsir c lbr a r at ional

Nature ls the End Point of o Teleologicol Process pathologv,thc larvsand cleterminisnrof pathologicalfactsarc thc
cxpiri- samelarvsand determinism ol physiologital lacts. \Vc knou' the
Il]61 ln u'riting tlre,lttro./ucrionA I'itude de la midecine
rnteccdentsofthis point of doctrine liorn llcrnardhirnself.In the
mcntclc,ClaurlcBernardset out to asscrtnot onlY that eflicacious
lccture devotedto the lifb anclu.orksof Fr,rngoisN'lagendieat the
action is thc sarneas rcicnce, but also,and analogously,that sci-
ence is idcntical lr ith the cliscovcryof the laws of phenomena. bt'ginning of the legonssur 1crsubstances
to\iquesct m;dicamentcuscs
(l l i 57), Ber nar dt ells us t hat t hc t cachcru hosechair hc occupies
On this point his agrccment u'ith Comte is total. What Comtc
anci r'hosc tcaching he continues "(lrc\\ (he feeling of rc.rl sci-
in his ph i l o s o p h i c a lb i o l o g v c a l l s th e doctri nc of the condi ti ons
of c x is t e n c e , B e rn a rtlc .rl l s" d c tc rmi n i sm." IIc fl atters hi mscl f cncc" lrom thc illustrious ['ierrc-Simon Laplace.Wc knou tlrat
I-aplacehad been Antoine-l-aurcntLavoisio-'scollltrorator in the
r v it h hav i n gb e e n th t fi rs t to i n tro d u cc that term i nto sci enti fi c
researc hon anim aJr espir at ionanclanim al hcat , r hc f ir st br illiant
French."l beliere I rrn rhc Iirst to havc introduced this rvord to
successin researchon the larvsol bi<-rlogical
phenonrtna lbllou,-
scicnct', but it has bc.'n used bl philosophersin another sense.
ing the cxpcrimental anclmeasuringmethods endorsedlrv phys-
It rvill be use[ulto <leternrinerhc meaningofthis u'orclin a book
Thir rvill icr arrl chemistrv. As a rcsult ot this rvork, l .rpl.rcchad ret.rinetl
rvhich I plan to r\rite: I)u tlitcrninismctlanslesrcicnccs.
a cl i sri nct t . r st elbr phvsi<r lo{:and
v he suppor t r r l 1\ lagcnr lit .ll
amount to a secondttlition ol nN Introductioni la midecinccx-
js lrith in tht univcrsallaliditv of thc detennin- Lapl acrncvcrusedt he t em r "r lct er nr injsn. " he is onc ol it s spir -
Virinttntolc.")tlt
i tual l .rther sand, at leastin Fr ancc, , t Daut lior ilr t i\ e and aut hor -
is t pos r u l a te.' h i c h i s a s s c rtc rlb v th e pri nci pl c " physi ol ogvantJ
i zcd l athcr of t he doct r inc dcsi[ nat eclbr t hr t cr m . I - r r rLaplace,
pat ho) o g v l re o n c a n rl th e s a n )eth i ng." A t the vcrv ti me thJt
detcnninism is not a m et hodologicalr t 'cluir t m cnt ,n nor m at ive
pat holo g t u a s s a d d l c rlu i th p re s c i e nti fi cconceP ts,there rvasa
researchpostulatesuflicicntly llexiblc t,' prcjudice in.rnv rvavth(:
phvsicalchenric,rJ phvsiologrrvhich met thc dcnrandsofscientiflc
Iorm oft hc r esult sr o r , r 'hichit lr : ads:it is r e, r lir vit sell, conr plct c,
knorr'lcdgc,that is, a physiologvofquantitativc lau'sverified by
cast nc r dr ief ur in t he lr ant cwor k of Ne\ r t ( ) Dianand Laplacian
expcrimentation. Llndtrstandably,carlY-nincteenth-centurv Phv-
mechanics.Determinism can bc conceiveclasbeing opento inccs-
sicians,iustifiably ca!erlbr an cflcctive, rational Patholog), saw
sant cor r cct ionsol t hc f br m ulac of laus an<it hc concept st hcv
in phvsiologvthe prospectivemodel rvhich came closcstto their
l i nk toget hcr , or as being clor cr on
/ it s ou n . r ssum eddclinit ive
and in meclicine,rvhen
icfeal."scicnce rcjccts the indctermindte,
content . I - aplaceconst r uct t d t he t heor v <r ft kr secldet er m inisnr .
opinions arc bascdon medical palpation, insPiration,or a more
C l rrrd* B, r nr r r l di, l nor , onr , iv. ol ir in r n\ or hr . r r r , r r .. r n, lr lr i*
or lesslague intuition about things,r','eare outsidc of scienceanrl
i s un< l oubt edlvuhv hc clid not believc f h. r rt he coll. r bor at iono1'
arc givcn the exampleof this medicinc of fantasy,capablcol pre-
pathologvand phvsiologvcould lead t<)n pro{rc\\ivc lectilication
senting the gravcrt pr,-tilsas ir dcliversthe hcalth and Iivesof sick
ofphvsi oJogicalconccpr s.I t i5 appr ( , pr int ehr . r c r o t r c. r ll {lliecl
m en t o th ( rTh i m s o f .rn i n s p i re di q n o ramus." l lB ut j ust becaus< ,

1.1+ llt
North Whitehcad's dictumi "Every special sciencc has to assume
results from other sciences. For examplc, biology presupposes
physics. lt will usually be the case that these loans really belong
to thc state of science thirty or forty years earlier. The presup-
positions of the physics of my boyhood are today pctwerful in{lu-
en ccs in th e m ent alit v of phy s iologis t s . 4 r l N P , P P . 1 0 7 - 1 0 9 1
it ex-
11 3? ] The dy nam ic polar it v of lif e a n d t h e n o r m a t i v i t Y
presses account lor an epistemological lict of whose important
significance Xavier Bichat rvas fully aware. Biological Pathology
exists but rherc is no physical or chcmica) or mechanical pathologyr
Thcrc are t things in thc phcnomenaol lile: (l)the stateofhealth;
'vc,
(2) th c s t it c ol dis eas e,and liom t hc s e t w o d i s t i n c t s c i e n c c sd t r i v e :
physiologv,which conccrns itself with the phcnomena of thc lirst
statc, prrhology, with thosc of the second.The historr ol Phenom-
en a in r v hic h r it . r l lir c es hav e t heir na t u r a l l i r m l t a d s u s , c o n s c -
quently,to rhe historyof phenomtn.rrvhert'thtst lirrccsart changerl.
Ncrrv,in thc phvsicalsciencesonlr rhe firsr historv exists, ntver the
sccond. Phvsiologvis ro thc movernentol living bodies rr hat .rsrron_
omv, dv n. r m ic s ,hr dr aulic s , hy dr os t at i c sa n d s o f b r r h a r e t o i n e r r
()nes:thcsr l.rst h.rvcno sciencc at all rhat corrcspondsto thtm as
parhologv corrcsponrlsto thc [irsr. For thc s:rnlereason,rhe tt'holc
idea oI nrcdic.rtionis dist.rsrelulto thc PhYlicalscicnces.Anr mtdi_
ca tion aim s . r r r ( s t or ing c er t ain pr opc r t i e r r o t h c i r n i r u r a l t ! P c : . r s
ph vsic al pr opc r t ies nev er los e t his t v p c , t h e v d o n o t n e t d t o b c
restorcd to it. Norhing in the physic.rlsciencescorrcspondsro what
is therapeuticsin the phlsiological scitnces-rr
It is clear fiom this text that natural tvPe rrrtrst be takcn in the
sense of normal type. For Bichat, the natural is not the et'f(ct o[
a d ete rminis m , but t he t er m of a f ina l i t y . A n d r v e k n o r v *e l l
everything that can be lound r.r'rongin such a tcxt liom the vierv-
146
point of a nrcclranjstor materialist biologv. One might sav that
l ong agoAr ist ot le believcdin a pat hologicalm cchanics,sincehc
admi tte d t r . o kinds of m or em ent s: nat ur alm ovem ent s,t hr ough
rvhich .r bodv legains its proper place u'hcre it thrivesat rest, as
J stone goes dor vn t o t he gr ound. and f ir e, up t o t hc sky; and
m ovem cnt s,bv uhich a bodv is pushedlr om it s pr oper
' i ol ent
pl ace, a s
'r 'hen
a st one is t hr oun in t lt c air . I r can bc said t har ,
rlith G.rlileo and I)escartcs,progressin Inorvledge of the phvsi-
cal t,torldconsistedin consideling all rnovenlentsas natural,that
is, as conforming to thc laws of narure. rnd that likerviseprog-
rL'ssin triologicalknoru]edgeconsistedin unilving the larvsofnat-
rrnl l i l e and pat holoqic. l lif e. lt is pr ccisclvt his unillcat ion t hat
Augustt'Comte dreanredol and Cl.rudeBernald llattcrr:d hinrsell
rvith havingacconrpJishcd.
as wasseenal)ore.To tlre reserrations
that I l e lt obliged t o sct f or t h at r hr t t inr c, Jr : rm e add t his. ln
cstabl i shingt he scienceol m ovcm enton t he pr inciplc of iner t ia,
nrodernnr echanicsin ef f ect m ar let hc dist inct ion bet uet 'n nat u-
r.rl.rndv iolent nlovenr cnt s. r bsur d,
as iner t ia is pr eciselvan inr lif -
l erencc r vir h r espectt o dir ect ionsanclvar iat ionsin nr or em ent .
L.i fci s far r em ovcd f r om such an indif ler encet o t he condit ions
rvhi ch a r e m ade lbr it ; lif c i5 polar it v. The sim plcsr biological
nutri ti ve syst emcr I assim ilat ionand excr et ioncxpr esses
a polar ,
itv. When the rvastes<-rIdigestion are n<rlonger excreted bv the
organi rman<lcongestor poi5( ) nt he int er nalenvir onm cnt .chisis
al l i ndee <laccor dingt o law ( phvsical,chem ical and so on) , but
none o1t his f ollor vst he nor m , u'hich is r he act ir it v o1t hc or gan-
i sm i tse lf . This is t he sim ple f act t hat I u'ant t o point out whcn
rvespeakof biological nor m at ivit r .
I NP, pp. 127- 28]
The Normal ond the Pothologicol os
Quolitotive Contrqst
Il j 8l Finally,as a r esult of t he det er m inist posr ulnt e,it is t he
reducti onoI qualit v t o quant it v r vhich is im plied bv t hc essent ial
147

ident it r o l p h rs i o l o g l a n d p l th o l o g l . l i r redutc the di fl t' rencc
betlvcenr hc.rlthvman .rnda <liabeticto a quantitativedillcr.encc
of t he an ro u n to fg l u c o s e rri th i n th e bodr, to dcl egatcthc task
of distinguishingone * ho is diabetic frorn onc rvho is not to a
rcnal thrcshold conceivedsimplv as a (luanlitativediflcrcnce of
lev c l,m e a n so b e v i n gth e s p i l i t,rfth e p h rsi calsci cncesrvhi ch, i n
iruttrcssingphcn,rmen.ru ith laus, can erpl.rin theni onlt' in temrs
of thcir recluctionto a conlmon mcasure.ln order to introduce
terms into rhe relationship:,of compositiottand depcndence,thc
hom ogen e i tvo f th e s c te rms s h o u l d b e obtai ned fi rst. A s E nti l c
Meyerson l-rrsshorvn, the human spirit attained knou'ledgc bl
ident it iin g rc a l i tl a n d q u .rn ti t\. B u t i t shou]d be remcmbered
t hat , t hou g h rc i c n ti fi c k n o rrl e d g c i n v a l i datcsqual i ti es,u hi ch i t
makesappcarillusorv, fbr all that, it does not annul thcm. Quan-
t it v is qua l i tv d e n i c d ,b u t n o t q u a l i ty s uppressed.
The qual i tati ve
varietv of simplc lights, percciveclas colors br the human cvc, is
reducedbv scieDcctr) the qunntitatire dilli'rence ofrvavelengths,
but t he q u a l i ta ti v ev a ri c tvs ti l l p c rs i s tsi n thc form ofquanti tati ve
diflcrencesin the calculationoflavelcngths. cgcl maintainsthat
bv its gros th or diminution, quantitv changcsinto rluality. This
rvould bc pert'ectll inconceivablcif a relation to qualit\, did Dot
s t ill pc r s i s ri n th c n e g a re dq u a l i tv rv h i c h i s cal l edcl uanti ty.r5
F r om rh i s p o i n t o f v i c rr' ,i t i s c o m p l etel vi l l egi ti mateto mai n-
tain that thc pathological state is rcallv and simplv a grear('ror
lesscrvariation of the phvsiologicalstatc. I:ither this phvsiologi-
cal state is conceivcdas haring one qualitv and value lor the liv-
ing man, and so it is absurdto e)itcndthat ralue. identicalro itsell'
in it s v r r i a ti o n s ,to a s tn tc c a l l e d p a th ol ogi calrvhoscval ue and
quantitv are to bc diflertntiated fiom and essentiallvcontr.rsted
r v it h t he l i rs t. Or u h a t i s u n d e rs to o da sthe phvsi ol ogi calstatei s
a s im ple s u n ma rv o fq u a n ti ti e s , rv i th o ut bi ol ogi calval uc,a si m-
p] e f : c t o r s v s te mo fp h v s i c .rla n d c h c mi cal f.rcts,but asthi s state
I '+d
HE PATIlOLOC CAL
hrs no r it al qualit v,ir cannotbc calledhe. r lt hvor nor m al or phvs-
i ol ogi ca l. Nolnr al an<lpat hologic. rhave
l no m eaningon a scale
l r here th e biologic. r object
l is r cducedt o colloidalequilibr iaand
i oni zcd solut ions.I n st udvinga st at c t hat he descr ibes. r phvsio,
s
l ogi c.rl ,t he physiologistr lualilicsit as such,cvenunconsciouslv;
hc consider st his sr at eis posit ivelvqualif icd bv and lor t hr : liv-
i ng bei ng. Nor r .r his qualil- iedphlsiologicalst at c is nr r t . ar such,
* ' har i s ext ended,idcnt icallv t o it sclf , r o anot hcr sr . r t ecapable
ol assuming,inexplicablv,t he qualit v of m or bidit v.
()f cot r r se,t his is not t o savt hat an analvsisol t hc condit ions
or produ ct sof pat hological lunct ions uill not givc r he cher nist
or phrsiologist numeric.rl resultsconrparablcto those obt.rincd
in a rv.tr-consistentrrith thc tcrms ol'the samcanalvscsconcern-
i ng the c or r esponding,so- calledphvsiologicalf ir nct i<r ns. But it
is arguablervhethcrthc terms "morc" and ,,less,"oncc thcv enter
rl r, rhl j nit ion ol t hr P, r r h, , lt r Air..rrrl r r lu, r nLir . r r ir r r . r r i. lion, ,rl lr ,
normrl , havca pur cll quant it at ivrm eaning.Also ar gLr able is t hc
l oqi c.rlcoher encct r f Ber nar d'spr int . iple: , , Thedist ur banceol a
nortnl l mech. r nism(.r 'n\ i\ r inll in a r lr r . r r r r ir . r r ir c iJt ion,, r n r . \ J! -
r Jr
gcrati on, or an at t enuat ion,const it ut est hc pat hologicalst at t , . "
,\s has be, . : npoint e( l ( ) ut in connect ion u. it h Fr angois, Joscph
V i ctor Br oussais's ir leas,in t he or r lcr ol phvsiologica]I unct jons
antl nee<ls,or r espcakrof m or e an<llcssin r elat iont r ) a nor m . For
exanrpl c,t hc hYdr at ionof t issuesis, t f act t hat can be exlt r essed
i n ttrms ol m or c anclless;so is t he pcr ccnt agcof calciunr in
blorxl. Thcse quantirarivelvrliflerent rcsults*,oulcl hare no <1ual-
i tv, l o valuein a lal>r r r ot on,
il t hc labor at or . had
v nr >r . clat ionship
rri th a ho spit alor clini< uher e t hc r t sult s t akc on r ht r . . r lueor
not oI ur cm ia, t hc valuc or not ol t ct Jnus. Bccausephvsiologv
stancl sat t he cr ossr oadsof t hr . ,labor at or l , r nd t he clinic,
t r vo
lloints of vie* about l)iologicalphenorncna.rre n(loptcdther(,,l)ut
thi s doesnot m ean t hnt t hev can be int cr clr angt , rThc l. sr r l>r t it Lr _
j.+9
 l-
tion of quantitativeprogressionfor qualitativecontrast in no way
II Cuepr t n Fr l .tl r n -
annulsthis opposition. It alwaysremainsat the back ofthe mind
of thosc u'ho have chosen to adoPt the theoretical and metric Nor m alit y and Normativity
point of vieu..When rve savthat health and diseaseare linked by
all thc intcrmediaries,and *'hen this continuity is convertedinto
homogeneity, we forget that the difference continues to mani-
fest itsclfat the extremc, rvithout which thc intermcdiariescould
in no wa,vplay their mediating role; no doubt unconsciously,but
u,rongly,w'econfusethe abstractcalculationof idcntities and the
concrete appreciationofdiffercnces. [NP, pp. 110-12]

The Value of Norms

Il ]9] The st at eof an) living t hing in a given sir uat ionis, in gcn-
cral, alu,avsnormal. flenri Bergsonsavsthere is no such thing as
disordcr;rather,there are tlvo orders,one of v,,hichis substituted
lor the other without our knorvledgcand to our clismav.Similarlv,
rve ought to saythat there is no such thing as abnormal,ifbv thc
term we mean merely the abscnceofa previouspositive condi-
tion or state.From the biological, socialand psychologicalpoints
ofvicrv, a pathologicalstateis nevera state without norms - such
,l
a thing is impossible.Whcrever there is //e there are norms. Life

;l
rffL
t l' i
i s a pol a r izedact ivit y, a dvnam ic polar it v, and t hat in it self is
cnough to establishnorms. The normal is therefbre a universal
catcgorvof life. l lence, it is by no meansnonsensicalto call the
pathological"normal." But that is not grounds fbr denving the

&l
distinctivenessofthe pathological,or fbr arguingthat in biologv
the normal and the pathoJogicalare, but fbr minor quantitative
diflerences,identical. The normal should not be opposeclto the
,l pathol og ical,becaust unclcr
' cer t ain condit ions ar r d in it s own
rra1.th(, par hologicalis n, , r m r l. I hcr , . ir . r ni. ( . r , sj\ ar( \ont r J\ t

fl I' etrrecn h, alt h . r nr l, lise; r , . .I lr . alr h i. m or ( . r hJn n. , r m alir r ;

' i mpl e ter m s, ir is nor r nar ivir r .Behjn, l . r ll apf Jr cnt n. , r m Jlir v.
in

ili
3 to
{l l tl

fl

onc m us t l o o k to s c e i { i t i s c a p a b l eo f t ol erati ng i nfracti onsof
t he nor m , o f o v e rc o mi n gc o n tra (l i c ti o ns,of dcal i ng w i th con-
flicts. Any normalitr opcn to possiblefuture corrcction is authen-
t ic nor m ati v i tv ,o r h e a l th .A n v n o rm a l i t v l i mi ted to mai ntai ni ng
itscll, hostile to anv variation in the thcmes that bxpressit, and
incapableol adapting to ncw situationsis a normalitY devoid of
normative intcntion. When confronted rvith any apparcntlynor-
mal situation, it is thercfbreimPortant to ask vvhctherthe norns
that it embodiesar-ecreativenorms, norms with a for\\'ardthrust,
or, on the contrary, conservativenorms, norms rvhosc thrust is
torvarrlthe past. IMS Normalitict normativ l, 1. lr]
Normality and Species
normal and
[140] In the biologv ol species,the problem of the
thc pathologicalarisesin connection rvith thc problem of varia-
t ions . ls a n a n o m a l o u si n d i v i d u a l ,th a t is, an i ndi vi dual i n some
respectat variancervith a dcfined statisticaltvpe, a sick individ-
ual or a biological innovation?Is a fiuit {lv vu'ithno n'ings,or ves-
tigial rvings,sick? Biologistshostilc to evolution or skepticalof
mutationist explanationsinsist that mutationsare rccessive,often
subpathological, anclsometimeslcthal. If, houever,one holds that
bio) ogic a ln o rma l i tl i s c l e te rmi n e db ] t he i ntcracti on betw een
structurcs and bchaviors, on the one hand, ancl environmental
c ondit ion s ,o n th c o th e r, th e re a rc rv a ysofdi sti ngui shi ng(i f not
instantaneouslvat least retroactivelv)betrveenthe pathological
nomal and the normativcnormal. Phillipe ['H6ritier and Georges
experimentson $ inglessdrosophila,fbr examplc,provcd
Ti:issier's
thc superiority of that varietv in a draftv environment. IMS Nor-
naliti et normativiti,l. 2rl
l i fe, pcr-
[ 141] Ie i s s i e rrc p o rtsa n o th e rf)c t u h i ch shous that
hapsrvithout looking lbr it, bv using the variationofliving forms,
without
sPecialization
obtainsa kind ol insuranceagainstcxcessivc
f\2
_...r
hencc u,ithout flexibilitr,, rvhich is cssentiallva suc_
rr:vcrsibiJitv,
ccssfuladaptation.ln cerrain industrial districts in Gcrmanyancl
Englandthe gradualriisappearanceofgrav buttcrflies and the ap-
pearanceof black oncs ofthc samcspecieshasbccn obscrved.It
aspossibleto establishthat in thesebutterfliesthe black colora-
r',,
tion \4.as
accompaniedby an unusualvigor. In captivitv the blacks
cl i mi nate t hc gr ays.Why isn't t hc sam et r ue in nat ur e?Becausc
tht'ir color standsout more againstthc bark of the trcesandattracts
rhe attention of bir ds. When t he num ber of bir ds dim inishesin
i ndustri alr egions,but t cr f liescan be black r vit h im punit v. l6
In short, this butterflv specics,in the fbrnr ofvaricties, ollirs
t$o comb inat ionsof opposingchar act er ist ics,
and t hc1,balance
eachother: more vigor is balancedby lesssccuritv and vicc versa.
In cach of thc variations,an obstaclehasbcen circumvented, to
usea Bergsoniancxpression,a po.werlessness hasbeen overcomc.
To the extent that circumstanccsallorv one such morphological
5olution to operate in preferenceto another, the number of rcp-
rcsentativesof cach varietv varies,and a varietv tends morc and
morr tona r d a species.[ . . . ]
llcnce, flnallv, rvc see how an anomalv,particularlv a muta-
ti on, that is, a dir ect lv her cdit ar v anom aly,is not pdt hologicdl
bccauseit is an anomaly,that is, a divergcncefi-oma spccific tvpe,
* hi ch i s de{inedas a gr oup of t hc m ost f icquent char act er ist ics
i n thei r av er agedim ension.O t her r vise,it u, ould havet o be said
ir that a mutant individual, as thc point of departurelbr a nelv spe-
$
,fr
cit's, is both pathological,bccauseit is a divcrgencc,and normal,
becauseit maintains itself anclrcprocluces,In biologv, the nor-
mal is not so much the old as the neu,fbrm, il it finds conditions
ofexi stenc ein vvhichit *ill appearnor m at ive,t hat is, <lisplacing
all rvithercd, obsoletc and pcrhapssoon to bc extinct fbrms.
No fact termcd normal, becauscexpressedassuch, can usurp
# the prcsti ge of t hc nor m of u hich it is t hc cxpr cssion,st ar t -
l tl
ing f r onr th e m o m e D t \ah e n th e c o n d i t i onsi n rvhi ch i t hasbeen
ret<'rreclto the nornr arc n.l lcrng.'rqivetr. fhere i" no fact that is
nor m al or p a th o l o g i c a il n i ts c l f An a n o mal Yor a mutati on i s not
in itsclfpatholo-tgical. Thesc tl'o exPressoth(r Po\siLrlcnorms of
lile. I f t he :e n o tn tsa re i n l e ri o r to s p c c i l i c e.l rl i ernorms i n terms
ol s t abil i tv , f' e c u n c l i tvo, r v .rri a b i l i tl o f l i fe, they w i l l be cal l ed
pnthological.lfthcse nortns in the slmc enl irrttrmentshould turn
out to bc equivalcnt,or in another environment, superior, rhey
*ill be ca l l c d n o rm a l . T h e i r n o rma l i t' r' rvi l lcome to them l rom
their normativity. The pathological is nor the abscnceof .r bio-
logical normi it is another norm, btlt onc that is, comparativelv
. u s h e da s i d cb l l i l !. fN P, p p . 8l -8l l
s peak ing p
is as it ma]
Ila2] No enviionment is normo.l.An environment
b('. No structurc is rormal in itsell. It is thc relation betrveenthe
cnvironmcnt and the living thing that detcrmineswhat is normdl
in both. A living thing is normal in the true sense\\'hcn it rellects
an ef f ir r ro l r th c p a rt o fl i l e to m a i n ta i ni tscl Ii n fbrms and rvi thi n
norms th.lt allorv lor a m.rrgin ol variation, a latitudc o{ dclvia-
t ion, s uc h th a t a s e n v i ro n n l e n ta lc o n di ti ont varY ,one of those
llrms rrr.l proveto be ntorc aclvantagccttts, hence rlore viohle.In
cnvironmcnt is normal rvhen it allou's a sPecics to multipll and
changcs
dirersifi in it in such a \!av as to tolcrate, il nccess,lrY,
in t he en v i ro n me n t.
I1 the relation bctrvccn the environment and the living thing
i: r uc h t h a t n e i rh e rc a n l a f\ \v i th o u t c ol nP r,trni si ngthe vi abi l i tv
of the living thing irreparably,the JPParcntnormalitv of ad.rpta-
t ion is in l i c t p a th o l o g i c a l .' fob e s i c k i s to I' e unabl c to tol erate
changc.INlS Nontalitdct normatititi,l. 2l
Normality ond I ndividusls
f1,13] From thc stanclpointofthc biologv oi individuals,thc prob-
lem of the nonnal rnd the pathologicalc,.rmes dou'n to what K urt
)t1
Goldstein calls "pllcrrcd bchavior" and "cat.rstrophicreaction,"
ln respondingto stimuli liom tlre environment,an organisnrrirres
n()t us e ever v f or m of bchavior it is capableol using but onlv
certiin prelcrrcd Lrchaviors- prelelrcd bccausethc_rmost lillv
e\l)rcss the nature of thc rrrganisrnanclallorrl it the maxirrrum
possibleor der and st abilir \ '.A sicl inr lividual is an indivir lr r al
l ockc clin. r st r uggler vit h it s envir onnr entt o es( abiish.neu.
r or dcr
or stabilitr. Recovcryestablishesa ne\\'norn.t,diflcrcnt fiom the
ol d, Dur ing t he cour se of r he illnr : ss,t hc sick individual r locs
er'<rvthing possibleto avoidcatastro;thicreactions.A catastrophic
reJction is one t hat pr event sr apid adapt at iont o changingenvi-
rr,nnrenr alcondjt ions. f he concer n r r it h avoidine( . . t t ajt r ophic
reJctionsthereforc rcflccts thc organism'sinstinct of selflprcscr-
vati on.Sclf - pr eser v. r t ion is not t hc nt ost gcn( r al char act er ist icol'
l i l e; i t i5, r at her ,r char acr er ist icof a r e<lucc<Idinr
, inishedlif e.
A hcalt hvper sonis a per soncapableol conf iont ing r isks.I lcalt h
i s cl cnt ive- call it nor m at ive- ir ) t hat it is r , r pablcol st r r vir ing
(ntast r ophcand est ablishinlla nc\ \ , or ( lcr .
Goldstein'sviews overlapncatlv rvith flen6 Lericlre'svicvvsof'
conce pt i( ) n.I lcalt h beconr esper celt t ibiconl, r in r clat ion t o dis-
case,* hich rcvealsits csscnccbv suggestinga possiblctransition
to D e$ 'nor nt s. A per son \ \ 'ho cat r not sur r ir e at high alt it ur lcs
l tt' cau seof hvpot cnsionm al bc ablc t o live nor m allvat alt it u<] cs
up to l if t een hunclr edlcct . No one is obligcclt o livc at alt it udes
abo,c thrq thousandleet, but anr<rncnrrr.somcrlrr be ldrce<lto
d,r ro. t n t h. r r( a\ r . .Jr \ 1, n1r r lr o t . r nnol i. iinlr r i, , r . "l\ 1r ni. . r cr e. r -
ture ca pableol'changingol adapt ingt o am bjenr condir ions in
orclcrto survivc.
Il\lS r\rornrolrty' ct n ormutiviti,l. 2r, )r]
f l ' 14] I lcalt h is a m ar ginof t olcr ancelbr t he inconst ancies of
the cnvir onnr cnt .But isn't it lt r sur r lt o spcr l of t hc inLonst ancr
ol thc enr'ironfftenr7
This is truc cnough of thc hum.rnsocialenvi-
roD tne nt ,r vhcr e inst it ut ionsar c f undam cnt allv
pr eclr ious,con_
I t5
ventions revocableand fashionsas fleeting as lightning, But isn't
t he c os m i c e n v i ro n me n t,th e a n i ma l envi ronment i n general ,a
systemof mechanical,phvsicaland chemical constants,made of
invariants?Certainly this environment, w-hichsciq.rcedeflnes,is
lnade oflans, but rhescla*s arc theoreticalabstractions.The lir -
ing creature does not live among laws but among creaturcsand
eventsthat varv thesc larvs.What holds up thc bird is the branch
and not the l.ru,sofelasticity. lf u'e reducethc branch to the la*s
of elas t i c i tv ,w e mu s t n o l o n g e r s p e a kof a bi rd, but ofcol l oi dal
soiutions,At such a Ieveiol-analvticalabstraction,it is no longer
a question ofenvironmcnt for a living being, nor ofhealth nor of
discase.Similarlv,l'hat the fox eats is the hen'segg and not tbc
chemistry of albuminoidsor rhe laws of embryology.Becausethe
qualified living being livesin a world ofqualified objccts, he lives
in. r r v or l d o f p o s s i b l ca c c i d e n ts .N o th i ng happensbv chance,
everythinghappensin the form of evrnts. Here is hou' the envi-
r onm ent i s i n c o n s ta n t.l ts i n c o n s ta n cr i s si mpl v i ts becomi ng,
it s his t or y .
F or t h e l i r i n g b e i n g , l i fe i s n o t a monotoD ousdeducti on, a
recrilinearmovement;it ignoresgeometricalrigidit\. it is discus-
sion crr explanation (r,hat Goldstcin calls Auseinandersehung)
with
an environment rvhere there are leaks,holes, escapesand une\-
pected resistanccs.Let us sav it once more. We do not profess
indcterminisnr, a position verv rvell supported todav. We main-
tain that the life of the living being, rvere it that of an amoeba,
recognizesthe categoriesof health and diseaseonly on thc level
ol erpcrience, rvhich is primadlv a test in thc aff'ecrivcsenseof
t he x or d, a n d n o t o n th e l e v e lo fs c i e n ce.S ci enceexpl ai nsexpe-
r ienc ebu t i t d o e sn o t fo r a l l th a t a n n u l i t.
llealth is a set of sccuriticsanclassurances
(u'hat the Gerntans
call S;crlerunlTen),
securities in the present, assurancesfor the
lLt ur e. As th e re i s r p s rc h o l o g i c a la s s urancew h;ch i s not pre-
)t6
sumption, thcre is a biol(,gicalassuranccwhich is not excess,and
uhi ch is healt h. Healt h is a r egulat or yllvr vheelof t hc possibili-
ri esofr cact ion. t - if eof ien f allsshor t of it s possibilit ies,but when
necessary can surpassexpcctations.[NP, pp. 197-98]
The Problem of Psychologicol Norms
fhe Child and the adult
fl ,t5] Childhood is a t r ansit ionalsr at e.I t is nor m al f or hum an
bei ng st o leavct he st ar eof childhood and abnor m alt o f all back
inro it. In childhood there is an intrinsic forrvarddrivc, a capac-
i rv l br scll- t r anscendencc,
t hat f lour ishesif r he child is phvsicalh
robust,intcllectuallvperspicacious and allorveda certain fieedom
ro pur suer vor t hu- hilcgoals.A child t hinks const ant lvol im it at -
i ng or r ivaling r vhat he seesadult s doing: cver y day he t hinks,
"Tomorrou l rvill be a grown-up." Aristotle makesthis magnifi-
cent obserr.ationr
onthroposonthrupontem{1,man cDgcn(lersman.
Thi s i s t r uc in t er m s of t he m at er ial causc:it is m an who sup-
pJiesthe seedfionr rvhich the child is borD, It is alsotrue in terms
ol -the f or m al caur c: t hc cm br r r , t he child and t he adolescent
(icveloptoward adult htrman fbrm. And it is true in terms
of the
fi nal cause,an ideal of m an and ol t hc adult vir r uesr hat educa-
ti on i n st illsin t hc child's m ind. This lastpr oposit ionshould not
bc intcrpretcd in too modern a sense,hovtever.For thc Ancients,
and fb r Ar ist ot le in par t icular ,r he essenccof a t hing w. asiclent i-
cal rvith its final fbrm; the potential pointcd torvardthe act, and
movement ended r'n rest. fhc thcorr of lbrms telescoped rhe
\rhole processof becoming into a typical
privilegetl state. Ho$,
a Potentialbecomesan act, how a lirrmal indeternrinate
l)ecomes
a form, rrould bc unintclligible if lbrm rverc
rlor in cvcrv sense
pri or to por ''nr ialand m an, . r .Thu. .
hum ar r ir ti\' t r , r nsm ilr r dl; om
D an to Dan, just as knor r ledgeis
t r ansm it t edliom int elligence
1\ 7
t o int elli g e n c e .C h i l d h o o d , b c i n g a s t ate of transi ti on,i s n,i th-
out human value. Grcek pe<Jagogy w.ts thercfore bascdon the
idcntiflt ation of man rvith his tvpical finished fbrm, his ocrne.In
t he c hilc l ,th c C re e k ss a * ,o n l v th e fu ture sol di erand fi rtureci ti -
zen, Plato shorvsno inclulgcncefor the tvpical predilcctions and
t endc nc i e so f c h i l d h o o d . N o th i n g rv a smore al i cn to thc anci ent
m ind t ha n th c i d c a th a t c h i l d h o o d i s , i n cach i nstance,a new
beginningltrr rnankind,a beginningrvhoscinnocenccand enthu
s ins mar e $ ,o rth vo fre s p e c t b c c a u s eo fthc i mpl i ci t possi bi l i tvof
going furthcr than man has evcr gone bcfbre. Furthermorc, the
ancient f.rmilv rvasbasedoD strong paternalauthoritv, and there
*'as ofit'n violent contlict bet.rvecnfathersand sonsorving to the
f it hc r ' s d o m i n rti o n o f u i fe a n d c h i l d ren. l ' h6odorc rl e S aussure
attachedgrcat importance to rhis f;ct tn I.e illiraclegrec-ailt can
be ar qut ' rl ,m o rc o v e r, th a t th e l o n g e r one rcmai ns i gnorant o1'
hou c hilc l re nd rc m a d c , th e l o n g c r o n e rcmai nsa chi l d; and one
r em ainsi g n o ra n ta s Io n g a s o n e { i i l s to contrastone' si deasr" i th
actualcxperiencc.At the root oIthc chilcl'smcntalitv is anxietv at
not k no\ \' i n gu h v o n c i s a c h i l d , th rt i s, rveak,pouerl r' ss,depcn-
dent anrl attachcd to one's mother as a plarrt is attached to the
nur t ur ing s o i l . T o rc n re rl vth i s a n r;e tl the chi l d dreamsof vast
m agic al p o * e rs , o f a c o mp e n s a tr)ryo n ni potencc. B ut contact
n it h r eal i tr' ,u h i c h ta k e sth c fi rrn r o f c onfl i ct, crur' l )y demon-
s t r at c st h a t s u c h d re a msa re v a i n i l l u s i ons. In other l r,ords,l br
political, phi)osophicaland, in a nr)re prolbuntl sensc,rcligious
r eas onst,h e A n c i e n tsd c v a l u e dc h i l d h ood i n a.rvavthat onl v ac-
c ent uar e dth o s e c h n ra c te ri s ti cos fc h i l d hood apr to pror.,ke the
c ont em pt o fa d u l ts . F o r th c A n c i e n ts , thc normal man ,w asthe
nor r nnt iv cn ra n ,a n d th a r me .1 n r< l u i n te sscnti al lthe
r arl ul t. Thi s
is , m or eo v e r,a c h a ra c tc ri s ti co fa l l c l a s si calpr:ri ods.Thc seven-
t eent h- c c n tu rl F rc n c h h .rd b a s i c a l l vrhc same i dca. D escarres
s pok c ol c h i l d i s h c re d u l i t' - a n d n u rs e r l ral cs i n much the same
I tfi
manncras Plato. Jcande la Fontaineis fimous fbr havingsaiclthat
he took pleasurein f)irv taics.but his fibles are harclon childrcn,
A certainvalucartachedto the childish tastcfbr the man,elousrnd
l br tl ct ion, but it wasa r elar ivcvaluc; jur lgeclhv logical nor m s,
such things w,crcconsicleredabsurd.
Paradoxicallr',it u.asthe ninetecnth ccntulr,, rvhich is olien
u ronglv maligned fbr its allegedblind faith in scicncc,thar once
agai na scr it r edvnluenot onl\ t o poct r y bur r o childhood f ant dsy
assr'll: rvitnessVictor Ilugo and Ch.trlcsBruclelaire.(Evervchild
i s a ge niusin it s uay, and evcr vgeniusis a child. [ . . . ] G eniusis a
delil>eratcreversionto childhood.) lr uas poets, long before psr-
chologists,rvho proposedlooking at thc child's rnentalirvas nor-
mal l n cl valid, hor veverdist inct liom t he yr osit ivrand
, ut ilit ar . ian
mentalitv of the bourgeoisadult (as tlaurlelaireremarked,.,Tirbc
rrc/u/ hasllwavs sccm cr lt o nr c a m osr hir leousr hing") , Char lcs
I)i ckensdid in Englandnhat Hugo and Baur lclair dicl c in Fr ance,
csl rl ciaf lr in Har d Tim es.Ar t ist s.u hoselunct jou is t o dr cam lir r
mankind bevoncllvhat is knorvn, to lcorn the real, to make tht:
nct rl firr ch,rngcinrperati.r'e. Ibund a trcasurctrovc in the thouuht
of chi lclr en.When EugdneDelacr oix s. r id,, , What is m ost r eal
l or mc ar e t he il] r r sjonsI cr cat c, " hc lr ; r s ibr m ul. r t il4 t hc ir lea
of a ch ild. I hcn, r vit h r ( : spectr o t he r ehalr ilit at ionof childhoor ]
and rnlnl ()ther rhingsarirlell. contcnrporlrr psrr:hologvand
lthi-
l osoph l cam e t o t he r escue:t hev pr ovidc<l
l) oct ic int uit ion \ \ it h
a di sco ur se.
The st udv of t hc m r : nt alit vof childr en beganar r oughlv t he
samctim c as t hc st t iclr . olpr init ir c r ner r r r lit r .ln
. Fr ench_speaking
countrits, rhe fbrmcr disciplineis epitomizccJ bl thc namt,ofJean
I' i a.qe tt,he int t er l) v I r r cicn lcvl, Bnr hl. lhr : r c <. r nbc
no r Jr lut r t
that th e m et hodologicalim plic. r t ionsol piager 's
r esear . ch
r vr r e
i ni ti al ll r hc sanleas r holc of l. dvr , - lJr uhlrpiaget
cor np. r r c<Jt hc
though t of t he child t o t lr ar ol a conr em l) or ar v
c ult ivat eclaclult ,
I t9
 an adult whosc culrurc \\'asof thc sort thar piagct rcgardedas
rhem . The child can exper ienccplcasur r only
: u, it h per m ission
normative for his time, that is, for \a,hichscientific and rational-
or bv deJegat ion.llc is st r ict lv dependenton adult s r o t ncct ir s
ist valucsstoo(l at rhe top ofthe hierarchv.Conrparcd wirh rhc
ri tal n ecds.Thus, t o obev is r ( Jlive. At I ir st , t hcr e is no diller ,
rational mentality, children's thinking could be charactcrizedbv
ence bet $, eensocial obligat ion and phvsicalnecessit r '.Adult s.
adjec r ive sb e g i n n i n gu i th th e p re fi x o -, i ndi cati ngsomc sort of'
rhen, arc both compensatioDlirr and incscapablcrcmjnd,.,riol'tbe
lack or absence.Note, horvever,that Piagct'sadult is rvhat Nlax
chilcl'shelplessness. Freudianpsvchologyhad thc grcat merit of
Webcr and KarJ.faspers call an "ideal tvpe." To be sure. it can be
rc' ea lingt he t r ue esscnccof t he child's t hought . 1'hc child lives
argucd that this normal type is not onlv normative but average
i n i l l u sion bccauschc livesin desir e,anclbecausehe f eelsdesir c
and characteristicof the majority, But the,,mentality" ofan age
Iong belor e gr at if icat ir - r nis phr sicallv possible-So long as it is
is a social fact. dctermincd by t,ducariorr,If, in fact, in surveys,
inrpossiblcto act on the norl<l in certain rva1.s, desire.rndrealin.
the ideal type turns out to reficct thc.rverage,it is becausecom_
1..rito l coincidc, And so long asdesir eseesno possibilit vof sat is
pulsory'cducatronhasestablishedcertain norms. Here again,man
l i cti on, t her e is alsono possibilit vof cxpr essir : ln.
The child can,
engendersman, and if the norms imposed on many generation5
not adm it t hat he r vant st o gr o$. Lr pin or dcr t o subjcct his f at hcr
ol c hilr lr e n i n c l u d c d a s y s te mn ti cd e v al uati onof chi l cl hood,i t
to pater nallau'and t hc r r . or lr tl o t he lau'of t he r lor ld, t hat is, r o
should come as no surprise rhrt, in c()mparingtodat,'schildren
< l omin. r r em en and donr est icat et hings. He cannot adr r it r his as
to todav'sadulrs,it turns out rhat children lack many of the traits
long as he does not knorv, bevond u.hat hc is told and rvhat he is
inc ulc at e di n a d u l ts .T h e p ro b l t' m o l n rcntal i rj esi s j nextri cabl r
not to ld ( \ 1hich com cs r o t ht sanr et hing) , hor v r o acr on t hinps
t nt c r u' ine ds i th rh .rr,rl e rl u c .rti ,,na. n d r h. pr,rbl emol educari , rn
,l nd men. f he cont cnt of t he child's t hought is his ignor anccol
is inextricably intcrt.w,inedrvith that ol generations.At anv given
the biologicalr eair t vol childhood. That ignor ancelar t s as long
point iir time, rhoseu,ho happcnto be aduits.rrefbrnrerchilclren
ns the chil( l r cnr ain5unauar c ol copulat ion as his incept ion and
who were raisedby other adults. lt takcsa generationto test the
tite, and so long as he is fbrbidden, u,hcthcr bv organic immatu-
r alidit v ofe d u c a ti o n a li d e a s .An d i t ta k esfi ftr ro si xtv vears(rw o
ri tl or sr ) ci. ilt aboo, t o !ng1gein copulat ionhim sclf .
gener.rtions)lbr philosophical valuesto become rooted as hab_
In I air v t alcs and lant asies,r he child seekst o sat isf va ncc<l
it s . P iage t' sa d u l ts mo re o r l c s s u n u ,i tti ngl v hetray superfi ci al
l or pl easur eand r o asser ta poucr lbr uhich he st ill lacks t he
tokens of respcctfor rhe positivist vaiuesof thc pcriod lg60_9f),
mcans.l- he u, calt hol ir naginar ionconr pensat es
lbr t he pover n
which gained favor u'ith the educational reformers of the late
ol rcalizat ion.
Dinet eeD tha n d e a rl l r\l c n ti c rl t c c n ru ri es.
IMS Lc N ormd ct l e \\'h.rt nc ,\lodcrnscall "adult" in m.rn is his arvareness of the
probldmcdesmentolrrls, II, f. lr, 2r, 3r]
gap betrveentlesire and realitv.Thc adtrlt docs not rclv on myth
[146] Therc is a characteristr'c gap betv,.eena child's dcsires br the gr ar if icat ionol clt 'sir c,I n t hc adult , r . csponsibilirl'or l t he
and his m e a n so fre a l i z i n g th o s ed e s i re s.fhc chi l d thereforecrc-
gratific.ltionof <lcsiresthat prcscnt-davrcalitl. placesout
of reach
atesa uorld of representationsin rvhich desireshave the abilitv can bc delegatcdinsteadto pl(ly or drt, that is,
to illusions con-
im m er lilt c l r l u { re rtc o b j rc rs p re s u n r erlcap.rbl e,,1 rati rl vi ng sci ourol t ir eir pr act ical\ aluc as r vellas t heir t ht , or ct ical
ir lcalir r . .

