A vital rationalist

A Vi ta l

R a ti o n a l i st

Se l e cte d

Wr i ti n g s

Ge o r g .t

Edit cd Tr anslat cd

yn g u i l h e m

b, v Fr ango is l) e lapo r t e bv Ar t hur

l vit h an int r oduct icr n a c r it ical

ZON E

f rom

G oldham nr er

bv Paul R. r binor v and

bib li ogr aphv bv Cam ille

BOOKS

N E\v

1994

Lim oge s

YOR K

,

O 1 9 9 4L I r T o n e ,In c. Z O N EB O O K S

(t

i\I

Contents

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

,^t \

A l l r i g h t s r c s c rve d .

rr

['

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 lnt r oduct ion: A Vit al Rat ionalist

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

by PaulRabinow 1r

the Publisher. 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 . D i s t r i b u t e d b y l h e M l l- Pr e ss, 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

I II III

25

lhe Hr st or r ol 5cr ( n( e

The VariousModels ar 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

PARrT\\'()

C a n g u i l h e m . Ge o r g e s,r e o a -

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 'fhe Molor ProblentsoJ Nincteenth-Centur.r'

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. 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 Qr) t.cl4

VI

lr . T itlc.

Ilpistemologvol N{cclicine The Linits of Healinll

'991 9 l- 86rI

ns

7hc Nev,Situationol lletlicinc A lledical Revolution ras

13:

P aer llr t r er VII V lll lX P,\RT FouR

X XI X ll P,url Frvr XIII

H ts ro n Y C el l fh c o ry

re r

T h e C o n ce p t o f R c fl e x 179 B i o J o g i c aOb l j ec ts 2 0 3 IN I F RF RET A r r o NS

Ren6 Descartes zrg AugusteComte

237

C l a u d eBe rn a rc l z o r Translotor's Note

P n o n r r l rs

Thc texts collected here are translatedfrorn thc French fbr thc from first tirne, but for trvo exceptions:I haveincluded passages

Knorvledgeand the Living and LiJe zet Science

ml translationofGcorges Canguilhem'sIdeoloo.v and Rationality

The ConccptoJ l.iJe zoz XIV

The Norm.rl .rnd the Pathological lnrrodttctionto theProhlcm

321

szr

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

(Cambrirlge,N{Ar NllT Press,1988) and from Carolvn Farvcett's (Ncu York: Zonc transfationof The Normo]on
Editor's Frangois

Note Dclaporte

The texts collccted in this volumc introduce English-language readersto an especiallvdifficult and complex dimcnsionofGeorge Canguilhem'srvork, namcly his philosophv of biology and merlicine. Its primary purpose, then, is to chart the main themes of Canguilhem'sthought, l\hich is distinguishedby minute attention 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 necesis not scicntific dissarybecausethe ob.tectof historicalcliscourse course as such but the historicitv of scientific discourseinsofar as it representsthe implementation of an epistemologicalproje.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 genesis,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 of that one to focus attention on both thc failurcs and successes acti vi ty. fa king a m acr oscopicrvic* ol t he hist or v ol science,

u n d c rto o k to s tu d v th e e m c rgenceofthrcc rl i sci Cangr - r ilhem plines:biologv. physiologvanrl medicinc. l)epenclingon the subjec 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

Introduction:

A Vital

Prul

Rationalist

R,rbinorv

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."

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 sentinrental erlucationis a classicone. High rnarkson nationalcxami nati onssent 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 eason and socict \ ' * an int er cst he shar cd wit h his ot her dist ingui 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

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

requircd ofall Ecole Normalegraduatesin rcpaymentto the stare t br t heir c dqca 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

Paristoday, as docs a deep rvell of affection for thc intellectual and institutional support he providcd over the decrdes.a

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,

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

History ond Philosophy of Science Louis Althusser paid Canguilhem a complinrent rvhen he comparcd 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

in both a philosophic and political sense,C.rnguilhemreplacerl .feanCavaillis, the philosopher of mathematics - he had been

The compar isonis r e"ealing if not r ; uit e an accur at cdescr ipt ion

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

and rvould aim not merely at corrccting a positivist and idealist

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-

cumulative understandingof nature, but also at dismantling the verf idea ofscience - a position as far liom Canguilhcm'sas one

ture of France'senduring institutions and the contingent evenrs ol his t im e. In 1943,Cangrrilhemdefendedhis rledical rhesis,,,Essais sur
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 underst andingof scienceas a singJeunif lcd act ivit r achievinga

could imagine. Nonetheless,Althusscr'sstatcment capturesthe mole, first initiatcd by' Bache]ard,anay from the static universal 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
\ 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 stemologist'sproblem is t() esrablish"the ordcr of conceptualprog-

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-

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

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-

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

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 history: it docs not identify the sciencewith thc scicntist, the sci-