l6 o
l6r
 Y_
The adult docs not neccssarilvbelievein thc inevitabilitvofprog-
ress,of knorvledgcand industrY.Adults knot that there are epis-
temologicatobstaclesto Progrcssand areasrlver lvhich thcorv is
porverless, \et thcy do not feel compclled on that accountto seek
compensationbr h,rrkingback to a mode ol thotrght that bclieves
o fd e s i re i t' ta n ormati \c re.rl i t\"
t ot allv in rh c re n l i ,,.l ti o rr
I t is nr rrma lto b e l i c ' e th a r th e rc a r e possi bi l i ti esothcr thari
t lr os ec on ta i n e <iln s c i e n c ea n d te c h n ,ll ogvat a P arti cul arP oi nt
in t ir r lc . l t i s n o rma l fb r.th e c h i l d ' s g etrcrcrsi tvto P ersi sti nto
adult hoo d . Bu t i t i s a b n o rm a l ,b e c a u s ehi srori cal l Yregressi ve, to
suggcstth.rt the pucrilitv of mvth is supcrior to scienceancltech-
nologv.The modern adult haslimits that must be ovcrcome' but
thev .dnnot bc overcomeb.vretutnin2l to d mo(le oJ thought which
illnoresprccisclrthdt theteorc limits to desiein realitt'anclobstacles
to rolucin $ittanac.
' lo bc s u re , c h i l d h o o d d e s e n c s to bc tteatt' d as a norm b,v
.rdults - or, rnthcr, not a5 a norm. preciseh, lrut ls a nornlative
-l-hisnormativesuper-
rcquiremr:nt,somethingto trc transcctrtled.
hum . r nirl o I c h i l d h o o d i s n o t to b e c o n ftrsed$ i th thc responscs
t hat a c h i l d i ts e l f m a v a d o p t to h i s t( ' rnP orar\ pow ' crl essness,
r c s pons e sth a t th c c h i l d w i s h e s rv i th al l hi s mi ght to repl ace
r , v it lrt r ue s o l u ti o n s , th a t i s , s o l u ti o n s that arc both vcri fi abl c
and c f iec ri v e .f...]
In short. trecauscthe child is not a con)Pl(tc being, he exhib-
its a generositr thit compensatcsfbr his avitlitr': this gcnerositY
can l>epr,rp,rsedasnomal lrecauseit is norDdri|c.that is, an allir-
m at ion of v a l r:c .
B c c au s erh c c h i l c l i s a h e l p l c s sc re a r urc,how cvcr,he i s credu-
Ious. Cr.'ululirlis not nolmal in humansbt'causeit ii not normativu;
it consistsin taking lor granted rvhat hasvet to be constructed.
I n t ht . c n c l ,th e m o s t p c rc e P ti v cre habi l i tati onof chi l dhood
is t hat ol th e p o c t.' fh e p o c t i s a v i s i onarl , a seer,but hc sees
t6 2
* hat docs not exist. \\'c scc llhat is. The poct dot's not so much
dcscr iber uhatexisr sas point t o values,l- hcpoeli.conscioulnct s
is a correlativeofthe scientificconlciousness, but also its inverse.
P ,,cr r \ i\ J poet ir lr r r r r
lion. nol J oclir on( .
'lo
hold out childhood as an idcal t o adult hum ankind is t o
demonstratt that childhood is a promiseanclnot a lact, i\lln nust
renr.rina child in r he : ensc t hat h<'deser r es
t o bccot Dct hc conr -
pl cte m an ol'r lhiclr childr cn dr eam . I M S Lc Nor nul t t I cpr oblim c
tlcsmentolitis,II, l. 5r. 6r]
hi itivc mentdlit)
fl ,t7l Theodule Ar m and Ribot , f bllor vingAugust eCom t c, cr it i-
cizcrl introspectivc psvchologvas the psvchologvol the civilirctl,
contempt firr moclesof
adult, heolth.vvhitc male, Ps,vchologr''s
thoug lr t diller cnr lit , nr t hat of t hc r espect able,cult ivat cr lm ale
r.cfl c ct eda hiddcn assur r pt iont hat t he r t sl>ect r blc.cult ivat cd
mal r' s m ode ol'r hought t *assor nehou valjr l and nor m al, Nlot 't -
tai.qncvvon<leled on rvhatbasir rvejudgeclthc narivcsrrf the coun-
tri cs r, r 'ecolonizc<lt o be savages,but his skept icismu, r s r Tidelv
clisnrisscd. ErasntusnrcrLeIn Proiseof Foll.r,but it rrirsregardeclas
no l es slant ast ict han t he plavsof Shakespearin c r vhich m adm cn
werr portraved as rvisc. Ancl Rousseautatrght in /:rni1ethat thc
chi l d is a com plct c hr r m anbeing, dif li'r cnt liom t he adult not
onlv in possessing Iessknorvledgcand cxperienccbut also in har'-
i ng an ent ir clr dif lt 'r ent at t it udc t onar d lif e. But sinceRousseau
rl as accuscrof l haring al'an<loncd his ou n chilr lr cn,his t er ching
rvasdeemtd urol>i.rn.
J he scvcnt eent hcent ur r idenr ilie<lm . r n r vit h his a. nr c, or
matur it r ',an<ll) cscar t cshcld t hat "t hc pr cjut liccsol oul chil<l-
hooclar e t hc f ir st anclpr incipal causeol oul er r or s. " Sincc . r vc
vtere "childrcn bt.lirre becorring adults," our rc.lson\r';tsnot (ls
purc as if rle had nevcr mad<'usr:ol our scnscs.Ilclirrc trhilippc
l6l
 --
P inel and J e a n E ti e n n e D o n ri n i q u e Es r; ui rol ,the i nsanc rvere
subjectedto punishmentin lieu oftreatrnent. Asylums were still
more terrifying than prisons.To be sure, the eighteenth century
witnessedthe f irst glimmeringsof relativisnt.When Montesquieu
aslied"llorv caD nnlone bc a Persian?"he encouragecJ
his con-
temporaricsto recognizethat such a thing rvasindecd perfectly
porsible. It became possible to submit Wcstern society to the
judgment ofan Oriental and human psychologvto the judgment
of .r nrvthicaf supennan. But ,\lontesquieu's Pe ion Lettersan(l
Voltaire's,l'li cromigaswere nlerc philosophical enterrainments.
Strangeas it may seem, the prejudice that establishedthe civi-
lized u'hitc man as the standardof rcferencefor all mankind grcw
out of a phi l o s o p h y fa m o u sl b r c o n d c mni ng aJl prej udi ce. B ut
Enlightenmentphilosophvlbund fault nrore rvith thc pre-of prej-
udice than with the illusory certaintv of irs ludtmenf: a prejudice
rlas the judgmcnt of a previous age. Yestcrdav'sjudgnrent rlas
declaredto be error becauseit survivedonlv asa .n'eaponofcom-
bat againstthe nen. Diderot's purposein rehabilitatingthe prim-
itive, in the Supplement
to Bougainville's
Voy,oge,
was essentiallyto
discredit Christianity.The Christianreligion rvashoist on its own
pelard: whateverpreccdedthe adventof tnrth rvasdoomed to dis-
.rppear.IIistorical precedenceestablishedlogical perspective.Tol-
cranceraisesa similar problem: tolerance is the recognition ofa
plurality ofvalues, the refusalto erect anv valueasa norm; intol-
er anc eis norm a tj re i mp e ri a l i s n t,Bu t trv a s one rvi l l , a pl rrral i tv
oI normsis comprehcnsibleonly asa hier.rrchy.Norms can coexist
on a fboting ol equalitv onlv if drained of the normative inten-
tion that callcd them into existcnccascodified, normative dcci-
s ionsenr bod i e di n i n s ti tD ti o n s c. u s to m s ,dogmas,ri tes and l aw s.
A nor m c an n o t b e n o rma ti re w i th o u t b ei ng mi l i tant, that i s,
intolcrant. In intolerancc, in aggressive rrormJtivit), there is of
c our s ehat r e d ,b u t i n to l e ra n c eth e re i s c o ntempt. V al uestol cr-
l6,t
ate u.hat thel deem to bc valueless.The rclativism anrl tolerance
ol the eightcenth century were inscparablefrorn the esscntiallv
normative idea of progrcss.[3ut progresswas not conceived in
terms ofa relntion ofvalues; it was identified rvith the final valuc
i n r scr ies,t he one f hat t r anscendedt he ot hcr s and in t er m s of
nvhichthev u'ere judgcd. That is *'hv tolerancc !1asthe value in
the nameof which one becameintolerant,and relativitr the valut:
in the name of v"hich one becamc absolute.f MS lc Norma,let ie
prohlimedesmentoftir, I, l. 1r]
Il4t]] Positivismtook the thcorics of BaronTurgot and lVlar-
quis de Condorcet on the progrcssof the human spirit and recast
them in the fbrm of a las, the law of three stagcs(theological.
nretaphvsicaland posit ivr ) . I n ot ber r r or ds, it t r icd t o lbr ce psy-
chol ogicalspeculat ionint o t he Pr ocr ust eanbcd oI nat ur al sci-
cnce. In formulating a ./owof progrcss,Comte u,astreating min(l
as il it u'ere a natural object. At thc sametime he rr.asdeclaring
that sociologr'(or,ashe sa* it, the scicnccof mind) rvasindepen-
rlcnt o1 biologv in terms of object and method. The positivespirit
rvasdeclarcdto bc the ultimate fbrm of the human spirit; thcol-
ogv and mctaphvsicsrveredevalued,the first asa primitivc fbrm
ol spirit. the secondasa transitionallbmr. These fornrsimpeded
thc dcvel,rpmentof spirit't firll potential, so spirit rcjccted thern.
D i ssat isf icdr vit h f lct ions, spir it cr eat edscience.Hence, scicn-
tific thought wasthc normal (that is, the normativeor icleal)statc
of thought . Posit ivismpor t r n\ cd it scll'ast he nor m al culm inat ior r
ol an cver closer and nrore f:aithful.rpproximationto the intcl-
lcctual nomr. For Comtc, thcologicalthinking rvaslikc the think-
i ng of c hildr cn. Wit h t his sim ile, Com t e ascr iberposit
l ivcvalue
to D ratur it \ ':t hat ol t hc individualas l1ell as t hat oI r hc hum an
race.And thc maturationofrhe race,he implied, !1nsjust asineri-
table and necessaryasthe maturation of thc child.
Meanuhiie, in Gennanr,HegeJ'sdialecticcncouragcdstudenrs
I ( ''
of philos op h vto s e e Il e g e l i a n p h i l o s o p h vas the cul mi nati on of
thc arduousadvent of the ldea and the German bourgcois state
as the normal fbrm ol all societv,And in England,Spenccr'sevo-
lut ionis m , ta k i n g u p rv h c re M i l l ' s p o s i ti vi snr l eft ofl , Irrrther
ac c ent uate dth e p h i )o s o p h i c a bl c l i e f th a t superi ori tvand poste-
riority are onc and thc samc.Anterior, Iesscomplcx and inferior
bec am es vn o n v m o u s .
l.ittle bv littlc a diffirse dogma took shapc:namelv,that thc
int ellec t u a l l y p ri m i ti v c rn d th e i n te l l ectual l y pucri l e are trvo
lbrms of a single infirmitv. At around the s.rmetimc, moreover'
researchin cmbryologvshou'cdthat certain anatomicalanomalies
lvcre the rcsult ofarrestcd development.A club fbot, a harelip, a
t c s t ic ulare c to p i a- e a c ho f th e s cc o n d i t i onsi s the P erP etuati on
after birth o[ a state through u'hich evcrv f'etusor embryo passcs
rvhile still in the utcrus. What is abnormalis the halting ol devel-
opment at an intermediatestage.What is normal at one moment
in time becomesabnormal later.
\Vhen Lucien Livr-Bruhl publishcd l:onclions mentalesdansIes
sociitisinfirieurcsin his
1910, initial usc of the tcrm "plclogical"
t o c har ac te ri z cth e " p ri m i ti v e " m o d c ol thought suggestedan
im plic it de p rc c i a ti o n .Ph i l o s o p h i c a ol p ini on rvasdi vi ded. S omc
philosophersrverc clelightcclto discoverthat thc theorv of mcn-
rol;tdsprovided argumentsto justifi a normative concePtion of
the history of thought. At last, there tvcre criteria fbr choosing
sidcsin philosophicalcombat, lor distinguishingbetu'cenfruitful
nerv ideasand survivalsof thc past, for separatingthe backrvard-
look ing f i o m th c l b rn a rd -l o o k i n g . L 6 on B runschvi cg,for ex-
ample, uscd both Lcvv-Bruhl and Piaget to argue in favor of his
orvn doctrine conccrningthc Agesof lntelligcnceand to disparage
Aristotlc's philosophvon the grounclsthat it rcmaineclconfintrl
r l it hin t he me n ta l fi a me rv o rko f a p ri m i ti ve or a ch i l d of si x'
l\'leanuhile, other philosophcrs,sensingthat u hat I iv.r'-Bruhl
lh 6
u as reallv arguing rvasthat primitivc thought rvasnot prelogical
but heterogencous,and scnsing,too, that championsrvould soon
comc fbrrvard to defend the merits of fbrms of thought "clillir-
ent" lrom modern sciencc,soughtto rcstorecontinuitv: the prim-
i ti l e, t hey ar gued,wasnot as alicn t o our logic as som eclaim ed,
nor *,as modern thought as ftrllv logical as somc believed. The
transition from one fbrm of mentality to another involveda cer-
tai n l ossof cont cnt ( m oder n t hought is not as r ich as pr im it ivc
thought ) as r vcll as t hc consolidat ion ol a cer t ain clisposit ion
(moclcrnthought is more methodical). Wc can easilvundcrstan<l
rvh.rtthe primitivc is: it is rvhat ue becomeu'hen rve abandonthc
critical spirit, thc preciousprize ofan allvalsvulncrableconqucst
(thesisof Bclot and Par ocli,discussionat t he Sociat c Fr anq: aisc
de Philosophieafier publication of L(:vy-BruhJ's
books).
Nocrtheless,both groupsof philosophcrsprcservecltlre essen-
ti ,rl r. r t i, , n. r list . r nrposit
l ivir t nor nl\ : r |a\ on i. \ ulcr i. lr t o m \ sli-
r i \m; n', n( "nlr J( lict ion i. . u|er i0r 1, , I r Jr t i(ip, r t ion: . r i, nr r is
supcriort o m vt ll; indust r yis super iort o m agic; f ait h in pr ogr css
is superior to the progrcssof faith. IMS Le Normalct le problintc
de; mentolitis,I, f. 2r, 3r]
l l 49l llat jonalismand posit ivismt hus depr eciat ul m vt hical
thinking. Despite the rationalistattitudesinrplicit in Christianitv,
moreo vcr tt hc t hcologiansr ccognizcr it hat t his depr eciat ionof
mr-th\\'asall-cncompassing. Phcnomcnologicaltheologiansthere-
fort: decir lcdt hat onlr one r eact ionwas possiblc:all m vt hologi-
c.rland rcligious systcmsrvould haveto be rescuedcn bloc.
N l o dcr n m vt hologv por t r avsit scl[ . r s r cst or ing t he value of '
m\th in the lice of rationalistcleprcciation.Tb grant rccognition
to othcr valuc syst ent sis t ant . lm ountt o r cst r ict ingt hc I alue of
ration.rlism.In tht'cnd, normativetoler.rncepro.r'es to be a depre
ci ati on ol t he posit ivistdcpr cciat ionof m vt h. lt is im possiblet o
saveth c cont ent of anv r eligion r vit hout s, r vingt hc cont ent ol all
1t)7
 religions.,., In order to sarea religion that ha<J, aclmitted)y,aban- that havebrought thosc valuesto consciousncss are tormotive,and
doncd the Inquisitionand thc srake,it w,asneccssary to saveothcr a normative dircction is norm.rllv \1orth pursuing. Il\15 /.c ,\br-
r eligio n srv i th th e i r n .h i rl i n g d e rv i s hesand human sacri fi ces:fbr
mal et le problime desmentaliri\, l, t. 6r, 7r]
if it is true rhat primirir'(, mentality is a totalizing structure, tlre
r c habi l i ta ti o no f th e rn v th i c me n ta l i tv i s al so the rehabi l i tati on
Normotiveinvention
ofsavagervin all its fbrms. The fricnd of primitive mentality rvill
[150] In t he evolut ion of t he individual,t hc m cnt alit y of adult -
objc c r th a t th c m o d c rn m c n ta l i ty i s not hosti l e to the bombi ng
hood co m es af icr t he m ent alit y of childhoodi in t he evolut ion
of civilian populations.But no one is savingthat the modem men_
of mankind, t he m oder n m ent alit y t bllowst he pr im it ive m cnt al-
tality or, fbr that mattcr, any constitutcd norm must be prefi:rred
itv. But whcn we refer to adulthood or modernitv as normal, we
over primitive mentality. Themodernmentality is not a ,tructwe but
do not mean simply that they succeedearlier stagesofcxistence.
a tcndency, To prcfer it is simplv to prefer a tendcncy, a norma_
Eachof thesestatesis normal in the sensethat it cflectivelydeval-
t iv c inte n ti o n .[...]
uesanotherstatehobbled bi internalconllict: betrveendesireand
The primitive and modem mentalitiesare not coexistingabso_
realitv, or betrvecn porver and scicncc. To be sure, just because
Iutesbut successilert latives,Technologyis clearly progress*-hen
thc moder n r ccognizest hese conllict s and t o a lim it ed degr ee
it demonstratesthe failure of magic; sciencc is ciearlv
progrcss resol vc st hem , it does not t her eby const it ut <'t he [ inal st ageof
rvhen it grou'sour ofthe inarlt,quacloftechnologv. The modern
el ol uti o n. The expect at iont hat t odar ''sunder st r ndingsu, ill bc
mentalit_vhascertain adrant.rges over previousnorms. advantages transcendcdis a nor m al f eat ur eol t ht 'Dodr r D m cnt Jlit v. Hencc
f r onr u,h i c h i t d e ri v e src l a ti v cb u t n o t absol utcval ue.
there is no rcmedv lbr modernin''s ills in merelv rcturning to old
M od r:rn i tt i s n o t n o rm a l i n th c s enseof havi ng achi eved.r
norms.The onlv truc rcnledv lies in the invention of new norms.
definitivesuperiorstatc. lt ir normatitc,horvcver,bccauscit strives
C enero sit vof spir it is t o be im it ar cd, but belief in t hc ef licacv
c ons t an tl yto o u rd o i ts e l l . H e n ri Be rgsongot at l eastone thi ng
of i mmediat e solut ionsm ust bc r eiect ed.Nor m at ivit v is inher -
right: a true mechanicsmn) not exist, but a true mysticism is
a ent in the kinds of changcthat brought modcrnity to conscious-
contradiction in terms. l)espitc Bergson'sobjective sympathvfbr
ness.It is t his nor m at ivit l t hat m Llst in t he nor m al cour se of
t he pr im i ti v e m c n ta l i tl , h i s p h i J o s o p hyi s i n no scnsea reacti on-
things be perpetuated.
ar y 'r ev a l u a ti o no f i rra ti o n a l i tv , . .] 'lo sum up, all normalitv must be judged lith
[. referenceto
Modern man is experiencinga crisis in the sensethat r]omi-
the pos sibilit vof devaluat ionin a nor m at ivescnse.Ther ein lics
nation and masteryof rhc enyironmcnt elude his grasp. But
the the only method fbr detecting m.vstilicdtion.
r es olut i o no f th a t c ri s i sd o e sn o t l i e i n thc past. It cl oesnot exi st
P ath ologycan som ct im csm im ic he. r lt h,lf sicknessis of t en a
in reaclv-madc form but renrainsto be invcnted, rcl ugc for an individual in conllict uit h him sclf , ot her s or t hc
The modern is modern onlv bccauseit hasfound solutions to
cnvironment, revolution is olicn a nr('ansof avoiding nccessarv
pr oblem sth a t th e p ri m i ri v e s e l d o n rp osed.Mo< l erni tvposcsri i f_ i nnovat ionan( l r ef or m . Tim e cannot sct t lc t he ( luest ionof what
lc r ent pro b l e m s ,l l l o tl c rn ra l u e sa re p r ovi si onal .B ut the changcs n pcrson'sor a societ v'snor Dr sought t o be: ncit hcr vest er davnor

t6 8 169
 -
tomorrow is an infallible oracle. Norms and valuesare tested br
situationscalling lor normative invention One can respondto a
challengccither bv seekingrefugc or exercisingcrcative ingcnu-
itv; oftcn the t\4.oresponsesseem deceptivelvsimilar. Yet there
is one surecritcrion for identifring creativitv:a \4'illingnessto Put
norms to the test, to asccrtaintheir Ialue fairly and u'ithout trving
to make thcm seemartiflcially normal. lhe normal is that \'vhich
is normativc unclergiven conditions, but not cvcrvthing that is
normal under givcn conditions is normativc. It must .rlrvaysbc
permissibleto tcst the normal bv varl ing the ambient conditions
It is in this sensethat the historyof the vo d is thejudgmentof the
world.[MS Normalitdet normativitt,l. 1r]
The Problem of Social Norms
speaki ng,
[ 151] f he L a ti n rv o rd n o rm a ,rv h i c h , e tvmol ogi cal l v
bear st hc w e i g h t o f th e i n i ti a l me a n i n g of the terms " norms"
{ nrentsof the samccollcctive clemand.It bcgan*.ith grammatical
and "normal," is the equivalentof the Crerckdl8oc.Orthographv
ortho-
lFrench, othographc, but long ago ortbographiel,orthodoxv,
pedic s , a re n o rm a ti v e c o n c c Pts Prc m a turel v l f the concept of
orthologr is lcss lamiliar, at least it is not altogether uselessto
knou. that Plato guaranteeclit+Eand the rvord is found, rvithout
a reftrcnce citation, in Emile Littri"s Dictionndirede la langue
it bY l-atin and
franqaisc.Orthology is grammar in the sensegivcn
mcrlievallvritcrs, that is, the regulationoflanguageusage.
I f it is tru e th a t th e e x p e ri c n c eo fn ormal i zati on i s a spcci fi -
callv anthropologicalor cultural expericnce,it can scem normal
that languagehasproposedone of its Prime fields fbr this experi-
encc. (irammar furnishesprime matcrial lbr rcflcction on norms.
When Francis I in the edict of Vi llcrs-Cotter0t ordains that all
judic ial a c tso l th e k i n g d o m b c d ra rv nu p i n French,rveare deal -
ing rvith an irnpcratile.l') But a norm is not an imPerativeto (lo
somcthirrgundtr pain ol jrrridicalsanctions.Whcn the grammari-
] 7o
ansof thc sameera undertook to llx thc usageol the Frcnch lan-
guage,it lvasa qucstion of norms. of cleterminingthe ref'erence,
anclof defining mistakesin terms of <iivcrgence,diftercncc.'l'ht:
f iom usage.I n t he m iddlc of t he seven-
tcl erence is bor r or , , cc]
tccnrh centurv this is Claude Favrcde Vaugelas's thesis:"Usagc is
that to lr.hich$e must subjcctourst'lvesentirelvin our languagc.";r)
Vaugclas'srvorks turn up in the *ake of rvorks of thc Academie
fianqaise,rvhich u,asfbundcrlprcciselyto embellishthe language.
In fict in the scvcnteenthcenturl the grammaticalnornr rvasthe
usagcofcultured, bourgeoisParisians,so that this norm rcflccts
a pol i tical nor m : adm inist r at ivecent r alizat ionf ir r t hc benef it ol-
roval p ower . I n t er m s of nor m alizat ion t her e is no dif ler encc
betwcen the birth of grammar in Francein the sevcntccnthccn-
turv and t he est ablishm entof t he m et r ic syst emat t hc end ol'
thc ei g ht eent h.Car dinalRichelicu,t he nr cm ber sof t he Nat ional
C onvent ionand Napoleon Bonapar t ear c t he successive inst r u-
normsand ended nith morphologicalnonns o1-mcnanclhorsesfbr
nationaldcfcnse,tlpassingthrough inrlustrialanclsanitarvnorms.
l )efining indust r ialnor m s assum esa unit v of plan, <lir cct ion
of uorl, stated purposc of m.rterialconstructed. 'I-hearticle on
"Gun-carriagc" in the F.nc.vclopidie of Diderot and d'Alembcrt,
revi scd bt t he Roval Ar t illcn'Cor ps, aclm ir ablvsct s f ir r t h t he
moti f.sof t he nor m alizat ionof r r or k in ar senals.I n it r ve seehol
the conf'trsionol eflbrts, the cletailof proportions, the diflicultl
and slorvnessof rcpla(cmcnts,uselessexpense,arc rcmt'died.The
standar dizat ionof dcsignsof pieccs and clim ensiont ablcs, t he
i mpos it ionof pat t cr nsand m odelshaveast hcir consequence
t hc
'l
precisionol'separatepro(luctsan(l thc regrrlaritlof assemblv. he
" (i un-c ar r iagc"ar t icle cont ainsalm ostall t he conccpt suscdin a
moder n t r eat iseon nor m alizat ioncxccpt t he t cr m "nor m . " llcr e
' rrchavet he t hing u it hout t he *or cl.
a7l
 l-
The definiticrnofsanitary norms assunlcsthrt, liom thr: polit-
ical point of vicw, attention is paid to populations' health con-
, th e h e a l th i n e s so f condi ti ons ofexi stence
s ider eds t a ti s ti c a l l vto
and t o t he u n i fo rn r d i s s e n ri n a ti o no f preventi ve and curati ve
trcarmcntsperfectedby rrredicine.In Austria Maria Thercsaand
JosephII conferred legal statuson public health institutions by
crcatingan Impcrirl Health Commission(Sdnitdts-Hot'deputdtion,
1753) and bv promulgatinga Haupt ,VcdizinalOrdnung,replaced
in 1770 by the Sonifits-notmati%an act u'ith fbrty regulations
relatedto mediciDc,\,eteriDarvart, pharmac,v,
the training of sur-
gc ons , dem o g ra p h i c a la n d me d i c a l s ta ri sti cs.W i th respect to
norm and normalizationhere, ll'e havethe rvord rvith the thing.
In both of these examples,the norm is what determines the
normalstartinAfiom a nornativc decision,As rvearc going to scc,
such a decision rcgarding this or that norm is understood only
rvithin the context ofother norms. At a given moment, thc expe-
rienceol normalizationcannot be broken dorl n, nt Icastnot into
projccts.PierreGuiraudclearlyperceivedthis in the caseofgram-
mar u hen hc *'roter "Richelieu's founding of thc Acad6mie[ran-
qais ein 16 3 5 fi t i n to a g e n e ra lp o l i c y o f central i z,rti onol -uhi ch
t he Rev olu ti o n .th e E m p i re , a n d th e R epubl i care the hci rs....
It rvould not be absurdto think that the bourgeoisieannexedthe
I norms?Assum ingt hat t he f ir st of t hescr wo pr oposit ionsis r r ue,
languageat the sametimc that it scizedthe instnrments of pro-
duc t ion. " t2It c o u l d b e s .ri di n a n o th e r wav bv tryi ng to substi -
tutc an equivalcntfbr the Marxist corcept ofthe ascendingclass.
l3etrvcen1759, rvhen the u'ord "normal" appeared,and l8]4,
when the lvord "normalized"appearcd,a nonnativeciasshad won
thc povverto identify - a beautiful cxample of ideological illu-
sion- the lunction ofsocial norms, rvhosccontent it determined,
u'itlr thc use rh.lt that classmadc of thern.
' [ h, r t
t he n o rm a ti v ci n t(.n ti o ni n .r g i v ensori ctr i n a gi rcn era
cannot bc broken dou'n is apparentrvhen vveexamine the rcla-
) 72
ti ons bet r veent echnologicaland jr r r idicalnor m s, I n t he r i- qor ous
and prcs ent m eaning of t he t er m , t echnologicalnor m alizar ion
consistsin the choice and dctcrmination of material, the lorm
and dimcnsionsof an object u hose char.rcteristicslrom thcn on
become necessar ylor conr ist cnt m anuf act ur e.The division of
labor constrainsbusinessmento a homogeneitv of norms at the
heart of a t echnical- econom iccom pler u, hosedim ensions. r r e
constantlvevolvingon a nationalor irrternationalscale.But tech-
rologv developswithin a societv'seconomy.A demand to sim-
plify can appearurgent fiom tht'technological poinr of vicw, but
it can seem premnture frorn the industrial and cconomic point
of vierv asf)r as the possibilitiesof the nroment and the i,rmedi-
ate futurr are concerned.The logic oftechnologv and the inrer-
csts ol'the economv must conlc to terms. Nloreoter. in another
respect,technologicalnormalizationmust bewareoIan excessof
rigiditv. What is manufacturerlmust finallv be consumed.Ccr-
tai nl r, th e logic of lor m alizar ion can be pushedas lar as t he nor -
malizationofneeds bv mcansof the persuasionofadvertising.For
al l that, s hould t he quest ionhe set t ledas t o r vhet herneed is an
obj cct ofpossiblenor m alizat iororr t he subjectobliged t o invent
normalizationmust provide lor needs,as it does fbr objccts char-
acteri zedby nor m s, m ar gins lor diver gence,but her e r vit hout
guanti l i c at ion.The r elat ionof t echnology t o consum pt ioDinr r o-
cl ucesi nt o t he unilicat ion of m et hods,m odels,pr ocedur esand
prools ol qualificarion, a rclative llexibi)ity, evoked furthermr>rt:
br the ternr "normaiization," u,hich n.rs preferred in Fr.rnccin
l9l0 to "stanclardization," to designaterhc administrativcorgan-
ism responsiblefirr cntcrpriseon a national scale.I The concept
ol normaliz.rtionexcludesthal of immutabilit\,,incluclesthe antic-
ipation of a possible flexibilitr'. So rve see horv a tcchnological
nornl graduallvrcflccts an icleaofsociety and its hicrarchvofval-
17t
ues, ho\1 a (lecisionto normalizc assumcsthe rePrcsentationol a
possiblc whole of correlativc, comPlementarr or comPensatory
clecisions.I his rvholc must bc llnished in advancc,flnished ifnot
closcd. Thc repltscntation of this totalitv of reciprocallvrclative
nor m s is p l a n n i n g .S tri c tl v s p e a k i n g ,th e uni tv of a P l an u' oul cl
bc the unin of .r unic;uethought. A bureaucraticand technocratic
mvth, the Plan is the modern dresscttthe ide.rol Providcnce.As
it is v er y c l c a r th a t a m c c ti n g o f d t' l e grtesand a gathcri ng of
machincsare hard put to achicvc a unifi'clf thought, it must bc
admitted that ue rvouldhesitatcto sa)ofthc PlanrvhatLa Fontaine
said of Providencc,that it kno\as rvhat rvc need bctter than wc
do.5aNeverthcless - and without ignoring the fict that it hasbeen
pos s iblet o p re s e n tn o rma l i z a ti o na n d pl anni ng as cl osel vcon-
nectedto a \\nr economyor thc cconomYol totalitarianregimes-
\\remu\t see.rboveall in planningendeavorsthe attemPtsto con-
stitute organsthrouth u hich a socictvcould estinrate,loresccand
.rssurrcits needsinsteadof bcing redrrccdto recordirg anclstat-
ing thenr in tcrms oIJccounts and lral.rnccsheets.So that lvhat is
denounc c d ,u n c l e rth e n a me o fra ti o n a l i z rti on - thc bogevcom-
plac ent lv r v a v c dl rl th e c h a m p i o n so f l i b cral i sm, the cconomi c
varietyof the cult of nature- asa mechaniz.rtion of sociallile per-
hapsexpresses, on thc contrary,thc need, obscurelvf'elt bv soci-
etv, to become the organic subjcct ol needsrccognizedas such.
It is easvto understandhorv technologicalJctivitl and its nor-
maliration. in terms ofthcir relation to the ecoDotrly,are related
t o t he jur id i c a l ,rrrl e r.A l a w o fi n d u s tri a l propertr,j rrri di calpro-
t ec r ion ol p a te n tso r rt' g i s te re dp a tte rns,e\i sts. l i r norntal i zea
r egis t er e<pl a tte rni s to p ro c e e dto i n tl u s rri .rlcxprcrpri ati on.-l ' he
requirencnt of national dcfinse is tht reasoninvoked bv many
s t at c s t o i n tro d u c e s u c h p ro v i s i o n s i n ro l cgi sl .rti on.' l -heuni -
v er s eof t t ' c h n o l o g i c a ln o rm s o p c n s o n to thc uni verscofj uri di -
cal norms.An cxpropriationis carriedout accordingto tlre norms
171
of l au. The m agist r at r : uho
s cleci<Je,
t he bailillisr esponsiblelbr
carryingout the sentence,arc personsidentified u'ith thcir ftrnc-
ti on bv vir t ue ol nor nr s,inst alledin t heir lunct ion * it h t he clel-
egationofcompetence. Here, the normal dcscendsfionr a higher
norm through hierarchizeddelegation.In his AeincnRcchrr/cbrc.r5
Jl ansK e lsenm aint ainst h, r tt he r r lidit y o1a jur ir licalnor m r k'pt - nr Js
()n i ts i n ser t ion in a ccr hcr cnts. t st eDtar
, ) or der ol hier ar chizecl
norms,d r a*'ing t heit binclingpo'ler lr om t heir dir ect or indir ect
rel'erenceto a fund.rnrentalnorm, But thcre arc <litlcrentjuridical
orders becausethere lle severalfirndamental,irreduci[rlenorms.
l l i t hasb ecn possiblet o cont r astt his philosophvof l. r r l r vit h it s
pow erl c ssness t o absor b polit ical f act int o jur iclical f act , as it
cl ai msto do, at leastit s m er it in havingbr ought t o light t he r el
ati vi tv of iur idical nr ) r Dr shier ar chizeclin a coher ent or der has
beengener allyr ccognizcr l.So t hat one o1 Kclscn'sm osr r csolt r t e
cri ti cscan *r it c: "Tht 'lau is t he svst emol convr nt ionsAnr lnor nt s
cl esti ne dt o or ient all beh. r r iorinsidc a gr oup in a r vell<leljncr l
manner."56Ererrs hilt' recognizingthat the l.rrr,,plirirte as rvell .rs
public, hasn.l sourccothel than a political onc, tl'c (an a<lmitchat
the oppor t unit \ t o legislat eis given t o t he legislat ivepouer [ , v. r
mul ti pl i c it v of cust or n5r vhich m ust be inst it ut ionalir e<llr y t hat
pouer i n t o a vir t ual jur idical vvholc.Evcn in t hc abr cnceof t he
conceptof jur idical or der ,dcar t o Kclscn,t hc r clat ivit v ol jur id-
i cal norms can be just if ied. 'l- his r elat ivit v can be m or e or less
stri ct. Th cr c cxist sa t oler ancef or nonr elat ivit vr vhiclrdocs not
meana gap in r r lat ivit . r .I n I act t he nor m ol nor m \ r em ainscon-
vergencc.llou coulr l it lr e ot her r viseif lau "is onlr t he r cgul, r ,
ti on ol roci. r lact ivin"?'it [ . . . I
' fhe c or r el. r t ivin
of social n( ) r m s- t cchnologic. r l,cconom ic,
j uri di cal * t cn<isr o nr aket heir vir t ual unit v an or ganizat ion.I c is
not easvt o savu'h. r tt ht , conccpt of or ganizat ionis in r {'l. r t iont o
that ol or ganism ,u. lr ct herr ve . r r e dealing *it h. r m ole gener al
t 7t
s t r uc t ur e th a n th e o rg a n i s m ,b o th m o re fbrmal and ri cher; or
rvhethcr r',,earc rlealing rvith a model nvhich, relative to the organ-
ism hcld as a basic typc of structure. hasbecn singularizedbv so
mrny resrrictiveconditionsthat it could havt'no more consistencr
t han a m e ta P n ()r.
L.et us st.rte first that in a social organization, the rules for
adjusting the parts into a collective u'hich is more or lessclcar
as to its o\1.nfinal purpose- be the parts individuals,groups or
entcrprises\\ ith a limited objective- are externalto the adjusted
m ult iple. R u l c s mu s t b c re p re s e n te dlerrned, , rcmembercd,ap-
plied, r v h i l c i n a l i v i n g o rg a n i s n rth e rul es fbr adj usti nqthc parts
amongthemsetvcrare immancnt, presentedu'ithout being repre-
s ent c d, a c ti n g n v i th n e i th c r d e l i b e ra ti on nor cal cul ati on.Fl crc
thcre is no divcrgence,no distance. no delav bct*'een rule and
regulation.The social order is a set of rulcs with u'hich the ser-
rants or beneficiarics,in any casc,the leaders,must be concenred.
T he or dc r o l l i l e i s ma d e o f a s c t o f rul es l i ved rvi thout protr-
lem s . ; 8[ N P. p p . 2 .+ l i -5 0 ]
[ 152] We s h a l l s a vo th e r* i s e - c e rt ai nl ynot bettcr, probabl v
I es sr v ell - n a me l y th a t a s o c i e ty i s both machi ne and organ-
ism. It rvould be onlv a machineif the collectivc'sendscould not
onlv be strictlv planned but also executcd in conformithr ith a
soci eti esrvi th a
pr ogr am .l n th i s re s p e c t,c e rta i n c ()D tcntP orarv
socialisrfbrnr r,feconomytend perlrapstc-,r.ard an.rLltonraticmode
of f unc t io n i n q . B u t i t mu s t b e a c k n o uledgedthat thi s ten(l encv
still encountersobstaclesin facts, and not just in the ill-rvill of
skepticalperfirrmers,u'hich obligc the organizersto summon up
their resourcei lbr improvisation. lt can cven be askcd r'thether
anv s oc ie tr w h a ts o e v e ri s c a p a b l eo l both cl earsi ghtedness
in
c let c r m in i n gi ts p u rp o s c sa n d e fl i c i c n c v i n uti l i zi ng i ts nte.rns.In
anv case,thc fict that one ofthe t.rsksof the entirc soci.rlorgan-
ization consistsin its infbrming itiell asto its possiblepurposes-
i76
u' i th the except ion of ar chaicand so- callcdpr im it ive societ ies
n,herepurposeis furnishedin rite and tradition just as the behav-
ior of the animal organismis providcdby an innarcnrodel- seems
to shor vclear lvt hat , st r ict lv speaking,it hasno int r insic f inalit y.
In the caseoIsociety, regulation is a nced in sc.rrchof its organ
and i ts n or m sof exer cise.
On the other hand,in the caseofthe organismthe fact ol need
expressesthe existenceofa regulatory apparatus.'fhc necd fbr
fbod, energy,movement and rest requires,as a condition of its
appear ance
in t he f br m ol aD\ iet v and t he act olsear ching,t he
relerenceol the organism,in a stateofgiven lacr, to an optimum
state ol [unctioning, determine(l in the fbrm of a con51ar1.4.
organic regulation or a homeostasisassurcsfirst of all the return
to the constant when, becauseof variationsin its relation to the
environntent, the organismdivergesfrom it..lusr ,ts need has as
its center the organismtaken in its entirety, even though it man-
i l csrsi rself and is sat isf iedbv m eansof one appar at us,so it s r eg-
ulariorrexprcsses the inte{r.ltion oIparts within tht rvholethough
it operatesby meansof one nervousand endocrine svstem.This
is the rt.asonrvhv,strictlv speaking,there is no distancebetrveen
organsrvithin the organism,no externalitv of parts.The knorvl-
edgethe anat om istgainsf iom an or ganismis a kind of displav in
cxtensiveness. But t hc or ganisntit self doesnor live in t he spat ial
tnode hr nhich it is per ceivecl.The lif b ol r living bcing is, 16r
each ol it s elem ent s, t he im m ediacv of t he copr esenceof all.
INP,Pp.2s2-s
]l
[153] Social regulation tcnds tou,ard organic regulation and
mimics it u'ithout ceasinglirr all that to be corrposed mechani-
cal l r. In older t o ident ili t hc socialcom posit ionu ir h t he social
orgar)i sr rin t hc st r ict senscol t he t er m , $e shoulr l llc able t cr
speakoI a society'sneerlslnd norms as onc spc.rksof an organ-
i sm' s vi t al needsand nor m s, t hat is, unam biguouslv.The vit al
177
needsan(lnorm\ ofa lizardor.r stir:klebackin thcil naturalhabitat
arc cxpressctlin thc verv l.rct that these animalsare verYnatural
living beings in rhis hrbit.rt. But it is enough that one individual
in anv society qucstion tlre necds and norms of this society and
challengethem - a sign that rhcseneedr and norms arc not those
of t he r v ho l e s o c i c ty - i n o rd c r fo r u s to understandto * hat
extent social need is not inlmanent, to \\'hat extcnt the social
norm is not intcrnal, and, finally, to rvhat cxtent the society,seat
ofrestraincddissentor latent antagonisms, is far fiom settingitsell
up asa rvhole. If thc individu.rlposesa question about the final-
it y ol t he s o c i e tv ,i s th i s n o t l h c s i g n th a t thc soci etvi s a poorl y
unif ied s et o f m e a n s ,p rc c i s e J r'l a c k i n g an end u' i th rvhi ch the
c ollec t iv c a c ti v i ty p e rmi tte .l b v th e s tru cture u' oul d i denti fv?
T o s uppor t th i s u c c o u l d i n ro k e th t' a n a l ysesofcthnographcrs
r v bo ar e s e n s i ti v eto th e d i v e rs i tr o f s rs t rms of cul tural norms.
Claude Li' v i -Stra u s s a v s :" W e th e n d i s c orer that no soci ety i s
hrndament.rllv qotxl, but rh.rtnone is.rlrso]utt'l)l-ad; thev all oller
t hc ir m enr b e rsc c rta i n a d ri rtrta g c r,rv i th the P rovi sothat thcre
is invariablva lesiduc of t'vil, the Jmount ol lr,hich scemsto re-
main more or lessconstantand pcrhapscorrespondsto a specific
incrtia in social life fesist.rntto all attempts at organization."5e
IN P,pp.2s s-5 6 ]
On the Normative Character of Philosophicol Thought
1154] P hilo s o p h vi s th e l c x e o f Wi s d o m. C )neseesi mmcdi atel v
that rvisdom is fbr philosophv an Ideal, since love is dcsire fbr
somethingthat it is possil>leto posscss. Thus, at thc origin ofthe
philos ophi c a lq u e s t i s th e c o n l e s s j o no f a l ack, thc recogni ti on
of a gap betrveenan cxistenceand a ncccl.
Wisdom is more than scit'ncein the strict and contenrporarv
s ens eof t hc rto rrl , l o r s c i c n c c i s ,r c o n templ ati vcpossessi on ol
r c alit v t hr o L rg hc x c l u s i o n trf rl l i l l u s i o n , error and i gnorancc,
178
rvhereasWisdom is the useof principlesofapprcciation provided
bv sci encef br t he pur posct r f br inging hunr anlile int o n st at ( 'ol
practicaland aflcctive pertection, or happiness.
W i sdo m is t her elor e t lr t 'r ealizat ionof a st at eof hum an f ir l-
fillment and cxcellence,a re.rlizationinrmediatelydcrived from
knorvl edgeof an or der of per f cct ion. Wisdom is t hus clear ly a
practical fbrm of consciousncss.
l init ion and ancient
N ou l e t us com par et hc ct vm ologic. r dcf
conception of philosophyrvith our conlrnonscnscimage.In com-
mon parlance,philosophyis a certain dispositionto acceptcvcnts
deemcd necessarv and incvitable,to subject prejudicesand phan-
toms of thc imaginationto cold scrutinvrnd criticism, anclto reg-
ulate one's conduct in accordanccrvith firrr personalprinciples
ofj udgme nt and evaluat ion.lt seem s1>r ob, r bJe,
m or eovcr ,t hat
insofir as those principlcs are lemotc lionr e'errdav life, pcople
are i ncl i ned t o t hink ol philosr , 'phv as ut opian and ir lle specula-
ti on ol n o im m ediar c r r seant l t her elir r c ol nt t r alue. Cont m on
scnrc, the n, seenr st o lcar l t o t r lo cont r a<] ict r r rjudgm
y cnt r con-
ccrning philosophy.C)nthe one h.rnd.it seesphilosophr asa rare
and thcrcf t r r epr est igioust liscipline. r nd,if it liuesu[ ) t o it s pr om -
i ses,as an im por t ant spir it u. r l t 'r cr cise. O n t hc ot her hand, it
deducesfr om t hc var iet v of com pt t ing philosophicalcloct r ines
that phi l osophv is inconsist entand t ickle. hence a m er e int el-
Iectualga m e.Yet t his judgm cnt , * hich t endst o discr editphilo'
sophicalspeculation,is contra(lictedbv thc lact that philosophers
throughout historv havc bcen the objt'ct of hostilitl and cven
persecut ion,som et im esbv polit ical lcar ler sanclsom ct im esbv
thc mass est hem selves.I f t he t eachingsand exam plcsof t he phi-
l osophersar e so r viclelvlear ed, r hen t ht act ivit y m ust not be
enti rel v l u t ile.
Norv lct us trringthcscscatt(rc(l observations toqcthcr. Io clenv
that phi l o sophvhasanr "ut ilin" is t o r ccognizet hnt it r cf lcct s a
I7.)
 concem wirh the ultimate meaningof life rathcr than rvith imme-
diate expedients, with lif'e'scnds rather than its means..Justas
\\'e cannot focussimultaneouslyon ob.jectsclosc to us and objects
far arvay,rvr alsocannot interestourselvessimultaneouslyin ends
and means.Norv, it is usual - not to saynormal - for people to
intcrcst thentselvesprimarily in means,or vvhatthev take to be
means,u,ithout noticing that nleansexisr only in relation to ends
.rnd that, in acceptingcertain me.rns,thev unconsciouslyaccept
the ends that make them so- In other v.ortls, the,yaccept whatevel
philosoph.yhappensto be embodiedin the taluet and institutionsoJ a
patticulat civiliTatior.To accept, for example, that savingis a means
to a better life is implicitly to accept a bourgeoissystemo[val-
ues,a valuesystcmtotally diflerent from that offeudal times.This
perversionof our attention is what causedBlaise Pascalto say,
"lt is a dcpJorablething to seemen deliberatingalwayson means
and neveron ends,"and further, "Man's scnsitlvitr to small things
and ins c l s i ti v i ty to l a rg eo n e s [a re ] s i gnsof a pecul i ari nversi on
o[ r ' aluc s ."P h i l o s o p h yi s a c o rre c ri v eto thi s i nv!rsi on,and i fthe
comrnonsensccriticism that philosophy is not usefirl, which is
strictlv.rccurate,is intended to suggestthat it is therefbrc abso-
lutely v.rlueless,it errs only in its identilication ofvalue with util-
itv. It is truc that philosophy is justificd only ifit hasvalue or is
a value, but it is not true that utilitv is thc only value: utility is
valuableonly in somethingthat is a meansto an end.
Insofarasphilosophyis the searchfor a meaningof li[e (a jus-
t illc at ion o f l i fe th a t i s n e i th e r p u re l ivi ng nor even rhe w i l l to
live but rtryoir-r'ilre, knowledgeofu,hat it is to live), it cntersinto
competition and occasionallyinto conflict rvith political and reli-
gious ins ti tu ti o n s , w h i c h a re c o l l e c ti vc srstemsfor organi zi ng
human interests.Everysocialinstitution cmbodiesa human inter-
cst; an institution is the codification o{ a value,the embodiment
ofvalue asa sct ofrules. Thc militarv, fbr cxample,is a socialinsti-
lAo
tution that [ulfil]s a collective need fbr securitv or aggrcssi()n.
Philosophy is an individual quest, horvevcr.ln the Historyof
PhilosophyHegel says,"PhiJosophybcginsonly rvherethc individ-
ual know s it self as individual,f br it self ,as univer sal,as essent inl,
as havi ng i nf init e value qua individual. "The individualcan par -
ti ci pate di rect ly in t he ldea ( or , as we uould sav,in valuc) r vit h-
out the me diar ion olan\ inst it ut ion. Philosophv is an asocial
activity.Thcrc are no philosophicalinstitutions.Sclroolsarc asso-
ci ati ons,not societ ies.
Philosophicaljudgment thercfbre cannot avoid casringitself
as a compet it or of bot h polit ical judgm ent and r eligious judg-
ment, w hi c h in any casear e closelv r elat cd. lt is not unusual,
moreover,for com pet it ion t o t ur n int o r ivalr v.Eit her philoso-
phy reinforcescommunal beliefs, in llhich caseit is poiltlt'ss,
or else it is at odds with thosc beliefs, in u,hich caseit is danger-
ous, " P hi l o sophv, "Ar ist ot lc said,"m ust not t ake or ( ler s,it lr ust
give them."
The ups hot of t his <liscussionis t hat t he essenceof philo-
sophicalspeculationis to applv a normativecorrective to human
cxpcri ence- but t hat is not all. Any t echniqueis basicallvnor -
mative, becauseit scts fbrth or applies rules in the fbrrrr of fbr-
mulas,procedures,motlelsand so on. But this normativccharacter
of technique is secondarvand abstractisecontlar,v
becauseit has
to do with means,and abstractbecauseit is limited to search-
i ng for one kind of sat islict ion.The m ult iplicit y of t cchniques
assumesa pluralitv of distinct needs. If phil<.rsophy is a nornra-
tive discipline.moreover,it is prinrordiallyand concrctcll so. The
tend tcrstressone of thcse
best-knovvndefinitions ol phil<.'sophy
aspectsover thc othet: either normative or concrete. Neverthe-
l ess, both a dject ivesf igur e in all t hc def init ions. Thc St oics
emphasizethe norm.ltive:in defining philosophvasrpiritudl mc./i-
cine,thev assumethat passionand diseaseare one and tht'same.
jlt
Novalis sayssomething slightll diffcrcnt *'hen he calls philoso-
phv a " hig h e r p a th o l c ,g ,v ." [...]
A lt hou g h i t i s tru e th a t a n c i e n t p h i l osopht P ostul atesthc
unit y of v a l u c ,i t (i o e ss o , I th i n k , i n a n ontol ogi calsensc,fbr the
Ancicnts also held that the value of action is inf'erior to that of
knou.ledge.Ancicnt philosophy u,asintcllectualist. Knowlcdgt:
of the universalorder is enough to cstablishit. Virgil's linc "Felir
causas"(flappy is the man rvho knorvs
qui potuit rerumcognoscere
the causcsof things)might servcasan epigraphto all ancient phi-
losophics.No anti-intellcctualisthas been as clcar on this point
as Niet z s c h e :' A me ta mo rp h o s i so f b e i ng by knorvl cdge:therei n
lies the common crror of rationalists,Socratesforemost among
them."60In The B;rth oJ Tragcdv,he calls Socratesthe "father of
theoreticaloptimism" and holds him responsiblefor the illusorv
bclief that "thought, follorving the Ariadne'sthrcad ol causalitv,
can penetratethe decpcst abvsses ofbeing, that it hasthe Po$'er
not onll to knorv but to rcfbrm existence."6l(Notc, in passing,
that Pascaland SchopenhaucrshorvedNietzsche thc u'ay to the
path of theoretical pcssimism.)
Givcn that modern philosoph! cannot useancient u'isdom as
a nodel, can it perhapsbetter serve thc infention that animated thc
ancient loversof wisdom? The connection bctrvcen ancient and
modern philosophy is deeper than a sharedidcal; it is a shared
need. Thc nccd that gave rise to ancicnt philosophy was for a
mcntal organizingstructure, a structure at once normative and
concrctc and thus capableof dc{ining r" hat the "normal" form
of consciousnessq.as.This need manifested itself in the trou-
bling, unstable,painful and therelbreabnormalcharactcrof ordi-
nar y c x pe ri e n c e[...]
. creatc tr ut h f br hum ankind. Polit ical anclr eJigiousinst it ut ions
The ancient mind neverthelesslacked the notion of a.tPi.rt-
ual sublect,that is, an infinitely generous and crcative pou'er.
Ancient philosophy trcated the soul as subordinateto the idca
I t i2
and crc at ion as subor dinat ct o cont cm plat ion. I t com pr ised a
physics,a logic, an ethics,but no aesthetics.Ancient thought rvas
sponta neousllnat ur alist ic.I t had no not ion of valuest hat m ight
not exi s t or t hat ought not t o cxir t . I t soughtvalucin being, vir -
tuc in strength, soul in breath. Modern philosophv is conscious
of thc po*ers of mind. Even the knorvledgeof impotence has,
sincc Kant, oftcn bccn intcrprctcd as a po\!.erof mind. Hence,
tlrcre ii no obstaclc to modcrn philosophl's bcing a searchfor a
concretc unit y of valucs. St r m m ar izingt he f br egoing analvsis,
thcn, Iof f er t his def init ion: m oder n philosophvis pr im or dial,
concrctc, normativcjudgmcnt.
What is true of norms in generalis tlrerefbretrue of philoso-
phv. The abnormal,being the a-normal,logicallv fbllous thc dc{-
inition ofthc normal. It is a logicalncgation.But it is the priority
of the abnormalthat attractsthc attcntion of the normative,that
calls {brth a normative clecisionand proviclesan opportunitv to
cstablishnormality through the application of a norm. A nornr
that hasnothing to regulatc is nothing bccauscit regulatesnoth-
ing. The esscnccof a norm is its rolc. Thtrs practicallyand func-
ti onal l v t hc nor m al is t lr e oper at ionalnegat ionof a st at e which
therctrybecomesthe logical negationof that statt';the atrnormal,
though logicallv post er ior t o t hc nor m al, is f unct ionally f ir st .
I lencc philosophvis incvitablr a sccondstageor moment. It does
not creat e valucsbecauseit is called int o being by diller enccs
among values. tlistoricallv, philosophv can be seen as an effbrt
ol mincl to give valueto human experiencethrough critical exami,
nation and slstematic apprcciation of the valuesspontaneouslv
embodiedin civilizationsand cultures,The scienceslittle bv little
l i ttl e l rv lit t le t ur n hum an act ionsint o good r vor ks,The ar t s,bv
represe nt ingm an'sdr eam s,lit t le bv lit t lc r cvcalt he ext ent nf his
ambi ti o ns.I n t hc pr im it ivc m ind t hescf Lnct ionsar e int er t wined,
lRl
s o t ha t m!th i m p e ri o L rs Jdve fi n e s$ h at i s real , * ' hat porversmcn
havc,and horv they relatc to one another,.rndthat is rvhv philos-
ophv takesmvth as its first object ofreflection, In the past, phi-
los op h vg re g ,ru t o fc o n l l i c t a m o n gmyths; today i t grogs out of
thc conflict among thc variousfunctions of mind.
Philosophycan succeedin its intention - to recoverthe unity
ol effort behind disparateacts ol spontaneouscreation - only b)
relating rhe variouselcments ofculture and civilization; sciencc,
ethics, religion, tcchnologv,fine arts. To cstablishsuch relations
is to choose.tmongralues. Criticism and hit'rarchvart'thcrefbre
c!5cntial.Philo5ophycannot adopt anythingbut a critical attitude
to$ard thc varioushuman f'unctionsthat it proposcsto judge. Its
goal is to discoverthe meaning of those functions br determin-
ing lro* thel fit togcther',bt' rcstoring thc unity ofconscious-
ness.The businessol philosophvis thercforenot so much to solve
problems as to create them. In L6on Brunschvicg'srvords,phi-
losophvis thc "scienceofsolved ploblems." that is, rhe question-
ing of receivedsolutions.Norv ne can underrtandwhl philosophy
hasattracted hostilc reactionsthrough the ages:philosophy is a
qucstioning of Iifc and therefbre a threat ro rhe idea that every-
thing necessar!to Iife is alrca<lrin our posrcssion.1-hegoal ol
philosophy is to searchfbr reasonsto live by seekingthc end for
u hich life is supposedto be the mcans.Bur to pursuesuch a goal
is also to discover r(asonsnot to Iive. Nothing is mrrre at odds
r v it h li fc th a n th e i d e a th a t a n e n d to l i fe mal be i val ue and
not s im p l y a n a c c i d e n t.T h e rc i n l i e s one s()urccof phi l osophy' s
trnpopularitv. [r\tS Du Coractcrcnornrctil de lo pcnsiephilosophiquc.
l. lr , 2 r, l r,4 r, 5 r,6 r]
ld 4
Critical Bibliography
Cam ille Linr oges
This bibliographvis dividcd into t$-o parts.PartCJncinclurlcsthe
ti tl es of G eor gesCanguilhem 'spublished r vor ks. I 'ar t 'livo is a
selection of the nrost significant published reviervsol and conr,
mcnt.lrieson these u.orks,This bibliography is intcndcd prima-
ri l v as a r vor kingt ool. I t includesa subst ant ialnt r m berof t it les,
pul>)isherl mainlv befbre 194J,thar are nor fbrnd in the on)r,orher
availablcbibliography(seebelolr',PartTrvo,the penultimateentry
undcr 1985 ) .
S u ccinctbiogr aphicaland cont ext ualinf or m at ion,r vhcncvcr
reltv.rntand available,is givcn undcr an cntrt. Fach entry appears
under t he vearof it s publicat ion,in m any casesr vit h t he cir cum -
stancessur r ounr lir gt he or igin of t he t ext - f br er am ple. a pub-
l i c l ec t ur e or paper pr csent edat a scholar lvc. r nler ence.Those
books consist ingof a collect ion of lect ur es and, / orpr eviously
publ i shedpaper sar e idcnt ilied as such. When applicablc,var i-
ous erlit ionsnr e not e( l ar t he f ir st m ent ion ol . r t it le. ( ) nlv ne*
cdi ti ons involving a dif lir ent publishcr or t r anslat ion,and, / or
revi si onsor addit ions t o t hc t ext s, ar e cit ed under t hc vcar of
the neu publication.
No <loubt,had GeorgcsCanguilhembeen askeclto provi<lchis
orvn bibliographv,he.rrrrulclnot havcincludecla goorJnuml.er
of
l8t
thc titles givcn here - not Lrecnuscof a rvish to conceal anv oJ i ns(. \\'i th thc ri s e ol ri ri onJ l s oc i rl i s m, C nngui l hc m i n l 9l 4 )5 rrnre to (ri c c t
e a n g u i l h e rnh a sa l n.rvsmai ntai ned.r stri ct
t hc m , b(t b < :c a u sC hi \ pol i(i c s ol p.(i ti \nr, rnd l rrer bec anrLrn:(ti \( rc s i s rnn(Lmc ml ' r.r. l )c s pi rt
distinction betrveenthc rvorks of the author (1'oeurre)and thc th, <ha ngei n bi s pol i ti c s . C angui l hem\ c l os t a(.rc hm.nt n) A hi rr nev c r ruv errrl ;
"traces" oI the inte]lcctual and profcssorialcarccr. hc r'.rsat A Iai n' s beds i dc rrpi ,n hi s death, atter s rrl l eri ngthrough r l ong i l l nc s s ,
As a bibliographcrrvho is alsoa researcher in Frcnch
intL'rested rrr func 2, l 95l (s ee J ei n' Fran(oi sS i ri nel l i , C l ni rotnn nrc l l eLruc l /c{:i rj anc ur c t
contemporar\ intellectual history,it hasbeen mv contention th.rt nornoli c ntdans I' c nrrc,/.ur' .ruuro IP ari s : I aranl , l 9i ]l tl . pp. J l r)l l . .i nd ,16411.).
an ac c ( ) u n ta s c o m p l e te .rs p o s s i b l eo l ' thc pri nted " rr.rccs" rrt (:rn gui l h(nr' \ c h* ot 192.1ar thc Fc i ,l ,: N ,rrmal t S uP c ri c ure rar p.:rti c rr-
CanguiI hcm's remarkalrleintel lcctual trajectory was \,\,elllvorth l rrl v,l i s ti ngui drc d: i r i n< .l url c dR av mondl .an' P rul S artrt..rnd P .1ulN i ?an,
^n,n.
pursuing.I am confident th.rt many readcrsr+ill shareml opinion. i 'nong othc r l umi ni ri c s . The pbi l os ophc ran< lmathc mati c i anJ c rn C aui l l es had

cntered thc ' Lc ol t thc prc v i ous v ear, rnd hc and C .rngui l hen c ommnc ul a

l i i c nds hi p rhrt s ,r,l d c onti nue l i ,r rrrnr v ears .

'rrong
Ita r t On e

192 6

W( ) RKs r JyCr ( ) r r ( ;l s CAN crrn rr i l l

"l ,r I hc ori c de l brrl n' rr du prc gl i s c htz l ugurtc C < ,mtc ," l )i pl ,l nre di r(u(l c s

sul : i ri rures , S ,,rhnnr.

( i c o r l r s ( a n g u ;lh e m r cccr ' ,,1 h ;s Nr h td u c.lii rrn rt thc rl cmenrar$r'hrx'l
\\ri tten rrnrl rr th( s uP erv i i i ,rn,,l (l (l c \ti n l J ougl e.
thrt ti mc , rhe
a n d t h t n t h " h ig h sch o o l o l h is n a tive to u n . C .rrrrl nau<l ar1,i n southsestcrn ' \t
D i pl nnrc d' atuder \upi ri eun s w as punuc rl upon c ompl eri on ol unrl c rgrad-
F r a n c e .I n l 9 l l. it th e a g e o 1 scr r n te e n . h r : e n tered thc l ,/rri qnc- sl x{ri al (l l i cs
ui tc s n,di c s (i ,.c n..), i nd bc l i ,rc the ' i rgri i Tarton"c x ami ni ri (,n, $ hi .h s tu'
t h a t p r c p a r tr l stu d cn ts kr r th e h ig h lv co m p e titi ve en{rancc rxrmi nal i ons n)
dcn ts prc patrl rr rhe Fc ol c \orm.rl c S rrpi ri c uru..S omr l i l i r v ears l rtt.r
t h . E c o l e N o n n a le Su p a r icu r . o i th e lvcic Hcnri l \' i n l 'ari s. C angui l hrrr
C .n gui l hem $ n,r. i t \l ),,( c ommc nr,rrr i ,' , ,,1l ),,ugl i (19?l lI.
. r t t e n d e dr h r I r e cc lio m l9 2 l r ,) I9 1 .1 .tiu g h ( b r rht phi l ,x,,phcr E rni l t C harti cr
( b e t t c r L n r n r n u n d e r th e p ,,n n r n ) ( " Aliin ") . AlJi n raurht thr phi l ov,ph! (our s(

t r o m l 9 0 l to lL lll, in te r r u p r .( l ,,n 1 1 b y wo r ld $trr I, r'hen he vol untrri l r 1921

c n l i s t e d ( h e r va st< x, o ld to b c d r a itcd ) a n d scned i n the arti l l cry. In hi s read-

i n g s ( ) 1t h . g r e r t p h ilo wr p h ica l .r n d lite r a r r tcxts. Al ,ri n l tcl hi s studcnts t,>.rna C angri lhc m pl i v rd i mri or rol c th.rt l rrr i ,r rhr i c onoc trs ti c r.\uc thar l i c ol f

l v z e t i t i r r l lr r n r l to r csp r ct r h .\c $ r itjn g !, whi l . cmphasi /i ng d neo-Ki ntj rn N ,'rmale s tuc l t' nts,,rg.rnrz e,lrnd s t,rgerlar rhr. c nd < n c ac h rc rrtc nri r rear. l l c

p e r s p t . l i \ t . a r r cll a s h is o sn { tiu n ( h p tr cilism rn rthi rs bascdon.r l unda- ras onc ,,f thr 1!ri te' r .,1 (h( pl .rv .l e I)era;tre rtc t..rngv ,n.. i
pun i nl ol v i ng
m e n t a l d i s r r u st o l p o r rcr l" le cio r < n L o n tr cle rp oututr') .tnd ol rcpubl i can gen- th( nnm e ol rhc di r.c t,)r,,1 the E L{ ,l c N < ,rnral r,c us tav c Ianrrn.
anrl t.ang S on
r : n r s i t y .A. l a in d ce p h in llu r n .cd Ca n g u ilh e m \ in tr'l l cctuall i fc duri ng thesc ytars. i n Indoc hi na, trherr r barl l c trc trv c en thc
Fr.nth an< lthc C hi n.n.hi (t l c (t ro
I n 1 9 2 4 , ( ' a n g u ilh cm e n te r u r i tb e Eco le No rmal c Supi ri cure, rherc,;rs:n thc di sn i s s rl ol thc
J ul ,s I:c n\ { ()\1.rnm.nr j n t885. 1e() anti nri l i ri ri \r s ones
$tr( c{ ' rs i dc rr(l p,rni fi rl .rrJ r
L r n a p o l , , g r tirJn r im ilit.r r ist n n ,l p r cilr sr . h e r e m.ri ncrll ai tbl i rl to r\l .ri n'\ rf.'ch ourragc o,!\ -,:,,r I ' LI I i I i s.r( i , , |) rt,.s ;nrc l l ec ruc l s

I 11b td 7
e n t e m p i Jd f g u cr r f!' a n d "Co r n p la in tc d u ca p ita inc C ambusat" (C ambu,;atuas
a n o l l i c e r n s p o n sib lc ti,r th c m ilita r y in str u ctio n oi tho E col e N ormal e stu-
d e n t s ) . C r n g u ilh cm *a s a u th o r o fth c fir st a n d co author ofthe second, rvi th a
g r o u p o l i i l l o r v stu d e n tsin clu d in g Sa r tr c.Sir in d li ha\ repri nted the text ol both
!'ngs (scc Clrdr.,,to, intellcctuellc, pp. 326-28) and provides substantial mate-
r i a l a b o u t t h c co n te xt o f th csc cvcn ts. I a n vr n b cl d C angui l hern and others
r c s p o n s i b l ef o r th e * a ctio n s,a n d th e in scr ip tio n "P R " (l i l r "revol uti onar,vprop-
. r g a n d a " )w r s re co r d e d in th e m ilita r y d o ssie r so f thc cul pri ts - rvho rvere sup-
p o r e d t o b e c o m e o llice r s a t th e e n d o f th e ir "m ilitr ry prcparati on"at the Ec<,l e
N o r m a l e ( s i r i nclli, p . 3 3 9 ) . Ca n g u iJh e mp u r p o se ly l ai l ed the exami nl ti on con'
c l u < l i n g t h i s p r e p itr a tio n in Sp r in g 1 9 2 7 b 1 -a llo wing thc basc oftht machi ne
{ u n h e s ' . r ss up p o se dto d isr n o u n t to fill o n th c li,ot <,1the exami ni ng oi l i cer
( i b i d . , p . - 1 6 5 ).
A t t h i r t i m e . h e wa s a ctive lv cir cu la tin g a p cti ti on agai nst thr Ioi P i ul -
S o n c o u r , $ h i ch h ,ll ju r t h r .n p a sscdb y th e Asse mbl 6enrti onal e, on thc nrobl
l i l . r t i o n d l t h c .,,!r n tr ! li,r s.a r r im t' ( se eb e lo w, fir st !ntn undrr 1927).
N o n c , ' 1 r hi\ p .cclu ( l( !l in tclle ctu .r l so r k, th o u gh: C angui l hcm rankc<l* r-
i r n r l t h ; r r t r r i n r h . h ig h lv co m p e tir ilr e r a m in tr tion l or ttu ol l ri ,totn n tc phr
/ o r d f f i , c . P r D l Vig n r u r . r r h o r r lr ld b e co m e a n e mi nenr schol ;r i n rncrl i c'al
p b i l , x , > p h 1 ,r a n L e d lir st,,r n d Ca n g u ilh e m i fr icn d lc rn C avai l l i r rrnl cd l ourrh.
C a n g u i l h tm th e n d id h is m ilita r ) scr vicc lo r ei ghteen months, bet\rrcr)
N o r t m b c r l 9 27 r n d Ap r il 1 9 2 9 - n ,) t a s a n o lllcer but fi rst as.r pri vrte and,
l r t e r , i n p r e p , r a tio n lo r n o n co r n m issio n e do fllce r sl b B ddi u).
C . a j . l l e r n a r d l p scu ll.l, " l a Ph ilo so p h ie d ' l te r m a nn Kcyserl i ng," 1i bf.i p.opor
( l \ 4 i r c h 2 0 , 1 9 2 7 ) , p p . l8 - 2 1 .
Revierv of N4aurne Boucher, I-a Philosophtetl'Htrnann Kclrer/rng (Paris:
R i e d e r . 1 9 3 9 ) . Bc' n r cr :n 1 9 2 7 a n d 1 9 2 9 , Ca n gui l hcm somcti mes usql tht
p e n n t r n r c" C.( ;. Be r n a r d " to sig n a r ticle s in L i brcspropos.l t i s nos qui te
( f i l l i c u l t t o lin d issu e so f r ;b r cs p r o p o s.
/o u r n o l d'.1l ai nt i n fi ct. a compl etc
s e r i e sc : n on lr b t fi,r r n d in I lls F r e n ch lib r a r i es. rhc i i rst i ssuc rpptart'rl
o n A p r i l 9 , 1 9 2 1 ,p r in te d b v th c "lm p r im cr i. co,)parati ve'l .r l abori ruse',"
It l
i n N i mr.s . l \l i c hel A l ex andre(1888-1952),then a l v c i c profes s ori n th' t c i t!,
rvi th hi s * i l i J eannt:,as s umedmos t ofthc edi tori al burtl c n ol rv hat rv asthc n
a w ee k l ,vpubl i c ati on. W hen A l ex andrc Il rs t met A l ai n hc w as tl v t.ntv y ears
ol tl ; he rc mai ned a dev ()teddi s c i pl e thri )ughout hi \ l i i t /,brc r P rofor c l ui c k l v
.rttra c te,lc nough att(:nti on i mong Frc nc h i ntel l ec n,al s that Gal l i mard dc
ci ded to publ i s h i t under i ts P res ti gi ous"N R F" i mpri nt i n 1922 23.rnd
192.1 l.v hc n the j ournal c eas edprtbl i c ati on A s ec ond s c ri esol l i bres prtrpos
sas p ubl i s hed as a montbl y from N l arc h 192? to S eptc mbc r 1935r s rc
llichel AIcrcntlrc: Lelons' tcr-rsl, /.trr.r
Jeanne Alcxandre, ed., En Souvcnir tie
(Paris : Merc uft. df Franc e, 1956), pp 499-51' 1. In l 9l l -12, C angui l hem
assumed thc mai n edi tori i l l i rnc ti ,,ns ol l i 6res proP dr (s c e bel os . entrv
unrl tr l 9 3l ).
C .ti . l l en urd fps eud.l , "La N l obi l i s ati on de! i ntel l c c tuel s - P rotes tatrond c (u-
{l i trntr." l i l rc r p/opoi (A pri l 20. 1927), pp. s l -52. Fol l ' rv c d on pp. 5} -i ' l
I'r r t err s i tnc d ' C . C angui l hem."
P,i ntd on t2{ c r + 6-' l U , undc r tht ti tl c "l a l l ac l i r.rti on (i ' l .urc pc no.
,l tr 15 rrri l ." i i thr rt\r ,)i thc P rot !s t, l i rs t prrbl i s hedj n / ur.T,.' .s i gnfd l ,!
160 i nrfl l rc tui l ! i n,l l .rdemi c s , i nc l rrdi ngA l .ri n. anrl l i ' J l o"ed bv tht ri gn.t
trrrcsr,l hl i r-l i ,untudc nts l i orr the E c ol e N orm,:l c i nc l udi ng C .rnqui l ht' rrr.
R armond A rc ,n.J eanC av ai l l & , C harl esFhrc s m,rnn,J eanl l )P P ol i tf. l l eD ri ' l
N l arr r,u and J e.rn-l ' aulS artn. Thc ' Loi P aul -B onc our, aborrt thc "gc nc ral
mobil i z ari on ol c he n.rti on i n w arti mc ." had been v otc d bv the A ' s rnrbl i r
nati onal e on l \l arc h 7. 1927.The l a* * rs denounc c d fi ,r s ti l l i ng i nttl l c t
tual i ndc pendenc eand l i ec dorn ofopi ni on i n w arti mc .
A c c onl i ng to S i ri nel l i (pp. l ,+ l -a2). C angui l hem i ni ti at.d the peti ti on
at thc hc ol e N (J rmal ..
'A nni vers ai rc s . I" j ui l l et n:i s s :nc c dc tc i bni z ," I.i brc spropos(l rl .t 20. 1921),
p. 18 5.
I:x trac tsl rorn I c ' i bni z ' ss ork s , l i ;l l os ed bv the menti < ,n' !,mmuni c ated
br (i .C ."
"l )e l a V ul gi ri s i on phi l ov ,phi quc . U nc E di ti on du t)i s c ours dc I.r rnethode,"
/.tbre rpfopd' (J ul l l e, I927), pp.200-201.
189
 R c vie * o l De sca r tcis "m u tila t{ a l ttxt" c tl i terl bv P :ul I tmai re (P ari s: C .C . Bc rn:rrl l ps eud.l , "C ommc ntai rts et doc uments A dres rt ; l r I i grc dc s

l l i t i c r , 19 2 7 ) . rl roi ts de l ' hommc ," l ,l ,rc r propo' (F.b. 20, 1929).pp 7l t-7e.

C l . G . B c r n a lr l Ip scu d .], " L a L o g iclu t d cr ju g cments dc vrl cur," l i brcr propor C .G. B trn:rrl l ps eud.l , "r* ai s . E qui s s e d\rnt pol i ti j uc de t' ai x . I' rt' ambul e,"
( A r g . 2 0 , 1 9 2 7 ) , p p . 2 ' 1 il- 5 1 . l ,bf c ' f.opo' (Marc h 20. 1929),pp. l i 5 lu

R c r i e r v o l [. Go b lo t, tr citi l. lo t]ig u . lPati \t C ol l i n, 1927). "l e Souri rc dc t' l aton." Lurry c 20 (1929), pp. 129-)u

" E s s a i r A l a l\' la n ' i' r ed e ...." t ih r csp r a p o slt) ct. 20. 1927). pp. l '11 -+s. R c v i ew oi ;\l ai n, Onur rhdpi ttc ss u P l on' n 11928) l hr: ti tl e ofthc rt' ' i er

A p astich c o i th t r vo r k o l \t,ltr ir c, r vh osr n,rmc i s l aceti ousl v used to i s tak t:n l rom ,\l ai n s S ouv tni rss ur l ul esIo11ntar,"here hc had w ri ttt:n, "te

s i g n t h f tr xt. An :p p cn d cd n o tc r o ca ls th r real authors to be C angui l hcm l i rrgtt the s ni l c ol P l :to." J ul es I agnc au,w ho rernai nsa s v mbol ol the s el l :

a n d S v l va in Br < ,u ssa u < lier r ,lcllo r stu d cn t it the Lcol e N ormal e. N {ost ol abnegati on,dorrti on to phi l omphy rnd hi gh moral rtan,l anl srnri ot:i ned br
' Ihi rc l R epubl i c , hrd bt' c n A l ai n' s phi l ov rphv
t h e t c x t is p u b lish cdin Sir in e lli. p p . 3 2 .{ - 2 5 .Thc parti chc mocks thr Frl l r s v,nre prc l i s s ors of thc earl r

d i r c c t o r, ( lu sta vc L .r n so n ,a n d h is r ca ctio n s t o the anti mi l i hri ri t contcnt o1 te.r c hc rrt the l y c i ' e. Ihat s amt rtar, C :ngui l hc m rtv i etrrl thc pos thumous
pub l i t rti on ol v ,mc of t-agneau' sl ec turc s (s c e bel or' , tu! c ntri t' s tl o* n ).

" 1 \ { o n t a g n e se t lr o n tie r cs." /tn r .' p r u p ,' ( N( ) v. 2 0, 1927), pp. 4{)l '+02. "i \1i \i mc I.()\, s phi l as Ly tuau tnas quc ."Iunpt 2t (1929),P P 152 56.
D c s c ortcIc

F . m i l c B o u t ro u x, D6 l&it& itcr r ) t' | lcsth ct Dcscartcs.lhese l ati ne tradui te par Revie\!.

N l . G e o rg csCa n g u ilh r m , ilive d c I' F co lt Normal r strpi 'ri crrrc.Prafa.. (l c "C al abrc s l eqons (l c J ul es t.agneru. N hc s . La L.abori tuv . l e2l l . ' I i brc spro2or

i U . L i o n Br u n sch ticg , d e l' ln stin r t ( t' a r is:I ibrai ri c Fal i \ Al can, 1927). (l pri l 20. 1929), pp. 190 9).

A 1 - r e n chtr a n sh tio n o fL m ile Bo u tr o u x' s 187'1Iati n doctoral tl i sscrta- Ittv i c s .

t i o n . A n c$ ctlir io n la s p u b lish e d in 1 9 8 5. l he 1927 edi ti on i ncl udes a "t a I i n i l ' unc par:de phi l os ophi qtrt. t (' l l c rgs oni s mc , w ,us l e ps tudonv mt

s t u d v b v Ii< ,n Bn r n sch vicg < in B< iu tr r u x' s phi l <,soph1,"t.a P hi l osophi c l ran roi s ,^rouc t. I' ]ari s ,E d. ' l -es Il fv ufs ' ." i tl ,..r frofor i A pri l 2{ ). 1929),

d ' E m i L : Bo u tr o u r ," *h ich is n o t in clu d cd in rhe l 9u5 cdi ti on; i t c.rn.ho" pp. 191-95.

c v c r . b e ln u n d in L io n Ilr u n sch ' icg , E.r its phi l osaphi ques(P.rri s: l rrcsses R ev i es . Ihe rc .rl name ol thr nuthof ol thi s i tta(k on l l c nri l l erg!,,n

U n i v e r sitilir e !d e lr ln ce , 1 9 5 .1 ) vo
, l. l, p p . z l l -l l . *ar C c orgs I' ol i trc r,.t c ommuni \t phi l ov ,phc r * ho bec ami .r s ol di er i n

the r.!i s ti nc c rnd \rrs ex c c ul rd bv the N a?i si n 19,12.

192 8 "l 'ri 'j tgi ! e1j us c nrc nt," / i bruspropos(j unc 20. 1929), p.2tr1.
"C i rcul ai rc :drc .,s r:c aur mc mbres dc l ' A s s oc i ati on l < l c s c c orn i ux i \nc i ens

C a n g u i l h c m sp cn t th ir r n tir e vca r in th c a r m v as p.rrt oi hi r ci ghtccn month Fl t\es dc 1' Fc < ,l enorm.rl e s upi ri c urel ," I i hrc spnpat (j ul y 20, l el 9),

m i l i t a r r s c r vicc. I le is n o t kn o t n t< ,h a r c p u b lishcdanr thi ng tl uri ng thi s prri rxl . pp. 126 10.

C rngui l hc m i s onc ol thc nrtl x s i { nat< ,ri c ol thi s c i rc ul ar (i nr:l ud

1929 r\l ri n, Ii omai n I{ ol l rnd, (;eorgc s Il i ni ' z c , R rl mond.\rrn

rnrl I-i l i c i c n
'ng
C brl hv e, r ho s r,emrtr) hi v . l ).c n rh. w ri ro ) pror{ .s ri ng.rg:i ns t thr prc s i -
dcnt ol the A s !oc i ari on, rhc m.rthc mati c i .r i :mi l c t,i c arrl . \r rht annual
C a n g u i l h r m co n r p L tc< lh is n r ilita r - rxn icc in Ap r il 1929;{sumi rg hi s usc o{ the
mc eti ng oi thc r\\r.)c i .rri on, i n
p * u d < , n 1 n r" C.( ;. B.r n r n l," h c stir ti:< l to p u b lish ag,ri nbcl i rc bei ng rel ersc<1. J anurf\, h. hrd c ondc nrnc d rhc c i ghtr

1 9 () l 9l
 i:li; i l:= i r: -' = =+jzii
;i1;=t +
==:=i !i 'i
:: : ; ' '
:;i i : -;
:; : j
- .: i j : - 1t . ' Zt,;S: i
vt ii :
:, = iilj :i ji ;: z = :7: ; i: i i=i, l
i ,
:i ,.i 112 ai ; i i :E . _= ;
i ;
:: ;?i it ; : {: ii = = ;vj:ii !i.1i,.;i
ai izj,, - : ii t i
= i : : : ; : =i ,i i:i
zi
=,=i; i : : , i i j= ! =: a1: ZZ1
1 i = , , 2,:==E,
,I i::ii ;r:it:ii:i +ij i
' i:::ii,,t,ri . ia
i; : i; , i E i I =: ; i ?: :
: ! ; i: *lr z ':, i; j 1 = ; :
i =! ii? ; iiii;
i=4:;ii: i I :
tl :? ;,;"
?+ ?
2,1 i
i.
+iri:i:;
): 3 1 r *i !;E
; i t ii -ii!1 i:i il
, =;::-2
i i lg -:'r z:+
;;
, :tl=F=ii
' -::= ; , -!
I i i; i; .:zi)
: E: ; = "= i:
:
: ; ii io"
''. :t;:;!i; -: n =e ,: =:'-= Zz1'--
j; : i=z:ti Z i ;- i i i : t + i r : i i
;: ii;i'
:E- --t;;i; ' -E l;;; i ' : ;: ;j =
: i '= i ; ! i\ i= e = = i: i t;' ;Z i i
iet==trrii;Ji i it =f:l=z.i -t1;=:;+
j:
i=47=++=z: ig'+:: :.;:. i?= :1t
?7 F : *:, | ; :
 -;-
{-;:.' S ! ;; . i
:--'rr';:
; . a --r=
o.! 4:?ol!
-:: i-:i-.::
-
i:i=!:-/- ;:: -: i
=!r
f + ;.. : !
,:::- | :!
1 l?
t rr>-. : , - - .' :
.:i + = ;=
!
rt : Q ! -- - = - ::
: l al l
!-
9-: -- ; ! : ; a= j;
- 'r - ) >e:-
: *- Y=
j:
I --- i I
'. + :
: E ==..- ',i .=;a
*: ",
= =:,; ;^i
-_ .t c 7 a.
-
' z
c : - - ' . Li
= :, 1. ra 1 I r . '
=: :La
;t- /:- r =
1tr-x' =;.:'c -l \;-r-
-' = -c?
^;e.- ::/
E ';^- :;:r
1 ':.1 ; a = I r r ;t 1 i
, a " i+ ::r = -;::;
f:a ai 7; i ^i i :i !
' :: F I; az
a- ii\
t aa -
t
+: I5 i :i i i j iil: a iEi E a : i
:.: = r-: i r.!:1:-,",1 : :=, :t ; ;.
.- .sj,iie
,,4 -i.a i77
!=i=l = ) ;i
-+: :.
i= E;i = ,=t
-= + l; !
-;a ;:-! i
" .;j
-.'.:::a-'=ii
i=it:1t: : j :;::t
=
:ii
==t
: ; ; :
: ;:
i ri
::- i:r:==i!!:tii'; ,: ;:
, = . = i ;::;:==:ii=ii j: ]:
i ii;
.: i ;i! - : i
-: -Jl irj::* i.'-=i;i:=E ':
; i i z t i:;;;:1i'E; i=-, ! ! =; 2. : ' i '
, i i i ;: ; i= ii: : : :!:::: ia:ii= : i:! j:i:i2a ==:i;1,i;. i; r 4i; =
:= :
'; i ;-=
=; : .:= i ::= i ::= ,_-, i: ri =1=; r: ! : =:
ii; =iii :1
i- -. =; =j:
: ::=7 :::;,i i :,:i :.:
+ii:
i"-i1 i!!= is ' i 3 ti = i .? E : .! i
. a-
 \

"l'Allairc D r t' r llr e t Ia tr o iliim r r i' p r r b liq u t p ar C . C hrrensol ." Li brespnpas "fr.rrcc A meri (tuc- S l r l c V ov agede Lav al ,"I i br.{ propoJ{ N < ,!. 19I l ), pp. 519-20.

( A p r i l I C/3 1) , p . 1 9 7 . S i gned"C .C ."

A b ricf n o r e o n th e b o o k, sig n e d " C.C.," publ i shed under thi s ti tl t "S oci ologi c - | c l C aus $ du s ui c i de," ti l ' r,' r p.,poJ (N ov . l 9l l ). pp. 525-10.

( P r r i s : Kr a , l9 ll) . ,/u rut.nl e(P ari s :A l c i n, l 9l 0).

R ev i ew ol l \l auri c c fl al brv ac hr,l c s C ous es

" D o c u m e n ( s r t ju g e m e n ts.Co n tr < la ca p o r a lisa ti ondcs i ntel l ectuel s- Ll ne P ro- "l )i fcnsc rl rr < i toy en - I a P res s e,l e di s armc ment c t l r .onfl i t \i no-j aponi i s ,"

t c s t r t i o n d e No r m a lie n s," / tb f., Pr o Po r( Ju ll l el l ) P p. 124 2s i '1... pnfo' { D ,.. l (r 1l ). tp.567-72.

N c . v r cg u la lio n sh llb ccn e n icr e d a t th c Lcol e N ormal t suP(ri (u( \Pf- S i gnerl ' (i .(-."

c i l l c a l l v li,r b id d in g co lle cr ir c n ctio n b 1 stu denrs *i thout pri or auth,rri za- "C ri ti que et phi l ow phi t: S ur l e P robl i rre dc l : c r6rti on." /,l trc r f.oP or (l )tc

t i o n b y i ts clir e cto r ,a n d th r e a te n in gd iscip linarvacti on agi i nst l tudcnt\ *h.) l 93 l) ,pp.s83 8E.
r c l l s e d to co m p ly lir lly with th e m a n d a to r v mi l i t:ri v trai ni ng. T*'ent! t$o R c v i c x ofP i c rrc A brahan, C ri otw c t thu B al n (P rri s : (i al l i mard, l 9l l ).

a l u m n i oI th c' Eco le ( in clu d in g Ca n g u ilh e m, N i z.rn, R omai n R ol l and ,tn<l

S a r t r c )ha r l sig n td th ir ;xo tcst, .r sh a d tb u r studentssri l l ,]t the [( ol c. i nrong 1932
t h e r n S jn !,n . We il, a lso r r litip lc o fAl:in fhi s rr:rr u:s al so publ i shed i n

L ' l J n i v ctsitisr n d icd lin cin Ju n e 1 9 3 1 . "l c|tun r. D i c adc nc c de l a nati on l i anqai s t - Lc C i nc c r amrri .ai n, par A ron

' A o r h r 1 9 1 4.lo d t 1 9 1 1 .Rive r ie s tr e ' Po sitiv{ ,sdu ci t<'venmobi l i srbl c," Ii l 'rcs ct l)trndi c u (R i c dc r, l 9II)," l ,l ,r.j prop.\' (.J an.I9l 2), pp.42 ' 14.

p r o p o r( Au g . l9 1 l) , p p . 3 5 7 - 5 1 1 . Itf! i es .

" L ' l n r c r n a r to n tlt n n llla n r c d ( i d fn r c,tr .n ir .p r r ( ) . Ithnr.:nn R Li i \l )ul (l (l Fql an- "t .r IJ,1i \rn\
r r(\( r!{ ? ( )tri ," l i l rc s frofo! ( I.c b. l 9l .l ). P P . e9-l (} 4.

t i n e . B n' xe lle s. l9 l0 ) ," /iAr .' JPr o Po i( Se Pt l9]l ). P P . 415-16 In N (^tml ,(r l 9l l . the pac i l i s r l -i l i c i c n C hal l av (.h;rrl prrl ,l i s hedan ar-

R r : rjcr v, liilL r we d b v a n c\r r a ct lr o m th c bo{,k, P . 417 ti clc r:nti tl c d "La P ri x s ansr6s c nc " i n thr i ourni l Ld P dtrpdr i c dro,r, w hi c h

w i t h I l i c h e l Ale xa n d r e ," ' D6 sa r m e m tn t,' se r iede textessur l e'probl i me nrval /i 6rc s propoi s rrmrrari z edi n J anuary 1912 (pp. 36-37). -l h6odore R ul s s en,

l i a n c o a lltn a n d ' ," t,6 r e r p r o t( r JlOct. 1 9 3 1 ) ,p.'f62. though hi ms c l l a pc i l i s t. had publ i s hc d.r c ri ti quc ofC hal l av e under thc

A p ar .r g r a p ho l in tr x[,c( i{ ' n b ! Cr n g u ilhcm an(l [l i chcl A l cxi n(l r. t().1 ti rl c "L.r P ai \ \i nr ri rc ^1 1 N on." t{ uy s s en' stc rl i s s umm.l ' i 7.(l i n rhi \ i s \ue

c o l l r c t j o n ,> fr lo ctm cn t5 o D F r cn ch - ( ;cr m a nrur')l ri val r),Pp 462 67 dn pagc s93 e1. l n hi s rrti c l c , C rngrri l hem s i des qi th C h,rl l av e,as doc s a

"l c Coin dcs ruadcs." 1tbrespnryot lt)ct. 19) I ), p. 48 3 l bl L rri ng arti c l c s i { nc d J ean I c N 4atai(pp. 104-109).(for l unhc r c v c nts i n
thi s (ontrov ers \, \ee bel ou, nro entri es do* n.)
A b r ie l !tn te m e n t b l Ca n g r ilh e m , in r e lP onte tr' (;rcrges D tmrrti nl 's
"[)ocum c n(s . Franc c- Lc s l ntel l ec tuc l sc t l c < l i rarmement,"Irl nJ
c r i t i < 1 uco fCa n g u ilh cm i r cvic| ! o fO. L e h rnann R i i ssbul d's book (l i bl cr l ropdr (A pri l
l 9l . l ), pp.20t 201.
p f o f o r , 5( p t. l( ) l l) .
" E l e c t i o n s a n g lr ise s,"lib r e s lr o p o s ( No t l9 3 l) ,p p 5l 0-l l . l )i s c us s i oD,)l n Irrl rr o{ l c :rn t;rrehenno publ i s hc < lrrnderthe s ame ti tl r
i n lurap., Marc h t!, 1932. S i gned,,(;.(-."
S i g ne d" { i.C."
"S ansp l us dc rts erv c qLr' auparav ant,"
l i 6rc sprdpo' (A pri l l 9l 2), pp. 210-13.
" l n r : c r t i t r r d $ a llcm r n ilcs,p a r Picr r c Vii' n o t l ib r ai ri c \ri l oi s, l 9l l ." I i brerP r.?o'
C angui l hc m' san,rer to R uy -s s c n.f< ' l l ov i ng thc rc pl v oi the Iattc r (pp.
( N o v . l s l l) , p p . 5 l,t- 1 6 .
2(l l I0 ol 1hi ! i \\u(,.nri tl c d "t a I,,ri x ,dui . Il i i s par Ic dr,,i r")r,, C i nS ui l
R c vics.

196 197
 h . n r \ r , t ic le " L r l' a i\ \.r n \ r ( \L i !r 7 ( ) u i" { se c rbovc, ( $o tn tri e! trI i . A c c orJ i ng to S i ri nel l i ((;(;n(i d!i or nt.l l t.tutl b, p. 596 n.l l ), rhi s r.\r

\ \ : , r h N l i . h f l r \lcxa n d n . " \lr n r ,r litc Pr im ir i\c," l l 'rci frol os (N l at l 91l ;, pp i nr I urk s C angui l hem' sc onrri l .uti on ro I hr c onr,^ rrs v pol ,l i \hr(l i n / /br.:!

2 S6 - ; 8 . prop l i n Ftbnrrry l 9l l , undc r thc D r$ ti rl r "S tc onrl c ri pos tc .

l ,,nrl e-
' ,rr
' ' F l , c r i o o s l9 1 2 ," /ib r e ' p r o p o ' ( Ili\ l9 l2 ) , Pp . 259 61. ments rl rr retus de toute guerrc nrti onJ l ." { \c r i b(r!(, s ec ri rrdentrv undc r

S i g ne d" C.C." l 9l 2). i nd.1c onc hrs i on, "Ii nal c en s c pt poi nts ."

" t A g r i g d t i on d r p h ilo vr p h ie ," tl.jth o r lr .Rctu t I'ensci gncncnr I

P hi l osaPhi quc R av nrond A ron publ i s hc d r c omm< nt .,ri ti fal rl 1 thi ' book l et i n / /hr.'

( N ' l i ! 1 91 2 ) , p p . l7 - 2 1 . prop a (Ftb. 1933, pp.96-99), rl i s s c nri n{ l rom C .rngui l hc m' sv i fw poi nt (,,n

l f i d o r le h r < l r c( n tlv b ccn liu n r lcd b r CeorgesB i 'nrl z!l l 3tl ti -l q7l l ), an i hi s. !e{ .\ron\ l l i nroi rc sIP :ri s : l rl l i ](1. l el l I l . pp. 56-5l t). l or C angui l hc nr' s

, , l d e r < l iscip lco { AL r in . Ih e jo u m .r l r Jisa p p u rcdi nl unel e}}..rl i cri t:rri rth r( i c(i on.i to i rdn' r rri ti qu,:, s et t' el o", l our rh ..ri ! L,n(l .r l () I L

i * u e . C a n g u ilh cn r ' s!r jr n d s JfJn llfPp o lite and R .:rmonrl A ron rl to si gntd A rl n. s h,>hrrl l ,c rn i ntrori rrc td t,' .\l ri n br C angrri l hc mr hc n th, r * err:

ri i 'n program and

) n i c l c s th cr e . C,r n g u ilh e m5 ;r r i( ' lc, a cr itiq L ,cof thc .,gri t1o l i 'l i ,u s tudents .l t the tc ol e N om.rl r:. l ,ubl i s hc d v \1r;l arti fl er i r) i /bar

o i t h c < ,m issio no l l) cscJr tc( . K,) n t. Ilcg e l, C omte and N i etusche l rom the prop os .C angui l hem anc lA ron rc rt ti ' hr c ol l c aguc si n ToLrl ous eand. l at.r.

r e q u i r c d r u th o r s, cr cm p lilics th c co n ccr n s of the i ournal 's col l aboratri r\. rr rhc S r)rbonnc .C rngui l hc rr w ns pres rnt nt r\r()n' sobs equi esJ n(l gr!. i n

C . r n g u i lh cm p u b lish td th r te tim e s in .llltio d c. s etc hi ng hi s c areer(s r:el r.l n,rr,/., { )c t. 21, l 9l J l ).

.rrl d res rl

" A l . r r n . P r q ,o sr u r /itlu c.r r r o r ( l' a r i\:Ritd e r ,1 9 3 2 ) , "i ;uropcII(l eJ2),PP I(l (l J0l .
l 9l l

" A u t o u r ( l c Lu cie n 1l( r r , / tb r c' fft) fo ' ( Se p t. l9 l2 ), pp. 416-79.

R r ! i cw o i L u cicn ilcr r , ( i) o ir d ' io t' .2 \ 'rtl !. (P ,r,i \: R j (,i fr, l 9l l ). i nd (hnsui l hc m r,rr ,rppoi ntc dto the l )c (i ( ,' i | ),r,ri I' x the ac ademi crc ar l ' ) ]l - I I,

, tlc I u L ,., /r ./ ( P.\r is:Rie dcr, l 9l 2). Lu(i rn l l crr (186'l -

C h r r l e s An < l1 e r ftt k)l l o$i ng rhr pfri { rl ol l rl l c he had t.rl en t ) m,)nagr /.i br.r profdr. l n thr l .rl l

l e 2 7 ) h a d lo r d e ctr d tsb e e n r h c lib r ir i.m o l the Lcol e N ornrl e Sup6ri eure (rl I9]1, hf $rs s c nl to \i rl c nc i c nnl s , rv herc hc remai nrd { br the nc rt nr,> ,rc :

a n d a n in llu cn tia l in ttlle cr u a l a d r ise r to its studr:nts.as tel l as an unsuc- drni c vc rrs .

r c s s l i r l p n 4 x,n cn t < ,1f{ cg cl in F r a n cc. Cr n gui l hcm publ i s}rctla bri c{ pt'r
n " r r l a c co u o t o l L u cicn I I( r r in 1 q 7 7 . fC onmc nts onl \nd J ,,u' s .1i n,"l ' rns c i s ' renrc nt rl c l .r w x i ol ogi c ." l < ,l l < rr-
j ).
" L I n l i ! r c \ c o l Jir c...e n Allcr n .r g n c.' 1 il' r .tp ..,p o r ( oct. l 9l 2),pp. si 3 l e. i ngthi r.rrri rl e, l /,j rhoJ r.A dru../. i .nrc tqtmr: fti l os ophi qu. (l .rn. l el
R c r i ts o l a r t r < ltr ,r l A h in : str kr r r r n slatcdi nto ( l crmrn: i rnr l urn,i l pl . l O-l l .

r r r r rr r r r c n l' lir lr cnzu r Ijn l[]h r u ,, n l) e r r l crr.ed. Jul ;r'' S chmi dr (B crl i n: "R . l c S(nn(, l r /)rrar (A l c .rn, l 9l ()). l t.i i r,/r' . R c rrrci /c /' c ns c ,gn,.nr,.nr,"i rl ,"
' cin
W i \ t ( r mr n , 1 9 l2 ) . mfh rv ud (l rl ,. l 9l ]). pp. 2 5-27.

1 o P o t t s o n so u cu n cr iscr vc,T h t* ,lt F ili.icn Chal l a\c. sui \i e (l i i nf (l i sfussi (,n l l o i c r.

''S urLrnc Int.rpri ' ti ri ,)n de I' hi s roi rc ." / tbrc r
c n t r e T h tr xL ,r c liu r sscn , F a licicn Ch a ll.tr c , {;corgcs C .togui l htm ct j can frol o! (11i (h t9l l ), pp. I55;6.

I c \ 4 a t .r l, e t d cs tc\te s ( lc llo ' lfr n d Ru sscll et d'A l ai n sur "Lr !rai c ct l i A c ri ti quc ol nn ,rrti c l e bl j ac ques{ ,.rnuc hrrrl prrl ,l ;s hc di n ! tbrc spa' p,t

l i , l l r R t lsist:n cc." I) o i:u n l,n t' r lcr ' l ib r cs I'ropoi C rhi cr no. 1 (N i mcs: ol N< rernhtr 1912. C ,rnr.hrL,(l \ rrpl \ i ptx r,.(l i n rhc nrrt i s s Lrr.,rt/r/' r..r

l r r p r i n r er ic l- a L a b o r icu s( , l9 ll ) . f.ol ,.r, t,p. l l 9-10.

196 199
 r

EL OGRAPHY

" F s s a i s .P a c ilisr n ce t r i' vo lu tio n ," lib r e r p r o p o r ( March l 9l I)' PP l 57-59 t 935
A r cp lv r c Ra vm o n d Ar ;n ' s cr iciq u e ' p u bl i sherl i n the prcvi ous i ssueo1

r ; 6 r e r p ro p o s( se ea b o ve ,lin a l cn tr y u n d e r 1 9321 I)uri ng tht- ac atl c mi c y c ar! l el ]-15, C i ngui l hem taught at the hc .c oi l hl en

" N t o . t e ! t . l le r r ;o r vu p a r lu i- m tm e ( e t co m m e n tc)," l rhr.s l roPor (A pri l I9l l )' ci (nnes. L{ r

' v as
appoi ntl rl toB i z i ers l or the ac ademi c y ear 1935 } 6.

p p . l l ? - 19 .
S i g n cd "( ;.C. ' A cr ir iq u t o fa n a r ticle p ubl i shed l >v Edoual rl Il erri ot i n ':{l ai n. /es /)rc ur (N rl , l 9} 1).' turopc -17(19} 5), pp..+ 4s 18.
r h c n e s r p a p e r It Din r o cr o r co f t.vo n o n APr il l 5' l 9l l . R c ri trr. Frtr.rtr { .,,nr thi ! foi es * ere rrpri nrrrl i n rhr i j u.i i c rrnr1i
' Li brespropos I'.1'\odatnn J t\ dni \ I.1/orn 20(f)rc . 196.{ ),pp. II
" t ) ( l ' O h j . ( ti.,n < lt co n scie n cc i ta co n sci< n cc de l i rbj ecti on ll.

( l \ l . r v l s ) 1 ) . p p .2 7 2 - 7 5 . C onri ti dc V i gi l anc c tl c r Intc l l ec trrc l s A nti ,fi s c i rtes , l .c Los tts nt tr l c t patnnt

A c r i( iq u c o f th e a ( lm in istr a tive cir cu lar si gncd bv N ti ni sttr C ami l l e (Pari s, 1935).

C h a u t c n r p sa g a in stth c cm e r g e n ceo 1 th e co nsci cnti ousobi tctor m'rvement' C angui l hc m w as the anonv mousi urhor ol thi s s i x tv trv o pagc(l oc umc nr,
Ini ti ati on .i 10 P hi l ost)Phlnn
" S u r l a P h i l ,xo p h ie c!n te m p o r a in e - H. Se r o r t.v^. ' pri nttd i n C ahors .The C omi te de V i gi l anc e des l ntel l c c tuc l s A nti -l as c i * es

icmporaiD. (L.r Rrnaissancc du Liwc). J. tsenrubi, lir Sourcesct /cr .ourd'tr dc *'as created i n res pons eto the l i ebrurr) l 9l ' 1 ri < ,tsi n P ari sand the threat

c fr a zc ( Alca n )"'[rl rt;f. ]l (l 9l l )'

I ' r p h i l Dn t) h ft.o n tu ln p o r o mcn pP '151 5l ' o1 frsci s m, and i t rc mi j D c ,l i n ex i s tenc eup to the rv ar. Irs l t.rdc rr ut' rc thc

rthnol ogi s t P aul R i v et, c hai red the c ommi rree. rhc pl rrri c i s t t)rul
' rho
l .angcv i n rnd A l .ri n. D u,i ng th.\( v ears ,A l ai n w as ol i en i l l and Lrn.rbl cro

I9 3 4 atti nrl v mt meeri ngs : C rngui l herr s l i i end Mi c hc l A l tx .rn,l n r,> L,l ,l s rrb,
sti totr. l o. hi nr ,)n rhe\e o((i ' \i on\ (5re J eannr A l ti .rndr,:. t< 1..l n S ouv rnrr

"D.u\ n o u tclu \ Iir r e s fr a n r a issu r le s { ' r ig ir e s rl r l ,rguerre ti brcs propos(Jan' dt .l ti c helA l ts nJ tt: /f{ on' , r.\rc r, /c trc s l P ari s : Merc rrt tl r t rrnc c , t.r56l ,

1 9 1 + ) . pp . 4 0 - .1 ,1 . p.520). Thus , C .rngui l hem hi ms c l l s as qui te c l os r: ti ) rh( i r(ri ,)n ot the

R t v ie r o f Ca m ille Blo ch , lcr Co u se sr ./el o.qucrrcmondtdl . (P .rri s:t{art' comnl ittee. l hc b()ol l c t has thru: parts : "P rc pos al s l or an ,.\gri c ul tur.rl

n r a n n , lg ll) , a m l lu le s lsa r c, I9 t1 - L c Probl i ntcder ori l l i nu dc kt oLteruc I'ol i cy-," a hv o-part apprndi x c on' i s ti ng oi the res ul ts ol I s urv rr on rhc

( P a r i s :Ir icd r r , l9 ll) . "agri cul tural c ri ri s ," i nd "N otes on i n frs c i s t Ittrl v (;c F
' \gri c ul ture ' n(l
"fcan Richrrrl t]loch, Oft'ronded la polit,gu. (Coll. Furopc Rieder. lell)"' / ibr.:r many," rv hi c h dc rl r \i th the rons equenc es oi l .rs c i rr rotal i rnri nni s m i n

p n , p o ' l ) r n . Ie l4 ) , F p . s 2 - s l.
R n ie u . s;g n cd"G.C."

" l l l r o i s m e u n ilcr sitn i,c. lifr e r p r o p o r( Ib r ch )911),pp l -l l 15 1936

l h ir is th c la r t ,r n icle Cr n g u ilh e m s r ote krr l ri 'rcr 2ropos.Though hc

* r u l d rtm a in p e n o o a ll) clo sc to Ala in L n til rht htter'r <l eath,C angui l hcm C angri l hem rr.rs .rpp< ,i nl .rlr(, l i ,ul ous e,rs prol i ' s w rr ol th( ./r,J J f d. ti < i tl ,c ,

b t g a n :r t th is tim c to d ista n cc h im se ll lio n 1 A l .ri n: pa<:i l i sm,as he real i zed begi nni ng in Oc rober l 916. Il ( k c pt thi \ re.i c hi ngpos i ri on unri l rh. l \.gi nni ng

t h a r ' . . ,n c co u ld n o t n e g o tia te with Ilitlti' ( rcc S i ri ncl l i , Gi nl ror,on tntef ol the \"i chy regi me, .r' x l l )c gi n hi s m( rl i c ,rls l udi c s s hi l c tc ac hi n{ .

/ c r t u c i l r ,p p . 5 9 7 - 9 8 ) .

4()() 4(]1
 A V TAL PAT ON^I 9T

progrrn, ol thc Iv c i e - rhi c h s ere "l < ,r' th-

s(i r then pr( ol rhc phi l < .' r,rphv
' ' P . l \ 1 . S < h u hl. I:sa i sL trla fttr n < xio nJc /a p cn ca r c rguc(Al can' l 9)'1)"Iuropc
eom i rrg," rr' Lrcn,:rc r publ i s hr,l .
. { 0( 1916 p
),P .+ :6 -28 .
R c ! i e \v.
(Al ri n' l 9l s)" 1ur?l 1940-t912
o ltcn td n d e
' ' R . r 1 m o n <.l 4 n r n , Ia So cn tlo g ic
' o ' r cn ]f' rr'i i 'c
. 1 ( )( 1 9 1 6 ).
PP 5 7 l- 7 a .
1n rhe l a l l of 19.10.C .rngui l hem tool l c av c i i om hi s t.rc hi ng at thf l v .ac (i i
R c v i es.
l i rul "Lnc , refi rs i ng 1d t(!x h i n the reac ti on.rrt c { )nrc x t i ' npos ed br (hc V i c h!

193'1 rrgi nrr. l 1c s rotc rD thc n, t,,r ol the A c arl enri cdc i ,,ul our: "l h.r' c n"t l x -

comt i al i gi de phi l omphi r to teac h' l -.rb,,r,Fami l v . 1.,)thc rl and"' (rhc nn)tto

ol thc vic hl gov ernmenl ). l k then dedi c at.rl hi ns el t t,' hi \ medi c .rl s todi r\.
"Dercartcs ct la tccbniquc," in lro'our t/u L{' Contlrisintcrndlnndldc Phih\oPhic
19l l ) pp l l 35 I{rrrnon rl A ron, s ho.rl s o.as i n T,nrl oU ru ,)i i h(. ri n)(. rrote ,,1 C angui l henr
l C o r t r , r J l ) cr cd r r .r ) ,r o m ( ll ( Pir i\: lltn r ' r n n ,
'5A - 7 (l 9U i )' rhrn: "Some, l i Lc ml l i i c nd C .rngui l h|m, s ere gc tti ng rtad\ to tak r a modc s l
C r n g u ilh e m \ Iir st co n le r cn cc p a p tr , r cPr intcd i n
'('A i "r
p.rn - s hi c h rv asgl ori < ,ur- i n thc rc s i s t.rx rr' (,i /l nroi z ' rl l hri s : J ul l i aal , l 9fl l l ,
p p . 8 7 - 9 ); in clu < lc<in l th is r ' i( lcr '
p. l a'a).

193 8 In Ftbnrarl l 9a), J (' J nC l \,ri l l i s . r' ho ras ttac hi ng phi L,w ,phr at rht' tl ni -

I vrni t' ol S tr.rs b< ,r|l (then

g at ( l .rmi ,nt-l :rrrand i n A u\ergnt). r' r' tal l ttl to

in Co m m u ' r i"rrl onr cl rl rturri otrt S dci 'tc il' thc S,rrt ,rrnnci n P .rri .: he c ,rn' i nc rtl (l nqri l h,:m t,r rc 1rl a," hi m i n C l c nnonc
'':\rti\it( 1 t (h n i( lu ( tr tr ,lr tio n .'
s le i7 a n r l le i 8)' 2nd w ri cs' PP sl -i l 6 I crr.rnrl.C angui l hc nrw i s l ppornrc d i n A pri l l 9' l l . \\' i th (-i \l i l l es and Lnrmrnuc l
t < , u l o L r sa ind| c p h ilo s< ' | h ic ( \.:
26' l 9l l t A <l 'Asti rr dc l .r V i geri e, C angui l hem $i ! a \ri tc r ol the ti rs t 1r.rc t,)l thr rc s i :
r \ f a Pcr g n cn r t th c m r r tin g o i th c S"ci i ti on Fcbruarv {
(l i scussi ()n
rrfthc "i ntnrs ri nc( rrwrnrc nt, Irh.t(,rft,n,i n l q+ l (s c c S i ri nc l l i , (,l at:r< rtrvrrtr//c
r ttuc //t.p. 599:
l i r , ' t n < , r ctr Cr n g tr ilh tr r ( J,. it6 ) in d icr tt\ th it It
I
(i i l l es I i v r rnd l -rrn(oi s C or(l . r. .1 naus ,.l uw l Fc ! Io l !:rna J rrri .r r.,,ndn.c ftt
i n g i l r r P o r ta n ( . ,,fb io l"g " r n ' l ' so cn lo g tt whnotogi '1tr" l i rr phi l ovrphv"
b1 a tl i xussi on tn ..tuvcrgne1910-t91.1l P ari s : P rs s es dc l .r c i ti , I9901, p. l l ).
h a s b e t n t,r n ir te < lfr o m th i5 Pr in le d ve r sio n l i rl l orvtrl

p.rgesIt6-S9
191?

1939
"C eni fi c ar de phi Lrrrphi c gi nc ral . .t de l ori { tuc . Indi c i (n,n{ bi bl i orr.rfhi qurs ,'

i l l c: ImP ri D l cri e F Bul l utn < I Ia l ,(rl dri l .c rrrrrr/c-\rrorl ' rrfrr20. I (l 9.l 2), pp. I l 0 I l .
\ V i t h C . r D i l lt I' la n r :t. /r o r tl r /c /,,i? ,( tu c.rd d r r r dl r (J\'l i l rn
A bi bl i ogrrphy (l ;r s n,1l fnl s pri ' pari ng tht (c rrl )rrr.rs pi rt oi thc i r
I t , , b e r t e t 1 lls, l9 le )
thc l l i bl n'thi quf t r<.n Lt l c phtl oi + hi 4 rhi ( c (' nrpl c m(nt\ the bi bl i < ' { ,i phv pul ,l i s hc i l bv
I h i s te xtb r Dk h .r ' b ccr r r n r tr tr cm clr d itli (ul t 1" ti nrl i
rhc v(t' ol '\l ar{ i l l e
l C .ri l l i s i n rhc /j ui /drrr th( ptu\rors l rnr.
n a t i , J r a lf in Pr r i\ h r \ o n t co P! l' h n tt $ is r ' r c bi ng
- li' r r l ('use l \ro "C onrme nt.ri rcau troi s i i mc c hapi trcde l ' hv ol nti on.r[!tri (c ," B ul ].tn l c h l .aLuhi
textbrtoL; br
x h i l c C a n g u ilh tr r tva ! ir th e l!( ' c o l 'rIher
(rrhcr subi (( t\ thi t dt:1turc t de S ta^houra2l (l ().12),pp. l 2rr 1t rn< l l ee-1,1.
t h c s . r n( .r u r h o r s,,,n p ir ch "l" 1 1 r a n ( l ir \( h r tic\ - th(

,lo I
402
 i t Z i l:= ii-=1 , i1: ': :i i :=
l it =:i :1 2 i , i z; : i =: ; !7
; =; 7|
=; =z:"
+ 'ii :t=
z : ;- r l : :i7 = = ;1 : i:
Z
. = =::
, ---i : :r 2: :: ;i
a ,=4 '!az r.i = a -- =:
, ;:;l.ij:"=ii ," =tii : i+. i=
=r)=r=:?i::i = -,2i:
"r : ?t ; E i Siarj+1 : i=,_==i
:
:
=:i.
=:j"-
::
;i
;' 2 ' i l =-ii=7:zZ : 1--:
:= :;
: ! 5" . o d i f Zl- : :::l-I it I :: i
' ;: ;zit=;:i?-!i:1iaii.! ;
l::: :
; E tl E Er i l E;i t:1 ii-= i =: : i : .ij-
r+=j F_i T ::j := E= zz,1 =; i i i z ::
: t ; ; =z? :7i z i:: i7: t iii, 1: , =j
ii, ;,) r===:!;i:=
i = 1i =,;:=. a =ii - ,;i i 1 1 =r ;i i i ':
i :
: i=: : ': ir ti i + i - = - ,_ !i rii- :i ,_ j
i :' i :r z
. :
)
-6+i 4i =i=t:i o=*=;iE
? ;,i j
;ii
gF: i: t t ; 1 :;
4a iir+ i
;i'r=;;:ji',=
: : ! ii, --* e i. = :
d : = i: ; i= S : = | +7': I is '=
::! $ ;i i ;:: lli= liali; i?
t'E E 13 -
, ,-'== i;,;1z
t =,=;-i1 ra ;1
1 ;:::i ;i ::t=
; ; i ' ; +'+: : - "1 E
. Eta- = != a = ii
, :izl , i;"2:::i=: u t=?=ilZti;11::
' , iii;
=;i.:
;=i :-1 i: j i: ii: = iz ' i: i =
i1'=:ii;i+-: 2-r:.:v:';';:i
i=zji::;i::ia+;,2i1:;Zii.
'i -ti i = :- i i :t- = :f:ir=:ziift
"":!c::c!:
 I

A J TAI RAT 5T
'NAL

t949
. scicu lc lt) 7 ( Pa r i r: I ts l l tl l es Lertr(s l 9'16)'
{ l e s L r t t ! cs d e Str a sb o r - r r gl,r

pp. 1'll-75.
"l 'ri l acc, " i n Inl m.l nu.l K rnt, I' s uttpour i nrro< l w n n phi l ot,phtt l c ,oruty Jt
l n c l r r< lccl.r ( ith r cvi\io n r . in I o Co n a a ixanccd' /'r rr'(1952)r '\trrcts
.rfti r(i .fi D i !/dtrc (P rri s : V ri n. 19.19).
l i o m t h i s r n ir :lc;r r c in clu d td in th is r c.r d tr '
l rans l ati on, i nl rodu(ti on anrl norc s br l toger K c mp1.
" C c o r g r s F r i ed n ' a n n , f.ib i/ t r a tis: Ca l l i rnarl , 1916)"' Bul l tti n tI 1a
SPin o /' \l'
"P ri \cni rti on,"i n"N l i thi mal i (l uc \(t1,)rmnl i s nl ((l ni di tpra\ntap.rr(;.(.rn-
5 ( 1 9 a 6 ) . p p 4]-'17'
f o c u l t l t ] ts L cttr s,lc Str a sb o r r r2,g
gui l h .ri )," l )! J ei o C r\ri l l i \, R rf(i c ,ntrrnorrir,rl r ,l r pl i i ' s ./* i i ].l t(l Q4q).
Rer ir:s
p. 158.

Pos thumous publ i c ati on ol )o rrti c l f C angui l hc m l i rund among thc

t9 4 ' l
prpc rr l .ft trv C .rv ri l l e' (pp. l ;9 6+ ).

( o h i!^ ''l l egcl r:n l r:oc t," B r' tn .l ' hi s k rft'tt l t phi bophi t n' )i gttus cl ri 29(l 9.1l l -1e).
"Ililitu e t n or n ,cs d t I' h o n r n r r a u tr a va il." i rl l crnol i ondu\tt
'D ci ol otl i e
pp. l l l 2-97.
2 3 ( 1 9 , f 7 ) , p p . l2 { ) l6
frtrac ts l rom rhi r arti (l c $(r. rc publ i ' he,l i t.l l taaz nc l i tt[tdi r. )< r\
A n t ssa r ,r n ( ico r yts I r icd m r n n s lr o l' lin cs hunutns du Inoch'n'\mt nt-
(N ,^. l 99l ), pp. l 6-2().
, / r r r , c /( P i, j' : ( ;a llim a r d . 1 9 1 6 )
t']u['l i c'rti on\ K urt (j oll s tc i n. "R em.rrquc ss ur l e 1:rrbl i mc i pi s ttrmol ogi quc rl e h bi ol ogi t, '
" J ( r n C i v i i l l a s ( 1 9 0 1 - 1 9 1 4 ) ." n t 4 1 6 n n r tu td ts o n ni cs 19j 9-t915'
i n (orrrar t' r.r' dr.n.rl l c phi l ory hi t rtui rri rrr,c r.Lr' \ l tl q. \ol . I (l ' i ri ' l
< l c l a F a c u ltt d e s I cttts . sci cul e l 0l (Pari s: t.t' Il cl l ts
tlc Str .r sb o r r r g fa
IILrrnrnn. l e5l ). ptr. l l l -.1l .
I r t l n \ . l e li) , p p . 1 .tl- ;t{ .
5rrr /n Irns l atc d l i om the tnul i s h l ,r { i c orges t-rngui l henr.rD (l S i ntonf (l J o-
\ \ i r h C . F h r.sr n in n . " Avr r ti\\ctn cn l d e ' ' ld itcu rs," i n i ean C avri l l cs'
dr Fri ncc' gui l hrm.
c lo th io r tt le l< t icicn .. ( Pir i\: Pr cssestl ni tcfsi tai res
t a 1 1 r 1 uct

l q + 7 ) , p |.,\- \iii.
199r ,
S e c o n ( l.( litio n , Pr css(! tln i\l r sit,r ir cs( lt Frant ' , 1960; thi ni r(l i ti ('n'
P a r i s .V r i n . 1 9 7 6 ; lir u r th cd itio n , Vr in l9 u T '
1915' "Fss.ri ssL rrquc l guer prohl i nrt; c onc c rnrnt l r n,,nn,rl c t l c pathol ,rqi (trrc ,"I' ul J
" I ' l . r r r r i t r :I I alb r ' .r ch s,l' h o r n m e ct l' o e u vr e ' in t/l nrori <r/rl tsanni ts 19l q
l i .rri ,,r)\.1. l aI.rc ul r,l rl c s Ltrrrrs rl rS tns b,,urg.fa!c i rul rl r)o(2n(l f(1..
t , r b l i c , r r io n r r lr la F a cu lt d cs I Ittr e s r lr Strasb,,uru.Fr<i cul t l t)3 (P ari s:
Pari r : Lc s U el l esl .c ttres , l 95t)).
|, B , l l ' ' l, r ' r , ' . 1 " 1 7 t. tt") o 4l
'
\\' i th a nc $ "P rrhc c (l ( l .r deux i i .nrc i di ri ,,n."
" N o t c s u r l a situ ltio n l) itc cn F r a n r t i la p h ilo sophi c t'i ol ogi quc " R cvur t/c

n , i r p r t , r tg u c,:r d ,:n r o < r lr5 1 1 1 9 4 7 i. p p lll 12

tq5

1948
''t-t nornrrl c t l . pal hol ,' { i quc ," i n l { .na I fri c h,. c rl .,
-\rr' nt r/i ne< l c c i ntt,rt.
unti l r.r,/,,,rdi n.(P .l ri ' i Lc s Frl i ti onsnrc rl rc rl c srl e l .r l )i rne l ra|\J i v ,, l ,)51).\(,1. l ,
L J | r g u i l h c m h r ( l r r tu r n e d t( ' tfich in g in Str a sbourgi n 1944r fi onr l 'i )+l t
pP .27- ll.
1 e ; 5 h c $ a s in sPtctr u r g tln ir a l d e p h iltxo p h ic'

11t')
ii,,l
 A V TAL RATIO\AL ST

cel l ul ai rc" (pp. 2l l l 5), N ote s ur l c s rapports dc l a theori e c c l l ul ai rt et

c /.]l ;r (1952 )
l n | l r r d c d , * ir h r e visio n s,in Io Co n n o ir so n r t/r
de Ia phi l ov ,phi e de Lei bni /" (pp. 2l s -17) and "E x trai ts rl u l )nrou^ rur

l 'onatani c du rery edu(.no par S tenon en 1665 i mes s i eursrl e Ir\s s embl a.
l9s2
de chez mons i eur' l hc v c not, ,i P ari s "(pp. 2l 7-18 ).

The scc ond edi ti on, ri ri s i e et rugmenrae," $as puhl i s hed br. \1ri n i n
, \i( \ .h o isiE e t p r i' se n te sp a r ( ie,,rgesC rngtri l h.m ( Pari s:
B c s o i n cs t t c n d o n < ,:r Ie
1965,and has s i nc c bc en rc pri nred nunl ti nes i ex trrc \ from th. l i trh edi
I l a c h c t t L . 1 95 2 ) .
ti on (1989 )i .e i nc l udc < li n thi s re,rdc r.Thr brx ,k s rs trrn,,l al c (lj nr, l ri l i .rl
A r c r d c r . ( d it.' ,1 h r C.r n g u ilh e n r .o f c\tr a ( ts ttrkcn l ronr thc srtrkr.t
and Spani s hj n 1976.
h ich r va sp u b lish crJi D rhL cr)l l fcti on "Tcxtcs
b i o l o g i s r s; n d p h ilxo p h e r s,
"
"l a C r6ati on arti s ti gue s c l ,)n A l ,l i n," A c fr. d. l mi tuph\i gut c r J ,t norol c \1
c t d o c u m e n ts p h il,A,,Ph iq u e s"u n d e r h is d ir cctio D l hi s .ol l .fti t)n i ncl odes
(1e52), pp . l 7l -i J 6.
o t h e r t i t l o cd ir cd b y Gille s I) e lt,u zc, lca n Br u n , l r.:nri s C ounds, R obert

Pagt\ and Jacqur t;uillerme. as well as r ovo rclulr.e lnro,lution d l'histoirc

r / c r r o c n c c s , p u b lish u l in 1 9 7 0 7 1 . e d itcd b l Cangui l hcn l vi th studcnts

t 953

i t t c n d i n g h i s scm in n r sr t th e In stitu t d ' h isto ir e d .s sci t'nccsat the ti me (scc

"l a Si gni ti c:ti on dc I' ens ei gnc mc ntde l a phi l o5ophi c ," i n t t D ' ti anl n. dc I.t
b e l o s , 1 9 7 0 r n r l le ll) . Nlo st !o lu m cs in clu d e : li ve-page"Prcscntrti on de
P hi l osoph i cIJ. nenqutre nk tndtnndl e dc I' l i N L:S C O(P ,rri s ,ttN IS C (), teS t),
l a c o l l c c t i < , n sig n cd tr 1Ca n g u ilh cm .

I o C o n n a t s o r u cdc l< tt,. ( l' .r r i\: l{ a ch e ttc, 1 9 5 2 ) P P . t'7_26 .

P rccc< k .d,pp. l l 15. b! .r " l ),l c h.rri on c ommunt rk s trptrrr," ri gned
hv (i ui do C ,rl ,,ger,. Georgc sC rngui l l rtm, Fugc n l i nl . I),,nJ l (i Il ,rc l i nn,,n,
i ncl rrrl crlha*c Lecn
' l \ ! c r t i r { m r n t." r n o n r io n in gth r t so m c o l th c r:ss.r1s
Ibr:hi m l \l adk our, (;rrs r,r|t I4.,n,!1, N l erri tr N l < r,re,N .r\. N i l rD r ,!n,l I tum
r e v i s c r ls r n c c r h cir lin r p u b lica tio n o r o r .r l Pr e \tn rati ,,n(Pp 5 6)i l n"l ntri '
berto Pi nera Ll c ra.
d u c r i o n : L n l ' !Dsa c.r lt viva n r ." p u b lish e dh e r . lor th( l i r\r ti me (PP . 7-12)r
C angui l hrm s t{ ,\r i r rhc grnerJ l pre!enrrti on (' f rhe * 1)rk (1,)n. br rhe
e n b io lo g ic a n im a le ." a le cn tr t gi vcD,)t rhe C entre i nt( r
" L ' E x p 6 r i n r e n t.r ti,) n

n r t i i ) n a l p . r l tr g o g iq u t d e Sivr cs in 1 9 5 l ( p p . l5 - 4 5 );

" l a T h i or i( ce llu la ir r " ( p p .' 1 9 9 8 ) , lir st publ i sh.d i n l e4r, i n the

195!
. 4 ' l i h n 5 1 c1s9 1 > ,' l r h ,: F a cu lt6d cs L e ttr e s d e Str a sh,urg;

" ; \ s p c c $ r lu r it,r lisn r e "( p p . l0 l- 2 1 ) , "lUich in e et orgrni sm'' (PP . I2'1

l .rngui l hcm suc c c ededC .r:t< ,nU .rc hrl aali n the f.rl l ol l e 5 5 ds pr.,t(rn). ot
5 9 ) a n d " l e Vir r n r tt r o n m ilie u " { p p . 1 6 0 - 9 1 ) , thr(t l c.l urcs gi !en .rt th. fhr-
l o,rphl at the S r,rtx rnne.i n I)2ri \. as s .c l l as < l i rec rrrrol thc Ins ti rut rl ' hi s r,ri re
C , , l l i g c p h i l o :o p h iq u c in Pa r isin 1 9 4 6 - a 7 , lo llo \ri ni l rn i nti trti o'\ l ro'D i t\
(1,\ !ci cncts rt drs trL-hni quLrol rhe Ll ni v c rs i tv oi pi ri \. l l r r !nri i i nc (l rh,r..
\VJltl:
" r ! r r r r , , r . r h, ; lr r l' + ,' p h r r l, r n
unti l hi s reti f.ment i n l e7l .
" t r n r r n n .r lcr lf P,r r li,lo g iq u c" ( p P. l9 ' 1 2 1 :), pnri orrrI prLl i shcd' i n

1 9 5 1 ,i n t h ( lin r \,,lu m c o f th e So m n c ,lr n id cLi n,t (orr{r'l ordtrc, rdi tcd

td l :D tmdti on<l u onc + t .!( tuJ h\c du\ Il tl " c t X t Itt" (pari \: I)n,,\.s U nj -
b v t h e s u r g co n Rr n e L cr ich e . th e n p r o lt sv,r a t thc C ol l i gc de I rancc and ' i i c t.r
k.rsi tai resd. Ii r)nc c , l 95t).
t h r r L r p p c n d icc.i " No r c su r le p a ssr g cd c h th iori c l i bri l l ai rr: i l a thi 'ori e

4(Jt,
 C a n g u ilh cm ' s Jir sr r ta tio n ftr th e Do cto rJ( Ltrtres' PrcP arcduncl er ol thr: l i i storr ol S c i rnc r i n l 95l J , and ht bc c ;rme.r i ul l i n 1960. l l c
's ' n(nrl l r
t h t , l i r cctio n .,1C.r ' tr tn l]lch cla r d . ' \ r tco n d cdi ti on sa" prrttl i thcd bv Vri n as prrs i dc nt,,l tht rc adc mv i rrm l 9' /l to 191i .
'cnrd 'icc
i n l ' r ? 7 . I.h c b o o l s* tr r n sh tcd in r o Sp a n ishi n 1975 and Jrpancsci n l 9EE '

F . x tr a ctslr o m th t st,co n dcd ir n x o fth ls bool <are i ncl url ql i n thi s rtader'
" t . e P r r b l i me d e s r { g tr la ti< ,n sd :n s lo r g a n ism c ct di ns l '1 \oci 'nr,' C 'ri rr'c'rde
l . l / l r a n . . kr < r ilir cu n ,r r n r i/,:9 2 ( Scp t.- Oct. 1 955).pP 64-81'
I h c le ctu r c, p p . tl4 7 3 ,islir ll,xr cd b ya d iscrrssi on'P P '7l 8l '
" O r g t r n i s m cse t m o d a l( ,sm ica n iq u o : Rillcxio n s strr l a bi ol ogi e t:arti si enne'''
R c " r r cp h tlo n p h i< 1 u tl' 1 5 ( 1 9 5 5 ) p p 2 8 l 9 9 .
N , , t a r .:r ic., b u r ,r n a n r lr \is o l l) csca r tes "Si rth \l c(l i l 'i l i or)," tl i th i
'
d i s c u s r io n o l N4 r r r ia lGu e r o u lt s in tcr p r e ta tiorl ')i i t i n the second vol unx
/b r r Jr c< /csr < r ir o n s{ Pa r isAuLri
o f h i s Dcsco r r cssci,n : er'195l )'
"Lr P hysi ol ogi eani mal r au X V l l l ' s i i r l e," i n R c ni -l aton, ,tl ., I l ts toi rcoLtni rul t
v ol . 2 { P ari s :P r.\,i ts U ni v ( r\i t.ri rc \(l c franc e, 1958). pp. 59 J -619.
t/crrcic nc c r.
Llnthrngrd i n thr' ' rri orrs rc pl i nt' ol rl rc rv orl : i nc l url rd i n thi : rc rrl c r.
''La P hi l os ,phi e bi ol ogi c l oe,l ' ,\ugus tcC < ,mteet s on i nl l Lro)c een Fri rnc e:urX 1X '
si i cl t," B ui l c th r./c/o 5o< ti rtl runl ai s e dt phi l a' ol ,i tc 5l (l 95tl ), pp. I l -26.
r ni ttoi rc
R cpri nrc J i n E tu< l cri phl l 6ophi (./., nLn(,ri (l 9ar8)r { \rr.rc rs
l rom thi s rni c l c rre i nr l udc rl i n thi ' ,c .rrl c r.
"Qu'est-ce quc h ps y c hol ogi c ?"A c v ucJ c ,rri rdp} rri .iu. .r ,/f ,n,rdi c 6l .l (19;8 ),
pp. I2- 2 5.

t.e rturc gi !en.rt (h( (,,l l i gr phi l ow rl ,hi qu( .,n l ){ ,(mhef l N . 1< )56.
1956
I:ol l orc i l l ,r "R emrntuf\ \ur' Qu c rt ,, quc l .r prrc hol rgi e?"' br R . I' ages
(pp. 128-14). and.r c < ,nc l udi ng"N otc " bv C .rngui l htrn. l \rbl i s hc ,l agi n i n
h so p h iqu"l '+6 ( 1956)' pp l l i -17
" l a P ( ' r s i e d c lte n e | . r ich e .' JRcvr c,"ilo
thr: C o hi c rrl our /' ona/rrc i n 1966 (rrpri rrl d i n 1967).rnrli n l :rul c s < l hnoi rc
A { ,m m r r \ r r :r its o l I cr ich .' s in te llcctu.rl tontri huri crns. tbl l ow i ng
rt tl c p l rl t rop,brrJ c s (196S ).
t h . h n r ( ,u s su r g fo n \ ( lfilth t- ,r n g u ilh e m h ad ri i tu*tl Lcri che i n Ic N or ' i r,' r..r
l r,rns l atc di nto E ngl i rh i n 1980. l nc l uded i n thi s ,rader.
n , t l c r l c p a th o lo yq u c r n < l h a d p u b lir h tr l ao rrti cl t i n a book c<l i tc<lbv

t('i.hc in l9 5 l.
1959
l9 5 ;

"Pl l hol ogi e (' r phv s i ol ogi cdr l a thrroi rl c aL,X IX ' s i i c l r," I/r.r/i tr9 l or I952 58
( ;. l l otrl i gand et.rl . //onnorti <i
" S u r u n . F p isti' m o lo g ic co n co r d .r tr ir c," in
(l trs9) . pp. l 7-92.
Gavarr Bochci rd: ! tu,|.\ ttu Philon|hk ct ./ frr J'r r"cn"r (Prri': Irre$cs
'r.r'f
1l,rs c ,lon .r l c l turc B i \.n .1t thc i .rrrrl re de Il c rl c r i ne, Ll ni ' c ri i r\ ,rl
U D i \ f r sitr ir ts ( if F tJn ( r :, 1 9 5 7 - )PP.
. l- 1 2
Strrsb< ,urg.on l anuary l { ). I95u. R rpnnred h E rul tt J hi s toi rttt dc phi l os o
" F i , n t c n c l l c, p h ilo v) Ph c tt h isto r icn d e s scie n ccr,".l nno/cir/i I'l Jntcrsi tldc l \tri '
phi . .i . ! r(k n. c ' (196u).
2 l ( 1 e 57 ) , p p . ) 8 + 0 0 .
/ho/i : hr,l as i ts rrl rti rl c ' R c < rrri l r|l ,sti Iaux (l ( l l n\i i tut .l ' hi i r(,i i .,l (\
R , :p r in t| r l in I r u ,1 r, J h ,Jr .,Icd r r i. Pi' l r ol tr. th\ !.i t'(.r 1196$)'
sci enr :esc r rl es tc c hni ,l ur s rl e l ' ti ni reni rt rl c l rari .;."J h, l i rs l ol um (193.1)
appcaredi n l 915. publ i s he(lb\ thc "Li l )ri i fi c fi l i \ A 1(rn," tht mrj or I renc h
t9 5 8
publ i shc r t,rr phi l ov ,ph\ i n P rri s .l r thc ti rne, undc r tht trl i t< i rs hi p rrl { bc l

r In th! l rri t rnrri ({1rl l crd!mr R $, thc i ounrl tr ol rhr l nrl i ri r,l ' hi rr,' i r, rl c s s ri rnLt,i rrri rs l frhD i rl r).\.
t . r n g u i l h t n r s a ' e lcce r l a co n .l,,r r r lin g n u r r h

. lr o +l r
 ! I
CR T CAL B ALIOGRAPFY

"L'H omme et l ' :ni mal ;,r poi nt de ruc ps y c hol ogi que s c l on I)anr i n," R c v uc
( ) t h e r v o lu m e s t' cr c p u b lish cd lo r th c ye a n 1935 1935 and l 9 ]?-18' thcn
i n 1949 (vol ume 5' .l 'hi sto i dc ss .i enc es1l .l (1960), pp. 8l 9' 1.
p u b l i c a ( io n wa s in tcr r tr p tfil b y th c wa r ' lt r cappe'rrcd
tl c tranct l hrce orhcr Reprinted in I.udcr d irkbn( d h fiilosaphic ,/,:t trirnccr ( l!)68 ).
< l a t c d 1 9 4 3 ) .p u b tish e db ) th e Pr ( r r cs lln n e r si tai res
(i aston Bachel ar<lrvas Review of / l'c .4urobiorray>hrol Charlx ltortin (N($ )brl: l)ovcr, le58), .'1r.hr'vt'
v o l u m c a te r e p u b lish . tl' r e la te < lto r h e ,vcarsI hen
l 95l (1951)and 1955 i ntunauonal esd' hi rtorrct?ess ri c rrc r l 3 (1960). p. l 5?.
t l i r e c t o r o fth e In stittr t: in 1 9 5 1 ( ( lr te d 1 9 49-50)'
vol R cvi cu of ttentl ey C l a* . Ow s ei Temk i n, w i l l i am L. S trau,' .J r..eds .. Ii nrun-
( 1 9 5 2 ) . l' h e la st vo lu m e r .r p p e a r e du n d e r th c cdi torshi pofC angLri l hem:
vol unr l l {1960) i 'r n!t' of D rrrv i n l 7J ;-1E ;9 (B ,r)ti nrorr' :j ohns l l opl i ns tl D j trr\i ty P re\\.
u m e e (1 9 5 2 - 5 8 ) in lt) 5 9 , to lu m c l0 ( 1 9 5 9)i D l q60'
14 (1970 ?l )' (hc l ast < lhi s rc n,:.16 ni rn.rr l l (1960), pp. I57-59.
19591,.1rc hi v cisntern.l ttanol es
1 9 6 2 ,v o lu m c l2 ( 1 9 6 6 ) in 1 9 6 8 i vo lu n le t I I (1969)i nd
dci another R evi e* otAl v ar E l l egarc l ,D arw n and ttu Gtnc rol R c o/c r (C otc borg: A l m(l v i \t &
t o a p p c a r .d ir l so a s sp ccia l issu cso fth e Rr vued i i {di 'c "k'n'cr'
( h c Pr c\\c' sL In n ,t' fr ir iires<l c Lrante i n l e70 and 1972' Wi cksc l l s , 19513).,l k hi ' /t !nt.tnati otk tl tr dfi ,1to,rc ,/c i r.i c n(.! l l (19(,()).
i o u r n a l p o lr lish e r lh r
et lc PhilosoPhrcJ'\ J'ie"'J (1968)i extr:cts p. 159.
Reprintcd in I1tu../{rd fi
'srotc
and thc S oc ra/S tene(I' hi l
R cvi ex ol C onrv avZi rk l e, E v ol ur;on.tl orti an B i ol o11.v
1 r ( , mt his ir ticte a r e in clu d e d in th is r e a d e r '
adel ph i .r: U ni v c rs i tl ' ol P enns y l "ani aP res s , 1959). l rLhi v es i nrc rnatnnLtl c t
' ' A r e r t i s s e m tn t." /h a lisg to r 1 9 5 2 - 5 tl( 1 9 5 9 ) ' p l '
a hi rtus I'ht'bi r . des s c i .n(s I ] (1960), pp. 159-60.
L l nsig n cr l.An n o u n ce m e n t o f r h e jo u r nrl ': rraP pcaran!( 'rfter

o l s e v r :r r l ye a r s.
R cvrtcrl c /'cnsci gn'm.ntsuP i '
" l h e r a p c L r tiq u ee, xPa r im (n ta ti.r n ' r e sPo n sa b il i t(r," l 96l
r i e u r I ( 1 9 s9 ) . PP l3 0 - 1 5 .
1968)'
R r p r in te d in ltu Je s< !' h n tr tr ce r d c p b ilo sopfr;iJ'r rci cnccri
( le's6l ecti on nrturel l e " en l 85tt: ''l 'fcol e dc Montpel l i er j ugtre par A ugus te C onrti ." l c S rd/pc i l l ' + .I (1961).
" L e ' C o n c e Pts ( lc' lu tte Pr ) u r le xistcn cd e t
pP.68 -71.
Charle r nar* et Altrtd Russcl wall'rc e ," Confifttu\ du Polorstlt h l)dtou
'n Papc r pr|s ented rt rhc "X \rl ' C ongri s i ntLrnari onal rl hi i rr> i re dc l a
v r . r c ( P.r i* 1 9 5 9 ) , { r ic D' n o . 6 1 .
on JanuarY mi dcci ne" (,\l ontpel l i c r, S eptc mbc r 22-28, l rl 58). R c pri nted i n E turl ,:r
P ub lic ltctu r e g ivcn a t th e Pa la isd e Ii D'couvertc' i n P ari s'
e r <L rc/cn'6 (1968)' r/c rs c i c nc c(1968);
d'hi sroi rctt tl c phtl os ophi r: s i nc l uc l edi n thi s rc a< kr.
1 0 , 1 95 9 . Rcp r in te d in f.tu d e sd ' h sa tr c Phi l dr.'P'1i'/?J
c
C rl l i mrrd' 1951)' "l r P hvsi ol ogi ctn A l l rm.rgoc ." "J rr' ft\ i c t)l c s rI l r rc .ondt peri rrl c ," ' hrh-
R t ! i c u o l i\la u r r ce D.r u m .r s,e d ., ,,r ' r ,) r ? iif ld r'n'..r tP ari s:
ni qurs rt probl i mc s ,l t l a phl s i ol ogi e au X IX ' s j tc l c .' i n R eD i l ;ton, c d..
A r c h i w \ n ttu n a tio n o ll ,:l' h tsta u de e s sc' cn tcsl 2 (19;9)' P p 75-82'
l l tttoi r c gi ntrol e d.' t()me l l l : 1., S o?nc . c antc npotui n., \\)1. l . It
' .,er.c r,
I1l 'n(;./. (P i ri \: P rrs rL\ U ni v ers i (ri rc \ (l c Fr.rnc e,l e6l ), pp. a75 7l l ,.t7l J -
1960
80. 180 81.

d'6pi st6mol o LInc h;nged i n the v rri (N s edi ti ons ol the bool ; i nc l uded i n thi s rearl er.
C a n g u i l h cmb e ca m cr m cr r b e r o fth e Co m m iss i onde phi l osophi c'
nati onal dc "N i cessi te rl r 1a' di l l i rs i on x i enti fi qrrr' ' ," R ev ut & Itns c i gnc ntnt l
g i r c t d ' h i sr o in d cs scie n ccso l th c Ccr m ite n ati onal of rhc C entrt ' upi ri c ur
ot rht c"n' (l q6l ). pp. 5-{ 5.
l a r e c h c r c h r ,scicn tilir lu c ( CNRS) tlu r \ca r ' llc remaj ncd a m(nrl )cr
to l 97l fC ommcnts l ol l ow i ng th| l c c rurc r{ t)l i ri er C (x ri df l } c ao(.gi r(1."t I l )i l enl mr
m i r s i o n u ntil h is r ctir e m r n t in 1 9 7 1 'ch a ir in g it fron) 1967

4 ll
4rl
 A V IAI RAT ONAI 9T

D h j e c tn itr lsu b ie cti!it6 d c la m cca o iq u c stati sti (tocet I'cqunal ('ncc c.'brr- P aptr prrs entc d;t thr:5v ntpos i um,,Drhc IIi n(r.\ .,l S r.j (nc e,ar tl )(,ti D i ,

n i t i q r r c cn r | t in k) r m r tio r r r t < n tr o p i,:.' Bul l ctn l a -\.r.,i .i l r.l ,,(dtrc J,j vers i trof()x i ord,htl d(,nJ ,,h9-l j . 1961.un(l c f rhe.rus pi c c sol thrt)i !i \i on
p l i l o J op h ,?s I 1 1 9 6 1 ) ,p p . 2 0 3 - 1 0 in ( l ,1 6 . ,,f Hi rton ol S c i c nc c ol the Intc rnati on.rl Ltni on ot rhr I Ii s tor! .rn(l p|i l oi

f C l a u d c B on n e ln r . "Ricn n e la i\sr it vo ir q u e Sartrc do i endrni r 'S artrr,' " ,,l rrJ, ophv of \r:i enc e. R c pri rt.(l i n I:ruttestl ' hi :toi rcc t tl c phtotophi c l c s s c i c nc c s

/ c t r r c r, Sj,,,t,,r /,r , llu Jtg r /.,lin . ll- 1 7 ,8 0 a ( ]()61).pp. l l l 4.l (196 8). uD dfr rhc ti rl f "l \l orl i l c s c t rnrl rgi L,srl ansl a rhr our c ne c n bi ol rg;r,...
I n clu d cs se g m cn tso l .r n in t( r vi( a ! r ith C angui l hcm concerni ng S,rrtrt "l ntro<l uc ti on. La C ()n\ri ruri on dt l a phrs i r,L;gi cc omrrrt ri c nc e." i n (.h.rrl i ,r
a t t h e tim r th c\ \e r e b o th stu d e n ts a t th c Fcol e N ormal r:. K av s c r,c rl ., t6rs i o/ogr (P ari s :Ldi l i on\ nr(!l i c atesFl ,rmnr.rri on.l e6t), v ,)t.
t.
pp. I l -4It.
| 96- R rpri nrrd i D [tD J r\ J h' noj t. t! J r
fti h)s ophn,J .\ !.,fr.r, (l 9r,l t), i n,l
i n th c s c c onrl edi ri orr rrl K av s er' sf/rr!o/rar (P rri s : t trnrmi l ri on, l qTo),
w i t h ( 1 . I ap a s$ d e ,J. liq u cm a l, J. L llm a n n . "t)tr D i vel oppcmcnt .i l '6vol uti on pp. l l -50; ex rrac ts l i { ,m thi s arti c l c rr.e i nc l uded i n thi s re.rder.
i o X I X ' siicl.." L la lis l1 lir le 6 0 ( 1 9 6 2 ) , pp. l -6s. "l 'hi sto i re dos s c i eni :c sdanr l i reuv n,i pi s tc nol ogi tl uc dr,(j ;rs ron l ].rc hc l arrl .,.
C an - q u ilh ln rc,' n d u cr td a r r tklv scm inar rt thc Insri rut ri 'hi stoi rc des .{nnot.l & ntni rc rs i i tl . n/r,1 j t l 96I ). pf. t1_ t9.
s c i e n ctr e t < lc tcch n iq u cs< lu r in gth e a ca < kmi c )ears I958-59 .rn(l1959-oO, Repri ntrrl i n E tudtsJ hi s totret,]a pfri toropi ri der
d nrfn..j (1968). tr.rns
t r i m a lk th r ce n ttn n a r y o l th c p u l) licitio n ot D arw i rs O.+tn d/ Spfti .r (rs l .rredi n1., Ital i an i n 1969,and C enn:n i n 1979.
c x p l a i ne d b r Cr n { u ilh cn t in th . !' Ava n tp r op,)s,'ip. l ). l hr i rti cl ., i (,i ntl v "l )i .1l ect i qu. c r phi l ov ,phi e rl tr non c her Gas r,rnB :c hrtar< 1."R c v uehttrnori onol c
; i g n c d l' 1 th c liu r .r r r th o n , r ,r s r r :p r in tr ,r a
l r ,r srr.rl l booL, /)u D ,i ,/op2crncnt t. ph i l o' oph 66 l t96\ ). pp. 11i -5t.
^.
r l i l r o l u r n n a u l/1 ' r iicic ( l) .r r ir :l' ]r e sr e sL lni rcrsi tai resdr Francc, l 985). R epri n(c d i n 1:.uJ c Jr h i s k )i t.t .tc i t< .aphx ,./i ,rri ,i nc c r. ti ans l :tett i rrt,,
th
" l a I , l o n s tr u o sita.t 1 ( .m o n str u e u \," Dtr a lir c.l0 (1962), pp. 29-.+1. It.rl i in i n 1969.
U a scr lr > n ,r lcctu r e g ivcn r t th c ln stitu t ,i cs hrutcs i 'tude' dt B cl gi que. "(;aston ll a.h(l i rd et l es phi l ,x ,,phts ." 5c i c nrr,l .+
{ rl arc h-A pri l l 96l ), pp. 7 t0.
i n t l , u $.1 \.,r n l:r :b r tr .r r r9 . Ie 6 2 . ttcp r in r t\l i o thc seconrl ,rl 'ti on,, i r) RepriD&11in Irurl.r {/hnare ct }L phto;qhr,/rr l r'cirici. {r.rnslrtcrl into
C o , n d ,$ d ,.r ./. /d fi. ( 1 9 6 5 ) . ItJl i rn i n 1969.

I C , , n r m e n ts in ] lg r ig o tto n . Ph il' ,so p h iet9

, 6 2 : R appon l c .tl . Iti cnnc S ouri au.

p r i s i d en t h iu r v ( Pa r isr Nlin i\tir c d e I' id u rrti on nati onJl e, l n!ri tL,t P6dr 1964
g , , g r ( l u cNilio n a l, l9 6 l) , p p . i- .1 .
i \ ' l in r co g .r p h cd . "l Ii \t.,i ft. des r(l i gi ons et hi ,u,' i r( dr! s c i enc c \rtms l .r thi ori c
< l u l i ti c hi s me c hc z
Augu(e C ,,mte." i n l l i l onoc s ..tl c ton< trc ,(i ,rri rot. j. 2: L' l v enturc.t. I,c \pri l
196 3 (l ']aris :l i rmann. 196.r).pp. 6.1-s 7.
C onl nl ,uri oD r(, rh. t(\1!c hri l r i n honor ol rht. hi s t,,ri .rn oi s ci c nc t
' ' l h c R o l e o 1 An a lo g ics a n d 1 1 < xlclsin llio li) si cal I)i sc(,vcri r5," i n A l i sl ai ' Al exa nrl reK oy ri : ( l i t92,l q6.l ). R epri D r.(t i a t trx tc srl .hnare
et phi l oty hi c
C a m c ro n Cn ) m b ic, c( 1 .. 5 ., r r it. a h d r 9 . (London: l {ei ncm,rnn. 1963), (i .! i .i c n..\ i 1968).
''I c C onc ept dr rrl l ex e au X l \, ,i ec l e,"
PP.507-21). i n K .t . Il orhs c hrh, c rl .. tbn /nrA oorr.

4 t4
 in ll unl l 9 (1968i ; c x trac ts from (hi s arti c l e are i nc l uc l edi n thi s reader.
b t : B cr 1 lu : Dte En o icklu n g lcr h o n r in cn tokn P hrsi oh!1i c
"Gottl i j ed K ol l er, D as Lc bendc t B nl ogenJ ohannes .tl nl l c f/d0/-/85,l i ." /rr 56
F isr h cr , 1 9 6 ' t) ' PP l57-67'
/ o l ' ! u n d tr r ( Stu n g r r r :
on S eptcm' (196s)p., 110.
I n F r n ch . Pa p crp r e r cn ( d a l a sr m Po si um hcl d i n Mri nster
tt\ \'i rntt\ Itev i eu.
b c r l 8 2 0 . 1 9 6 2 . RfPr in tcd in Etttd e sI' h ttotre u 'l e fti l osoP hrc
" fh6ophile Cahn, 1a Vieet I'oeuwed'Etienne Gcoffro.vSaintHilatre," Isr 56 ( 1965),
(re6lr
).
' ' C a l i l c t : I a Sig ' ) i{ icitiDn d t l u r r c ct l' } le ron dc I'h('nrnrt''' '4r'hncs tnr" pp.2.{-{-46.
'x
d c6 r .icn .cr I7 ( 1 9 { ,' + ) PP
' 209 22 Revier'.
n d t i o n .,lcs.!' h isto ir
i )n thc lgrdgation de phtlosophi.. I96i: R,rppon <lc tl. GcorgesConguilhen, prisidcnt
L ectu r e g ive n a t th c tn slitu t lta li' n . in Prri r, on June I l 96f
R cpri nted i n du j un l P ati s t Mi ni s trrre de Ic duc ati on nati onal e, l ns ti tut P i dagogi quc
o c c a sio n o fth c fo u r h u n d r e ,lth a n n ivcn r r y ol Gal i l eo's bi rth
(19681' N ati onal , I965 ).
EtuJes <1'hrnirc a <tt philosoPhicdc' \.rcn1s
vu e p h ito wr p h itlu c s ur I'i nadaptati on tl ans l c monde Mi meographed.
i C o n r m e nts in l ' Po in r d c
l 3'+-l e ''Philovrphie et Sciencc," Rcvu?dc l'lnscignentcntphiloirphiqu. 15.2 (Dec. 1964-
c o n t e m p c,r a in ."Rcr h e r r icro Jib o r r ( l\' la r ch 1964)' pp l 09-58 and
C a n g u ilh e m \ t o r n m cn r s a r e p a r t o l th e rl i scussi onon a paper prescnrcd Jan. l 96s ), pp. l 0-17.
A n ex c hangew i th A l ai n B adi ou, broadc as ton Frenc h educ ati onal tc l e-
L ' v P i e r r e Co lin b ca r in g th e .1 b o ve - m e n tioncdti tl e'
vi si on, J anurrr 2 ), 1965.

196\ "P hi l oso phi e et V i ri te ," R tv ucde I' tns c i 6l nc ntntphi k rophi gue15.4 (A pri l 1965-

l \1rv 1965), pp. l l -l l .

d c ]a vir ( 2 n d e d ' I' a r is:Vr in ' 1965)' An ex c hangc ,i n the rv ak eol tbe di s c us s i ons i th A l ai n B adk ,u i n J anuarv
L a C o n n oissa n ce
1965 (s ee abov e entry ). on Frenc h educ .ti onal teLev i s i on,* ' i th A . B adi ou,
R cp r in t o l th e lih t r llr tir ) n . p u b lish e d bv l Lrchettc i n l 952 rri th a nerr
strrtl l D . D rev fus , J l l . Fouc aul t,J . H v ppol i te, P . R i c oeur, broadc as ton Marc h 27,
' ! \ v e rtisse m e n t," vr m c a tld ir io n a l r e le r e n cesantl tht''rddi ti on ol the
l hi s edi ti ('n l 9(,5 .
" L r N{ o n 5 tn r o ' iita( r lc m { ' n r tr u e L r x" fir st prrt'l i sh"1 i n l 962
b r s b e e n r .p r in te d m a n Y tim e s.
in 1966
Extr a cls lio m th e stco n d tr liti' r n o f thi s book ( 1939) arc publ i shed

l l ) i q r e a d cr . il
l e N ornal c t h pothol og,gu.(P ari s :P res s esU ni v ers i tai resde Franc e, I966).
" L ' l l c r m me d c \' a sa tr :< la n sIe m o n d e d + Co Perni ': l s'+]"' i n C ontntntoroti on
R epri nt ol the s ec ood edi ti on, w i th i rs prel ;c e, publ i s hed by Les B el l es
uncnne)lcr1u quantnc c.ntcnd|" d. h rr'ort<l \ndri Vtso 19-11 a obrc lt)61
Lcttres i n 1950, and i nc l udi ng a new s ec ond part: "N ouv el l es r!fl ex i ons
( l t r u sscls:Pa la isd cs Aca d tm ie s, l9 6 q ) ' Pp ' l 4s 5't'
.onrerndnt l e normal er l c pathol ogi que (1961-66)," pp. 169-222, and a
R r p r in ttr l in tr u ,lr s d h ,r l,,tc cr Jf PiilrxnP l )i r'l cr r'i 'l ]'c' (l ()68)'
Palats bri el ' A v erti s s tment" (p. i ). The "N otrv el l es r6fl ex i ons " c orres pondi n part
"L'lrlie rle m{rlccint, r'rptrimentale selon Claudc Bcrn:rcl" Collrences 'lu
to a c ours e gi v en br C angui l hem .r( the S orbonne the prrc edi ng y e.l r (M.
c / r b Diir ,r /r ' ,:a c( Pr r is: Un iw' r r itr ' r lc lJr r is' 1965). s6ri e D ' no l i l l
Fi cha nt, "GeorgesC angui l hem et I' i d!e de l a phi l os ophi c " 119931,p. 38).
P u b li( . lcctu r c g ivcn a t th e Pa l;r ird t l a l )'couverte, i n Prri s' on Ii eb-
l ts sci cncts t h;s edi ti on appearedi n thr "C ol l ec ti on Oal i en." edi ted bv C angui l hem,
n r i r v 6 , lq r ' i. RcPr in t( ' .l in I' tu d ., .1 ' h i\t.i r( tt dc phi l otophrc

.llt' 1t7
 rorrr c r dc phi l orophr de: s .,fn!.' (1958). l h t Ghn\ pour / dndtrr,' , qhi c h
a n d w h i ( h in clu d e d sto d ;cs in th r h ir to ^ a rd phi l 'rr,rphr '.,fbi ol ogl - and
l i rst appearc d i n mi meograph i brm, w ere publ i s hed by the C erc l e d' 6pi s -
m e d i c i n e . Am o n g th e tille s a PPca r in gin th is seri esuere rtrks bv severalol
ti rnol ogi c dc I' E c ol t N on} al t S upi :ri rurc . a grorp ol s tu,l t' nts c l o\e ro
hjs \tud!nt\, Ylett! Conry, lrrnqois Dagognet, Nlichcl Foucault ant-lCanillt
Loui s A l thus s er.
t . i n r o g e s./- e No r m a / cr te p o th o lo g iq u ewa sr tp ri nl ed i n that col l ecti on (the
id ( Diicn l to r hi s ont) !nti l 19l J'l .shtn tht P ubl i s hed i n Fngti s h i n 1980;i nc l udc rl i n thi s n.rder.
f o u r t h a n,t iilth e d itio n s
"tr c
R evi ew of "l \' 1.D . Grmek , ed., C l audc B ernard, C ahrr de notes(1E 50-l l l 60)
" C o l i e d i on Ga lie n " ce a se dto e xist. l h c tcxt th{j n aPpear !d,unrevi sed,i n
(l ar i s r (;al l i nrard, 1965)," R c v ucd hrs rtrrcc /c , l 9 (1966), pp. 405-406.
t h e n t w co lle ctio r ) " ( lu r d r iSc" ( Pn ' ists tln iversi tJi rci rl ( F'rncc) ' c i !r.f!
S i ngul i c r et de l a s i ngul ari t6 en i pi s t6nrol ogi e bi ol ogi que," R oue i nter-
T h e b o o k u ' a str a n sla te din io SPa n ishin 1971,Gc.man i n 1974, Ital i an f"D u
( l e66), f. l l 5.l
nttnnal c dc phi l os ophi e
i n 1 9 7 5 , En g lisb a n d Po Ytu g u cscin l9 1 8 a n d lapantsc i n 198l '
n s The s urnmarl ofa l ec ture C .angui l hemgav e to the S oc i 6t6 bel ge dc
" L e T o u t e t l a p a r .ie d a n s la p e n stc b io lo g iq u e ," LesE tu.l ?sP hi l osoPhi ques, '
phi l os ,,phi eon Frhruarv 10, 1c 61.
2 l . 1 ( 1 9 6 5 ) . p p . l- 1 6 .
Reprinted in EtuJesdl isbne et de Ph o\oPhieder scie'.er (1968)i c{tracts
in th is r e .r d cr ' l 96t
f r o m t h i \ a r ticle r r c io c\r ltd

"Pr6facc," in Claude Btrnard, / eqonssur /cs phtnonines de Ia vi': .onnunt olx

"-l hao.i. er tec hni g(redc I' ex pari menr,rti on(he/ C l i (rde B { rnrd," i n E ti c nnr
d r i ' n ? r u r.t,r !r i vig cr d u t ( Pa tisl Vr in . 1 9 6 6 ) . Pp. l -14.
Wolf, cd.. Pnrlosopi;c ct ndtho<!aloqicscienrifiquesrlc Claude Bernorrl (Paris:
I n c l ud cd in th is r e a d e r .
' ' L e C o n c c l t e t l,r vie ," Rtvu . p lilo r o p liq u c < it l ouvon 6a (i \1ar 1966)' P t'' N 1i \\on, I-ondati onS i ngtr-P ol i gn.rc ,1967), pp. 2 l -l ).
P aperprc s entedat an i ntc rnati onal c ol l oqui un organi red l br the c el e-
193-223.
t,rati on of thc c entenary of thc p!bl i c ati on oi C l aude E c rn.rrd' s/ntrodur-
8 . r s cdo n tso p u b lic lcctu r e s g ive n a t th c Fc<rl edes sci enccsphi l ovr-
tnn i |' l tul c < l el a ni dui ne e^pi ti nent.tl c , i n 19t,5. R epri nted i n E ruder
p h i q u e s e t r e lig ie u se so l th e t- a cu lti' u n ive r s i tai reSai ntl oui s i n B russei s,
re dc phi Lmphi c <i 'htrtoi rec r tu phtl o:ophuJ ts s c rc ntts(1963). ti ans l ared i nto C erman i n
o n F e b r u a r r l2 a n d .1 1 , 1 9 6 6 . Rcp r in te d in futdcs <1'hrstoict
1979. E x trac ts frorn thi s arti c l e art i nc l udc d i n thi s rc ader.
d e r J c t c ' .$ ( 1 9 6 8 ) . Extr a cts lr o m th is a r ticle are i ncl uded i n tbi s reader.
"Ll n P hv s i ol ogi s to
phi l < x ophe:C l rudc B emard, D rrri oaur5.4 (196?).pp. 555-72.
.lgrlgatnn dt phitosophrc, 1966: Roppon & M. Ceorlles Cangutlhcn' prisident
l -ec ture gi v en at the D i partenrent de phi l os ophi r, Ll ni v c rs i tede Mon-
d u i r r ) , ( Pa r is: M in istir c d c l' 6 d u ca tio n n a ti onal e, l nsti tut P6<l agogi que
tri .rl , j n thc 1;l l .,t l e66: i nc l uded i n thj 5 rrn(l c r.
N a t i o n a l, 1 9 6 6 ) .
"Mort d e I' honme ou 6pui s ernent du C ogi tor" C ti ti qu? 212 (l ul y 1967), pp.
Mimeographed.
l l l -26' 599-6t8.
" Q u ' c s c - c e qu e la p svch o lo g ie ? "Co h ie tsp ,.u r I' a n<r/!',r2(N l rfch196{r).pP .
Lssavrrevi$v of l\lichcl Foucault, lcr ,tlors cr /cs.fiordr (Paris: Gallirnard,
M i me o g r a p h e dr e p r in t o fth c a r ticle , lb llo l ed bv "R emarquessur'Qutsc
1966).A l $ publ i s hed i n l tal i an (s c e bel orv . rl v o c ntri c s dow n).
c e q u e l r p svch o lo g ie ? " ' ( p p . 1 2 8 - la ) b r R . Pagts, and thc concl udi ng
"D u C .,nc c prs c i enri l i quei l a rel )c x i on phi l os ophi que, i n C ah,ersdc phrl os ophre,
"Note" b,v Canguilhem, all rlready Publishcd in thc Rcvuede nitaph.rsiquc
pub l i s hed bv the C roupc rl ' i tudo dc phi l a$Fhi e d. I' U ni rers i ti de P ari r.
t t d c n o ra lt in 1 9 5 3 . Re p r in tcd in r h e l9 6 i cdi ti on ol thc C ahi .tt Pour
U N [F-]i (i [.1. no. l (J an. l e67), pp. 39-69.
, e n p u b l;sh e d b y th c E( litio n s d u Seui l , and agai n i n E ruJerr/ti r
/ ' o n o i y s eth

,1 1 6 4r9

A l e c tu r e b y Ca n g u ilh e m ( p p . 3 9 - s2 ) . fo llow ed bv a di scussi on.
" M o r t e d e l l ' u o m o o e stin zio n e d e l co g ito ? " in M ichel Foucaul t, Ie Ponl e e l e
c o s e( M i l a n : Rizzo li, 1 9 6 7 ) , p p . 4 1 2 - 3 1 .
I t a l i a n tr a n sl.r tio no fth e te xt fir st p u b lish ed i n French.
1968
"Claude Bernard et Xavier Bichat,",4dcr /u XI' Congris intemational d htstorre
det s.ien.es ( 1965 ) 5 \1968), pp. 287-92.
Published in Erudesd Iistoirc et de philosophE.!esrciences(1968).
Etudesd'histoire er de philosophiedesscicn.cs lParis: Vrin. 1968).
Includes:
' A v a n t- p r o p o s" ( p . 7 ) j
" L ' O b ie t d e I' h isto ir e d e s scie n ce s"( p p . 9 - 23). previ ousl yunpubl i shed,
b a s e do n a le ctu r e g ive n a t th e in vita tio n o f the C .nadi an Soci etv l br the
H i s t o r y a n d Ph ilo so p h y o f Scie n ce , in M o n teal , on ()ctober 28, 1966;
r e p u b l i s h e d iD Ita lia Da n d Ce r m a n in 1 9 7 9 i Cangui l he'n had gi ven a seri es
o f l c c t u r e r o n " L a fo n ctio n e t I' o b ie t d e I' h isto i re des sci ences"at thc Ecol c
N o r m a l e Su p 6 r i!u r ein I9 8 4 i
" L ' H o mm e d e V6 sa led a n s le m o n d e < le C ope.ni c" (pp. 27-3s), pub
l i s h e d ; n 1 9 6 4 ,r e p r in te d a s a p a m p h le t in l9 9 l;
" C a l i l !e : la sig n ilica tio n d e I' o e u vr e e t la lcqon de I'homme" (pp. 37-
s 0 ) , p u b l ish e d in 1 9 6 4 ;
" F o n t c n e lle , p h ilo so p h e e t h isto r ie n d e s sci en(es" (pp. 51-58), pub-
l i s h e d i n I9 5 7 :
"La Philosophie biologiqu! d'Augustc Comtc et son inllucnce en France
a u X l X c s iicle " ( p p . 6 1 - 7 4 ) , p u b lish e d in 1 9 5 8i
" L ' E c o le d e tlo n tp cllicr ju g ie p a r Au BUstcC .,rntc" (pp. 75-80), pub-
l i s h e d i n l9 6 l;
" H i s t . ,ir e d e s r !lig io n s e t h isto ir e d e s sciencesdans l a chi ori e du f!ti -
c h i s n r ec h e z Au g u steCo m te " ( p p . 8 l- 9 8 ) , p u b li shcd i n 1964;
" L t ' s C o n ce p ts d e ' lu tte p o u t I' cxiste n ce ' er de's !l ecti on naturel l e' cn
1 8 5 8 : C h a r le s Da r win e t Alfr e d Ru sse l wa lla ce" (pp.98-l l l ), publ i shed
120
T
i n 1959;
"L'H omme et l ' ani mal du poi nt de v uc ps y c hol ogi r;ucs el on C harl es
D arw i n" (pp . l l 2-2s ), publ i s hed i n 1960i
"L'l d6c de m6dec i neex penmc ntal es el on C l aode B emard" (P P . 127-42),
publ i shed i n I965;
"Th6ori e c r tec hni quc de I' ex p[ri nrentati on c hez C l aude B ernard'
(pp. l 4l -55) , prev i ous \ unpubl i s hc d;
"C l audc B ernard et B i c hat" (pp. 156-62), bas edon a prper publ i s he< l
i n the proceedi ngsofthc X l th Internati onalC ongrc s sfor the H i s rt,n ofS c i
ence, i n Wars awand C rac orv ,on A ugus t 28, 1965;
"fEvolution du conccpt de rnethode de Claude Bernard i Gaston Eachc-
1ard" (pp. 1 61-71), pre' i ous l v unpubl i s hed,bas edon a l ec ture gi v en at the
i nvi tati on o fthe S oc i 6t!de phi l os ophi e de D i i on, onJ anuary 24, 1966:
"L'llistoire des sciencesdans I'oeuvre 6pirt6mologique de Caston Bache-
l ard" (pp. 1 73 86), publ i s hc d i n 1963i
"Gaston B ac hel arder l es phi l os ophei ' (pp. 187-95), publ i s hed i n 1e6];
"D i al ecti quc c t phi l os ophi c du non c hez (l as ton B ac hel ard"(pp. 196-
207), publ i s hed i n l e61;
"D u Si ngul i c r c t de l a s i ngul ari t!en epi s ti mol ogi e bi ol (' 8i q' re" (pP .
2l l -25), pre v i oudy unpuhl i s hed,bas edon a paper pres entc dto rhe S oc i etc
bel ge de ph i ]os ophi e, i n B rus s c l s ,on February 10, 1962, trans l rted i nto
C erman i n 1 979i
"La C ons ti tuti on de l a phy s i ol ogi ec omme s c i enc c " (P P 226-71), P U b'
l i shed i n 19 53r
"Pathologi eet phy s i ol og' ede l a thy roi de au X IX " s i dc l e" (pp. 2?4-30' 1),
publ i shed i n 1959r
"Modi l es et rnal ogi es dans l a,l 6c ouv erte c n bi ol ogi e" (P P 105 l 8),
I publ i shed i n E ngl i s h i n 1963;
l "LeTout ei l n prr(i c (l ansl a pen:ee bi ol ogi que" (P p. i l 9-l l ), publ i s h.d
i n 1966i
"Le C onc ept et l a v i e" (pp. 315-5' + ), publ i s hed i n 1966 l thi s arti c l c
i s !ometi mc s c rroneous l r c i tc d as "t a N ouv el l t' c onnai s s anc cde l a v i e."
421
.{
t
 CR l CAL. B BLIOCRAPts\

w h i c h i s a c( ,a lly th c titlc o ith e su b se ctio nofthe book to w hi ch thi s ar'

t i c l e b e l on g sl;
lj An c x c hangt $ i th Franeoi sD agognet,broadc as ton I-rc nc heduc ati onal
tel ev i s i on, Febru.rry20, 1968.
" Q u ' e st- ce q u e la p svch o lo g ie ? "( p p . 3 6 5-81), fi nt publ i shcd i n 1956;
"U n l \{od i .l e n' es t ri err d' autre que s a l onc ti on," i n \4i ni s ta' c dc I' E duc ati on
r e p r i n t e d h cr c \ ir h o u t th e co m m e n t b y R. Pagi sand rhe fol l ow i ng "N ote"

bv Canguilhcm. both of rvhich can be found in thc R.vuc d( nitaphvsiqk

d e n o r o l c ;n 1 9 5 6 , a n tf in th e r e p r in ts o fth e C ohnc pour I onol vsei n 1966

et tl Nationale, En,r?tic,r phtlosophiques:A I uso# de\ pnJ?'stu'l (le philasophte

de I'e ns dgn?n.nt r..rrJ di re (P .rri s : Ins ti tut pi dagogi que n.rtj onal , 1968),

pp.1 33- 16.

and 1967i
" T h a.a p cu ti( tu c, cxp 6 r im cn ta tio n , r csp onsatri l i ti " (pp. l 8l -91), pub-
1969
l i s h e d i n 1 9 5 c.

This trooL has becn reprinted many times. lt rvastranslatcrl into Japancse
"lean Hyppolite (1901-1968)," Rcvue/e mitaphrrigue er dc rr.rfdlc 7.{ (April-June
i n 1 9 9 1 .Extn cts fr o m th e fifth e d itio n ( 1 9 8 9)ofthi s book are i ncl uded i n
1969), pp. 129-l ().
t h i s r e a de r .

" B i o l o g i e e t p h ilo so p h ie : Pu b lica tio n s e u r o p e e nnes,"i n R aymond Kl i bansky, l Tri bute to J eanl l y ppol i te, the res pec teds c hol araod trans l atorofH egc l ,

at tbc E c ol e N ormal e S uperi eure on J anuary l 9, 1969. C angui l hc i n trnd

ed., I o Phila'oph'! .ontenporoine, Chtoniqucs, vol. 2: Phtosophie <lessciences
H vpp ol i te had been s tudents at the E c ol e N ormal c and bc c amc c ol l eagues
( F l o r c n . c: l, Nu i) ta lta lia Ed itfice , 1 9 6 8 ) ,p p. 38?-9a.
rt the Ll ni v er\i Ir ol S tras bourgand, l ater, thc S orbonne.
A r e vie w o l *o r ks p u b ljsh cd b e tr ve e n l9 s 6 and l 9{,(, i n bi ol oty and on
"A!anr pr opo\." i n D omj ni qu( I ec oun,l ' Ipi 1' ti nD l ogi c htx ornl uc r1eGas ton
t h e h i s t o r r o l b io lo g y.
,d..4. l drd(P J ri s , \' ri n. l 96e). p. 7.
l C o m m e n t s in l " Ob je ctivite r t h isto r icit ! d e li penseesci enri l i que,'l qdr'ror Thi s brnL i r I.:c ourt\ mas tc r\ rhes i s ,prep.rredrndtr tht s uptrv rs i on
p / r ? r ' c 8 ( 1 9 6 3 ) , p p .2 4 - 5 4 .
ofC angui l hem.
C a n gu ilh e n is co m m e n t ca n b e fo u n d o n pagc' l 9-41, 46-47 and 5l -5 2.
L'Eprstenoldqiu<li Gaston Bacheldrcl:Scritti di Congutlhm c Leroun, trans.
R e p r i n t ed in l.- M . Au zia s e t a l., Str u ctu r a h sneet nd.rnml ] (Pari s: l 0/18,
R i ccardo Lanz aand ,\{ agni(Mi l an: J ac aB ook , 1969).
1 9 7 0 ) , p p . 2 0 5 - 6 5 ; Ca n g u ilh e m ' sco m m e n ts there are on pages235-39 and
It al i an l rans hti on of D omi ni quc Lec ourt' s I' E pi s ti nol ogi ehi s tori qu?dc
260-62.
GostonB ac hel aftll $ i th C angui l hem\ " P remes s a"on p. I I ), to u hi c h a s c c -
"R6gulation (epistemo|tgie)" Lncvclopaediauntvrrrd/r I4 (Pitris: Encyclopaedia ond p art i s added c ompri s c d ofthree arti c l es bv C angui l hen on B ac hel ard:
L l n i v e r s a lisF r a n ce , 1 9 5 8 ) , p p . I 3 . "l a stori a dc l l e rc i enz e nel ' opera epi s temol ogi c a rl i Gas ton B ac hel ard,"
R c p rin tcd in lir llo sin u t' d itio n s.
pp.87-9l l r "C as ton B ac hel arrlc fi l os ofi ," pp. 99-l 0S r "L,: di al etti c a e l a
" L a R e c h e r ch ee r p!r im e n ta le ," Rcvu et/e /' cn r r g n mtnt phl ottphque tE-2 (D rc. /i l oso ti a del ' non' i n C .rs tun B ac ht' l arrl ."pp. l 0?-16. l hts c rhrc c arti c l es
1 9 6 ? - J . rn .1 9 6 8 ) .p p . 5 8 6 4 . l i rst :rppe.rredi n Frc nc h i n t96l .
A n c \cb a n { c wi( h Ch a r lcs M a ziir e s o n experi nrentalresearch,broad-

c a s t o n F re n ch e d u c:tio n a l te le visio n , F e b r u trr)6, 1967.

1970
" L c V i v a n r , " Re vu c< /e/' e n \ci| n e n e n tp h ilo sa p h ig ue18.2 (D ec. 1967-Jan.1968),

pp. 6s 72 . With S. Bachclard,

J.-C. Cadieur, Y. Conry.{). Ducrcr, .J.Guilterme.p.G.

122 42f
 H a r n a m d jia n ,R. Ra r h td , C. S.r lo m o n ' Ba vet,.lS. ebesri k,Inttudu.ti .no I'hk- "C. Koncze.rsLi. tlvnomqu.i'r/,,f.nJ.. vdruc(ParisrFl.lmmirion.
!a Psvcholozlie

r o r r r ia r r r r a n r ci,
i6l (1971).PP.ll9-20
iel0). ' Rd uap,rrr/oroph,,luc
l: tle n te n tse t in sttn cntr. Ir.\r.'r.,l i oi r;r(Prri srH arhette.
' o l.
r 970 ). R r! i c t!.
7l (Marc h-A P ri l l 9?l )'
"Logi qu e dL: v i rant et hi s toi re de l a bi ohgi c ," S c i c nc es
' Ava n t' p r o p o l' ( p p . iii- v) b v Ge o r g e sC angui l hem.Publ i shcdi n C angui l -

h e m \ co llcctio n "T e xte s e r d o cu m cn ts p hi l osophi que," i r i s ai med mai nl y P P. 20- 25.

a t s t ud e n ts in th e lin a l ye a n o fth e lvc6 e s.A t the ti mc ofpubl i cati on, thc A n rs s ay rev i ew oi rranqoi s J ac ob' sIa l ogtquc du v ,v .,nr(P ari s : (;al l i

a u t h or s we r c a ll p a r ticip a ti g in Ca n g u ilh em'srveekl vsemi narsat the Insti mard, l 9?0).

d h i\r .ir c d ( \ \ ie n ,.r , r d e ' r c, h n iq u e'. "C rbani\. P i r.rc -J c an Georges ," i n C harl c s C . (;i l l i s pi e, ed., D i c ti onorv ol S u'
'ur
' ' Q u ' e s t - ceq u ' u n c i< li< .' lo g ie
scie n tifi< lr r ? " Or gonon7 ( 1970). pp. l -1.3. cn.l,( B t.ar.rpfrt(N es Y ork : S c ri bner, Iq?l ), ro1. I, P P . l -i .

B a se do n a n in vitc< Jle cr u r e g ive n a r r he l nstj rute for rhe H i story ol Sci - "D c l a 5 L-i c nc eer de l . c ontrts c j c D c e." i n S . B ac hel arl et al .' H omnr,tgr,i/ran

e n c e a n d T cch n o lo g r o l th e Po lisb Aca d emy ofSci enccs, i n Warsaw and H r p 2oi rt.'(P ari s :P res s esU ni v er' i tai rc s dc frrnc e, l 97l ), pp. l 7l -l t{ )

Cracow, in October 1969. Itcprinted in Id;ologic ct ratipndl'ti tlans I'hinoirc A c ontri bui i on to a book publ i s hc rl i n honor ol J ean l l )P P ol i tc th :(:

d e ss cie n cetle
s la vr ' e( 1 9 7 7 ) Extr a cts fr o m thi s arri cl e are i ncl uded i n thi s vearsafrc r hi s death.
Wi th S . B ac hel ard,Y . C onry , l . C ui l l erme, P .G II' mamdj i an' R . R as hc rl .C '

" B i c h a t , Ma r ie , F r a n g o is- Xa vie r ,"in Ch a r le sC. C i l l i spi c, cd., D i cti onarvoJ Str Sal('mon B)r'et, J. Sebe\tik, lntfodu.rion ri / fi,rroire d.' ntc'.cJ' !ol. 1: Obi':t'

. n t i f k Bio q n p h v ( Nc\| Y< - r r k:

Scr ih n e r , 1 9 70),vol .2.pp. l 22-l I. ni tl oi /c , trurrp/c r. Ic rrc r.i otrl s (P .rri s :I l .i .herte, I97I)

. r ,/.r ( Pari s:V ri n, 1970). pp. t- 10.

" P r!s t ' n t atio n ," in Cr sto n Ba ch t.l,r r dfa S ec on,land l l nal rol ume. fol l ol i ng rhc ooc put' l i s hedth. p.^ t,,ttsrc rr,
\i th r n( w A !ant-propos " (pp. r-+ ).
C a n g u ilh e me d ite d th is co lle cr n o f a rti cl cs,\hi ch B.rchel ardpuhl i 5hed
b e t w ee n l9 ll a n d l9 l.l. I o nono l t h patol ogi to(Mex i c o: S i gl (,rti D ti uno edi tores . l 97l ).

"iudith Swazev,Re/leresond )toor IntefFotion: Sherrington\ Comcpr of Integrativc A s ec ond< l i ti on * as publ i s hed i n l 9?l l ; thi s tr.rns l ati onIas madc l r' > rn

.4rrton, I Iarvarrl University Press," C/to .4led,rd 5 (1970), pp. 364-65. the |renc h edi ti on of 196r,,i nc l udi ng i rs nes s c c i ,nd part.

Revicw.
197 2
! n t r o d u c tio n l " Ge o r g e s Cu ' icr : fo u r n 6 e s d 'i tudes organi s !er par I'l nsri rut
d ' h i s t o ir e d cs scie n ce sd e I Un ir e r sit6 d e Pari s,l et l 0 er l l mai 1969 pour
"P ri f.rc e.' i n Ini l i r tu L,tnortk , P r6:tnti : par U r\ \tc hon. C j l l < x n.Lru' \'
l e b i c e n r e n a ir e d e la n r issa n ced c C. Cu vi er," R cyucd'hi 't\ne des s|,trcct
I nr * us { P ari \: V r.' "n. l ' l l .)l .pp. l -,1.
2 3 . 1 ( 1 9 ? 0 ) , p p .7 - 6 .
(l ' ari s : P res s rsIIni
"P 16l i c t," i rr Gas ton B ac hel ard,L' E ngogc nttntr.rrr' dr.ri ,rre

vers i tai rc rde Franc e, 1972), pp. 5-6.

1971
''Phvri ol ogi r:ani mal e: H i * oi re," I:norl o2oec l i auni ruk l 2 (P ari s rLnc y c l oP i tf-
's
di a U ni v c rs al i sl rranc e, 1912). pp. 10' t5-i 1.
C a n g u i l h e r nr e tir e d th a t ye a r ir o m h is p r o fe ss orshi pat the S orbonne,and from
R c pri nted i n the ne$ edi ti on ol 1939 unrl er a s l i ghtl v di l l i rent ti rl t;
t h e d i r e c tio n o fth e In sr itu t d ' h iJto ir e d e s sciencesct rl es techni ques.
i ncl Lrdedi n thi s rc ader.

125
424
 ''l klie <k, nrturc dans lit thi!rie et la pr:riquc mi:dicales." rUAicctri, Jc / /romn,c
pl i g uer (J ul )-S epr. 1974),pp. 293-97.
. 1 ] ( N l.r r .h 1 9 7 2 ) , p p .6 - 1 2 .
B as c don : paper gi v en at a c ol l oqui um hr:k l at the hous e ol dugu;tc
A n cxt.a ct il in .lu d e d in th is r e tr d e r .
Grnte, i n P ari s ,on l unc 27, 1972ri nc l udc d i n thi s reader.
It lrornal ct le pothologrguc(2nd rev. ed., Paris: Prcssc! Unnersitaires dc lir.rncr:,
"La {l ues ti on dc I' dc ol ogi e: La Tec hni que ou l a !i e?" D tdbguc (B ru\el l e\) 2l
tt)1)1.
(N 'l nrc h1974). pp. l 7 ' 1' + .
R c p r in t o l th e 1 9 6 6e d itio n , r ith so n :c "recti l i cati onsdc dat:i l s (t quel -
B as c don a l ec nrrt: gi v en at the "l ournats (l u protes tanti s mel i ba,.1l ,"i n
q u e s no tcs co m p lim r n ta ir e i' ( a d d e n d u m to thc 'A vcrti ssement"). fhi s cdi -
S i \te,on N ol c mber 11, 1971.
t i o n h a s sin ce g o n c th r o u g h se ve r a p
l r in tin gs. Extracs l rom thi s edi ri on arc
"(i asto n B ac hel ard," i n S c i enti dtic tec nol ogi(orremP or.,rd,(N l i l an: \4on< l l ori ,
i n c l u d r d in th is r e a d cr .
197.1),v ol . l . pp.65-6?.
lo ,tlothindtisotion des doct.ines infom6: Colloque tcnu d I'lnttitut (1'hktairc .les
D as N onnal cund rl asP arhol otrrhr.trans . Moni l a N ol l and R ol fS c hubc n (l r.rnk -
nrenrt' lc l Llnivcrsiti d! Pa s, Ia dircction <leGnretes Cangutlhcnt (paris:
'oD' l url , ts erl j n,V i enna: U l l nei n, 197' + ).
I l r r D a n r . Ie 7 2 ) .
Trans l ati onol thc l 9l 2 s c c ond. rev i s c dFrc nc h c di tron fhi \ Iran\l i ri ,)n
' : q \,) n r p r - r ) p ( ^ ( p p . 7 - 9 ) a n d co m m cn ts<,npages67,68, 69, trnd l l l -14
$as rc P ri nted i n 1977.
l : v C a n g u ilh e n r . i h is c,) ll( ,!u iu m wa \ h e ld J unc 2'+-26. 1970.
197 5
t973
'l {ugLrs reC ,' D rrc ,"i n S dc i dti c teool og' tLl L orl Ti nio/ I97j (]\ti l an: Mondad,> ri .
''Iic. 1 n L r c/,1 < r c< /,a
u n ,,./r ./,, l6 ( l,ir ii: t' r cl cl ,,t,l c(l i , tl ni rcrsal i s Francr, IeT t).,o1. l .l p. 125 28.
l 9 l I ) . PP. 7 6 .1 6 9 .
IC omm c nts i nl .l c tc ' d.l oi oi ..t,' .tl ,ru.' J ttti t(P .rri s :\' ri n, l e75J .P P . l s o i i l .
R c tr in ti.( l in th r jtco n clcd itio n o f 1 9 8 9ri ncl uded i n thi s rcarl er. ()n A nnc Fagor." Le ' Trans l i rrmi s nrt'de 11atrp.,rui s ."pp. l 6l -r-s .

I hes ew erc the pn,c t' c di ngsol a c ol l oqui um hc ' l d i n C rtrti l i n I)c c c rn
197 4
l ,er 1971.
' ' S u r I l l i s t <r in .ilr s r cie n ce sd c la vic ( lcp u is [) a nri n," .l i rcs Ju t///" C onU ri si nl .r-
"P our la phi l os ophi e," l d N duv c //cc fi ttqu. (N l ay 1975). p. 2e.
n<tional <1'htstoirctlcs scienccs| 197t ), Confircnccs iniircs \Nroscrx: Nauk,r, A s hort l etter by C angoi l ht' m ans $eri ng ques ti on\ rc { .rrdi ng oppo:i '
1 9 7 4 ) , p p .4 l r ,l. ti on to rc l i )rm ofthc nati onal progr.rmsofthe l v c r:rs , * hi c h x oul d al l Ltt
T r an sla te din to Cicr m a nin 1 9 7 9 . the te:c hi ng oi phi l os ophy at that l t:v c l . l -hc ti tl e i s not C an{ ui l hc rn s ; al l
' ' 1 , ' h n B r u { n ( 1 7 1 5 l7 tllJ) . L i T h 6 o r ie d e I' in ci tabi l i t[ rl e l 'organi smc ct son
anrw ers gi v en bv !' renc h phi l os ophers $ hom thc j oumrl c ont.rc t* l * c r:
i m p o r ra n ( e h isto r iq u e ." AL t.s.h Xlll" 0 o nyl ri sl nttnoti onal d'hi sroi rcdt pub l i s hrrl under thi s namc .
r . i c r . . r ( 1 9 7 l/ ( iUo sco r v:Na u ka , 1 9 7 .1 )Se
, cti on IX , pp. I4l -.16. Itnorno l e e t potol ogi c o(R i mi ni : Gurral di , l 97i ).
R cp r in te d , x ir h m o d ilica tio n s, a n d u n der a <l i fk.rcnt ti tl e, i n Itl l ol ogre T.ans l ati onol the 1972 s ec ond,rev i v rl Frc nc h c di ti on.
cr rorionaltti dLtns1'histoircdes scienccsh lo vic 11971). La Jbmocidn .l.l n)ncet>rorfc rcfltio n hs silllor I f1l.r' .Y[/// (\hlencia, Brrr elona:
" l l i \ t ( , j r c d c l' h o m m e e t n a tr n .d cs ch o sts sclon Argusrc C omte dans l c P /aa
l ua n I l i teras , 1975).
Jcs tnrou\ s.!.ntifiques pout tiotqonNr ld socitti, t82)," L?:;t:tu.l.\ ftilaso- Trans l ati onofthe 1955 fi rs t Frc nc h c di ri on.

427
 A V IAL R^' OI!ALIST
t9 7 t
I t e t n o r t <lcJco n Co vo r l/tr(sAn r b ia le t lT a r n l: Pierre Lal eure, t976).
T h e t e xts in clu d e d h a < ln o t b e cn p r cvio u s) ypubl i shed:
" A va n .p r o p ( ,s" ( p p . 7 - 8 ) i
" l n au g u r a tio n d e I' An r p h ith 6 ;r r e Je a nCavai l l i s i l a nouvel l e Facul t6des
l . r t t r e s d e Str a sb o u r g( 9 m a i 1 9 6 7 ) " ( p p . 9 - 34);
" C o m m!m o r a tio n i l( ) .R.T .F ., F r a n cc'C ul ture (28 octobre 1969)"
( pp.3s 3 9 );
" C o m m e m o r a tio n i Ia So r b o n n e , Sa lle C avai l l ds (19 j anvi er 1974)"
( p p . 4 t - 5.1 ) i
" B i b lio g r a p h ie : Pu b lica tio n sd e je a n Ca v ai l l i i ' (pp. 57-61).
A ncw c( litio n wa s p u b lir h e ( l in 1 9 8 4 .
" Q u a l i t 6 d e la vie , d ig n it6 d c l.r m o r t," ltte s du ol l oque non.l i dl B i ol ogi eet
d e v . n i t d c I' h o m n ., Un ive r r ir e d e Pa r is. le l 6 (N ew Y ork: McGraw IIi l l ,
1 9 7 6 ) , pp . 5 2 1 - ) 1 .
F i n a l r e p o n o fa co m m issio n p r e s!n tcdat ao i ntrrnati onal col l oqui um
h e l d r t th e So r b o n n e in Pir is, Se p ie m b e r l9-24, 1974 (i t i s fol l ow ed by an
E n g l i s h tr a n sla tio n o l th e te xr , p p . 5 3 2 - ) ? ) . C angui l hem w as a member of
t h e F r e n ch o r g .r n jzin g,,Ddr e .cp tio n co m m ittec ol thc col l oqui um.
" N a t u r e d dn a tu r 6 e ct Nr tu r c n a r u r a n tr ( i p r opos de I'oeuvre de Franqoi s
D a g o g nct) ," in Sd vd ' .,tsp ir v, b s lm ir e s d e Io rori on(B russel s:Facul t6 U ni
v e r s i t a ir cSa in t' L o u is, 1 9 7 6 ) , p p . 7 l- 8 8 .
" l l r u o l o d e ll' e p istcm o lo g ia n r lli sto r io g r a { ia sci enti fi ca contemporanea,"
S.i.n/a &Tccnica '7 6: .4nnuano della Enciclopedi.,.le d Scicnta c de o lacnko
( M i l a n : M o n d a d o r i. 1 9 7 6 ) , p p . 4 2 ' / 3 6 .
Rcprinted in ldioloBie d rauonalitd tlans l'histoirc des sticnos de 1o vic
( 1 9 7 7 ) . T r a n sla te d in to Ce r r n n n in 1 9 7 9 . Extrtrcts from thi s arti cl c arc
i n c l u d e d in th is r e a d e r .
" l \ ' l a r c K l e i n, 1 9 0 5 - 1 9 7 5 ,' + ch n .' in e n d u o n a les d'hktone des sci ences
26.98
(1976),pp. 161-6a.
K I c in h .r d sp e n t h ir ca r e r r r s i p r o F sso r .r thc Ll ni l ersi ty ofS trasbourgJ
42U
medi c al s c hool rv htre C angui l hc m hac lc ompl ete< lhi \ (l .grc e i n nredi c i nc .
K l c i n c onti nued to teac h at th ! uni \ers i l y w hen i t w as mov ed ro C l c rmont
Ferrandduri ng tl re Gern)anorrup.)l i on l n 1944, thc (;c s ri po arres tedand
dep orted hi m to the c onc (ntrrti oD c amps ol A urc hw i t?, (;ros s ros enand
B uc henw al d, from w here ht' r' as l i berated i n l 945 H e publ i s hed w i tl c l v
on hi s tol ogy , endoc ri nol ogy an(l on hi s rory ol bi omedi c al s c i c nc c s l n thi s
obituar), C angui l hem s ugges tedtbrr K l ti n' s hi s tori c al P aP ersbc c ol l ec ted
and publ i s hed as a book ; the book rv .rsi n l i c t publ i s hc d i n 1980, and C an-
gui l hem w rote the i ntroduc tbn (s eebc l or' , s ec ond entrv undc r 1980)
I o conoscenzadella vita ( Bologna: ll l\lulino, 1976)
I:1':onocinicnto de Ia vida (Barcelona: Editori.tl Anagrama' 1976)
t977
Lltulogic et ratiandlite dans I lrirrorredcr rcrcn<.'r,/c ld ttr: No'veller itul6 d'histoite
dess .i tn(c r (P .ri s : v ri n, 197?).
ct d. phi l os ophi e
tnc l udes :
"A v anc propoi (pp 9-10)r
"Le R 6l e de l ' !pi s ri mo)ogi r bi ol tgi que dans I' hi * r' ri oA rrP bi e s c i enti -
fi que c ontemporai ne" (pp. Il -29). publ i s hed i n l t.rl i an i n 1976i
"Qu' es t-c e qu' une i d6ol ogi e s c i enti l i quc :"' (pp l l -45)' publ i s hc d i n
1970;
"U ne Id6ol ogi em6di c al eex enphi re. l e s v s temede B nmn" (pp.4?-5' + )'
basc don the paper publ i s hed i n 197' 1under a di l l erent ti tl e i n the P roc eqf
i ng ' .i rh, X l l l rh Inr, rnrri ,' nal C ongres ' l orrhel l i ' r,rr,' l S , ren(c i n Mu*
, os . A uE ,rs rl 8-24. l aTl :
"l ' E i l et de Ia bac t6ri ol ogi e dans l .r fi n dc s Thi ori es medi c al er' au
XIX' s i ec l e" (pp. 55-77). bas c d on a l ec ture pres entc d i n B arc el ona i n
Apri l 1975, trans l ak ali nto (;c rmrn i n l 9l s i
"t-a t.ormati on du c onc c pt dc ri gul ari on bi ol ogi que aux X V l l l ' ' et X IX '
si ec l ei ' (pp. Il l -99), an ex (en(l (d v c rs i on ol thc papc r publ i s hed, al s o i n
19 77,i n thc prreedi ngs ol a c onterrn<e hel d i n l 9?+ ;
"S ur I' tl i s (oi re des s c i enc e: de l a depui s Ihr$' i n" (pn. l 0l -l l 9).
'ie
.+29
 A V TAI RAl OI!AL ST BL OGRAPHY

p o b l i s h e d in I9 7 ' 1 in th e p r o ce e d in g so fth c X Il l th Internati onal C ongress Supi ri c urcl 319(N l arc h 1977). pp. l 2 l l .

f , ' r r h " lli' to r r " l \.icn ce in llo - o t. On thc oc c as i on ol the l i l i i eth anni l c rs trfy ol l l err' s death. l n 1912,

" L i Qu e !tio n d c la n o r m a lit6 d a n s I' h istoi re dt l a pensi t bi ol ogi que" C angui l hem had publ i s hc rla ro i ov ol a c ol l rc ti on ol H err' s rv ri ti ngs:s * el l

( p p . 1 2 1 - 1 9 ) ,b a scdo n a p a p e r p r cscn tcd a t a col l oqui um organi zcd by-the as o l hi s bi ography bl C h.rrl c sA ndl er.

I n t e r n a tio n a lL In io n o l th e I listo t) a n d I' h ilosophvo1 Sci encr.,i n JYs;sk)l :i . " Lfs mac hi nesi go(:ri r," I e i tl ondc\A pri l 6, 19' 71).

I . i n l a n d , in .lu n e - ju l1 le 7 3 . R c v i e* ,ol l \,l i c hel Fouc aul t, B l andi ne l l arrr:t K ri egel , r\nne Thal amy ,

T h e b o o k r va s tr a n sla tcd in to Ce r m a n i n 1979, P ortuguese i n 1981, Fran(oi r B c S ui n and Il runo forti er, I.c s),l oc hi nc td gui ri t (z ,d\ ori gi nc ' dc

F n g l i s h in l9 li8 a n d Ita lir n in 1 9 9 2 . I'hi ptral notl trne1 (P )ri s : l ns ti tut de I' env i ronnrmc nt, I976). C angui l henr

A s c c o n d cd itio n a p p e r r e d in l9 ltl. Extr a cts lr om the l 98l t tr:rnsl ati onl r1 the i s i nc orrec tl v i dc nti l i ed at the bottom ol thc rc v i ov rs "P rol c s c urau C ol hgc

f i r s r e ditio n a r e in clu d e tl in th is r e a d e r .
" l a F o r m a tio n d u co n ce p t d c r a g u la tio nb io lo g ique aux X V l l 'ct XV l l l 'si i cl es."

i n A n d r i L ich n e r o r vicz,Ja cq u i,' t io n s, F r a n(oi s P erroux, (i i l bcrt Gadol l i e,

t976
e d s . , / ' //lc d e 1 6 llu la tio nd o n s /e r r tr n r r s (Pari s: N l al oi ne-I)oi n, I977),

pP. 25 19.

P a p e r p r e se n ttr l a t th e Co llig e d e F r a ncc i n D cccmber 197'1,at a col - ''U ne I' i dagogi r:dc l .rgueri s on es t-el l e pos s i bl e?"N ouv c //zr,:rrc /e ps rc honal ts t

l o q u i u m o r g r n ize d b v th e e d ito r s o fth c p r occedi ngs.on the i dr:ao1 n'gul a l 7 (19i 8), pp. I l -26.

lion in scirnce. {n cxtcndr:rlversion was publishtrl tht samc vc.rr in /diologic ''Le C onc ept d' i di ol ,,gi c \c i c nti l i que: Lntreti tn rl ec ti eorgc s C angti l hc m."

er fttranaliti don\ I'ht'toft .l,Jsvicnres de Ia vie. R ai s onpri s c ntc+ t' (19 t 8 ). pp. s 5-68.

I o I'onotion du .on.epr dc ri/1ete out xt ll' et I l/i/'riir/er ( 2nd ed., Paris, Vrin. Fol l orv i ng the prev i ous v ear' spubl i c ati on ol hl i ol t)gi t!.t k rtj andl i ti ddns

t9J"/ |. /cr rri c nresdc /o ri c , * hi c h i nc l udc s the ani c l c "tl u' ts t c t qu' unr: i di ol ogi c

l h e lir st e d itio n h a d b r tn p u b lish cd bv the P ressesU ni vcfsi tai rcs dc sci c nti l i qrre?"()n p;rgc s55-5U . C abri c l C ohau c omments on that a.ti c l c )nd

F r a n c cin 1 9 5 5 . I h is n e N e d itio n , "r a :visic c t augmcnt6e," i ncl udes a 5h(,.t rri sc s l i v e ques ti ons .rhi c h C angui l hem ans rv rr\(pp. 58-6(l ).

" A v . r t i sscm cn t d e Ia d e u xiir n e a { iitio n ," ci )rrecti ons ol mi spri nts and a "C rl l f\ti n B ougl a," l nnuoi rc i e l ' ,l s s oc i oti on
dts ani tns i l i rc s < l e1' Lc ol cN ortnal c

" C o m p l6 m e n t b ib lio g r a p h iq u c" ( p . 2 0 2 ) . i upi ri c urc (1978), pp.29-12.

l x t r a ts lio m th is:r ticle .r r e in clu d e d in thi s rcadcr. C angrri l hem had w ri tten hi s "t)i pk l me d' i tudes s upi ri trrrc s " undc r

"Jacques Rufii6, De la Btolo5lica h culture (Paris: 1976)," tn Tlopocdia u w:-!alts the s uperri s i on of C i l es ti n l l ougl i i n 1926 (s ee abov e, l i rs t c ntrv un< l t' r

( P a r i s :En cvclo p a cd iaUn ive r sa lisF r a n cr .:,1 977), pp. 378 ?9. te 26) .
Rlviov. On thc N orn,tl antl rht Il tthol o.j i @|,trans . C arrl v n B . Fnw (c tt, \!i th rhc c di r()

" J . S c h i l l e r ct T . Sch illtr , He n i Du r r o ch e r ,") r chj v.\ i nt.rnatnndl s .l 'hi stoi rcdes ri :l c ol l abor:ti on ol R obrrt S . C ohen. Introdrrc ti on bv l \l i c hc l Iouc aul t

r r i c n r cr2 T ( 1 9 7 7 ) , p . 3 .+ 0 . (l l ordrec ht: R ei rJ el .l 97rl ).

R cvis. Ii i ns l ati on o1 thc 1972 s rc < ,nrl ,rev i rtd frenc h r:di ti on. R c pri nred br

" S o u v c n i r d c t.u cie n lle r r ," Bu llctin d e la So .ti ri 'Jcr dm,r dc I'l .col t N orntal c Zon e B ooLs j n t989r ex tr.rc tsi nc l u< tc di n rhi \ re,rder.

.+lo 4] r
 AL'']GRAPtsY
A V IAL RAT ONALIST

O n o r n a l c o pa r o lo lyo ( Rio d e Ja n e ir o :F o r e n sc' U ni versi tari a.1978). "l )i e I l eraus bi l dungdc s K onz eptesder bi ol ogi s c hen l l .egul ati oni m 18.

P o r r ug u tsetr ,r n slr tio n o fth e l9 7 l sr :co n d.revi scd French edi ti r)rr. und 19. J ahrhunrl c n" (pp. 89-l D 9 ), l i rs t publ i s hed i n Fn nr h i n 1977r

"l )er S ei trng dc r B ak teri ol o!i t /um U ntc rgrnS dc r ' medi z i ni ,rc hc n

1979 l he ori en' i m l q. Iahrhundert" (pp. l i 9-109), l i rs t publ i s he(l i n l -rrnc h

;n 191' J i
"Zur Ges c hi c hteder W i s s c ns c h.rl ten
v om Leben s ei t l )i r$ i n' (pp. l l .{ -
r n d e Bla in vi l l eet 1'AbbdMauPi cd," R rvu.
" L l l i s t o i r e d e s \cicn fcs d e lb r g a n is:rio

. l ' h i s t o i r .dc\ \.icn cc' ]2 ( 1 9 7 9 ) , p p . 7 l 9 ) . i 3). l i rs t publ i rhc rl i n F-rc nc hi n 197.1.

I n c l u d e d in th is r e a d e r .
<leI'hisrapdrtologt. (Paris: Vrin, 1979),
"Pr6face," in Othnrar Kccl, La GdndaLtSTe 1960

pp. i-;i.
''Prilacc," in fran(ois llclaporte, Ic Scronr/regncde /d r.rrr. (Paris: Flammarion, ''l I C cr v eauet l a pc ns c e," l ros pc c ti v cc t S onrd1.1(S ummc r l 9l to). pp. l l l -911.

1 9 7 9 ) , p p .1 tO. B as c d on a l c c turc del i v c rtrl on l -c hruar1 20. 198(),at r c (,,rl i rc nc r

T r a n s la tcdin tr : En g lishin l' ) 8 1 a n r lCcr m :n i n l 91l l . organi z c db1 tht "l U { ,uv emc nt uni rrrs el de 1are' pons i bi l i t( s c i c nti l i quc .'

"l-'ogg.tto della stori.l (lcllc scienze." in GasparePoli//i,.d., Scicnto ?.1cpirtco]^- i n Pari s .R epri nre(l $ i th ()mc c orrc c ti ons i n 199l .

l o g i a i n Fr u n .io ( t9 0 0 1 9 7 0 ) ( T u tiit L o e sch cr Ecl i tore. 1979). pp. 200-16. "l \1rrc K l ei n, hi s tori c n dc Ia bi ol ogi e," i n Marc K l ei n, R c l l onfsd un hnl ol ptt:

T r a n s la tio no l " t.' Ob jct d e I' h ist,r ;r ed cs sci ences."publ i shed i n J:turJtr f.votution<feI oppn,tu sc'cnrifique.l'1 nrion.ntnt nidicol \troshourqeos\l' i\:

,l ht:t,;trt u lc phtla:ophic d.s \L).nr.' (1968). l i .n nann, 1980). pp. \ j i -r i i .

ttt's?nschoftsg$.hi.htc und Epis'rn@l.tqK:{'csannttu .1ul:iitte, Wolf Lepenies. S rc C rngui l hem s obi tuarv ,,1 K l c i n abol e, 11l th.n(r\ un(l c r 1976.

e d . , t r r n s . M ich a e l Bisch o ffa n d\\h lte r Se ittcr( Frankl i rn am Mai n: S urkhanp "l 'ri 'l ace ." i n A ndri P i c ht)r, E l i rnc nts
pout un?thi orrcJ c /o bro/o< 7rc
(P ari s :N l al oi ne,

V c r h g , 1 97 9 ) . l 9U 0), p.7-l (1.

''C ,)n(l iti ons(l c l bbj c c r i v i re s c i enti l i qrrc .' R oi ' onpi ' entc 5 5 (l 9l to), pp. l l l 81.
A r e ad e ro l Cr n g u ilh e m \ r r r r ls. in clu d in g:
''\\ hat is P s v c hofogri ' IJ r:ohtotond C onx i ourn.IrT (198f)),pp. j 7-50.
"Di. (;cschichte dc. \l'i\scDs.h.ikcn im cpisremd,,gi5chco \\/erk Ci\t,,n

B a c h e l a (1 "( p p .7 - 2 1 ) , fir st p u b lish e d in F r cn c h i n l e6l : frrns l ati on h\ l { ,trv l ftl l )a!i c s 0l rh(,rc x r fi rs r puhl i rhed i n l 95l i .

" D c r Ge g e n sta n <tlcr (pp. 22-17), l i rtt puh

l Wisse n ,!( h a ftsg e schi chte"

l i s h c d i n Fr e n e h in 1 9 6 8 r 1981

" D i e Ro lle d cr Ep iste m o lo g ie ;n d e r h e u ti gen H i stori ograhi e der Wi s

ttt.rl oqr o. nei onLl oh nas ti i nnr h t t (Li s bon: Frl i l r' ,r. J 0. l 98l ).
s e n s c h a ltt' n "1 p p . l8 - 5 8 ) , fir \r p u b li:h e d in Iti l i .l n i n 1976 anJ i n Irrench

in )9'7'7. Itans l ati on ol the l i rs t Irrenc hc (l i ti ,rn (1977).

Uiolo c rt totion.tliti dans /cr rc,cnccsJ,: /rr ric: Nourcl/cs car<lesd'hirltirc a Llc
" D i e Ep istcm o lo g isch eF u n ktio n d e s ' Iin zigarti gcn' i n der Wi sscnschi l t

v o m I c b c n " ( p p .5 9 - 7 ' 1 ) , lir st p u b lish c( i in fr ench i n l 9f,8r phj l onphi . des l .i ",L!' 12ndrs . c rl ., r i rh c orrec ri ons , P ,rri s :V ri n, I981).

A n Itnl i an rr.rns l rri on ol thi s .(l i ti on rras publ i s |c rl i n 1992, and rn

" l - h e o r ir r r n r l lcch n ik d cs F r p cr im e n titr cns bci C l aurl c B crnarrl " (pp.
I:ng l i rh rrrn\l i i ri (,n i D l ei J 8
7 5 - 8 8 ) , l i r \t p u b li!h e ( l in fr e n ch in 1 9 6 7 ;

, +tJ
412
 /

R IOI,R]PHJ

" P 1 6 t a c c . "i n lltn r i Pcq u ig n o l, l].t/r ' .r itr . ,n u \ (f',rri sr\i i n, l 9i l 1), pp. i r.
t t uJu l ' h tttotu et dc pl i l ov ,ti rf J c r' .i c nr.( ( 5th td, P ari s ;\ ri n. l 9fi ) )
T h i s tcr t r r .r s.r lsoin clu tltr l in th e scccr n dcdi ti on, ntr l r enti tl e<ll i r,/i rmr Inc l udes ;rl l thc l c x tr publ i \ht(l i n th( l e66 (di 1i on, P l rr: "P ui s :anc l rt
d c d e n t a in :liu lh L r itr . r ,.!\ ( \' r in . I9 tl6 , p p . i \, w i th a "C ompl i ment potrr l i miter dc h rati onrl i ra c n mc dtc i nt.".rl s c r publ i s hetl i n rhe prx c c di ngs
u n t : n o u v clle 6 d ititr n ," p . v i) . ,,i r,"n[ren..i n l qS l rpp. ]l l -"1 ).
" G u s t a r c i \ ' l i,n o d , p b ilo vr p h e . p id a g o g u e ." in I o ui s C rcs, ed., Gusravc,t'l ona<l : F\trrc l s i nc l udr(l i n rhi s rc i ,l ri .
lln Pionnicr .n iducdtion. ld ( /arscsnourc//cr dc /d lii,lrdttor (Paris: Conlita
"Vorw o rl ," i n Franqoi s D el i tportc , D ,,r z rt& rc N rrtrrrc l c l , nhc r.l i ( I:rul en .l c \
u n i r c r s i t a ir e d ' in lo r m a tio n p .a l.r g o g iq u c,l9 8 l), pp. l 5-19. i n l t l ahrhundc n (Fr.rn(turt: Ll l l s tti n i U dtc ri al en, I98l ),
l 'ey l etabi l i :;c hen
"whrt i s r S cicn tiiic Id co lo g v? " R.r r ' lr coPn
l iio r p lr '29 (1981),pp. 20-2s.
P P .7-9
l i a n sla tio n a n d a n in tr xlu ctio n b r M iL c Shortl and,pp. 19-20. Trans l ati onofthc tc x r l i rs t publ i s hc d i n l :renc h i n 1979.

t982 198 a

w i t h C . L . r ptr ssa d c.
J. Piq u e m a l. I. tllm a n n . Du t)tvtl oppencnt d l '[vol utnn au "P ri 'cnt rti on de l ' A natomi e," i n (i . C rngrri l hc m. C l )tbru, G. Fs c at,I-lGuerv .
l / , ( ' s ; A r / e ( f' a r is: I' r tsr e s tln ir e r sita ire s ,lc F r r ncc, 1982).
J. L ambc rt. Y . Mi c hau< l ,A . M. N l D U l i n..l r.rr.rrtf,t un tprtl ntL oouc :Franqoi s
R e p r in r i) l th c str r lv in /h o i,r ( le ( ' { ) ) . p u bl i shed i n 1962; w i th a "Pre-
n./l i ..g r { P rri ' : \i i n. l c R 4 l . pp ?-l ().
s c n t r t i o n " b \ F licn n c Bilib ) r . ) d Do ' n iDiq ue LecoU rt, pp. v-vi . A n.\, A n i ntroduoi on to rhe proc c r< l i rrgrol r c ,,nI r,:nc ,:,orgrni z c d trl C an-
i d t n t i c . r l e d itio n a p p c;r k( l in l9 ti5 . gui lhem. and hc l d on \' 1ar l ' 1, 1981, rr rht l \l us i t C l .rrl i e B rrn.rrd i n S ai nc
" l i o r e s o r d , " in l:r a n lo is l) tl.r p o r r e . No r u r ci 5 cto nJ (,ngdr,'r (C ambri dgc. N 1A:
Jul ien rn B eauj ohi ' , r,r tl i s c us srht $t,rL\,' l I-r.1n!oi \Ihg< ,gnet l ).rg< gnc t
! 1 l T P r c ss, 1 e ti.1 )p. p . i\ \ii.
hnd \ri ttc ' n hi s di s l ertrri on, Lr R .rk o, !./c r rc ma,l .i (P rri i : P res \estl ni v c r
I i a n sla tio n o l r h t b o o k lir \( p u tr liih e d in French i n 1979.
si tai resde Franc c , 1964). un< l tr C anqri l hem \ \uP c rfi s i ,rn.
" E m i l e L i t ( r e , p h ilo so p h e d e li b io l.) e i( e t d e la mi deci ne," C r:ntre i nk,rna' i n C harl es N l arx . ed..
"P ui ssJ nc c c t l i mi tes rl c 1a rrti on.rl i re.n mc deti nc .
ti,,nal dc svnthi:sc, lircs lu anlbqu. l:mib Lnt.i l80l-1881. Paris.T 9 octLlve
.tli.lcdn., et rcchniqv: Rccutil ,l'itl..lct rilqics i I'ocLosnn<lu ctntcnarc
'':ienc.
/ 9 , 9 i ( P r ris: Alb in Nlich cl, 1 9 3 2 ) ,p p .2 7 l 8 1 .
<h l a non de C l autl eB c rnonl(l i i l l /S ;,\l (P ari s :E di ti ons du C c ntrt nati onal
' I h c s c p r o cce d in g sr lso c( r n slitu tca sp e ciali ssueof the R evueJe srnti i se
dc 1 .rrc c hc rc he s c i c nti i l quc , l L)8' t).pp. l (J 9-10.
1 0 6 - l 0 l i (Ap r il- De c. I9 8 2 ) i in clu d e ( l in th is r {,adcf.
R c pri ntc d i n the l l fth edi ti on ol Lrudesd' hi s tai n c t de phi bs oP hi cde\
., r,.c . ( l q8 r): i rr. l rr,l ,,l rn r hi . rc rder
1 9 83 "Gr*on dtrns Il ( i te s .i enti fi quc T" l l P ntol l an 21.5
l l .rc hc l ard.ps y c hanal y s tt:
(Ja n.Junclesa) .pp.le- 26.
C a n g u i l h e m qa s a u a r lcr l in l9 lll, in r h sL n tja , thc S arton \4trl al , thc hi ghest P ubl i s hc d i n rn i s s ue ol the j ,,unr,rl rl trotrd to "(hs ton l hc hc l :rrd
h o n o r o f t h c Histo r ,r o l Sr itn t:t So cift\ ( scc b clo*. i n Part l i vo, cntrv under U i l a nc i (,c ri ti c o di una c pi s rc nro)dgi .r."
l 9 i l . 1 , f o r t h t n :lr n n cl r ) th r cititj,) n ) . "E ntrct i .n av ec (i c orgc s (i rngui l hc m" (ri th J trn' P i errc C hrc ri rn-(;oni rnd
C hfi s ti ,rn t-a7l rri ). i n /n' nrrp/rnrt: C anrtv r5.7.5. I (l es .l ). pp. l l l .+ .

411 . '] t
 t9 8 5
l c o m m e n t s i n l Co m it! co n su lta tif n a tio n a l d ' 6 th iquc porr l es sci encesde l a
l i c c t d e I n sn n ti, Ro p p o r t I9 t.1 ( Pa r is,L r Do .u ment.]ti on tranqai se,1985),
pp.132- 8 4 .
C o m me n ts o n th r e e p a p e r s p r e se n te r lb v F Q'rar6, M. Gl orvi nski and
M . P e l i c i e r a t a r o u n d ta b lc o n th e "Pr o b lim e s d'i thi ques posi s par l a re-
c h e r c h e s ur le systim c n e r vcu x h u m a in ," o r g a ni zedby the French N ati onal
C o m m i t t e c o n Eth ics in th e L ife Scie n ce sa n d Medi ci ne, D ecembcr 6, 1984.
Emile Boutroux, Des Vditds itenelles chez Descarrcs,Thdse latine traduitc Par N{.
Gcorgcs Canguilhem, 6live de I'Ecole Normale Sup6rieure (Paris: Vrin, l9us).
R e p r i nt o fth c 1 9 2 7 e d itio n , th e n p u b lished by F6l i x A Ican, l acki ng
the preficc by t-6on Brunschvicg; r'ith a shor( "Av.ln.Propoi' by .Jean-luc
" t r r i g m e n t r , " in lq e vu e,le n ita p h vsiq u ct d e m o r cic90.I ( 19115
), pp. 93-98
" S t r i k i ng lia g m e n ts" sclcctcd fr o m th e wo rl s ol C .rngui l hem,b,v D i na
l l r t ' v l l s , Cla ir e S.r lo m o n - 8 a veat n d Je r n - Ja cq u tsSrl omon.
" D c \ c r r r e s c t l a te ch n iq u e ," Ca h r cr s5 .7 .5 .7( l9 ti5 ) , P P .87-91.
R e p r i nt o fth e p a p e r fir st p u b lish cd in 1 9 1 7.
1986
"Sur l"llistoire d e la fb lie ' e n ta n t q u ' a :vin e m .r nt," Ic D dbat 11(Scpt,/N ov.
l 9 { 3 6 ) ,p p . l7 - 4 { } .
N o t e on th e cir cu m sla n ce ssu r r o u n d in g Cangui l hem\ report on Fou-
c r u t C s d o cto r a l d isscr ta tio n . Did ie r Er ib o n p ubl i sl red the report 1991
'n
(st b e l o r l , fir st e n tr y u n d e r 1 9 9 1 ) .
l9 E7
" 1 , l ) c c r ( l c n cc d e I' id 6 e d e p r o g r is, Bo u c d c mi tophtri quc ct d. no.dl .92
( 1 9 8 7 ) . p p .4 l? - 5 4 .
1i6
"l -ccturc et s ouv eni rdc J .an B nrn." i n Ftanqoi sD agognetet al ., Il ne phi l < x ophi t
du s eui l :H onnage < i J d.rnB .u, (l l i j on: E di ti ons U ni v c rs i i ai res (l ! D i j on,
198 7), pp. l -7.
P ubl i s hc d i n a Fc s ts c hri l tpres rnrerlto J eanB run, a Frtnc h phi l os opher
w ho had bc c n a * url tnt of C angui l hc m at thr I v c i ! Ferm.rt. i n Torrl ous e,
i n 1 917.
"D i scou rs dc Mons i c ur C c orpes C angui l hem prononc 6 l e 1" d6c enrbn' 1987 ,;
I'occasion de la rcmist' ,lt' lr Midaille d'or du CN RS." .rr'ldoillc rJbr du CNR.\
/9t7 (P ari s :C c ntre N ati onal de l a R ec herc hcS c i enti fi que, 1987).
A nv o-page pri nted tc x t of C angui l hc m' s ac c c ptanc e s peec h ol the
C N R S ' s gol d mc dal for s c i c nti tl c ac hi ev ements .
"A verti ss ement c l es6di teurr i Ia premi ere 6di ti on," i n J c an C rv ai l l as , .l ur /o
(' tth ed., P ari s :V ri n, 1987), pp. i x -x i i i .
I.ogi queet Ia thtori ede Io rc ,err.,r
T he l l ts t three edi ti ,rns , begi nni ng i n 1947,had been publ i s hc d b' thc
P .cs s c sU ni v er\i tai r(' r d(, Frnnc e.
J-etout'oB y ouri( l bk l o: H .rs c i Ll ni v c r\i ry P ,c r(, 1987).
Japanesrtranslation. bl llrkehiu.lilizanr,r, ol ltliorn,i
':t
L Potholoatquc.
"P rel i ce," /Irtt' rr und l rrhnol og_r' 4
(198?I, pp. 7-10.
T hi s tc x t $a\ C angrri l hem\ c onrri buti on to "S c i enc e: l a rc n,ri x ,rnc c
d'un e hi s toi re," a c ol l ,x gui um hc l d i n memory ol A l ex andre K oy re i n P ari .
on Junc l 0-14, l 9tl 6. l t i > pri nted here i s the i ntroduc ti on to a s pec i alj our
n:l i s s ueofthe proc eedi ngsol that c ol l oqui um.
1988
IdcoloSl.vond Rdtiondlitt n ttu Histor.r ol rhe LtJi Srienccs,trans. Arthur (iold
ham mer { C ambri dge. MA : N l l -r P n' s r. l 98l t).
. ri s c < l Frtnc h edi ti on (1981); ex trrc ts i n'
Trans l ati < ' nof the s ec c rnrl rc
cl uded i n thi : readrr.
"P rascn tati on," i n )res S c h* anz . Fy i nel l .t n onnok ' onc e < l u rnttti l (P dr;s :
E (l i t i ons S oc i al!s .1988), pp. l 9-22.
"l c S tnt ut c pi s ti mol ogi rl ue rl c l a mi dc c i nc ," l l nni ),.rntl P hi b' opht of th. l 4i
417
 A V TAL FAT ONAL 5T

S c i r n c e sl0 ( su p p l., 1 9 8 8 ) ,p p . l5 - .1 9 . "Pr!sc nc .rti on," i n Franqoi r D el aportc , H ,rroi rc r/r i o /i :r,rc
l ouni { Ir.rri s :I} rv ot,
l n c l u ( lcd in th is r e r d e r . l eS q), pp. l t l l .
l l a n s h o o o i n cnn o r cktsh(r lb lyo : tio * i L ln n e r sitv Prcs\, l 9i Jft). l i ans l ared i nro S pani s hi n I989. F.ngl i s hi n l 99l rtul J ap:n$( (i n prfs !).
lapancse translrtion. bv (\amu Kananrori, ot I o lorntotion tlu nnept rlt "Pr61 i c c ," i n A nne Iragoc l .argeaul t,Lts C ous c s& l d noft: U i s toi rcnantrc l l c .t

l octeurr d. ri s qu' : (P i ri !: V ri n / Lv (,ni Ins l i rur i nt.,(l i s c i pl i ni i rL (l ' atudes

" t r \ r n t i , . o n cr p t ! u lS,r ir ct q L r e stjo np h ilo v,phi que," C i ts Ju ti ni noi rt cpi s ti nrol ogi quc s . l 9R 9), p. x i i i .
t u p h n u op h te 8 : l( r J.r r ti ( Str a sto u r g : Ed itio ns C (:ntrr de D ocrmcntati on "Pr6sc ntrIi on," i n,l .l i Lhtl FouLouhphl os ophc : R c nc ontrei ntc n.tti onnl 4 P dri s9,
e n I I i s t o i ( d e 1 aPh ilo so p h ic, l9 lltl) , p p . ll9 3 3. 10, tt j dnrter /988 (P ari s :S c ui l , l 9l l 9), pp. I l -12.
I h c te xt o la le cn r r e g ivcn r t th r tln ive r si (v oi Strasbourgi n l l av l 9l i 8. B l td on a l rrr thr c ol l ol ui Lrnr or!.ani z erlhr the l w rc i .rti on pour
' pec (h
P L r b l i s h cda s a L ,r ,tltt in l9 9 tl.,r n r l ig a in , in pnrt, rr thc i ntroducti on to r l e C c nrre Mi c hel I ouerul t.
b o o l i n 19 9 2 , u n d r r th e litle " t a \a n t6 . ve r ite du corps." "P rrl i c i o," i n Ffi i nqoi s l )el aportt , H i s rori o < l cl u frc hre anortl l o (C emc a: 1tl I

U Nn$1. 1989), pp. l 1-1.1.

198 9 S p,!ni s htri n\l i i i .,n D l rhe rc x r publ i ,h(d l i nr i n 1,ft.n(h (s ef abol r,
rhr(c rntri c s up).
" l e s N l a l a d ie s," in An d 1 6 J;co b , td ., F n cyclo pi di cphi l osophi queuni R B .11.:
vo l. J ( Pa r is:P( :sse sUnnersi tai ft r de Fri n.r. l 9i J9),
I ' t l n t r . t s p h ilo so p h tq u .. 1990
p p . l l l ] -1 6 .

l n c l u ( l.d in th is r r a d cr . "P hi l ov rphi e d' unc ev i c ti on: I' obj c t c orl rc l a rhos c ,' A c y uc r/c rni ,tophv s nptet
" P h v s i o l o g i e , I' Ph lsio L ,g ie a n im a le - t) b jcctil! et meth(xl r," fnctcl apaedrt dc mor.,/c95.1(1e90). pp. 125 29.
r l n , ' r . ' d l iJ l8 ( 2 n d cr l.. Pa r is: In c!clo p a cd ir tl ni versrl i s France, 1989), t{ t!i c $ ol I:r.Ir!oi \ t)ag,,gne(,I /,)4,jd. /i )r/.. ( P .),i \: \rri n, 198.)).
pp.:44-46. Id Santi . ,ont"pr w l ttntrt c r querti onphl auphni ur (P i r-B J l mai S abl .\. t990).
J t e p r in t lr o m th t lir st e d itio n . A thi rtv { i x pi tgebook l et rc pri nri ng th. rert Ii rs r publ i rhc d i rr l L)tl i J .
" R a S u l a ( i o n( e p istcn n ilo g ie ) ,"fr .!.lo p d c./id u n ivcrsal rr
2j (znrl ed.. P ari s:Fnc\-

c l o p . t c < l irUn ive n .r lis F .n n ce , 1 9 8 9 ) . p p . 7 l l- l l . l 9 9l

l { c p r in t lr o m th e lir st e d iti0 r .

"\ie," L n c . r tlo p o e d tou n ir tso lx 2 ) ( 2 Dd cd ., Pa r i r: Lncycl opacdi a Ll ni versal i s ''R app< ,n dc l \{ . U angui l hc n s ur l f drpo,J r p,rr l \1. N ti c hc t fouc rutr,
' n.rnu\c ri t
F r r n t e . 19 8 9 ) , p p . 5 1 6 - 5 3 . di rti teur dr: l l ns ti tut l ran(.ri s rl t l l ambours . L,n ruc de l ' oLti .nri on rtrr
R c p rin t lio m r h r iir st r r litii) n i txce r p ts fr,'nr thr l i r:t cdi ri ,rn are i n- pfrD j \ d' i nrpri nl c r (,,mrnf rhi s c prj n.' pal e dc ,l (,(rori t a' l e n.\."
c l u d t d i n th is r ta r lcr . C .ngui l hem' s rrp,rrt (i pri l 19. tt)60) on Fouc aul t' sdoc t< i raidi s s trt.r-
T t u N o r n t o l an d th t Pa tn o lo ticd(l Nr w x,r k: Z o n e Bool s, l 98e). l i on t' l l bl i s hed under rhc ri tl e tol rc t < l i nts on: tl ts totrcrtu to
l l l tL d t' nat
t l e p r in t ( ,fth ( tr ln sh tio n p u L li.h r d b v Re i dtl i n 1971];r\tri (rs i nci uded .l d $i q.r. (P ari s :pl (,n, l q6t), i n t)i < ti tr F-ri hon..l t,(fr.//du.dul r(2n(l c (t., t,i ri s :
i n t h i s r e a d cr . Fl .rmnrari on,l 99l ). j ,p. l 5 U -6l .

.+]8 419
"Qu'est cc quirn philosophe !n Francc aujout<l'hril" Connentdt. l.+.sl (Spring P :rti al repri nt of the rex t publ i s hed ov i c e before, under the ti tl e "L' 1

I 9 9 l ) , p p . IttT - l2 . santa.c onc c P t v ul E ri rc c t .l uc s ti (,n P hi l os oP hi que' ' ' i n 1988 and 1990
di notio e
( ) cca sio n e d b v th e a s' a r d in g o i th c JeanC rvai l l cr Pri ze ro I(an-P i crre l<l.ologia 4 zion.tlitd nclla ttotia d.11. \.i'n/' dcllo vito: Nuovi studi
scicnrc(Florence: La Nuova Italia Editricc' 1992 )'
Saris for his book ,tlocfiin( ct tonnmicdtion lPari;: Vrin, 1987), ar the Ecole filosoficd.lle
Trnns l nti on,$ i rh .n i ntroduc ti on bl l ac quts C ui l l c mt (:ee bek rw ' P a*
N o r m n le 5 u p ir ie u r c, M r r ch 1 0 . 1 9 9 0

" l l e g e l en F r a n ce ,",lfa q o lin elittlr cn c 2 9 3 lNov. I99l ), pp.26-29. Tw o). by P aol aJ c ni s ol the 1988 Frenc h rev i s ededi ti on'

f.xtr a cts fr o m r h c a ( icle p u b lish e d in 1949.

I 'Honnc de ltdsohdansh non.I d? Coptnic (Pitis: Lahorat<riresDcl.lgrangt. I991 ). 1993

A r e p r in t, ls a b o o kle r , o fth e a r ticle fi rst publ i shed i n 1965.

" T i m o i gn n q e ." in So citlti d cr
( D e c. l9 9 l ) . p p . 2 0 - 2 3 .
<lcr
m is < leI' Eco le n,rror.rl c B ul /rri n 186 "Lc C er v eau er l n pens ee," i n Geory J .rC dr)rui /hetn: P tul as oP ht'hi s torrn
'upl ri eurc,
(6 7-t < l i c enbrc 1990)l P ari s : A l bi n N 4i c hel '
sci c n.es .A c tesdu c otl o< 1ue

C) :rJe a nHr p p o lir e . 199 3), pp. I l -l l .

"Prelice," in Fr.rnsois Delaporte, The Historv oJ Ycllow /:.rer (Cambridge, N4A: R .p.i nt ol rhe n(i c l e ori gi nal l y publ i s hed i n 191t0;the s ubti tl es that

M I T I' r e ss, l9 9 l) , p p . ix- r i. harl bc en arl l ed br the j ournal ;rc omi ttc d, and s onrc oi thc ori gi D al P ar' )-

En q lish r r a n sla tio no f r h e t( .xt fir st p ubl i shed i n Irt'nch i n 1989. qrap hi ng has heen rt' es tabl i rhed(tec p. 1l n l )'
et lo
K o l l o k ush Ko g a lu tcxu r a lu Kcn lr l ( T o kvo : Hosei U ni ver\i ty Press,l 99l ). "l 'rei i ce," i n fac quesP i quemal , fs s ai ser /el ons' l ' hi s tune' J c10 ni dec i nc ' l c

Japanc:etr.rnslarion. bv Os:mu Kan.rnrori, Shunsrrkcfvlatsuura,Shoujift,rr bi ojori . (P arj \: P rc l s c \ Ll ni l trs i tai rts d( Fri nc c , l 9q3)' P P 7-8

Koga, Muncvoshi Hvoudou, li*rko Moriwakiand Kiiko Hiranatsu, oi Erudcr ''P rcl :ce." i n Frangoi s D c hportc , (tuntts u no t& nhi (fok v o: l U i s uru S hobo'

l htstotc ct dc ph onphic d.\ scitntcs. I9rl I ).

l l rs t P ubl i s hedi n Frenc h i n 198' r'
J i panes r trans l i ti on ofthe te' (t
t992

"l'ostlice." in Jcan Ga,\on, t<l.. BuJfon E8: Actcs du Colloquc inrernotional Parx- Pa r t Tw o

Vri n ' l yon: In5ri tur i ntcr,

. t l o ml,u J- Dt1 o n\Pa r is: L ib r a ir ic Ph ilo scrphi qrre
C { J MME N Ts o : l C^Ncull lII 11's WoRKs
d i s c ip lin a ir e d ' 6 tu d e sip isr 6 m o lo g iq u e s, 1992). pp. 745 .19. l SEL Fc TI o N { rr R Fv rL w s
^ND
" O u v e r tu r e ," in Elisib cth Ro u d in csco , d ., P ens.'rl o fol i c: l :sats sur i ctu]
/ o u ca u lr ( Pa r is:Ga lil6 e , 1 9 9 2 ) , p p . le - .+ 2. 1933
Op e n in g a d d r e ssg ive n a t th c co llo q ui um on the "l l i sroi r! de l a fol i e

t r e n tr .,.r n s:p r t\s,"h e ltl b ,r th e So ci6 t!d 'hi st.i re dt l a psr<hi arri r tr ,l r l .r l rrrmon rl .\ron. " R i fl trn rrs s ur l c ' prc i l i rmc i nti grrl ' ." I i l ' ' ' ! P k ' i "J r( Fth l 9II)'

p s y c h n n a l\se in
, Pa r is,o n No vcm b cr 2 1 , 1991. pp. 96 99.

" L J s i n t6 , v6 r iti d u co r p s," in l\' l;r r icAg n is Bi j rn.rftl i s,ed., L'hontneer Ia nntt On "l r I' ai x \i n!.es enc " (l el 2).

( P r r i s: Se u il. 1 9 9 2 ) .p p .9 - ls.

4.lo -14|
 CR T CAL B BLIOCRAPHY

1959
1946

c t d,
D a n i e l t a g a.h c, " L e No r m a l e t le p a r h o lo g iq r r ed'aprts
GcorgesC angL.ri l hem"' Jean t he orl ori di r, R ev i eu ol "l r:r C onc c pts c l e ' l uttc p,rrrr I' ex i s tc nc e'
(19'+(')'pP l l T- i {)' \el ec ti on natu.el l e' (1959)," A tuhi v .t i ntunol i ondl e' .1' hN oi rcdes ' i i ,r' c ' l l )
B u l l t t u t tle1 o ta cttti < te slcxr cd e Stt' r r b o u r tl4
w as r>fthe earl r (195e), pp. l l -31.
A r e vie \vo l Ca n g u ilh e m \ le ' l1 !tu d ) la gachc' 'vho '>nt
the E col c N ormal e
p r o p o n cn ts o l p sych o r n a lvsisin F r a n cc, h ad entcrccl
rt the Ll ni - 1964
S u p i ' r i cu r r in 1 9 l' t, th e r .r n r c' ca r ' r sCa n tr r il hcrn l l e 'rl st'tl rqht
l :s:l so ptrb-
v r r s i t v oi Str a r h r u r g r vh e n h t !vr d e th is a r ti cl c l hi s revi et
in th e Rcrue de ni rcP hv'i qu< ct dc norol t P i rrre Mac hc rc ), "1.r thi l os ophi . (l { ,l i i c i enc e de ti c trgc s C ;ngui l hc n. Ii pi s ti
l i s l r t d , in a slig h tly sh o r ttr fo r m ,

5 l ( 1 9 a6 ) , p p . 3 5 5 - 7 0 mol ogi e c t hi s toi re des s c j c nc ts ," I(7 P c nrL l I I (196' { ), P P . 5(l 7a

W i th a l i rre* ord bv Loui s A l thu\1er. pP 5(l -5' 1.

t9 s 6
1967
le (Pari s: PressesU ni -
P . D e l r u n n v, Rcvics o f Io Io tn .ttio n Ju co n a l l l c"
d'J J"'n(r! e
v e , \ i t a ir cs d ! Iir r n ce , 1 9 5 5 ) ' ,lr ch vcs in tcr nati onal es
'l ti rroj rf Jfi n Li croi 11,"Le N ormal rtIepathol ogi rl trr' ,"1c )l onde,l an.l l -9(19b1),P ll.
( 1 e 9 6 ). p p . l6 l- 6 2 . Rc v i ov ol the 1966 c (l i ti ,)n ol the booL puhl i s htd Lrnderthat !i t l c
au I l // x l'/t'" Iiicl'r i Prr i\:
F.ll., Rcvict ol t,r fonnorn n Ju conc':y tlc rll"rr 't
56 (1956)'
t ' r e ' s . s L ln ivr r sita ir cs d t F r a n ce , 1 9 5 5 ) , I' tl nni e P stchobtl i '|@ 1968

P ile'
( ) nly th c iu th o r ' s in itia ls a r c g ite n
Frederi c L Il ol mes , R c v i t' rvol C l aude B trnar(i , l .(o,r J U f l rr P hdnotni nc sdt Io
ri c c.mol un\.rur rrni m.ruy .r,i u\ v i < r,rrdur(P i \: V ri tt, Lq66). i n l i r 5e.l
r95',:
(1968), pp. 149-50.

t i . Itudo l ph. R t' r' i r.* ol C l .rudt s c rnard, l c qonss ur i l phi nonti nc s< l ek nrc Lont-
t \ n , , n \ ' r ' r u sl. t{ e !i.s o f t,i F o r n o tto ntlu < o n tt1'tdc 'LJl f\' du\ '\ | //' et Il '///'
,l rurr dl l \ dntn.,u\ .t du i l /i r.ru\ (P i ri s : V ri n, 1966), i n.l r.hr,.(,nr./l l .r
tl c rni rttphvuque
r t , c / c r(Pa r i!: Pr csse stln ivcr sita ir e stJeF r a n ce' 1955)' kvuc
ti o.d l c s.1' hi s toi rc
< 16 2l .82-i J I (196E), pp. 196-97.
' c i .rc c J
. r < i ! r ro r d l.6 l ( 1 95 7 ) Pf.9 9 - l{ ) 1 .

1970
l9 5 E

\l,ruro Di (;iandomcnicr,,Revirs of I.rur/esd'hittorc er dc phlotophicdrr r.r'..r

dc ri fl ^c dr^ 'tt/i " cr
i \ l v i n P l )o b stva g e , Rcvir :r ' o l /- o to r n a tio n rl u conLC P t
.1(1970).pp. I I l-1.1.
(Paris:\i in, 1968), /:ptrrcmr
1955) PhtosLph and
{ l / / / ' !ta .1 c\( Pir is: tr r r \\c\ Un ive r sita ir csJt Francc'
56s 69'
ln Itrli.rn.
l f i i n o n cr o i ,q ico / Rcr ca r .} lil ( sfPt' 1 9 5 7 - Junc 1953)' PP

.1 4 l
442
 .-. RIT]CA L A]B!IOGRA Pts Y

A n n e t t e La vcr r . " ljo r a ' Co m n r itte d ' Histr r r r of.S ci encc," H t:torr o] Sti enct9
hi stoi re dc r rc i enc es ; Ie rari onal i s nreappti qu6
( 1 9 7 0) . p p . 1 0 1 - 1 0 S. dts s c i enc esbi ol ogi ques ,,.
di sc us s esC nngui l hem' s epi s tc rrol ogi c al v i ew s .
A s ec ond edi ri on w i e pub-
Revicw ol Erutlcsd h,rrone et .le philotuphic .lessc;tnces(paris: Vtin, l96ti).
l i shed i n 1979.

19? l
1974

F. Courtis. Review of/nttuduljon i) I'htsto;rcdesr.iercc!, vol. I (paris: Hachcttc,
t 9 7 1 ) , Etu d $ p h ilo so p h ;g u cs
2 6 ( t9 7 t ) , p p . 12.+-25.
t97 2
Ylon Gauthier, Revierv ol Io ,,nollirna tudtjon d.s
doctines ;nformcJ (par,s: Vrin,
1963), k r 65 ( t974), pp. 5 27_28.
I r.:nqojs Russ.,, "Epist!mologic er hisroire dcr
sciences,,,.tf. hnes tfcphtlosaphic
37 (19' 74),pp.6t7-57.

A rev i c s es s .ryrhat c ommenrs on man! ofC angui l hc m,s

w ork s .
D o m i n i q ue L e co u r r , Po u u n c ( r itiq u c d . 1 ' q 1 s l A ',o/orrc
(pari \: Mrspero, 1972). G. Quan ,r. "C . C angui l hc n:. s tori c o dc l a :c ;c nz d,,, prorc goro
It tl l t971l ,
C h a p te r 3 : "L ' Histo ir e 6 p isr a m o lo g iquede C eorgcs C angui l hem,,'pp.
pp.9s- 96.
64-97.
l i r a n e o i s R o sso , "Ch r o n iq u c d e s scie n ce sd e la \ j e." ,.1rc}r,ejde phtosophi c)\
r977
(1972), pp. a69-508.

A n e ssa vr svir s, in clu d in Sc,,m m e n r so n numeruus*.orl s ofC angui thcm. J.A . Schu s ter,R ev i ew of l o .U athtnoti s ati ond$ do,:tt,nc si nfome\ (pari \:
|i e.
Jean Srarobinski, Revieu of Itudes r/lrstoi,c et dc phitosophie.]er r.ren.er (paris: tn.\i u , t9' 7)), A nnal soJ .tri e,c el 4 (1977),
pp. 78,8t.
v r i n , r9 6 8 ) , Bu fe !in o l' th . H$ to t,t o f ,| .d io n..+6 (re72 pp. s8-89.
),
1978
1973
,\{i chel Fouc aul t, "tnrroduc rj on," i n
C eorges C anS ui l hem. On thc N ornot and
LheP athol ogrot(D ordrec ht: R ei del , 1978),
Jamcs L tarson, Revie* of Erurjcsdhistoire et.lc phitosophie der rcieD(.J (piris: pp. i x _rx .
V r i n , 19 6 8 ) , Ir s 6 4 ( 1 9 7 3 ) . p p . ll5 - 1 6 For a s )i ghtl _yrl i l l erent traos l ati on ()1 the
s amc rex r, 5!e l ec on(i enrrv
l \ ' t . E c k , " f c No r m a l e t le p a tb o lo g i< 1 u c,"L a Noutel l c prcsstni dkal c 2.t ()an. under 1980.
trerctt N lc nrl el s ohn,.,E di rori alN ore,,' i n
l 9 ? 3 ) , p p .5 l- 5 6 . C ;c orgesC angui l hc m, On the N trnnl
A <lcfcn :e o f Ca n g u iib cm s r ie n p o in t and rhc P othol ogi ot l D ordrec ht: R ei det,
agai nst att.rcks made t,r F. l 97B ). pp. rx i i j -rs i r:
ci useppe Q uarta, "tdeol ogi a
D u y c l a cr ts in h is b o o k Io No t' r .n.le n o m ol cn pychol ogi cc/,nniue (pari s: e s tori a del tc s c renTei n (;. C angui l hc nl ,,,B ol /ef,ro
.1i della fttost{k) 6 (r978), pp. 219_5r.
Vrin, 1954). 'totia
M i . h c l F i .h a r !. "L ' 6 p i\r im o lo g jc e n fr a n ce ," i n F-raneoi sC hatt.L,t, cd., Za

p h i l o s op h ito u 2 tl siicle( Pitr is:H,ch e tte , l9 ? I ), pp. 129-?t. 1979

F r rt !- o u r o l th i\ e ssa ! ( p p . l6 l- 7 0 ) , u ndcr rhe ti tl e..E pi stemol ogi (,cr

Wi 'l l I epc ni c s .,.V orl ,emel k ung
rl es l tc raus gebc rs ,,,j nC eorgrs C angui thc nr,
,ri J _

441
44\
 A V TAL RAT ONAL 5T OGRAPHY

u n .l Ep n kn n lo Bje : Gc' d n n.h. A uhntu, w ol i Lepeni cs. 198?

' . n s c h a fttg e s.h r h te
c d . ( l ' r a n klu r t a m i\' la in :Su r kh a m p \e r lilg , l97e).
l n t rr r d u ctio n to th is r e a d e r . N l . S h o r t l a n d ,"l l i sta se r ( i $ h !o l L j l c."i ( /cd l o g r d n d C ,n r .i o u r n .$ 9 ( t9 tr r - 8 2 ) ,

S . , \ l . r r c u L c i, Rcr jo v o f la co n a sr o tvt ,fcllo tir r (tl ol oS ni : l l l \l ul i no, 1976), p p . l l i- 2 2 .

RNntu c tt.d .lt \toti.t tltlh llksolia l4 ( I') 7r)). pp. 2 26- I l. i A rer i.$ ol On rhc Ntnro/ ,rnrtrhr.foriolooroi
{l)onlrccht,
'. l97n).
1980 'lamavo,Rul P6rez,
tifr..r (rU(\i.o: Ft Colcgji,Naci.,nal,1982).
A c ri ti c al ev al uari onol C angui l hc m\ rv ork , i n p.rrti c ul ar/hc ,\brn,a/.rnJ
Onrella Costa. Revieu ol idiolo17icct rationnltl .l<tn' l8 s(icnus Je 1o vic (Paris:
th? Pathol oU !rc |.
on ?p. tS + 1.
\ r r i n . l 9 l7 ) , - S.;cn r nlls ( 1 9 8 0 ) , p p . 2 2 ? - 3 5 .

N l i c h e l F o u ca u lt, "Cco r g cs Ca n g u ilh e m : Ph ilo s opher ol Irror." tdcol ol y and

1983
C o n s c i ou sn css
? {1980), pp. 51-62.

l i a nsla tio n b v Gr a h a m Bu r ch e ll b a r e d o n tbr: samt Frcoch ori gi nal uscd

C hri stophc r Larrrenc e, R ev i e$ ol (;(orges C angui l hc m, On the N omot anrt thc
b r C a r o lyn R. F a sce tt in 1 9 7 8 fi,r th c in tr rrl ucti on to hcr transl ati on of
Potholol l i Lal(D ordrec hr: R c i drt. te78), anrl ofl : K r;upt Tarl or, /i c
C on
I h c N r rn a l a n d ttu Pa th o lo g ir d l.lh e fr e n ch tert used bv the tso transl a-
oJ IIlness,Dkeoscond )1thus (Canbridge: Cambridgc Universitv t,rcr(,
':epts
r o r s d i t l cr s in m a n y wa vs lio m r h r t p u b lir h c rl i n Fn,nr h i n l 9i l 5 unrl rr thc
1919). B ri hh l ourntt b h. rk ,,f -\.k ' ,n. j 6 (1981), pp.9t_96.
r j t l e " L i t Vie , I' e \p e r ie n ce e t la scie n ce " ( se c bfl '^\. un(l (r Iq85).

C , ' l i n ( ; ( , ( l o n , " T h c No r m a l .r n d th c P.r th o lo g ic al A

: N ote on C eorgesC angui l -
1984
h L r n , l <lu n o g ro n d Co n r .,d ,r r r .i j ( 1 9 8 0 ) . p p. l l 16.
R L r r s t l l N l a u litz, Rcvics o l On ttu No r n to l .tn d th. P .tthol ogi ftl (l )ordrccht:
$/i l l i ,rm C ol eman, [Lx trac ts rrorn rhc c i rati on rv ri ttc n
and rei (t b! $,i i .rnr
R e i d e l , 1 9 7 1 1 )/si,l1
, ( l9 liO) , p . 6 7 ,+ .
C ol ema n, on rhe oc c as i dr oi rhe a* anl ol thc S arton l \{ edalol .the l l i s ton
ol Sci e nc e S oc i r:ty to (i rc rgrs C angui l hrm, on 28 Oc t< ,ber l r)ul l ,,.pri l e
198.
i nnouncc menrs ,' /' i r 75.2 (198.1),p. 157
,.Gtl rgts
\ \ i A . A l b u r y , Rcvicr v o l On tlc No r m a l a n < lth e kt hol ognal (D ordrecht: R ci del , Jcan P i errr:C hri ti en (;oni , C angui l hc rn. 190.1_,'i ,n Il eni s I tuy s mnns ,
1 9 7 8 ) , C lio .a h d ico 1 5 ( 1 9 8 1 ) ,p p . Il5 - 1 6 . etl ., D ttti onnoi rc < l c tphi l L,hph$,2 v ol s . (tl ari s : prrs s es U ni v ers i tri res
dc
l \ l i l c S h o r t l a n d ," ln tr o d u ctio n to Ce o r g e sCa n gui l hem." R oJrco/P i i l osopl r'29 France, 1984).v ol . I, pp. 16r)-65.

( r e8r )P
. P.l 9 -2 0 . An a n:l v s i sol C angui thc rr' snri r rork s .
, \ n o te o n Ca n g u ilh e m ,in tr o d r r cin ga n F ngl i sh tr,rn\l i ti ,'n ol "Qu'cst'ce

q u ' u n c id e o k,g ie r citn tiliq u t? " t985

1 4 i r t i n 5 t n u m , Rcvicr vo fOn r ic \,r m o ln J
1 9 ' 7 , \ 1l,o u n o l a f th e ttsto r v o l tltJu n t
u8-ll9.
r h t Pathol a4KolL)ordrecht:
( R ei del ,
d n .l .A l hc.lS .i enct:'36 (1981), pp.
I hc Ibl l orvi n garti c l * ,,r,. pubti ,he(l
i n i s p(r i .rti s s ur ot B c y rer/cni r,tphrs ry ut
ct dc norc l e 90.1(l 9U t ) d.!o((< i (. C ani tui l henr:

416 417
l r r n q o i r D ag o g n e t," tln l. o e u \r e e n r r o is tcDr Ps "'pp 29-l U ' on "l e N ormal c t l e pathol ogi que en ques ti on" i n honor ofC angui l hc m:

C a ng u ilh e m h a r l b e e n Dn g o g n e t' sd isse rttrti onsuP crvi sor' Franqoi sD agogn* , "Le N ormal et l e pathol ogi que." pp. 7-10;

N l i c h e l F o u ca u lt, " L a Vic, l' cxp!r ie n cee t la scicnce"'pp. l -14' Je an-C l audcB eaul ne,"C anqui l hem, Fouc aul t rt l c s autres ," pp. Jl -20r
'I o f F o u ca u lt' s in tr o ducti on to thc E ngl i sh trnn\l a'
h e F r e n ch C h ri s ti ane S i ndi ng, "R el i re C angui l hem. l )c l a N onl )ti v i 16 i l a norm.r-
' cr sio n
r i o n o f l e No r m o /ct /c p tth o lo tliq u .. l i tc," pp. 2l - 2 5;

l l e n r i P i q u i g n o t, "( ;( i,r g cs Ca n g u ilh e m ct h m ideci nt"'pp )9-;{)' tl e nri P i qui gnot, "La C l i ni que fac c au del i tec hni qrre." pp. 2?-1l r

C a n g u ilh e m h a d wr itte n a p r e fa ce to I' equi gnoC sbook' l i {t//tr cr i rrc Anne Fagot Largc aul t."l ' c rs un nouv eaunatur;rl i s me,"pp. 13-38;

r,cur, in 1981. D eni s V ers ant,"E pi s temol ogi e de I' i nc c rtai n," pp. l 9-46r

J a c q u e sP i qu e m a l, "C. Ca n g u ilh e m , p r o fe sse u rde

Tcrmi nal e (1937-1938): U n
t H c rv 6 Le ts ras ,"l a ' nomrc ' di mographi quc : P ol i ti quc et i i l 6rl l ogi c dan\

E s r i d c t6 m o ig n a g e ." p P 6 3 - 8 3 l es sci enc ess oc i al es ,"pp.47-50;

Inrl
l a c r lu cs Piq u e n r a l h a d h ccn a stu d e n t ol C rngui l hem i n Toul otrs< C i l tes E rri eau, "(l n P r.rti c i rn (i re aux c ,> nc eprs :' N ornr.l ' er' pIth,'

l a t e r i n Pa r is. Iogi qu e' pour l e g6n6ral i s rc ."pp. 5l -5 2;

j c r n J a c q u e sSa lo m o n ,"Cco r g e s Ca n g u ilh cn l o u l r moderni ta," PP . s2 62 S i uart F. S pi c k er,"L' U n et l e mul ti pl c : L' E pi s ti mol ogi e m6di c al e l i an-
S a l o m o n h a d b e e n a stu d cn t o fCr n g u ilh cm i n P ari s qai scvue des L|S A ," pp.53-59;

B e r t r a n dS a in t- Se r n in ", Ce o r g cs Ca n g u iJh e r ni ln Sorbonne"'Pp. 84-92. Irra n{ oi sR av eau,"P our un di al (} guena(urc /c ul tLrre:Les V uesde I' anthr< r
S a i n t- se r n inh a d b ce n a stu d e n t o fCa n g ui l htm at the S orbonnc p<,l oq i eD r6di c al e."pp. 6l -6)i
( lcs tr tr viu x d e Ce orgts C angui l hem," pp 9s-105 ( h i rl es E ri s \c t, "La' l )ouN e'
[ ; \ n o n v n r r ' !s]. "Eib lio g r ip h ic hi s roi rc rk l a l ol j e: A ranr et apri s l a ps v ,
T h i s b ib lio g r r p h r Pir tia lly co ve r sCiin g ui l htm s Iri ti ngs and gnes a l i 'r rhi ,rtric ...." pp. (tl -66;
o f C a n g u ilh e m ' s co u r se s a t th e F a cu lt[ r lrr l cttres of the U ni \crti rc de Mi rc el C ol i n trn(lThi errr Gui c hard, "D 6v i anrL' . ps !c hi atri c et s oc i etc :
S t r a d n u r g , a t th e So r b o n n ea n d a t th e In stirut d'hi stoi rc dcs sci ences. Lcs Imp ui s s anc esdu c orps v rc i al ," pp.67-69;

G.fl. Brieger, Review ol On the Nornol ond th. fddolotirdl (Dordrecht: Reidel' l \l i rei l l e D el mas l \' l arty ."N ornrc s et droi t: R c pi re5 pour unc ' mi 5e en
1 9 1 8 ) , Bu llctino l th t Ht' to r r o f M e d icin c5 9 | 1935 )' pp l 32-33 <rrmpati bi l i t6."' pp. 7l -76r

I'r,l nqoi s eC ai l l , "Fx empl ai n, oc i rnographi e...Le N ornral ' en 16,ol u,

l9 E6
ri on pe rmanente," pp. 77-79.
Sl La( f. S pi c k er,' A n Introduti ,)n to thc Medi c al E pi s remol ogy of (;eorges
C.M.P.Nl. I Iertogh, Btthelard en CanBuilh.n: tP'\tenolo{lische Discontttu'Ictt en
C anguil hem: l \' l ov i ng bc rond N 4i c hc l Fouc aul t." The J ourndl ol
h e t n c d *h n a r n b u o r ip ( Am ste r d a m : VU Ui l geveri j ' 1986). ' ttedi c i ne
ontl P hi l os op l 2 (l 9l l 7), pp. l e7-411.
D . C h c v r o to n , Re vie r r .r iDu Dd vclo p p cn e n ti I'i vol uti on (P ari s: Pre:res U ni -
An .rnalvsisofOr rrSc,\'ornol antl rhc Patholollical.
86 (1986)' pp.2?5-76'
v e r s i t air csd e F r n n ce . l' 1 8 5 ) , /:' ln n lc Pr - r cloi oi Trgur
\l i s<1utz(i rrc i a, "La c ri ti (J rl r l a hi s tori r rl ogmi ti ta rl e l as c i t:nc i .rsen l ,r

1987 epj srrmol D gi adc (;eorgesC angui l hc m," i n A ngfl l U . L.,rc n,o, J os e L. h*

set itnd Francisc(' V;squtt, l.stuitos lc historiatb los rrn'trr,vol. 1: Lockc,IIunte,

lhe journal rrorp.dirctt Sanrdpublishcda specialissuc'+0(Winter 1986-87) C drgdtl nen (t.os P al ac i os ,V i l l afranc a:A .M. Lorrnz o, 1987),pp.95-126.

416 4.+9
P i c h o t , A n dr i. Rcvi$ v o l Du Divclo p p tn tcn rA f i nl utj on (I'.l ri s: P re\sesU ni - tnn of l rc nc c l c ambti dgc , l \' l A : Itarv ard Ltni v ers i o t,res s , l 9B 8),,r|.,.i ,.d/

'12 { 19i 37), pp. 3 29- 30.

v c r s i t a i r csd c tr r a n ce ,1 9 85 ) , fr u d cJ p l5 iio r o p.rri gucs H ,r.orf 14 (1990), pp. l l l 1.1.
Rogct Smith, Rev'ew of/rlcoloor: and Rationdhtv in th. Itktorl ol the Ltfc Sticnccs

1988 (C rmb .i dge, J \' l A :Ml t P rc s , l 9l l l l ) and ol l hc N rrma1 dn.t th. P dthoh\fdl

(N .w York : Zone B o(,k s , l 9l J 9), /nn.rt ol S .,c n...17.2(1990). pp. 199-201.

F r a n q o i sA z o u vi, " Ca r g u ilh cm , Cco r g e s," lc Dii,.,r 50 (i U a\-A ug. 1988).p. 216.
t99l
A s ho r t b io g r a p h ica ln o tice .

Jo) l l )^cv, R ev i eu of /r/c o/ogrond R dti onol i t).i n thc tti s to ol the Li /. S .k nc c s
198 9
(C rnbri (l gc . MA : N l l l P res s .l el ti l ), /' i ,82 (1991).p.610.

firll j,rrion. Rttn'u <tf I<liololltctt rortordlirl (P,rris: Vrin, \97'7), Revucde l'lnnitut
C a r ) ( ; u t t i ng , .tlich cl lo u co u lt s Ar L h a ca b o J S.i cnti l i . R coron (C ambrr,l ge,
J. i t.,.r/.,4r. I I(l e9l ).tp. 167 70.
C a m b r i dg t' Un i' ,:r sit1 Pr t' ss.1 9 8 9 ) .
(;. K.irn1. Relict! oi tladoqy and Rationaltt! in th. Histar). ol th. I
+; Scjcn..\
I n c lu d e s: d iscu ssio no l Ca n g u ilh t' m s pp. i 2 5a.
"ork, (C anrbri dge.IU A : N l l T P ft\{ , l q88), Iry i ronm.nt dnd P l dn i
! D -S D .i ,!t< tn< l
K e n n e t h A . l r r n g , Rcvie w o f ld .o lo g .ra n .f fictr onoirtl n thc Il stan ol thc I i l t
Jf.r.r q (l 9et). P P . l 7I i -1.
S t i c n t c s( Ca m b r id g c, l\1 A: NllT Pr cs. le tilJ) , C 1,ol l l ..l ( l 9l J9). p. .107.
11. N i c(rl i n. "Th( S d(i .rl .rnrlthc (ogni ti v r: R c s ,rurc c sl i ,r thc S oc i c ,l .,[r ol S ( i -

rnri l i c K nD t!l rdgc ," /l i ,tD \ ont P hi l o\nphtol S .r.D ..22 (1991).pp. 117-69.
1990 An e\s i ! rel i .w (,1 Ih. \,,rn)d/ ond th? P dthol ogi rc (X
l ew Y ()rL, 7(,nf
B ooLs , I989).
t ) r r i r l l l r a i n . "F r o m th e Hjsto r r o 1 Scje n tc to t he S ,xj ol ('r!,,1 th! N ornri l .' R . ()l b!. Rev i c $ ol l dc ol ol y onl R attonol i tv i n thc H [tot! of th. Ii l c S c i ut.r\
C o n t c n p o r a r .v
So tr clo g .rl9 ( 1 9 9 0 ) , p p . 9 0 :- e 06. (C l mbr i dgc , .MA : MIT I' rc s s , l 98tl ), B ri ri J }
/otrnal l or ttu Its tor.vol S c i c nc c
I r cvie r v o t Ih c No r n n l a n < l r ,6 c/.r r h o lori .d/ {N c$ l orl ' Zone l l ool s, 21 (r99 1), P P .494 96.
1 9 8 9 ) i s se ll a s o l th o se r vo r ls o l 1 4 ich e l l' oucaul t tr.rnsl atcLJ
i nto Engl i sh. D . Ir,rtcr. R tv i erv ot Itu N ornal onJ rhc P adol r9rol l N eu Y orL: Zont 8rx ,k s ,
\'1. Ercshchkl., Rcvicrr of/Jcolooy ond Rdtionalttv in th. llisrr ol rhc Iift Sctcncs te!,9), J orrnal of ttu H i s tor.rol l tnl ogv 21(1991),pp. 542-' 15.
( C a m b r id g c, l\' 1 A:M I I Pr e ss,1 9 8 8 ) , Q:o r tir lr, Acrrcl f rl Bi ol orr 65 {l q9{)).

p p . 5 8 59 . 1992
S. Cilmu, lte vie u o l T h c No r n a l o n < tth c Pa r lo lottr.r/(N c\ Y ork: Zont' B ool s.
r 9 i r e ) , i r ir 8 l ( 1 9 9 0 ) , p p .7 .1 6 ,4 8 . (Ncw york: Zonc
P.rfr Osrlvald,Rerirw of i hc Norntoldntl rh. ldrioli,a/r..r1
I l o s a r d l . K a r r . Re vie w o l Ih c No r ,r o l u n < lr h t P othol agntl l N cl v )'ork: Zone U(xrks.l9tt9)./orrrr.//.tth.lliston ol ttu B.ho'ior.r/
J-.icn.c'
2lt (Ocr. 1992),
B o i ) k s , l 9 lt9 ) ,/o u r n d lo / ln t.tu liscip lin o t.r
Ilktor.r 2l (t990), pp. l ,+r-,+1. p ? . 1 ) 2- ) 1 .
C. I ax n nce, lteviex ol /r/eolo17r'
onrl Rorronalirr in thc Histor) ol th? I if. S.i.n.cs iacquc;Cuillerme,"Pn.senrrzionc
dcll'edirionciralirnn:ceorgcsCanguilhem,
( C r m b r i d g c, NlA, l\1 lT P.t.ss, l9 illt) , a n d o l l l run<, I atour, l hc P art,:uri n- un en,e modcrno?,"in C.rnguilhem,
I.tutogioe t<uin".tlitd
ncltostorittrtc c

.15()
 l' ,.n/,| del\.1 vit.Jj Nuav, rru<1,<lt storia e flosofia,r'ciic scrcnzt (t;lorence: La Ger ard I ehrun. "D e Ia s up(;ri ori te dtr fi l ant humi i n dans l ' I rol ur,on
N u o l i lL a lir Ed ir r ice , 1 9 9 2) . p p . vii- x!i. rri otrrrc . pp. 20l l -22;

J a cq u e sGu ille n lc h .r d b e e n a r r u d e n t ofC angui l henr i n P ari s I-ra ni ;,,i s D el rporte. "l a P robl !nati rl ur hi s tori que dc Ir v i (," pp.

1993 A l fo nv r M. Iac ono, "C c orges C i ngui l hc m tt I' hi s toi re du c onc ept df

16ti chi s mc ,"pp. 2 33-42;

{'torges Cangutlhen: Philosoph<,hirroricn dcs scicnces.Acres du colloquc (6 7 E Jan S c bc rti k . "l -e R 6l e de Ia tec hni quc rl ;ns l beuv re de tl eorges C an-
dxmbre 1 9 9 0 ) lPa r ;" ,:Alb in Nlich !1 ,l9 9 l) . gui l hem , ' pp. 2+ 1-50r
E d ite d b y th c < ,r g a n iu e no t th c cr n lo q ui um: Eti enne tsal i har,l \l i rei l l e Mar c .J ei nndri !1,"S ur l e C c ,nc c ptde morrv c rnc nt!ol (nrtai rc ." fp. 2 5l -6l i
C a r d o r, F r a n q o iscDu r o u r . l\tich cl F ich .in t,Don)i ni quc L(court rnd i rcques D onri D j quc Lc c ,,urt, "La Quts ti (,n de I' i ndi v i dr d' apri s Georgc sC an-

gui l hem , ' pp. 262-70;

l n c lu d e s:
M i c h e l F ich a n t, "Ge o r g e s Ca n g u ilh e m et I'l da'e de l a phi l osophi c,"
pp.37-48;
F r a n co iscDu ( ,u x, "L ' lm tr g in a ir e b io lo gi que du pol i ti qr.re,"pp. 49-57;
E t i e n n e Ba lib a r . " Scicn cc ct t6 r itt d ins l a phi l osophi t'(l c Gcorgts
C r n g u ilh e m ," p p . 5 8 - 7 6 :
H r l lin e Vir in , " G' :r ' r r L s Cr n g u ilh e m e t l e geni c," pp. 77-89i
Al ai n P roc hi antr,"Lc Mat6ri al i s medc (;u,rges C angui l hem,"pp. 271-781
. arel a,"' l e C erv eauet l a pens ee' ,"pp. 279-l .i 5i
Franc i s c o.JV
Pi erre Mac herev , "D e C .rngui l hen.i C angui l hem en pas s antpar FoLr,
ci ul t," p p.286-94;
Al rin B adi ou. ' Y a-t-i l une thi (,ri e dr| s |j c t c hez C angui l hc mr" pp.
)ves S c hrv artr."Ll ne R c mont6e en rroj r r.mpr: Georgc sC angrri l hem,

J e an Pie r r e 5 6 r is, "L llist.) ir r ct la vic," pp. 90-l 0l : l i vi c, Ic tri t!ri l ," pp. 105-2l r and
F r a n q o isC( ) s, "tjo m m ,r g e i Ca n Su ilh enl ,"pp. 10,+-l t)9; Mi c hel D egu_,",
"A Il oc uti on de c l dturc ," pp. 12.1 i 0.
Claude Debru, "Georges Canguilhem et la normativiti du Pathologiciuc: l nch' des a l ettc r rc c c i v ed from C angui l hem, on p. l 2' + .
D i m e n sio n s ip ist6 m o lo g iq u ( \ ct a th iq u cs." pp. I l 0-20i Franqoi sA?ouv i , "LIn N l ai tre i nl l uc nr et di s c rer, ' l c ,tfonde,N l av 27, 1991.
Anne Marie i\{oulin, "La l\4trdecincmodcrnr sclon Gcorgc' Crnguilhem. Rcvir\ ol C!d.q.J Cdnlluilhen: Philosopht, h'\r[rin d.' rcicnrcs.A<t.',1u
' C o n c ep ts e n a tte n te ' , p p . l.ll J4 ; .o//oqu.1I,rri 1:A l bi n \l i c hel , l 99l ).
E l i r b cth Ro u d in cs( o . " Situ a tio n d ' u n &,\te: Qu'est-cc que h ps,!cho- D i di cr Frj boD . "C rngui J hem l c prt(D ." l . N c l l r./ { )bny r,,rc ur(l ur(h IR -14.
l o g i c - r "p p . 1 3 5 - 4 4 r l 99l ), p. 56.
Y ve ttc Co n r y, "L a F r > r m a r io nd u co n cept dr: mi tanrrphose, tl n Essai Rcvies ol Ccorgcr Canouilhot: Philosopht. htttoicn <les\.i.n.e'. tlctesJu
d ' a p p l ica tio nd c la p r o b llm a tiq u e ca n g u ilh 6mi ennedu normal c du patho- coi l or7rc
( P ari s :A l bi n M i c hel , 199I ).
l o g i q u e," p p . 1 4 5 - 5 7 i Marc R egon , "K i ng C ang," Lhi fdrk , (Feb..1, l egl ), pp. l 9 21.
C 6 r a r d l\lo lin a , " ' D,r n ' in c' t \Va lla cc...', trentc ans trpras,"pP. l 5l t-74; Inkr rmati on on C angui l hem\ l i l i ' :nd rorl . on rht: oc c as i onol the pub
P a sca llissy, "De ve lo p p cllr ( ' n t ct tcm p s gan[al ogi quc," pp. 175-93; l i crti on ol G..orqc rC ongui l hen: P hi l o:ophc ,hts t,' rrc ndc i s ri c rrc r. :1c rc i < /o
j e . r r rNta th io t. "Gcn cliq u t ct co n n a issanccrl e l a vi c, pp. 194 2{J7; .o//.,9u.(P ari s iA l hi n N l i c hel , l 99l ).

152 4t )
 Ackn o u ' le d g e m e n ts

l rom the tcncr Notes

T h e c o m p i l i r i,) n o f th is b ib lio g r r p h v b e n e lltcd subsrrnti al l v
ard vtrY S rrte-
o u s i s s i s t a n c. o f m a n y p co p te to "h o m I a m g r eatl v i ndebk\l
D rri d-N {'nrrd'
l i r l . T h c s c i n t lL r tlc:fr a n e o is De h Po .tc, Cla u d ' ' iu i'na(l N toni qui r
( ;u ille r m c a n d Iur S chsartz' w ho prrvi <l cd
P i e t r o C o r : i , lld lin e \tr in , ir cq ( r c\
(i ':'rrgesC ':nuui l hem
p h o t o c o p i c s,r n d r tk r cn ccs( ) l t' tlcs d illic' r it tL .l(x 'tc '!r)d
s h o g a v e n r , c,,p ie so ir a r c itcm s lr lso r vish to thant t$o01m) reserrch'r\si s

t a n t s . S t i p h a n e Ca sto n g u a ywh o r o n d u cttr l th o rough scarchesi n bi bl i ographi

of
c a l d a t a b a nks, a n d Vin ce n t Pa q u ctte ( h o tr a nscri bc<ldi fl erent versi on'
Pi erre
t h . b i b l i o g r :lp h y, a s we ll a s th e d o cu m cn r a lists ol our researchcent'r'
*crc
D i C a m p o a n d ivla r ic Pi!r r c IPPe r sie l, r vh o d edj c'ttrl rrnrth ri me rn(i
L j fi n- Fri nroi s S i ri r)fl l i , (;i rl rdrnD i nrc l l nutl l c : { l .i gnrui c r l ormo/rc ns
r c ' m a r k a b l yin g e n u o u s in p r o cu r in g te xts I r lso si nt r(' thanl the authLrr'ri f\
01 ' i ,ri \: I:.rv ard.l eui J ), p. + 65.
dansI'nrrc dtu:11uc rrc(P
o f t h e B i b l i o th d q u e n a tio n n le in Pa r is' x' h o p r ovi ded mc !'i th a mi crofi l nr
com 2. Ibi d., p. 599.
t h e c t m p l e t e L ib r e sp r o p o sd n io in . t' in a lll, I { a n t to strcssthe exccPti onal
l . {i co rges C angui l hc nt, 1r \brnrdl tr k pathal ogk l uc(P ari s : t' rrs rs tl ni -
p r t c n c e , r h .,( ,u g h n e ssa n d d e d ica tio n o tth e e d itors at '1'rne Books' pani cul 'rrl 1
rcrsi ti ri rts rl t F-rrnc ., l (r6(r)i l \orntul and ttu l \nl ol ,,rrnal , tran;. (.rni l l n R .
\ ' t c i g h a nC rlc, r ' ith o u t wh o m I ,vo u l< th .r vem a r ic numerri ur i nconsi stcnci cs'rn'l
Fi scrrr (Nor Y ork : Z,)nf l l tok s , l t)81)).
m i s t a k e s .( )fco r r r sc. a n y r e m a iDin gd e llcicn cv is tul l v mi ttc'
+. Je.l nJ ac quc sS :l onr,n, "{ i eorges C rngrri l hc m ou l .r m< ,tl c rni ta," i { c v uc

d( nl toph'i quc c t < !cn)or.r/.l (l 9i J 5).

5. touis A l thu5s er. "P rtl rtnt.rti ,)n," i n I' i errc l \1:c hc rv ."1 rl ' hi l onl phi c dc
h r i tncc d c Gt' < ,rgc C
s rngui l htnr," to P c n,r l l l (1961),p.;1.

{'. C angui l hem, "l ntrr> rl rrc ri ,,n: l he R ,' l r,,1 Fpi \rrnol og\ i n C ,' nnmp(f

rar\ l fi \tor\ ol S c i c nc c .' i n l dc ol o ond R ornnal n i n rhc Il i nart oJ thc Ii l c

.\.i .D .rr (C l m bri dge, N l A : l \11I P rc s s .l 9l tl l ), p. i ).

7. l bi d., p. l .
i l . H run o L:tourrn< l C c ol l l l nv L.r, ' A H ,x ,' ni fi g l )i s .i pl i nc S hort ol t)i \c i

t,l i ,rc: {S ,,.ial )S rudi .r,)l S .i .nc ri nFran(.. I71l 9l t?).

-\d.j rriS ruJ rc rry ' Itrc nri
9. C anS ui l bc m,"l Ohj c t dc I' hi s t< i i rtdc s s r:i c nc r:s (l
" 96l t), i n l rr,i . J hi r
toi ft.|de l h i b phi c < l c rr.k r..r(5th ed.. P rri s : \' ri n. I98I).p. IL
10. l bi d ., p. 16 a,rd Ie Ip.25,26 ol thi s n..r< 1,:r.
l t. ,id.. p. Iu.

454
lt t
 1 2 . C a n g u ilh e n rs Do cto r a t d ' ftr i, Ia !:a rrl 'l tton du contcpt <l erl fl ':rc aut ncti vi (y of the quarry mrn or mi ner, l rom w ork i n a qui rrv or mi ne. To drv el l
1977)'
I l , l i r r , { / / /lr ;ir /cr ( Pr r is:Pr ( sse sUn ive r sita ir e sdcFrance'1955;V ri n on thi s commonpl ac e here w oul d tak e us too f;r afi c l d.
tcnps.'' R .'uc de ar':roptl rr4ut
l l . I : r in q o is Dr g ( ,g n ct, ' Un e Otu vr e cn tr oi s l . Quotcd i n MetTger,l a Gc ni s e,p. 195.

c t d ( m o r dlc I ( 1 9 u 5 ) P 3 0 4. Thi s i s, j n part. the s ubj c c t ofa s tudy by J ac quesP i quemi tl .

1 4 . l b id ,P 3 l. 5. "Theote ti c al prac ti c e dl s s i thi n the g!nei al deti ni ti on < .' fpr,rc ti c e.l t

1 5 . I tli( j .P ll Korks on a ras materi al (repres ent:ti ons ! c onc epts , fac ts ) w hi c h i s gi v en by
i n thc H i stort ot Bi 'togi ci l
1 6 . C .r n g u ilh e n r ," I h c Qu e stio n ' r i No r m il i ty orher practi ces. w hether ' empi ri c al ,' ' tec hni c al ,' or ' i deol ogi c dl .' .. . Th( theo-
' f h o u g h t " ( 1 e 7 3 ) , in /d e o lo fl.t
d n ( l R' ) tio n a lir y' Pl 2u and see p 205 ofthi s rudcr'
reti cal practi ce ofa s c i enc e i s al * ay s c r:mpl etc l r di s ti nc t from the i deol ogi c rl
p l S l and scc p 34l ol
1 7 . Ca n g u ilh e m , ttu No r n a t ' tn tl th c Pa thol ogrc'tl thcor!ti cal pra c ti c e ofi ts prc hi s torl " (Loui l A I(hus rer, for ,/drr. trnns . B en

Brew ster fN c'v Y ork : V i ntage, I9701, p. 167).

I t t . l b i< I.,PP. 1 9 6 - 9 7 . 6. See my "Caston Bachelard," Strcntia, c tecnologi.ontcnryokrnci 1,pP.65-
et Ll ephi l osophrc
d'htstotrc
1 9 . Ca n g u ilh e m ' "L e Co n c' P( | t ln vie " ' in ErLtdes 67. IB achel ard' s* ,ork i n thc hi s tory ol s c i enc eand epi * emol ogy i s muc h bet'

d l r r i e n c cr ,p i3 5 . rer knorrn i n E uropc than i n rht U ni te< l S tatc s ,* here hi s reputati on i r pri ma
2 0 . D ig o g n tt, " Oe u vr ( "' P l2 ' ri l y as a Ii terarv c ri ti c . l nteres te< readers
l rv i thout Frenc h may !v i s h to.on\ul t
ll. t c Co n ce Pt," P. l6 { ) my tranrl ati on of Il c N c v S c renti fi cS pi rt (A os ton: B c nc on, 1985), u hi c h ron-
2 2 . tb id ., P 1 6 2 . tai ns bi ographi c aland other i nformati on. - TR A N s .]
cr In sci cncc.'' l l cvrrcdc ni t'r'
2 J . \lich e l F o u ca u lt. ' L a \/ic. ) cxp ir ie nce ?. Gast<,nBacbclard. I? llatdriahen. kttionnrl {P:rir: Prcssts Unjvcrsitiiirc\
N nrmal ond
I ( 1 9 8 5 ) , tr a n sla tcda s th c l ntr('ducti on to Il e
p h t s i . t u .e t.le r r ,a r cttc de France, 195 3).
8. l bnl .. p. 86.
2 ' + . J ca n Ca va illis, ith o tl' o u o n d tiq u e c t fontol i snc: E s\oiru l e Ptobt'm' 9. S ee Annc FagoC spaper, "Le' l rans fi rrrni s mc ' de l \taupertui s ," and mv
/d l or'
l u l o n < t tn cn t r ? .t s r r is:Ile l]nl nn' l ql 8)' R fm'rrgl rcj 'u'
m u r .tr j.' a a r r q u(eP' rcmarks i n tht' ens ui ng di s c rs s i on i n .l ttes tl c Io J ourni t,l l au2c rui r, C retei l ,
H ermann' 1939);C angui l hem'
l n d t i o n( 1.lo r h io r l( d b stn n e d e se n scm b lr(st' a ri s: D eccmber I, 1973 (P .rri s :V ri n, I975). E mi l e C uy dnot i n L' E v ol uti ondc l d pc ns i e
(Ambi;let: Pitrc Laleure'
I'raa )lon t)t Jun Gvaillis' in Lct C'trncs lc Bourleror sci cml \oe. h*crc nt' :\ tl e 1o v i c out.Ll i i ' c t .Yl i //' ri i t i c ' (t' ari s :A . 14i c hc l . l 9' 11)
te'7
61. gocs so far as to c al l l v taupertui s"a genc ti c i 5t" (p. J 89 ).
cri \e (l u P rotcstanti 5me
? 5 . Cr r a ille s, " Pr o r e \r in tism c ct Ilitlr r isme: La , ur l o l ogtqu
1rr. Jean C ] .l v ai l l c s S l a thi oti . dt 1o v i c nc c (3rd c rl .. t' ari s :

a l l e m a n d ." Er Pr it( Ni,\' . l9 ]l) V ri n, 1976), p.7 0.

ll. Ibi d., p.78.

l . l n r ( ) Nr r NIEI tIo D( ) l ( ,cY 12. [l n rre nc h: l i ' oc turc .Thc rv or< l ,l v hi c h i s to br c ompared * i th the no'
(P 'rri s:Al can' l 9l 8)'
l . l lilr :n c M ctzg e r , 1 o Ccn iced t: Ia vt' :nccdc\ 'ri rf'rur ti ons ol rn epi stc mol otl i c albl al (rupl urc )or "tc ar" (r/i r,l i rurc )us l rl by B ac hc l ar< |,
but ratl x r the obj cct
2 . No < lo u b t,a "n :tu r a l o b jccC is n o t n atural l vnatural ts l rorrrvcd l ro m
J c an C av ai l l i r: ". . .. er l i ac runx d' i n< l c pen< l ancseuc c $s i v ts
For cxrmPl c' the ('bj cct
o t l o m mo n txPcr ie n ct a n ( ' Pcr ccPtr o nr lir h in n cul ture qu' chi qL,. l i ,i ! di tac h( nt s ur l ' anti ri eur l e prol i l i mpi ' ri eLrxrl c c c qui v i ent apri \
apart i i orn the
' ' n l i n c r a l" r n ( l th e i,b ' e ct' .l:r 1 - sta l"h a vc n o si gni l i crnt eri rtcnce 'xi c.\.di , ci n.nt c r porrr Ie d6pas s c i ' ( \ur /rr i o tl tga.c t Lt thi otj (. p. 28).)

4t 6 1t 7
 rI
{

1 3 . T h c r esp o n * t.r Da r r vin in F r a n cc

, ) l c r i r r c a l ( P i sifn r ( ' 1 .) g vlr r Yr tttt

h a sb ce n studi ((l l rom the standpoi nt
( ir n r ,r ' I ' ln r a xlucoon<iu Jarr I ni trr,'ut l k'n(
i l .l . Thri mas K rrhn, l heS truc turc ofS c i nti l i rl tc v o/uri onrl J nded.,C hi c ago:

tl rri !e^itv ofC hi c trgo P ft' :i 1.1970)i Ttu C aptrni tan r\c < ,/utmn(N c s Y orl : V i n-

r;l gc, 19 59)

n , r I / I ' 5 t 4 . / d ( P.r r i\:vr in ' 1 9 7 ' 1 ) '
i :i udc' J l tstui rc d' 1')P'n\tc 25. I:rangoi r R L,\s o,"Fpi s tanl ol ogi t et hi \toi rr dc s s c i enc es ."i l rr,i r,v c sdc
1 4 . S e e A lcxa n ttr e Ko lr i' "Ga Jili' e ct Pla to n " '
J 1-1 11911).Fathrr R us s < li i equentl y rc l c rs t{ } the i mP ortant rv ork
l6 6 - 9 s' and EruJesi Tal i i i cnncs(P ari s: thi l osry hi c
r . k r r , r . t u c ( Pa r is: tia llim :r < J, l9 7 l) , p p
Koyri statts that ht (ntl .i sn and thcC rc * h o/K nortJ c dgcc, dl terl by l mre Lak atos .rrrrl A l an N l us graw
la tte r Iork
t t . r m a n n , t 9 ' + a l) .Ar th c b e g in n in g o t th c
lr is i rut th'!l i n tc N l uvcl crpri t (C ,rnrl \ri dge,LIK : C al rrh.i (l g. LIni \eni tv I)rc s , 1970), rn s ' hnrh K Lrhn' \i dtl i r{
b o n o r r c d t h c tcr m r n u lir r r o ' fr o n Ba ch tl' r r r l
epi *trro|rgi cal di sconti nu- (i i r(r'5st< l atl ength i ni l at ti mes s ev erel rc ri ti c i z ed by t-al atos . K arl P oppc r;ul
n r c n . t i g u c ( l 9l+ ) a n il Io Ph ilo so p tuJtt n o n\1 9 4 0 )'
j 'aul I-e y erabt:nd
biolog,v l his crrl'v Bachelardiitn
itr is rlescriberl using mctaphors borro$cd 1r{'m
bre'rk" i n Ic R ori onal narc 26. S c e B uc hdahl , ' On the P R ,s uP l o' i ti (,nso1 l l i s tori rni of S c i enc e"
l o c r b u l a r y w as clin lin a tt< l in la vo r o f" c' p istcm o lo gi cal
17. for a c ri ti < 1ucofc x tc rnrl i s m, s c c K ov ri i . "l )c rs P c c ti !.\ \ur I' hi l toi rt (l c \
d p p l i q u i \ t 9 4 <) \.
Arm'rnd C (ni n' sr:i tnti . ," i l frurl c r rl hi rroni dc i rr pi ns .i i r,rrrrrl i gut l hi s tuti i .It,)mmt' t()n
r 5 . N l a ur iceClir ve lin 'I o Ph lo so p h lcn o tu r d lt ' lc C 'rl i i i ' l Prri \:
modrl rnd chrl l cnges thr r prpcr by I l enri C uc rl rc , "S ome I ti s tori c al A s s umpti ons.l tht I l i s torv ol S Li
l 9 6 l l ) , c o n f i r n s th c va lid it\ o l th c ' \r ch im td ca n
cncc." in.\.C .C ronbi t, trl ., S c i c ntry ' thanS
r Tc(Londonr l l tj remann. l 96l ).
u s c l u l n c s so 1 th c t' la to n ist a flilia tio n '
( T u r in: l i naudi ' 1957)' 28. J .T. C l ark . "Thr: P hi L,s ophv r.,lS c i enc e l nd l l i s t,,rv o1 S c i enc e," i n
1 6 . L u r l o r ico ( icym o n a t, G' r l' /coC' r /i/"
l l .rgc t.c d., C ri i nl
1\l rrJr.rl C c tl ., N l adi s ,,n:
P robl ensh tht H Lrtorrol S ri c nt,:12n,1
1 7 . K o y r c, ttr r L x.g a li/te n n e s,p p llt- 1 ) '
(l : j \l rndel "' l cctrrtc del ncrcrl tl ni rcri t r oi W i rons i D t' rc \\, l 96l ). p. i 0l .
1 8 . i r c q u.s f i.lu cn r a l' ' AsPccts r lt h P' r n sce
29. K ov ri ., l rnn, tht C Ios c l ttbrl J t' , rhc Infi ni tc Itnttc rs cl B rl ti more: J ohn*
r r t h c P a l a i sd .li D.lco u vCr tc'Pa r is, l9 6 s'
ho' to thc Il opki n s Ll ni v c rs i tv P rc !s , 1957).
1 9 . I n t his ca sc' th c n a m c l]1 ih c scicn ce r vastrrnsl erred P (xt
tay arornd' 10. Str: Kovri, thc lsrrononjcal Rcvohrton: Coperni&', (tp/i'r, Borc//i. tr:ns.
i d t o l o g v ; i n th e c.r seo fa to m ism . it ' v' r sth e o th cr
()f tIi 5rori '1nsol S ci cnct i n R .F.W l U a(l di !onl l th.rc r: C ornel l tl ni v c .i i t! P fts t, l 97l ), p. + l ).
2 0 . ( l c r d Bu ch d a h l. "On th e Pr e s( r Pp o sitions
i 'n"r! /t S ct'ntf I (1967)' ll. Foratri ti quc .s tl r1i c hel Fouta,,l t, Ih.Onl c rol Ihtnqs :1n,1rc hoc ,,1L..1t
A l i s t a i r C a n rtr o n Cr o r n b it r n r l l\lich r e t llo slin s' erl s
ol th! IIw nan S (i .nc c s ll 9r,6l (N c * r(,rl : V i nragf, l 97l ), pp. 115-65.
pp.61 11.
hi storl ol xri encc' 32. S c c I)i quc mal , ' A s pec ts dc l .r pc ns i ' ede \4endc l ."
2 1 . S e t th e in r u g u r r l le ctu r e in a co u r se o n the gcncral
ll. K ov re, ftc .,l nrononi c alR ev ol uti l n.p.11.
in Rcvreoctl enrol c' l \4ar 1' l i l 9l '
C o l l i g e < l c lr a n cc 1 \4 a r ch2 6 , lltg 2 ) Pr in te ( l
l +. A .L. l c i ttrl es , "$/c . i d der S egri i nderder Lehrc dt' n R el )c x bc * ' c g
' on
p. l'1
un3enl " !,c rtc /l ohrrrl ti l i 1 .1rc prc k tts c hcl l c i i l undc (P rague, l 8s 8), v ol ..l ,
td'r")Pordr'f (P ari s:
2 2 . B a c h tl.r r ,l. I' .1 .r ivr r i r d r i' ' r ' i' !r c d c la pi rs;'1uc
pp.t0-72.
rl so "l 'Acnral i te dc I'hi \t()i re
P r c s s e rU n i ve r sir .r ir cscleF r r n ce . 1 9 5 1 ) 'p 2 5 ' See
15. D u B oi s -R c \m(,n(li s k no* n l i ,r rhc c o,c l udi ng rorrl , "l gn< ,rrbi nrus l ."
< lc l a fti couvcrte' Pari s'
d e s s c i e n c e s."lcctu r c ( le livcr cd a t th c P' r la ir
ol hi s 0 hc r ,l i c Grc n/!t/c r N orurc rl c nnc nr{ 1874).
R atbn')l i sn1c
2 1 . l l a ch cla r r l' l' Actjvjti r d tio n < th tt'p S Seeal sol c 'tP P ti ttut'
16. D u I]oi \-l t(!nr,' nd, "(i rdj < htni s rtdt aul J ohrnrr$ Il Lrl l L.r," i n R c J c n
th in kin g ( l( r ( s n o t' b e q in ' lt corrccr'' It /cI]u/'rftl 'r' l t
f. l l 2 : " R i ti( ,n .r li\t
{l t i p,i g. 1887), \ol . ), p.20' + . Thc terl rl rl )i s ad(l ' ' (' s \rrs l i rs r publ i rhc rl

,+t9
.+58
 54. l bi d., P . x v i .
(Bcrlin' I85 91'
in thc ,lbhandlungen tler Aka<lcnie'\er l4lrssansdofien la
5 5. l bi rl .,rol .3' P
i n R edea(Lei pzi g l 886)'
1 7 . S e e Du Bo is- Re r m o n d \ lcctu r e o n t- a M e ttri e
56. l bi d , v ol . I' P ' 246'
*a s n o t unaw are that La Mettri e had
v o l . I , p . 1 7 8. D! Bo is- Re vm o n d su r e l- v
5?. tbi d.' P . 284.
Il i n l l 48
s o u g h t a n d l b u n d a sylu m n t d r e co u r t D{ F i' d r :r ick ' fhe c onc eP t o{ mc as urc i n c omP ' } rnti v e rn' rtomy aP P eari i n C taude
58.
cl car to K onrarl E cl hard'
l E . D t ' Bo is- Re lm o n d n e g lccte d r p o in t th a t Ias ln rhe prel;ce to 'UilDDirtsPtur rervrr d l'h"td'rc
Perrault, architcct and anatonrist
and that ofrel l !xcs'
n a m e l r , ,t h e r ela tio n b e t*e e n th e p r o b le m o Isym pathi es hc w rote,' ' l t has been nec ts s aryto agre !on
a
naturcl l edesani nau!l 671-76),
I haveal read;-noted [ear'
3 9 . I h a vcn o t b e e n a b le to co n su lt r h is wo r l' but does i n arc hi tec ture- 5o that' w hen one s av s 'l or
Measureor a Modr-rl e,as one
that P rochaskauscd
l i e r i n t h e r v o r k lr o m *h ich th is cxce r p t is ta kcn - Tn'rN s ] htad atmal l v enrri c l e' and an unc ompl i -
crampl e , thatadoghas an el ongatc d
r h c c o n c e p t ofr cfle ctio o in h i! Pfr fr tu l' g i' o { 1 7 9 7' ol thes e P arts s ' i th the parts o1 the
cJred l e g, i t i s onl ,\ b) !omP ari s on ' rl l 'll
- 1 0 . R c d e r , 2 n d se r ie s,r o l 2 ' p 2 O5 '
Dagogn(t' Pour unc thiarie giftrob du formts
hunr;n body." Quoted in !rd'rqoi'
al. l b i d , P. 3 1 7 . and l "l aupi c d' rhc mtn-mta5 rt i s
(l 'ari ';:Vri n, l 9l 5). p. l ?8 B rrt l or B l ai rv i l l e
42. According to F,itz Lei..tnc' Lei4Adcn M Gcschi'hte du tl'dnin \194))' s c ri es
i s the c ri teri on ol perfec ti on i n thc
thr: morc -than' rni nal ' man: that
oPernti onsm removc
p . 1 2 1 , P r o ch a skap e r fo r m e d m o r c th a n th r cc thous'rnd H rs roi re'v ol l ' pP l 5' nd l l ?i
59. S eees pec i al l vB tai nv i l l e and Maupi ed' s
i s onc ol
p' 431: "M C u!i er' i n my v i ew '
and {us i er c r Geoffrov S ai nt-H i l atu'
is n o t m c nti oned i n Feari ngs te'<t or
' 1 1 . D u 8 tli:- Rcym o n d ' s le ctu r c phi l os oP h) i n ac ti on-"
the o s t emi n(nt ex ampl esol pol i ti c al
b i b l i o g r a p h y.
60. l bi d., rot l ' P 'ii
(t'ari s: Li brari e J B Bai l l i i rc'
4 4 . t s i r in r ilfe , L u vit a Gco flr o v So ;n r - Hr la rrc
61 . l bi d., v ol l ' P 16'
sut hs oural l es tt l o vi c tl e
1 8 9 0 ) , p . , + l6 i co m Pa r e Du vcr n o ) , No ticch isto t t'l ue
62. l bi d., P .529.
1 1 .L c B ' o n Cu vie (r Pa r is:f.G. L cvr a u lt' l8 3 j) T h e "sci enceoffi nanc !"'i n$hi ch
61. Ibi d.
economi c theor! and
C u ' i e r t o o k .{ ,u r se s n t r h e Ca r o lin c Aca d e m v, incl udcd
64 . Ibk l . v ol .2, P .58'
p r a c t i c e , " p olic\ scie n cc" r n d tcch n o lo g r '
45. Blainvillc' Cuvrer ct Gcofftnv Sdin''Hi|'tnt' PP '{8-'19
P A Rt Tw o: E P l s i !MoL()c Y
(P ')ri s: Forti D ' N 1a'son'
4 6 . G e o r g e sCu r ie r , H) std i' c Jd r { ' "n ' c' ' ' r tu'fi l rr S i h es ter I l umphri e: ( N c \r
l . A ri s totl t' D . oni n.r, trans K c nel m Forter i nd
l 8 ' 1 1 - . + 5 )v, o l. l, PP. l4 - 1 5 2l 7-19' P l 6l '
H rvcn, C T: Y al e U nners i tv I' rc s s , l 95l )' )l l ' i rt
d? I'oryani sal i onet kuts
4 7 . t s l a in r ille a n d Nla u p ie d , Hr r o tr e d e r r ciences 'l e
2. Ibi d., 11.2,art.25a' P l 84'
l- e c offrc' 1847)' vol 2' p 65'
p r o 1 l r i sc. o nn t b a sed c ld Piilo r o Plt' ( Pa r is:J
l . l bi d., 11.3,P P . 196-203'
4 8 . I b i d., vo l. 2 ' PP. 2 5 3 1 7 ) . 2 8 { ) ' sur /'or174nis'nion vivd lParisl
'1. Jean-BaptistcI amnrck. Rcrirruiti 'las 'orPt
-19. Ibid.
fayard. 1986).
s0 . ib id. , P. 295 c ogtqv (P rri s ; C htz t)' ntu
et L' A (t!or' 1809)'
S. Lamarc f, P hi l os ophl nol
51. Cuvier,Hn'ire, vol. 3. pp 55-5{t' !o1.2, p.6.
s2 . Ib id. ,P. 61. d':s s'ien':csndttttttct
6. Ceorgcs Cuvicr, Roppoa llistoriqut \t)t h' Ptogtis
vol' I pP xiii-xiv
51. BlainrillcandN{aupied,l/isroirc.

461
46(|
 :.'. t ' aul -j ri s c phB arthez . N ouc c ourdi i mentsel ch ti tnc dc l ' ho' rl nc (l ' rri ' :
J t p i i s t 7 t 9 j u s' 1 u ' dcc i.,u r ( P.r is: De L ' im p r im e r it i mpi ri al e, l l i l 0).
(;ouj on c t B runot. 1806), rol .9.
7. Ibid.
of the ttunrcn
f l . N l i c h r :l F o u ca u lt, fh e On le r o f T h in g s: .ln 4rrhacol o11.v 21. Comte, C oursdc phi l o,j ofi i c pos i ti v e,\ol .4, l (\s (' n' t8

S r , . n . . r f l 9 6 6 l( Ne u Yo r k: \r in t.r g c, l9 7 l) , ch . il. 2+. Srrnard, P orLr, notc rJ .t,r.l i c r (P ari s :l i l ,rri ri tj .S . B ai l l i i re, l 9l T).

9 . ( ) 1 1 o R ,) n l. In c lr ,r r r D.:o / Br r tfi( Ne ' r Yt' r l, l l arcourt, Bnrr', l el e). 15. t { rnri A tl an. "N l ,,rt ,,rr ri tl " i n I' Or5l onts ornnhr,t/ogl ,1rrL
c r l ,r t,rr,1' rrL
Jr

l { ) . R a n L , Ilcn lr r r 5 o /th c Bn h o J th c He r o .tr ,rns l : R obbi nsandSmi th I:I / trl '"),rrr,,n (P ari !: H e rm,rnn. I972).
.l o. Jorge I ui s B orgc s ."Thl A l eph" (1962), i n .l P c rs ono/rl nthol o51(N e*
J e l l i f l e ( N e w Yo r k: R. Br ( n n cr , le 5 2 ) .
I l. Claude Bernarrl, Intnduction d 1/tu.l. d. 10 ni.lc(inc .xPirin.ntolc \ltatis York: (l rov c , 1967), pp. l l 8-54
27. A ntoi nc A ugus ti n C ,,u.not, C on\i .l i rati ontw l a morc hcdc s i di es c r < i c t
a n < lN e r v Y < , r k:I.ib .a ir i. 1 .8 . Ba illia r c. I8 6 s) , v,,1 .l. p. l .
(l l uc nos A i rc s , F.lA tc nc (' . 1e6' 1),v ol . I, P . I 16.
i 'i ncntns ,l onsbs tc npr m(,c /c rnfJ
l . l . R c o i ' t) csc.r r tcs," lic) tise o n ,\' la n " ( Al XI.)t)1 202). i n l )cscartcr:

5 . 1 . . r , , , ,P f i i h ro l/r n d i lli;r r n 9 r , r r .r n s.lo h n C.,1 r jn !l ),)nr,R oben S toothol l and 1S. Brrnarrl , A apporrrv 6 prr11n\t )t nonhc J c 1.,p,bl ra/ogi cai nri rul cc n

D u g r l d M u n l och ( C,:n l> r ir lg r , UK: Ca m tr r ir ltt Uni !.rsi tv P rcss l el i '1-91)' /rr:nrc (l ' .rri r: L' l mpri meri ( InrP eri )l e, 1867), p 2l 1 n 209

v , , 1 .I , p . l 0 l l . .l q. Bl ondl ot, torn i n l 8l t). rv asa profi ' s s orol c htmi s try at the l ac ul ty 0l

l]. D c s c ar t( :s,"Pr ssio n r ,) l th c So o l" ( AT XLl 6'1 65), i n i bi d., vol . I, N ancv. l li s l l s tul ati on rc c hni qtrL i s di s urs rc d by l l c marl i n l c s s on 26 of l .c qonr

i r l . . 1 7 , p . J 4 6. dc phn.l oti t opi rdtoi rc(P ari s :Li brai ri e J .l i . uai l l i i rc . l 819).
( 176.1).(,1. 4, p. 26
i rt. Al brec ht v on l l al l et, E l c :|.rttlpht s i ol o|i < rc
l a . N ' l a r ce lloM a lp ig h i, Dt lb r n ta r io n cp u lh in ora (Londi ni : A pud Jornnenr
ll. 5 .. Fr\!i n l l ti nu A i l rrk nec ht, J h..of,.l S tutrs arr: FnLc , l 9l 0):"1)i (
N l . r r t ! r ) , 1 6 1 I ll6 6 q l) .
l s . C a s p a r F r icr lr ich Wo llT , Ilto r ia g ' n ,:kr tn n,r {}l rl ac ad S rl arr: Li rtcri \ thcraprc i r Fc gel i uc r rv ahrl nrl rl c ' I9.j arhun< l c ns . Ortmc trhts thc l rtttttttunLl

l i r n d e l i a n i s . 1 7 5 9 ) , a n d Dc lo r n a r io n c in te *in o r u n t11168-69). 2.+(N l ,rrc h 1969); ' A s pc c ts ol rl )r l { i s l orv ol l hc rapc D ti Ls ,"B ul l c ti n.l ttu l l tr

1 6 . C o t t l i icd Wilh clm l cib n iz, Ih c,llo n o d o lttg.val Iti b'tr, tri ns. H crbcrt tor.tol mc di dn? 16.5l t96)).

W i l d o n C r r ( l .r x An g i,lcs:tln ivcr sitv o f So r tth cr n( ' .rl i l i ,rni aP rers,l 9 30), p. 1I 2. l .l . Bernr(l , P ti n.i pc s< !c ni k (i N erpti ,,enr.r/c((i ( rv a: A l l i anc e C ul turel l c

l ? . I e i b ni, " L e tte r to ;\n r .r u ld ,No r ' . 2 8 , 1 6 8 6.' i n G.l 'J4Lei bnj .: P hi l a$P hl du Ii rrc. re(rt), P .2l l .

Jl . ( oui \ Fri \.i r. I,; l l ,i l ,rrtL,t l Lr n/J c rrn, (l ' ,rri s ,I i l ,rri ri c J .B . l tai l l i c rr' ,
r u l I r u l r . e d . .r n d tr .r n s. Ro g e r Ar ie s ;r n d ll.r n jtl C rrber (hrdi anapol i s. !N :
1857),!., 1. l , p.401.
H r c L f t r , 1 9 U 9 ) ,p . Ito .
1 8 . D a n i c l Du n ca n , Iltsto n t tu I' a n in a l, o u h ronnai ssancdu corp: nmi l +. ic an B apti \te l l oui l l :u,1, l ,rai rur /o 2hi l os ophi cnti dtrc l c c r s ur l esoi ni -
l o (l i nrqucni < /t.dh (I,i ri s :.J . R ouv i er er t. Lr uouri er, l ti ]6), p.7s .
rcl ttt\ <1,:
par la nitanique ct la poft .hin'( (t686).
15. f ouc aul t. Ttu B tth of rh,:C l tni c .trrns . A .i !1. S hoi dan S mi th (N er' \' ri rk :
1 9 . C h a r l ts Bo n n e t. ".lib le a u d e s co n sid cr a ti onr sur dcs corps orgrni si s,"
Vi ntagc, 1975),p. 192.
inIdn i n g i n isiep h ilo r o p h ig r . ( Ce n c\a : C. Ph ilib crt)r'd B C hi rol , I769).
16. I i rtr; i s .l ur)t((i i n P ri s r' , j d.!' ..,/c ti i x r.rJ . nnr/.' i nr, r,,1. 2. p. t6J .
l r ) . l n r r a n u e l K,r n r . Cr r r r g n ' o l Ju J,q r ) cr r r ,tr,)t)t. Irrri s C rctrl Il ertrl i th
}7. l n rnar(|, P rn.rr\,1. ni d(n. rpi ti nc nk l c . p.1+ 2.
( ( ) \ l ; , n 1 , U K : Cla r e n d o n Pr e ss.1 9 5 2 ) , a r t.6 5 , p p . 2(f22.
18. Ci t({ l bv B oui l l tru(l i nIs ai s url a phi l onphn ni di c ol e c r s ur l c s ,ti ni ntn[s
2 1 . l u g u ste Co m tc, ( o u r r d c p h ilo so p h iep o strtv':(P rri s: S chl ci chcr l ri res,
tt. td cltnittu. n[dicolc ( l8 36), p. 69.
1 9 0 7 2 . 1 ) ,v o l . l. lL r sr n s' 1 0 - 4 4 .

162 461
 19. Bernarrl. i nrradurrion d l'itudc de lo n6<lecineexpirinentale, vol.2, ch.2,
s!c . - l : ' V i v i \e ctio n ."
a0. tsernard, Pr,rc?er de nddecint expirinentoh, p. 44O.
. r l . l b i d., p p . l? 9 - 8 0 .
42. In his way, Bernard rernained faithful to Cuvier's vie\'! that the nervous
s v s t e mi s t h e a n im a l a n d csse n tia llyth c o n ly o r g ani c regul ator.
41. See Mirko Drazen Crrnek, Ratsonnemcntcxpirinentalet rccherchesroxi-
c o l o B i q u 6. h u CL Be r n ur d ( Ge n e va ,Pa r is:Dr o z, 1973), esp. pp. 408-16.
4,+. Rcn!-Theophile Llyacinthe Laennec, De I'Auscultotion mldtdrc (Paris,
: 8 1 9 ) . p . 5 ?.
4 5 . F r r nq o is D.r g o g n e t," L ' lm m u n it6 , h isto ri que et m!thode," l ecnrresat
t h c P a l a i sd c la Dico u vcr t !, Pa r is,Ja n u a r y4 , 1 9 64.
46. On Ehrlich ,rnd his rvork, see Hans Loewe, P.rul Ehtli.h, Schtipjir del
( Stu ttg a n : \\' isse n sch a ftVe r la g sgese)l schal1950);
C f i c m o r h!. d p ,a i, Fel i x Marti
l b a n e z . I l . ' . l /in r l u n d th c ttb r ld o f Pa u l F .h n tcfi( N e$ Y ork:pp. 2s7-69i
'958),
t !o n \ t r g c l , " Pa u l Eh r lich ," tu vu ,l' h r to ir c d e Ia ni dc.i ne hi brci .l u.84-85
( 1 9 6 9 ) ; a n d Pa u lin e 1 \1 .1 1l\{
. .r zu n d .r r ."T h e An tigen-Anti body R !r(ti on and the
P h y s i c sa n d Ch e m istr y o f L ife ," Bu lle n n o f r h e Hstory of t.ti ci nc 18 \19t4).
p p . l - . 2L
47. OD Ihcsc mattcrs, sec Dagognct, ld Rdiror d ier rclrad.r ( Paris: Presscs
Llnivcrsitaircs de Frrncc, l96a), and Sutrlalin. thirupeuti.l!. et Jornation d?s
c o n c c p t sn t i Jtco u x,;n h o m a g e to Ca sto n Ba ch e Jard(P ari s:PressesLl ni versi tai res
rle Francc, 1957).
4 8 . B a ch e la r r l,lc lla titio lisn c r o r io "r / ( Pari s: P ressesU ni versi tai res de
l r a n c e . ] 9 5 ]) , p .2 0 2 .
. + 9 . D a go g n ct,,i/ltlo d e \.t d o cttin e d a n s l\teuvrc dc P d'.rr (P afi s: P resscs
U n i v e r s i t a i r ts d e F r a n ce , 1 9 6 7 ) .
5 0 . l b i d ., p .6 7 .
P.\k r TrFr!: ll r s r o RY
L N l y un d e n r .r n d in go fce ll th co r yo *e sa g r catdeal to Marc K l ei n, H ,i roi .e
desongines dt la thiurc cc?/u/aire( Paris: I lermann, l9 36 ).
454
2. Robert llooke, ,llicrogrcphia. or Sont PhvsioL,arcolD$ri/'o^ ol inute
Bodks Madc bv ognifvintt Glass.with Observarionsand lnqurn'r lhocupon (l_on,
don, 16 67).
3 See, fbr ex ampl e, P . B oui n, A ugus tc P rc nant and L. N l ai l l ard, If,rrrl
.t fi rro/og' ( (P ari s :S c hl ei c her, 1904-l l ),v ol . 1, p.95, fi g.84; orMax A ronand
Pi erre C ras s e,P ri c ,sdc bi ol ogi conina l e l P at;s tMas s on, I939). p.525, fi g.245.
4. Erns t H ei nri c h l { ac c k el , C emei nv c rs tri ndl ,rhc
l /er} e (Lei pri g: K rrtner.
1924),v ol .4, p. 174.
5. C omte B ul l bn, H ,rron( noturc l l edesoni no,I (1748). c h. 10.
6. Buffon, D es1:i l ms nrr,i n i bi d., pr. l : on l i ght, heat rnd fi re.
7. I bi d.
8. t bi d.
9. t bi d.
10. On Oken as a nature philosopher, scc Jcan 5tr<,h1.torcnz {)lrn urJ 6cor.g
B url nrr l Zuri c h: V erl agder C orona, l 9l 6).
l l . ()n S c h$:rnnand c c l l thc orr, rte tht tundamc nti l w ork ot N l .rrc tl Fl ori n.
N arrron rcrr rl i ti ati on < l el a thi orrc c c l l uhi rc tl onsI' oc ov rcl c l frti r,/orc .S rA ronn
(P rri r: tl rrmrnn, 1960).
l-1. l\'larc Klein, Hiidirc dct origincs dc la thionc Lcllolotrc. y;. t9.
ll. On the ori gi ns ol c el l theorv , rr: l . W al ter \\i l * ,n. "C c l l ul ar fi s s ue and
th. D as n o{ thc C c l 1 Theory ," tur 100 (A ugus t 194.1),p. t6l { , and "D utroc her
and thi :C el l Theorv ," l s n 107-108(N 1at 1947), p. l .{ .
l.+. llieckcl, D,? W'.|fit/.l. in Gcntinftr(d'dlr.hc ryerl.', \ll1. l. p. ll.
15. K Ic i n ofl i rs addi ti onal i ni ;rmari on on thi r poi nt i n hi s "s ur l rr rl :buts
de h thi ' ori e c c l l ul ai re en Franc e," Ii ral o 6 (1951),pp. 2s - i 6.
16. J ern R os tand."l .es V i rus Irn,tc i nes ," i n B ml ogi cc r ml deri nc (prri r: Gal -
l i mi ftl . 1919). Ii or a s unrmtrrv< ,1tater q,ork , s er: I{ os tand' s ..t a C onc epti on
parti culai .r dc Ia c (.l l ol e." i n I c r GftrnJ ri .ouranr d. i ./ 6n /W tc (t' i ri s r (;j l l i ma(t.
l 95l ).
17. l he l i nes that l bl Lrv w ere rd< 1c dro an nrri c l e ti rs r w ri rr(n i n 19.15.
I hc arl di ti < ,ns r.emc rlnatur:1. t < l o not s av thi i i n orrk .r
to c l ai nr .rnr pr< rphtri c
gi l i but, rathrr. to r.rl l at(.nti on to rhr i .1c l rhar (c rtai rr
i nn< rrti on:.rrr rr..rl l r
46t
s o m e w h a t o l d e r th in a d r o ca tts r n o r e e a g cr to u st thnn to undtrst.rn{lthem are i n i bi d., pp.99 108. C l c nc l i c r i s undi ,ubrc dl \ .i ght on thi s p(' i nt.

$ i l l i n g t o t r dm it. 2?. "l t i s i mportant to k no* the true c aus coi thr hc art\ morc ment rhat

l l t . t ' ] a ulBu $ c Cr a $ itz' ' l' tp d n cn tcllc Gm < l l ogcn ru ti nu noderncnP arho s i thout s uc h k norv l c dgc i t i s i mpo* i bl c to k n< Iv anv thi ng w hi c h rel atesto thc

Ioqi( VonCelluhr r .tlohtulorpathologre (Rdsel: Schsrbc. 19'+6)is thc C;trmin rbcorv c l l mrdi c i ne. for.rl l the othc r l unc ti ons ol thc ani mal arc rl c pc ndc nt on

v e r s i o n o l a rvo r l lir st p u b lish cd in Sp a n i\h thi s, rs rv i l l bc c l c arl v s c c n i n * hat l i l l o* r' ("1)c rri pti on o1 the I l uman B ody "

1 9 . C h ar le sNa u d in , "t L s Esp ice sa llin cs ct la thi ori t <l c I'i 'vol uti on''' R evuc IAT X I.2a5l , i n i bi d., p. l l 9).
\ ( i e n t i f k t u et u 1 ' 1F r d n r ce t tu l' ltr u n t]cr ,stt. 2 , vo l. 8 ( Irl T5 )

2 0 . A r t i clt l0 o l " T h c Pr ssio n so fth c So u l" i 5 cnti tl cd "l l orv rhc Ani mal
$ 28. P oi s s ontook thi s argumc nl l i om I)c s c rrtc s hi m\( 11(c 1. " l b t' l enpi us ,

.l I illarch 1618" iAl ll.6?1. ii Thc Philosophn.,l llrttiryls ol Dcscortes.rc!. ),

S p i r i t s A r e Pr o d u cfd in th c Br a in ," b u t in lict Dcscrrl es sho\vshos the sPi ri ts I p.93), to del end the C nrtes i an !i e\i agai ns t l :athc r Fabri ' s obi c c ti (,ns : \rc

c o m e l i o m t h e h e a r t in th e lb r m o f"vcr v iin e p a r ts ofthe bl oul ." Thcy-undergtr ,& R cnanl u c s s ur l a ni tho< !c dc .l l ons i c ur D c rrarrc s ,part 5, y :c < ,n< obs
1 c rv ;rti on.

" n o c h a n g c i n th c b r a in " o th e r th in to b e se Pn r itcdl rom "othcr, l css fi ne Pnrts

o t t h e b l r x x l" ( AI Xl.ll5 ) in Dcsca r r cr :ScltctcdP htl onphi cal tt'rtti 'gJ' tr:ns
iln p. 293 o 1 the s ec ond v ol ume ol the l ?24 edi ti on. thr c x ampl c ol thr' l i rx r
w horr ht:art i s c x c i s trl or hc a< ls c rc rc d c l c l l v ernbarms s edD r:s c artesrrhtn
j o h n C o t t i n gh a n , Ro b e r t Sto o th o ll a n r l l) u g a ld l \'l urtl och (C ambri dgc, LIK : thr qucsti oo $as put to hi m b1 a c orrc s pondrnt. l { r.c s raperl the di i } i c ul o bv
I
C a m b r i d g c Lln n e r sir v Pr css, l9 8 ll) , vo l. I, p i3l . Thus i 1 i s not i ncorrect to argui ng that l i l i i s dc fi nc rl not bv mus c ul ar nn)v c mc nt but bv c ardi ac hc at.

\ a v t h r t t h e hc.r r t is th e " so u r q " ( ,f th e sPir itsin " l i eati se on l \{trn"(AI X l l 66)' fifl Srr "t-rt ters to B os w el l (?), 1646 (?f' (A T M686 and 695), i n C harl es A danr

i n i b i d . . v o l . I, p . l( ) ' + . .rnd I'aul Tannery , eds ., Oc uy rc s< /eD c s c orrc s(t' ari s : V ri n. 1974), v ol . .t. pp.
;ll
2 1 . l ) c sca r te \. " T r cJtise o n ]\ta n " ( AI Xl.l3 2 ), i n i bi d., p. l 0l n.l . 686.695.

2 2 . D e sca r tr s. l) isco u r s( . F ( ) u r in " OPtir s " (Al Vl l 09-14)' i n 29. \C or) c ni m non v i s c r-rs
nobi [: et pri n(.ps r\t ut us quc ;rd|o rrti pc r-
'bi d.'
pp. 16.+-66. hi bcttr s Lrl mc rus mus c ul us , c nrne tantum et tendi ni bus more c ortrrorl rm

21. t bid . connrns. c t s i ngui ni c i rc umprl l c ndo i ns eni eni ' (W i l l i s . P i ornrdc eut;c croti
s ordi rs

2 . 1 . D c s ca r te s,"T r r r tisc o n ,M a n " ( AT XI l2 9-31), i n i bi d., p 100. fl 67l l ,pr . l ,s c c .6,r:h. l ).S c c A ppc ndi x ,p. l 74. S tr: al s o I)c s .i n< l ui ni i\n:].,l es -

2 5 . D e rca r tcs, Disco u r sc F o u r in " Op tics" (AI VI.l 09-1'1)' i n i bi d.' ..frt., (1 670), i n Op.n otrtni d.v ol . l . p. 661 (' i ' \ .l ,ri , l i .l uc t

p p . 1 6 , 1 - 6 6 .Ra b cla ir s liie n d tiu illa u m e Ro n d tltt (1s07-1566) (,fMontP el l i er and D c nerv orun d.s oi pti o.t r/l ,r (16{ ,.+ ).i n i bi d., rol . l . p. 36t}
'nuscul um")
a p p e a r st o h a vc b e e n th e lir st tu h yPo th e si,cth a t nervesconsi st ol i nde$ndrnt i "D i crnd um c ri t quod i ps i us c ordi s c ompagc s , c .rmr: v al dc l i bros r c ons tans .
b u n d l c s o f ce n tr ip e ta l r n d ce n tr ilir g a l co n d u cto rs. pol i u\ nl us c ul u! qu.rn parc nc hv mr apprl l ari < l el ,c t").

2 6 . l n th c 1 6 6 ,tp r | licc 1 o De sca r te r ' s" l;e trti seon \4ao." C l crsel i erpoi nts 10. "l n c :orde,s i c ut i n toto praetereamus c ul os ogenere.s pi ri tuum i ns i torunl

o u t t h a t t h c n e r vc' sin scr tio n in to th c n r u scle .a n d the(:l bre the muscl t s cxpan- pi rti cul i s s pi ri tuos al i ni sc opul a s ul phurc a a s rngi nc s uS g.s rar(l j ungi rur; quac

s i o n b v t h e an im itl sp ir its, ccr e p o o r ll r cp r e se ntedb1 l oui s dt l -a Forgr:'rvho matcri es , dum s pi ri rus ngi ri nrur, dc nuo c l i s a, ac v tl ut c x pl os a (non s ec us a

b e l i r v c r l t h a t th e n e r vts co n d u cte d th e flo v o ispi ri ts i nto thc muscl es,rvhL:rt'as P h,!eri s py ri i pi rti c ul )e a.c rn!ae rc r.rrel ac rae)mrrs c ul um,s ne c or i p m, pr.)

I ) c s c a r t e st a u g h t th a t "th e n e n r fib cr s a n d b r a n chcr rarni I i n thc muscl esthent ni xu moti ro tffi c i c ndo i ntl ant ac i ntumi l ac i unt" ($' ;l l i s , D e nnrtun .k \c ti pti a

s e l r c r , a n d .r sth o se lltr r sr vcll o r co lla p sc, th e i r nrrangcmcntraus(]sthc mu! .r uJt's).On rhe c onrpari r(,nol rhc hc rrr r(, i hv rl raul i c mac hi ne: "C i rc a nr< ,trrm

p r o d u cin g vari ousel l ecs" (Al X l .l l 9-2{)2)'

c l e s t o s r v e l lo r co lla p sc:cco r r Jin g lv, s:ngui ni s natural em, non hi . i ngui ri mus dc c i rc ul ati onc c j us , s (.1 qual i .oftl i s

167
 A V TAL RATI

h vd r a u lictrcon5tarttiri tu ci rcumgvrctur" rnurruturi .i n v ol . 2, p.6rl l .

1 t y a s o r u m s t r u ctu r r ve lu t in m r ch in a
in OPcr oo n ,n r o ,vo l l' p ' ? l) 4fJ. "W e c al l ' rc fl ex mov ementi mov emc nt\ duc to a ni mul o-motor ner-
r D e / & b r ; b u rI l { ' 5 9 ],
mutuatui ' rous tbrc e produc ed by the unc ons c i ousl i rnc ti onalac ti v i tv ol the s ens or!nc n' es .
l l . " C a l d cm ta m e n co r o m n in o t sa n g u in ee t non s'ngui sa corde
in, ib id ., vo l l. p 66l )'
in ca .le sccn r io It soul d be more c orrc d to c al l them mov emenl sproduc ed bv a erv ous rel l c x
, Wi l l i s , D e s on g u in r s
trcti on, lbr i t i s not (h( nrov ement w hos c < l i rec ti on c hangesbLrt the nerv ous
3 2 . C f . i bid ., vo ) . I, P 6 6 1 .
w i l l i \, Ccr ch ti a n a to m . ( 1 6 6 1 ) .ch t 9 , l 0anrl l -f i nOper<t onni o' l orce. *h i c h rl e rc gartl.Is hari ng been s omc hos rel l ec ted i ns i dc rhe organi s m
ll.
, o l . 1 , p p . 2 8o 1 1 ..i) 0 .ln De l' ]r ,cn ta tia n c( ib id .) . p +. Wi l l i s descri bts
a sti l l so rhar n c!ntri pc tal mdti on bec omes ,r c c D tri l ugal one. ts ut thc l i rs t ex pres -

terms 'l l i sti l l l - si on i s co nv eni ent,and j ts us c i s s anc ti onedb! c us tom" (H enri N l i l nc ' E duards ,
, n d e x p l a i n s ho s it wo r ks. T h c h ie r a r ch ica la r r a n gemcD tol thc
i o n , " " p u r i { i ca tio n ," "su b lim a tio n " a n d "sp ir itu a l i zati on" provi des remarkabl y Ieqons sur la phlsiologi. conpoic dc I'honnt t dcs oninour IParis, ll]7ii-791,

"l magi nati on necess'rr- v,l . Il , p . l l 2).

) r e c i s ec o r r o b o r r tio n o fa n id e a o fCa sto n Ba ch cl ard\:
i s to +1. SeeW i l l i i s D c anna brutorun (16' 7)J .
l v a s c r i b e s va lu c.... Co n sid cr th e r lch e m ir ts For them to transmute
. . f o r .r n a lch cm ist, ;: r tjstilla tio n is : p u r i fi cati on thrt tnnobl es a sub 42. J.A. Un/er, l:rstc Crnnde einer PhtFlogic.lcr cigenlichn throrrricn Notur
'ertect.
. t a n c e b y r e mo lin g itsim p u r itics"Se e l' 4 ;r clle r so tq"r(Pari s: J C orti ' l 9'+])' th rLh? n K 6ry t l tJ l l ). s c c .49S .

,p.296,298. 43. l t i s c heati ngr l i nl e to i nc l ude thc n:mc i ,f Iegal l oi s , r' hos c l i rs t paper
in on hi s ex peri ments $ i (h c utti ng the s pi nal c ord datesl mm l l J 09. i l s l br W hv tt,
1 4 . W i l t i s. De r /,o tulr ' u ' cu la tilL o n d in i: Ap u d JacobtrmN l art,vn' 1670)
) p c r do m n i d , vo l. I, PP.6 8 0 - i3 ' + . I mcnti on hi m onl v i ns ol .rr.rshi s c onc epti ons (oi nc i de at v trri ou\ poi nts w i th

3 5 . D c f cr n tn ta o o r c co n t.]iDsill r h e p h ysica)'rnd chemi cai prcl i mi n'rri es th,,seol ,ruthors mrrl e ex pl i c i t us e oIrhc noti on oIrc l ]ec ti on.
"ho
de 44. J ohannes N l 0l l .r, t/dndbuc h der l hv uol ol l i c dc , c ns c bc n(C obl enz :
o Wi l l i s \ p h t\io lo g ica l th e o r ie sr \cc csp . ch . 1 0 , "D e r)aturai gni s et "bi ter
rdi t-t?).b|. I.th. l ..et. r.
: o l o r e e t l u c e : Ex Pr e n m issisn o n d ifficile cr it p u lv eri spvri i i n rormcnl i s bel l i ci s J.l l ol "h,r .
-15. Franeoi sJ ac ob. l a Logi qu.du i v ant(P ari s : Gal l i mard, 1970),p. 102.
r s i t a t i n a t u r ao e xPlic.r r e"
{t. A ri s rorl e, D c < r.J rnr.r,
trans . J .A . S mi rh (O\l brd, U K : C l aren< l onP res s ,
1 6 . O n th e a n a to m y a n tl p h vsio lo g v o fth e nerrc' sce C cf'6ri dnd'onr''
h. 1e.
r901i -9 2)
lr ..r .
4?. Ari s totl e, D c ponbu: oni mal i un, rrrD \. W i l l i am Ogl e (London: K . P .aul ,
1 7 . " Q u ip p e sp ir itu s r n in r n lc\ I Ce r e b r o ct C erebtl l o, cum mcdul l ari
ti rcnch, l l t8 2 ), I.5 .
r t r i u s ( l u e a pp e n d icc, ve lu t r Scn ir ) o lu m in a r i al l l uentcs' S ystcma nervosttm
d a d i a n t " ( Cc' .b r t d "d to m c, r cl. l, p . I3 6 ) '+8. A ri s tode, D . g.nc ruti one.tni ndl i dnr,rrans . D av i d B al mc (()x tbrd. U K :
C l .r'cnd( ' n P res s ,1972). IV .l 0.
j8. " c l ua p n r p icr lo n g e m cliu s iu \ta h !p o th esi m nortrnm' hos spi ri tu\ '
+e. D c s c artc s ."P ri nc i ptc . ofP hi Los oph\" (A T v l l l A .l 26). P hi l as oph-
, 3 n g u i n i sl l a m m l e m isio s, lu cis r r Jiis. s.r lle mii5 aur'rt 'l eri qLrci nterte\ti ! si nr- in l^
i .ol hi i ti ngs of D es .,trtc r,rol . l . p. 2l tl t.
l c s r l i c a m u r , lDt o n im a b r u kr u n , in OPcr c o nni a. vol 2' p 3l ) "Spi ti tus
50. D es c artes"Mc
, rl i tati ons on Fi rs t P hj l .,s ophy "(A l V l l .85), i n i bi d., v ol .
r n i m a l e s .v e lu t lu cis r a d io s,Pcr to tu m svstcm an enuurn di l l undi supponi nus'
2. art.6, p. 58.
C c r c b r io n a to r n c.p . 3 l8 ) .
5r. I bi d.
19. "Pari li'tc mode rc si quisquinr pulveris PYrii 'rc(n''r' Per lunem ignari'r'n
r a tio n o ln pt 2 P . 1-19)Sc! al so D c ntz'ra
s2. r bid.
r d d i s t r n c c acce n r lr r ct" lPh o r n o ccu n tcs

46u 469
 rel :ti on b l rrv ec n s rns i bi l i tr ,rnrl the rl i s pos i ri on o1 thc rrrgans ,s ec l )es c al rrs ' s
, c tl,td e cinL lcso i' n tn rc(Pari s:P resses
5 L S e c F. Auiu r Sh u sr e r L tl ni verri tai rc'
theory ol the "dc grets ol the s c ns es "i n' A urhorr R c pl i es to rhc S i rth S c r o1
d c F r . r n c r : ,1 9 7 2 ) , ch 1 .
( )bj ccri on! (41 \:11.,136-)v ). i n i bi tl ., rol . 2. n.(. 9. pp. 294-96.
5 . t . G c r r g F r n sr Sr ,r h l,D( ,tr to &:r tio n o tL r .r \1 696)'
6. "l .c tter of l 9 ,\{ arc h l 67l l , to C < i nri ng," i n Got4i i e.l l l ' i l hc l nt Lc i L,nr:
5 5 . S e e , fo r e xa m p le , Bu ilo ' r ' s a r ticle o n " T h e Ass" i n /l i rl oi re 'drur"' '/'!
s,i nl nh. S .hti ftenun,l B ri + ( ui nn\ti rd(: R c i < l el . 1916). 2nrl s c r..v ol . l , pp. )91-
.101.(i ,mp are Lc i bni z s c ri teri a for di s ti ngui s hi ngani mal s l rom aur()mata$ i rh
st'. Scc On thc Ori4n oli.hc jPc.ier, ch. r+.
I)c\crrtc\' \ nrgum(ors as w c l l ;s w i th F< l garA l l an P oc r profi runtl rc l l c c ri ons
5 ? . S a l v r d tr r F d .v:r r < lI u r i.r . life : Itu ltn fin ishtt /:rpcrrment(N cw Y orkr
,,n thc srD ,' ques ti on i n "l \1ael z rl ' sC hc x s pl ay er."On Lc i bni r s di s ri nc ti on l !-
Scribner, I97l).
r{rcn ma(hi ne an(l organi rm, s c c "A N erv S y s trm ol N aturc and thr: C om-
53. Xavir.r Bichat. lnatontic g[nirolc oppliqu& i lo phvsiolollicct la nidctinc
nruni ctrl i of),' l s ubs rrnc ts ," i o l .c i bnr P hi l os ophrol Ic rtLrs onLl P o2c rs .trl ns .
( 1 8 ( ) l ) ,v o l . I . p p .2 0 - ll.
.rnd ed. I.c r,l Loemk c r (C hi .ago: U ni l trs i tv ol C hi ri go P rc s s , 1956). s c c . l (),
i9. S c c m) p r cfa ce t< , tb c m o d cr n cd itio n o i C l audc B emard s l -efonsrur
.rnrl "N l <'nr< l ol ogv ."i n thnorl o/,rgr onJ Othc r l htl os aphr,rl E s ,orr, rrrn.. P rrrl
l c s p f i . r n o m i n csJclo ' ir .lr n r m u n r { r u \d n r m o u \.' td u \f4l i tdu\(Pnri s:Vri n'1966)
s, bncker and A nnc N l a.ti n S c hrec k fr (N e\ Y orL: Mac rni l l an, l 9l i 5). s (fs .
t 0 . S e enr y Itu No r n a l o n t r h ePo th o lo g ica( lNov Y<rrk:Zone B ool s' 1989)'
6l -66.
pp.2?5-iJ9.
Bi ol o1|i N ew )ork: Ihsi ( 7. Lr i bni T too $as i ntc i s ted i n l hr l rbri c i l ti on ol mathi nc s and.rutom
6 1 . [ r a r i o r ic Cr ct' r c, . lp p r o .td te sto tt Ph tlo so phnal
at.r.S cc,l orc x ampl c .hi s c orrc s pondc neerri ththrI)uk (i )fIl anov .r(1676 7q)
B o o k s . 1 9 6 5) .
i n \.tmrl rc hr \c hri l t.n un.l B rl al . \l )arms rrrl t: R c i rl c l . l 9l ?), l s r \|r.. t(,1. l . In
Ptdenkcnvon .4ulrrhrun11eint llolenit otfo So.irttit nt D.ut'.hldn.l /u .ltlnehnltn
P A R T l t o t r R : INT I RI' I{ l IAllo Ns
Ne \\c.}s(l tl . Ocrober 16+5" (A I r/cr (r'i nrt c unrl l { ,' s .n(fi dItc r, l ti bni z pr.ri s l rhc w P erj ori rr- r,l (i fmrn art,
L R c n i t) e ltr r tt\, ' T " [T h t l\l,tr q r r tsr
' ;{
x hi ch ha d ,rl w av sbc c n i ntc res tc d i n thr hbri c .rti on ol mo!i ng mi c hi n.s (mon,
lV.t9), in Ihr Philos.Phtcolliitttnlls of Dcstarter'traos John C()ttingham' Robrrt
str:ts,cl oc k r. hrdraul i c marhi nc rr i n(l w ) on), (nc r l ri tl i i n i rr, $hi .h c onc c n-
S t , x , t h o l l a n < l Dtr q a ld l\lu r lo ch lCa m b r i( lg ( . L IK: C ambri dge tl ni veni tv Prerr'
trrted al m os t ex c l us j r' c l yon l rr.rk i ngs tari c , l i l el r:s sobj ec rs to be c onrempl arc (l
l 9 U . l - 9 1 ) , v o l . i, p . 2 7 5
from w i th.,ut. S c c i ti d., p. 5.t.1.Ihj s prrs rgc q.r c i trd br J ac qu(5\{ i ri rri n i n
2 . " R u l e r lb r th e Dir e ctio o o l th e Nlin d " ( A l - X l 80). i n i bi d., rol l'
.l 'r.r r.o/d ,J U .{ l ,.ri \: l _i hai rre rl e l ,rrr (' i rhol i quc , 1920). p. t2l .
pp. .l{F21.
8. " l reati s e ()n N l an" (,{ T X Ll l g-2{ )), h l h. fhi to' o i ft| l l ri ri ngs ol D Lr
l . D c s c ar tcswr o tc, "F o r th cr c is { ith in u s brrt oot sorrl .and thi ' soul has
.(r!.{, v{,1.l . tt. 9e.
r i t h i n i t n o r livtr sitr o fp a r ts: it is r t o n tt r tn litir c,rni l rati onal ,an(l 'rl l i ts rppt'
l' 9. W h,rt i s morc , D erc artesc annor rx pl ai n (;rx l ' s c (' r\truc i on ol l ni mnl -
t i t e ' a r e v o l i tio n s" ( "T h e Pa ssio n so 1 th e So u l" lA f X l l 64l ' i n i bi d ' 'ol
m.r(hi ncs t! i rhout i n!ok i ng r
art.4?, p. 1.16). trurtx )s e:' ' ( ons i < l eri n!irh( Il r.r(hi ne (,1thc hum.]' l
hrl v rs h.rv ;ngbec n l i rrnc d hr (;rx l i n orrl er to h.rv ci n i rs el t al l rhe D nl v fnl c nrs
+ . P a r t 5 .Jt "l) isc.u r sc.r n th c M e th ( xl" ( AT VI 40-t'0)' i n i bi rl . !ol l'
utual l l m.l ni l i s rrd rhc rr" (,.S i \rh N t(.l i ti l i i )n,
i n Iht thi L\ophrc tt nl ort::I
p p . 11l - ' 1 1; " To th t M r r q u is til Ne r vca stlc ) S No veober l 6'{6" (AT l V 570-76)
D rsrorter , tarnr. F.S . l l al < hnc .rnd (i .ri . L R os s
i n i b i d . , v o l . l, p P l0 l- 1 0 ' t IC i mb,,(l 8t, l rK : C .rrnbri rt{ c
Ll ni !crsi tv [,rc \s , l 9l tl , v ot. t. p. 195).
5 . " T o Mo r c, 5 F e b r u a r ;-l6 a s" ( AT Vl6 ? - 7 0 ) i n i tri d., P P 160-67 On thc

470 471
 1 0 . " D e scr ip tio n o l th e Hu m a n Bo d y a n d All o1 Its Functi ons" 1 (A T II 225)' [(Al -x1.520], i n Oeurrer& D l rJ .drter,v ol . l l , p. 520).

in The Philosophical l'ltt.irgr o/ Der.drfer, vol. I'p ll5. 21 . ' A c c reti o dupl ex es t:.rl i .r mortuorum c t quac non nutri untur, l i tr;ue

Il See Ra1mond Ruver, E/lrncnrs dc pr1.ltl-6id/orir (Paris: Pressts tlnivcr' s i ne ul l a earunr i mnrut.rti one,v tl s al l em
pcr si rnpl i c c m parti um opp< rs i ti r-rnem,

s i t a i r e sd e F ra n ce , 1 9 4 ? ) , p p . { 6 - 4 7 . si ne n,rgna. . . A l l i a ac c reti o c |r \ i v c nti um, s i l c (' orum quae nurri untut. rt l i t

1 2 . " l t i s so jn ) p o r ta n t to kn o w th e tr u c ca u seol the heart'smovenent that n'D rpc rc um al i qua parti um i mmutal i one. .. P erl ec tanutrj l i o s i v eac c reti o s i mul

w i t h o u t s u c h kn o *le d g e it is im p o ssib leto kn o w anythi ng shi ch rel atesto the gencr. ti onem s i v e s emi ni s produc ti onem c onti net" ("L\c .rP ttr.rnatomi c r: de

t h e o r y o f m e d icin e . F o r a ll th e o th e r fu n ctio n s ol the ani mal are deP enl l cnt on accreti on !et nutri ti one" IA T X I.596], i n i bi d., v ol . !1, p. 596). D es c aneshere

t h i i ' ( " D c s cr ip tio n o fth c Hu m a n Bo d y a n d All o l Its Functi ons" 2 IA T X I 245]' contr$ts the grow th ofan aggregatew hos e parts remai n Lrnc hangedni th that

in The Philosophircl llhtings of Descartes,rcI. l. p. I 19). ,,f an i ndi v i dual through trans form,rti onof i ts parts .

ll. "Treatisc on l\14n" (AT Xl.l65), in lhe Phlo\oPhicdl Wntingr ol D$&n's' 24 . "' l b l { ore, 5 Fc bruarv l 6-|)" (A T V 277-7u). i n Ihc l htl as ophi c altti i r

v o l . I , p . 1 04 . i nq' ol D es c orrc s!ol

, . 1. p. \66.

1 4 . " T r a ite d e I' h o m m c" ( AT XI.l7 .]- 9 0 ) , in C harl es A dam and l 'aul Tan- 25 . "P ri nc i pl es o1 P hi l os ophr" (A f V l l l A .326), i n i bi tl ., v ol . l . p. 21l l t.

n e r y , e d s . , Oe u vr e rd e De sco r r e(sPa r is: Vr in , 1 9 7 4), vol . l l , P P 17l -90ral soi n 26 . "Medi tati ons on Fi rs t P hi l os ophy " (A t V l l .8' + ), i n i bi d , v .,1.2, rrt.6.

A n d r 6 B r i d ou x, d ., Oe u we se t le ttr e s( Pa r is:Ga lli mard, 19s3). [.Ihi s passagei s p. 5tt.

o m i t t e d f r o m th e En g lish tr a n sla tio n o l " T ft.ttisc on N 4an"i n the Phtl ost'phi cal 27 . C uc roul t, D es .att?sftk ,n l .drc .l er rdtronr,p. l 8l .

Witings ol Dcscartcs.l 28. l bi d, p. 193.

1 5 . " T r aitl d r l' h o m m e " { AT XI lg l) . iD ibi d., vol . l l , p. 193: B ri ri rur' l e. Ibi d.

p.867. )0. l hi d., p. 194.

r 6. r bi d . ll. A ugus te C omte, C oursl c phi l os ophi cpor' ri v d(l ' .rri s :S c hl ei c her, 1908),

l ? . " T r a it6 d c I' h o m m e " ( AT XI.l9 2 ) , in ibi d., vol . l l ' p 192; Bri doux' vol .6. pp. 150-51.

p.866. 12 . A l brec ht v on H al l tr. B thl t' thi qut onatoni guc . v ol . 2. p. 58 3.

I U . " P r im a e co g ir itio n cs cir ca g e n!r r tio n e nl ani mrl i um" (A T X LS I9). i n I l. Au8lstc Comte, S'5tinrc Jt: plitiquc positire (t'aris: I'rtsses tlniversitaircs

ibid., vol. ll, p. 519. dc Fra nc e. l q?5). v ol . I. p. 584.

19. ,\lartial Cuerc,ult, Descotes rclon Iordrc lts rorsons,vol l: I 1n'' d Ie ]4. C omtc , C ours ,v ol .6. P rel ,]c e.p. x v u.

: b icr , 1 9 5 3 ) , p 2 4 ll.
c o r p s ( P a r i sAn 15 . C omte, C ours ,l brti!rh l c \\on, l ol . I, p. I5l .
tl ./. pol i ti qucpos i ti v e,v ol . I, pp. 57.1,592. 650.
15 . C omte, 5rrt,.a??
2 0 . S e ese ctio n U5 o fth is vo lu m e , a b o r e .

2 1 . D c s ca n e s,"T o M e r je n n c, 2 8 Octo b e r 1640" {A T Il l .2l 3)' i n Ihc Phi l o'

: 17 . C omte, C ours ,l orty l i r;t l es s on,v ol . 3, p. 280.

s o p h i c a lW i tin T s o l D.sr a r r e s,vo l. l, p . 1 5 5 : tlr id oux,p. 1088. 18 . C omtc , S frfi mc d. pohti qft p.\i ti v t, v ol . |, p.410.

2 2 . " B r u ta n u lla m h .r h e n tn o titia m co m m o di \,el i ncommodi ' sed qtrat<l am 19 . Ibi d., v ol . I, pp. 518-80.
a0. l bi d., v ol . I, p.602.
i p l i \ i n u t c r o e \iste n r ib u s o b via lu tr u n t. q u o r u m oPe crcv!tunt et a qui bus ad
41. l bi d.
c e r t o s m o t u s ir n p u lsasu n t: u n d e , q u o tits illis p o sreasi mi l c qui d occuri r, scmPer

e o s d e m m otu s e d u n C' ( "Pr im a e c.r g ita tio De \ci rca gcnernti onem ani mal i um" -1. 2.C omte, C our, l i ,rti eth l es s on.!ol . ], p.2.l l n.

172 171
 i

+ 1 . C i ) m t c . 5 ,r n a m . z/rPo ltr &u cPo s,r r v.'vo l. l, p .661' 66. " l rans rati on.tl i fut 1 ( l l l i l 0), p. l 5 l l .
i \nrt," l o P htos oph rc S ' ot

. { 1 C o m t e , ( ou n . iir r icth le sv- ' n .*r l. } . p . l7 l. 6?. Li ttre,4fi dc tnrc .t rn(i l ..i r' , t)p. 269 l (1.

4 5 . I b i d . , l b r tl' lir st lr xo n , vo l. 3 ,2 izltl 68. l bi d ., pp. 27{ ,-77.

4 6 . C o n r t e , Svstin r ed e Po lititlu ePo tin t( ' \o l. I' P.6 11' 69. In German i n 1866, i n Frt nc .hi n l 87a Il -he Orl .,rrl l nql ts h D Ltnnar.v

' 1 7 . C o m t e , Co u r , ft,n ie th le sso n ,r r r l. 3 ' p 1 6 3 . gi vcs l 89f,.r s the datc otrhe { i rs t trs col "c c ,rl < ,gv "i n Fngl i s h - TR ^\s l

-18. Ibid. 7(1. l bi d ., p. 284.

Bio lo g rc4{}(l 8s9) Thereponi :

{ 9 . S e t t h r Co m p t| sr ,:n ,lu rd c lo Sn cr d r " r r lc 7l . (l ,r* on s achr Lrrrl . I/rL N r* 5r ,c nol rr S prrr. rrarrs A rthrrr C otdhammer

r , p r i n r e d i n E m i lc til.1 , Exa ts d c p h ;h tso p h ;ce r d ' h is toi r. J. i r) bto/orre(P ari s: (B D sr.r):Beac on, 198.1).p. l l 6.

Il,rsson. l9{X)). 72. l he i i rs t trv o tbrmul ati onsare to br: l oun(l i n B ernard' s/d S ri c nr..rl i ri -

5 0 . t l c o r g c s Po u ch e t Pu b lish cd a n in r e r e stin g b iographi cal notc and bi b- m.nk,/c (P ari s :L' brai ri e l .l l . l l ai l l i i re. 1878). P ' + 5,i nrl thc thi rrl i n hi s P errl c r:

l i o g r . r p h r o l R o b in : u ' t' r k in th e /o u r n o l t I' a n ' lto nti cet cl el o phvsi al ogi ei n nrrrcsr/.radr l es ,ed. L. Lrel horme (l ' ari s : Li br.ri ri c ' i .B . B :i l l i i rc . l ' l l 7). p. J 6.

lsl{6. r'1. Brr n;rrd, / 11r:nrrur )c sphi nonti nc sdc 1at rt'r,' rrrr/rr .,r/r dn,mr,r/\.r .,r/r

5 1 . L m i l e I i ttr ' ,l..tlir Je .n rrct n r 1 d r .,' t ( 2 n d e d ., Pari r: D i ri i cr. 1872).p '+31: rl a.j rour (Pari s :I i brai ri t J .B . B ri l l i are, 1879).v ol l , p.' 10

r n d L o S c i . n c . . 1 up o in ttc vu c p h ilo so p h iq u tlf' a r is: Did icr' l 87l )' P i i i . 7a. Bcrnard, Rdpporl nr lcspngrit et la narthc Llelo ph.rsiologicgtnintlc cn

5). Littrt.,llidrnt et miJccrrx, p '1l3tr. /ran<r(Paris : Impri meri ( Imperi :l c , 1867). rr. 2l l .

s l . l b i d . , p . 41 1 7 . 75. tlernrrd, /ntrodurrion i I'ltu<le<lclo n<l<lttt f c\PlrtD.nrd/i (Prrii: t-ibrairie

p o iir ir c, .ln tl scr ' .r t,l 2 i.Ju l.l) cc .

5 4 . J o t b i f t , s,p ,r r ;c l E31' J.tt. Bi i l l i ,rrc , 1865). p. l l 2.
5 5 . L i t t r i , l .r s.k' n .. ,r u Po ' n t .I vK l,h ilo so Ph iq ot'P . \i i 76. l bi d., p. I4l .

5 4 , . J o h n S t u a r t Nli1 l. .' lu g u r r cCo n t. in .l Po siivi 'nt' i n J N l R obson' ed ' 77. B ernard,l c qons s urbs phi nonti nc sh h v ri ' .rol l , p i ' 11

L , , l l | . t e d W r k s l lo h n Sr u .r /.r tiil ( T ( ' n ) n t.' : Un ive r sitYof To(,l )1o Press' 1969)' 7s. l bi d., v ol . 2, p. 5).{ .

v o l . 1 0 ,p p . 2 t t ' 1 - 9 2 . ?'1. B .r n:rr(I,P rn(i p.' , f.71.

5 ? . L i t t r e , i u - Si,r n r e P. 230. ttO. l bi d., p.5:.

,
5ll. Ibid., p. 231. Sl . Bc rnard. Intral uc ri "n, p.' 70.

59. lbid., p. 260. E2. B c rnard, l ' j ri nri pc sp.

. 26.

t'0. tbid., p.261. 8l . l bi d., p. l s 2 n.2.

t l . L i t t r i , , ' UA/c( ]t..I n r lr lcr r n i,p . 1 7 0 . 81. l hi d., p. 156.

t i 2 . C h a r l c s R o l' jn , ' l) c h b io lo g ic, i,l) ict e t s oDbur. se\ rtl i ti ons '1\cr i i 5. B c rn.rrd,/ntrorl ui ti or).p. 165.
')n
p o sitt,ca ( ,\4 a y Ju nt l 869),P l l l .
I t s a r r t r c ss c i c n c cs, /.r t Ph ilo so p h ic i i 6. l l cr ni trd, P r.4' (r, p. l 7l .

5 1 . I i t t r a , 1 d Siicn r c, p . 3 ' 1 0 ;th is te r t o r ig in a llv apperrcd as an arti cl c i n 87. U ernard,/nrroduc tr' on.
p.,t0l .

r h L , f r n u a r y l l l 7 0 isr u c r r fla Ph ilr ,r o p h tu 8N . & :r n.rrd, P ri nri ptt. p. 119.

Po ' tL itc.
6 - 1 . L i t l r i , . l/( ilc( in ..r r n id ..,n ' . p . l+ x. It9. l bi tl ., p. 165.

6i. l L i d . , p . J- lt. 9tl . Thc ful l ri tl i r ol rhc s orl i s "l ,r N rtrn oppri nc L p.rr l l mi dc c i nc

i
171 17t
 m ( , d c r n f . o u la n ice ssit6 d e r e co u r ir i la m e r h o de ancj enne ct hi ppocrati quc 5. .J ul i enP ac orre,l d P .ni i c rc ri nl guc (P ari s :A l c an, l 9l l ).
d a n s l L .t r . r i t c me n t d e s m a la d ie i' ( Pa r is: Dtb u r e , 1768). 6. Franz R eul eaur, Thtorc ti s rhc K i nerl ,dti h:Grunbtj .l t: c i nc r theor)c dt
91. Bcrnard, lrincipes <lenidccine ctpirimcntolc (G!ne\a: Alliance Colturcllc ( B rauns c hu' ei g,\' i c u rg. I l l 75 ).
.tl osc,l i nrv c s en
d L rl i r r e , ) 9 6 . )) , p . l3 ln . 7. Ac c ordi ng to trl ari , tool s arc nrov c d br human s trc ngth, rrherc ar m,r-
9 2 . B e r n a r d ,In tr o d u cr io np, . ) 5 1 . chi nes a re nov ed bv n.rtrrrall i rrc t:; s ee hi s C .rprtol ,trrnr- S amrrel,\l tr> rc anrl
9 3 . B e r n a r d ,Pr in cr p e s,
p p . 5 1 fl. Edsard Av el i ng (N erv l i rrk : Inttrnrti onal P ubl i rhers , 1967),v ol . I, pp. l ?.1-?.).
9 4 . I b i d . , p .5 3 . 8. F or c x ampl c . troc hl c r (from thc C reek for a bl oc k ofpul l c l r), thrmi (l
95. Ibid., p. 392. (f;om thc Greek l br s h;el (l ), \c aphoi (l (l x ,ats hapc rl ),hammc r (i n thr c i r). $c ,
96. See the paper bl Marc Klcin and Mmc Sificrlen in the Conptcs rcndus duct, tronrpc(the frenc h for l )l l opi an tube, s o c al l ed bec aus eol i ts res embl ,rrrc c
o l t h e C o n g r ds Na tio n a l d cs So ciit6 s Sa va n te s,Strasbourgand C ol mar, 196?, to r horn ), thorax (from the C fc ek fbr c hc s t), ti bi a (ori gi nal l r, a k i nd ol l l utc ).
S c * i o n d e s S c ie n ccs,vo l. I, p p . lll- 2 1 .
9 7 . B e r n ar d , Pr in r ip e s,p p .9 5 a n d 1 2 5 . 9. Seemv "Modi l es et anal ogi esdans l .r dec ouv erteen bi ol ogi e." i n I-rudc r
9 8 . N ' l i r ko Dr a ze n Cr m e k, " R6 lle xio n s in e d ites de C l aude Bernard sur l a l 'hi stotrcet dc phi l os oph,.dc rrt.' .fi (P ari \: V ri n, l 96tt), p. 306.
m i ( l c c i n f p r a r iq u c," ,td d e cin ed c lia n ce 1 5 0 ( 1 9 6 4), p. 7. 10. A ri i totl e (\pl ai nc ,l rhc l )c ri ng an< lertens i on ol the l i mbs bv ,rnal ogv
e 9 . B c r n ar d . Ca h ie r d c n o te s.e d . M ir lL o Dr ve n C rnrel (P ;rri s:Gal l i mard, rri th : c:tapul t: s ee D e nr,,rrronrrn.r/i rrrr.
tr.rns .N { arrhaC ra' en N us s baum(P nrc c
It)65). p. 126. ton, N j : P ri nc c ton Ll ni v eni tr P rc s s ,1978),701 b9.
1 0 0 . P u b lish cd in Pa r is l) y \r . l\{ a s,io na n d So n. Thc nork l i nt rppcarcd as li. D c \c a(r\. "Io l l ers rnnc . l o Ffbn,rfr I6]9"i n(tl l ).525), i r. P brd-
an arciclc in thc Gazcrtchibdonadoirt ,lt .lllJ,ntu .t l. Chiruryi(. \ophi cal l hi ti ngs of D c s tortts ,trans . J ohn C otti ngham, I{ oberr S r.rrthotl anrl
l0l. l b i d ., p . I1 7 . l l ugal d i\l urdoc h (C .rmhri dge. U K : C ambri dge Ll ni !rrs i rv P res s . l .l 8-+ -el ),
1 0 2 . B c r n a r d , Pr in r ip cs,p . 1 1 7 . vol . 1, p. I34.
l0l. Bernard, Pcnsic's;
nores<litachics, p.16. 12. CIaude l l ernard, /nr..,.l u(.r(,n
(186s ). pt. 2, c h. 2. s ec . l .
ll. K ant, C ' ttguc ol J uU mnt, rrans . J .11. B c rnrr(l (N c \ Y ork : l l al nc r,
P , r n r I t r v r : P R o a L Ir !s l 95l ), sc c . 65.
L Emanuel Radl, Gesci;chteder b;oloyllschen
Thcortenin der Neurcir {2nd ed., 1.1. Eernard,/ntroduc aon,pp. 356-57.
L r i p r i g : W . E n g clm a n n , 1 9 ll) , vo l.
ch a p .4 , \cc. L 15. lbi d., pp. 159-60.
',
2. \\hlther Riese, I'ldic <lcI'honne <lansIo neurobiologi.contenpot.lhte(Patis: 16. Aogus teC omrr. C aursJ c phrl ot,ph|.pos tti v .(l l ari s :S c hl ri c h.r, 1907-24),
A l c a n , 1 9 3 8 ) , p . 8 ; se c a lso p . 9 . tol . I, l i r rtv -l i rs t Its s on.

L A r j r t o t l c. Po litiL s,in T h t Ba ( Wo tI\ o l Anstatk, \.d. R j chard McK con l ?. See mr Ia C onnots s oncdc
c /ri ri c (P .rri s :V ri n. l t)(,5). on c el l rhc ory .
1 \ , . s Y , , r l : R an .l,' m H,' ,,\' . le + 7 ) . L .ll. .\ppcodi r l l trl th.rt rrorl , rftr' \ rh( ,,l nri { )n! bo"ten c el l rhenrr' .rnd rhr phi
. { . T h e o p h ile d e Bo r d e u , n cd tr .l.r a n .' r d n iq u.' su l cspo'i ti onsdesgl andu l osophv o l Lc ' i hni ;.

l P r r i s , ( ; . E Q u jlla u , I7 5 l) , scc.6 .+ ,q u o ( d in Ch n r lc ! Vi l i or D aremberS ,H r'ro,r! 18. [ti ennc \\i rl l i , "tts C ul turc s rl i ' rg,rnesembnonnai res ' i n ri trr' . " R rrar
J c r r c i c n r c sm i dir a lcs ( Pa r is:L ib r a ir ie J.ll. E.r ;llier ., 1870), vol . 2, p. l l 57 n.2. r.,c,rl ,qu. (l uav -J une l .)511,f. t8e.

476
 1 9 . B e rn r r d , Cd h ict Jc n o te s.cd . Ntir ko Dr .v en Grmck (pari s: Gal ti martl , ll. j c an R os rand, l l ont r\.l e i ri ti : patteur.B [nonL tonttnettc ,I.o R t.hc
1 e 6 5 ) .p . l 7 l.
1,,tl .du/d(P .,ri r:S toc k . l e' + 2), p.96.
. 2 0 . A r i s to tlc,,t/cr d p ,4 r .e cs,
in L h c Bo r ic ltb r [\ ol A n\totl e, an.966a, p.718. 42. Ilr:rnard, lnrrorludbn Li I'ttu<tcdc ltt nirtccir. fr/,i|rnrrr.,/. (t,aris: Librrj_
J 1 . S c e Ka n t\ Ap p r n ,lir to th e lia n sccn r lcnri l D j al ecti c i n the C rn,ru. ol ri , f.B. B,ri l l i i rt. I865),rran\. l .\ l tr.nrvC opl :v (Jrc enr ,rs tntro.l urtbn
ta th \ruJ l
r D . / t . d ' o r ( Ne $ Y( ,r [, Di) u b l( d i) . t9 6 6 ) , p . a 2 5fl .
nl I\Fti n c ntol .tl & l rnc l N c r),> rt:rrl ,rc ni l trn, I.!7;C ol l j rr. l 96l ).p.96.
2 2 . l l e n r l- E. Sig tr ist, tta n a n d ,ttc,licin c:.tn tnoo.l ui j on to,l tctl i rst Kno\l +1. A l f;ed N orth w hi rrl ,c a(t. \t,!u...rnd t,/. ((.amt,ri dgc , U K :
Lrni r(,ai r!
c d 1 7 ct r, a n s . Ma r g a r e t Ga lt u o is( .( Ne s Yo r k: No r r on, 19t2), p. 102.
P rc!\. 1 93' + ),p.5. { l uoted hr al ex andre K oy ri i n.r rc port i n R c rhc rc hc s
phto
2 3 . I b i d., p p . ll7 .t2 . roph,9ucr .+( l 9 l 4- I s ), p. 198.
l . { . C o mtc, ' Co n sid ir ,r r io n s p h ilo so p h iq u cs srrr l ,cnscmbtc de l a sci encc 44. Xavicr Bichat, l".rtonit gininjl. dppligu'c ri to phrsiotogit a t) Lt nilcttnc
b i , , l o 8 i q u e " ( 1 8 1 8 ) . lL r r ie th lcctu r e o f th e Co u n rtc yhi l osophi tpo,,rr,c(ti ri s; (l )ari ! ts ros s onand C hl l rrl a, t60t): nes rd. bv B ec l arrt. tS J l .
Ii i l n!. b\ (;.i ,,B f
- r c h l c i r h e r , I9 0 8 ) , r ,,) . ]. p . I{ ,t) . lLrr r.rrd as Gcncral lnatontt tpphcLtn f\nrtnqt ,t tt ,u*ti.in(, ) rols. (tj,l\rl,n:
2 s . I b i d ., p . 1 7 5 . R i t hrrl rrn and I ord, I812). < rt. l , pp. 20-21.
26. r bi(t.,
P . I7 9 . +! B c s i des ,l l c gel undc ntrx x l rhi s
rrl ec rl v K . , s c e w ,i s ,c ns c hr/t
.tu Ir,tA ,
2 7 . S i g cr ist,.llo n d r r d V&lid n e , p . t0 9 . chs. I an d l .
1 8 . C o mte , Co u r j, p p . 1 7 5 , l? 6 .
46. If i !s i (' r,"l ntc rl enri on.'
2 9 . I b i d ., P. 1 6 9 . a?. I hi orl orede S aus :trc . h,v roc tc gret l t' ari s : t)f n().,1,l gl e).
I t l . C h u dr Btr n a r d . lcq o n | u . tc d n th tl .t to
rl corcn.i rf dni nri rl c(f,.l ri \: 18. l l l atu. f,4r S .fi rJ r. I j 9b. i thc S ,tphrv dn,/.i c s r.,.c ,n.,r. l rrn\. i n(l
L i l ) r a i r i ( J . B . Ila illit:r ' . l3 ? 7 ) . p . 5 6 .
tntr,. A .t Tarl or, c < 1.R . K l i l ,anrIr and F. A ns c onrtr, ondon: N el s on, t,16t).
ll. rbid.
fOrrh,,l o gv : the an of us i ng ,,orrl s c orrtc tl v (tr,c l l w a! N L,rr Intc moti onttl D r.-
1 2 . l b i d ., p p .6 5 - 6 6 . tfunorr, 2nd r:d., 1958) TR ^N s .]
3 3 . I b i r l ., p . llil. 4'). See P i errc C ui rruri , i rr C ranrrnrri rr(P ari s r pn,s !c \
Ll ni !c rs i r.l i rc l t(.
1 . 1 . I b i d ., p . l l2 . fri D .f, l9-58),p. I09.
1 5 . l b i ( i .. p . 1 6 0 . i (r. C l .ru(l ( l rv rc < l e \i rgrtar. R c norguts ;ur tn k tnauc
l ' onc .ti \t (t6+ i t.
1 6 . B c r na r d , L cq a n tn r lo .h .r /( ,u r d ,,n r d i.. 1 p.rri s,I j brai ri e
J.B. B i i l ti erc,
l8l(, ), p. l9l.
51. I:s trbl i s hmenr ol .ooj c ri pti on.n(l the mc l l i .rt
errnri nrti on ol c on_
17. f.M. (iuardia, Hisrorc dc l<t nidtLinc tl,Hjppottot. d Brcusl,dir.t sc, srrc s.ri pt\i cs ttrbl i rhrnc nrol nati onal s tLrdl arnrs
ana rrox )unt depot\.
. c j n u r J ( P i t r i s :Do in , lU8 4 ) , p . lll. 52. (l ui raud, ta Grc nnoi .,p. 109.
Iti. \'jctor Prus, Dc l'|nit,1t,,n dc ld phL,gnallc. ou nouvc c tloctritu nittiLot. 51. S c r J i c ques MJ i l \, l N o,,d/,.!d.ron(pari s : t)un,x l . t9.16), pp. l s 7t,.
( P r r i s : P a n c k ou clc. llll5 ) , L . 1r hri cl r c c < ,untol n< )nrrrl i /,r(i ,,n(r\es muc h
to rhi s rv ork , l r hi c h i s us el ul l i ,r
i 9 . ( ; c o r ge s Ii:is\i( ,. " ln r r r vcn tio n ." IJn e Ctntovcrsc sLtrl 'l val urr.,r. fi o(. i ts chri tv ol an.rl v s i srrx l hi s torrrrl
i nti )rmrl ron.rs s 1 .l \ br i ts rel i ,rc ni :r..tr,.r
rn ntstr i clle dt l' f nt.vcl ol'e.:I
rc l.d n e i sc ).2 lt9 18). studv ol D r. I l c l l mi c h, Lbrrrfi c r
rtu N o' :rl tun.tOa2j ).
+ 0 . F l n i l e Gu \a n ,) t, L o lo r io tto n e t f ivo lu tio D,I rcl !. (pari s: I)oi n, l 9l 0). s1. Jc .1n(l c l a Fontai ne. rotl er, 6.,r, ..J upi tc r
ft l e j uar.r\c r,,0upi rc r rn,j

47R 479
thc Sharc Crr-rpper). "L'tl i s toi rc dc s s c i enc e5de I' organi s ati onde B l ai nv i l l e
c t I,A bb6 Maupi ei J ,,.
Accir s/.,fr r(ele ip zig r [. D cuti ckc, 19]4;2n<l ed..
5 5 . l l a n ; Ke lsr :n ,,Rcin e n R evued'hrtot. des\.i c nc c s| (1979), pp.7 S _82 and
90_91.
) 9 5 0 ) , t r a n r . a s Pu r c T h a ,r v o l lo w ( Be r kclcy: Uni verri tr ol C al i l brni a P rcss. "Vie," Encrclapo.dia unive6rlis t6
lts.jt), pp.762r,6(,b, J6h_(,9c.
r96 7). "P hy s i ol ogi e ani mal e: H i s toi re," fn4,r/opoe.ti .t uni v .ts dtk
t2 l l 9t2), pp.
50. JulicnFreund,I tssentc
du poltiquclParis:
Sirey,1965),p. 332. t01S-'77d .
5 7. lb ;d,,p. 293. "ta P hv ri ol ogi e ani mal e aLrX V I. s i c c l c ,' , i n R c D e
Taton, & ., H noi n
58. SeeI lenri Bergson,fhc TwoSourc*of llorollT and Acligion:"Whether gi ni rcl e des s c i enR ' , v ol . 2 (pari s , pres s esU ni v ers i rai res
dc Franc e. l 95l i ).
humanor animal,.rsocic(yis aDorganization;
it impliesa coordination
an(lgen- pp. 591-98, 601-601, 618-t9.
erallyalsoa nrbordination
of elcmcnts;it thercforecxhibits,whethermerelv "La P hy s i ol ogi cc n A l l c maS ne,' ,j n TanrD ,ed., H i \toi rc
l i j ti nb J c ,c )c nc c s .
embodicdin life or, in addition,specifically
formulated,
a collcctionof rules rome III: l o S ri enc cro ntc hporc i ne,\ol . l , te Ii X . s j i r/e ( pari s : prc s s c s
U ni v erri _
and laws"(trans.R. AslrlevAduraand CloudeslevBretonlc.rrdcnCil. NY: tai resde F ranc e, l 96l ), pt. 482-84.
Doubledar.19541,
p. )1 ). "L'1d ac .l c narure dans l a th6ori e et l ,r prati .l ue mc rl i c al c s ,,,
J l etl ec j ntdc
59. Claudet-6vi-Srrauss,
lrtstesTrcpiques,
trans.John and Doreen Weigh. l'l'"mmc .+3 (,March 1912J, pp. 6-1.
ma ntNe " )i'r k : Ar h' r r . um , lq8lt . p 18i "Lcs M al a(l i es ," i n A n< l 16
J ac ob, d., E nc .v tl opi di ephtorophtqueuni v ers c l l c :
60 . Fried r ic hNiet z s c he.I et t er of f ebr uar y l 8 ? 0 t o P a u l D e u s s c ni.n L t-tni vcnphi l os ophi que,v ol . I { prri s : pres s e5U ni v ers i rri res
.l e Franc c . l 9l r9),
Nictzsche
Bricfwcchscl(Bcrlin:
Walterde Gruyter,1977),p. 100. p. l 2I5.r.
61. Nie(,sche,fht Brth of f qcdv,trnnr. \!hltcr Kauihan (Ne$ lbrk: "Lc S r)tur api s ramoi ogi quede l a medec i ne,"
H ntotr dnd phtos oftr oJ the
Vintagt,1967). / i /i J, rcr,c , l 0ts uptt., l qx x r,pp tS -l a.

La Gn nats s anc <

e l cl a v r. (pari r: V ri n, 1989),pp.47_50,52 s 6,s 8_61,69-71,
ji 76, 79 , t)6-u7,83_89, 9 i _92. I02 l o+ , l r(,_r5.
So u r ce s
"l l crc; rrtes et l a tec hni que," Iral out du !.\"
C onorc isntendti ondl < tc phi i ,s o_
phrcC ong i s D c s c .i ttc ' ,tome tl (pari s : H ermann, l 9l ?),
T h e l i r l l o r v i n g p u b lir h e r s h a ve g r a n te d p e n n issio n to usc exccrpts from copy pp. 79_1j 5.
"H nroire de I' horl nrc c t nature der c hos es s el on;\ugus te
righted works: C omtc drns l t
Plandes trcvaut sctenifiqu.J'nicessdnes
pout tiorqanncr k) n(iiti. t,q,!2,.,i cr frUJ.J
E t u c l e s< lh isto itc e t d e p h ilr so p h tud e s r r ,e n ce s( 5th (d., Pari s: Vri n, 1989), ph i losophryucs(197 4J, pp. 291-9't.
p p . i 1 - 2 1 , 5 5, 6 l- 7 3 , 7 5 - ' 7 9 , I ll, I l5 - 4 1 . i4 .{ - 46, I47-51. 153-60, 226-27, "Emi l e Li t.ri , phi l os oph!d! l a bnrl ogi c
et de l a medec i ne,,,C enrre i nrc r
2 I l - l l i , 2 6 0 - 7 1 , 2 9 6 - 1 0 4 . tzl- 2 7 , t2 9 - l t. 3 1 6 - .15. nati onal i i e l y ni hi s c , ,i tes rl u C o oque
E ni tc I nrrl /f0i _i J J /. pori s j.,q o.bbrt
I<lxlao.r and Rat'dt)dlit.vin the Htstotr Df thc Iik S.icnccr (c)mbridge. MA: /e6i (P ari s :A l bi n Mi c hc t, 1982),
pp.27t-7? anrl 279_ttO.
N l l T P r . s s , I e 8 8 ) . p p . l0 - 1 7 , 5 2 - 5 9 , 5 6 - 6 1 , 6 5 - 7 0, 125-4,1. "LIn P hy ri ol ogi s reptri l G< ,phe:C hude uc l nar< t.,.
D i dto|ut 5.4 (te(J ?). pp.
I a F o r n a tio n d u o n cp t d c r tlb \c o u \ XVll" e t Xyl l l , si i (h.s\2nd ed., Pari s: i 56-57, s60_62, 566_6tt.

v r i n , 1 9 7 7 ) , p p . 3 - 6 , j0 - 3 2 , ]4 ,1 5 ,4 r , 5 2 - s6 ,6 0 61,65-66,68-69, ll0 L "P rel i ce," i n C l aude B ernarrl . ter:onss ur

tesphi noni n.s .tc Io v i c :ontnruns
I t6--t2. t55-56. ou\ ti \'nou| .t ou! v i { l .ru\ (p.rri \:
V ri n, I96tr). p. v .

460 4al
 i
=
:
=,..
!aox
-.
3
,a
'a
i>- - !
^. -
*r -6=. +
!<n=-
ic 12;
.==t- cF
'=.2 +. 4 . =
= r a: 2