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-

enti stswit h t heir biogr aphies,or sciencesr vit h t heir r esult r , nor the resultsrvith their currcnt pedagogicaluse. fhe epistemolog-

mium takesfor granted ttrit sciencccxists and holds a privileged status,but Canguilhem,like FoucaultanclPicrre Bourdieu, never

ical and historical claims assumeclbv this notion of thc historv of sciencearc magisterialand run countcr to t'nuchol contem-

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

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. and pedaFrangoisDclaportc hasarrangedthem in a conccPttl,11

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 -

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-

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

deed, thev pr ovide a kind of coht - r ent"boo) . , " r lhich, cxccpt him sell'never l l br hi s seconddoct or al disser t at ion, rCanguilhem 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

" 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

prcci se, alm ost aphor ist ic, sent eDcer ,t 'Danv! r 'it h t he clensit v

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-

of krypt onit e.

lar historica]moments:phvsicsis not biology; eighteenth-centurv natural historv is not trventieth-centur.tgenetics. '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

The Normal ond the Pathologicol A l though Canguilhempublishedin t he lat e 1930sa philosophicaf treatise on ethics and epistemologv, froitd de lol1iqueet de

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
medical thesisivhere he invcstigatcsthc verv tlefinition of thc a nr aiorr ever sal normal and t he pat hological.This nor k signalc
morale,intcndedasan unconventionaltextbook fbr advancedlvc6e studcnts, thc *'ork fbr rvhich he is hest Lnotvn starts vvith lris

covcred. The historr
i n thi nking 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 -

r+

r5

stood as the dcviation from a fixed norm, which rvastaken to be a constant.Medical practicc rvasclirectedtorvardestablishingsci-

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

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

order to survive. Rather, life is action, mobility and pathos,the constantbut only partiallysucccssfirleffort to resistdeath, to use

rvhich the patient had strayed.

B i chat' sf am ousdef init ion: "Lif e is t hc collect ion of f inct ions th.rt resistdeath."

As FrangoisDagognet,the philosopherof biologr',hascrisplv observed,Canguilhemlauncheda f'rontalattack on "that edifice of normalization"so essentialto thc proceduresof a positivistscience 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.Normativitv 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 state, v The resul t, i f

Canguilhem's*-ork hasbeen a consistentand disciplined historical 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 set 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

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 scoven rhat huntan

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-

bodv tempcraturehasa much rvider rangeof normalitl than rras previouslyassumeddemonstratesthis point. Normalitv - and this is one of Canguilhem'sconstant themes - means the abilitr to

stant presenceof evaluativenotions like "prescrvation,""regulation," "adaptation"and"normality," in both everydavandscientific approachest o liI e. "lt is lif e it sclf , and not m edical judgm ent ,

adapt to changing circumstances,to variableand varying environments. Illness is a reduction to constants,the yerv norms bv

that makesthe biological normala concept of valueand not a con-

rvhich we measureourselvesas normal, Normality equalsacti\'ity and flexibility. Hence thcrc is no purely oblective pathology;

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

rather, the basic unit is a living being that exists in shifting relations with a changingenvironment.Arguing for a clramaticrever-

cope. This testing, parrying rvith pathologr.,rhis active relation to the enyironment, this normative mobilitv and projective abil-

sal, Canguilhemmaintained that illnessultimatcly is defined bv the vcrv terms that had defincd health, namely stable norms,

it!, humanitv'sconceptualcareer,is central to its health. "Bcing healthymeansbeing not onlv normal in a given situation but also

l6

normativc in this and othcr evcntual situations.What characteriz 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 infractionsof the habitual norm and instituting ncw norms in nerv

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

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

A New U nderstonding

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,

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-

opposed,but neither legislatcsthc othcr, of Life: Error

It hasbecome a commonplaceto saythat Canguilhem'srecogni-

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

cessofo ne of his f avor it est udent sand f iiends,M ichcl Foucault .

livd' (r,n're),or thc past participle ./erecu.Canguilhcmis unequivocal on this point: the first level o{ life, form, controls thc second, cxpcrience.Although it is only the first level, the powcr ancl

intercstcd Foucault. And, even further, are these problems the panguilhem'srvork, it most pertinent lor an American auclience?

dimensionsof life, rvhich constitutesthe explicit subfor-rn-giving ject mattcr of his u'ork, the presenceof the sccontl is fiequentlv For all its declarativeclaritv, the claim of prifilt nonetheless.re

to be askedthen is, Why read him todav?Thc ansrverlics par-

ority only thinly masksthe kecn a*arenessof suffcringand searching - in a rvord, pathos - rvhich is the expericntial double, the

While not exactlv false,such an appreciationremainsinsuflicient unless rve also ask rvhat it rvas in Canguilhem'slvork u'hich so

is rvorth underlining, is relevantfirr diversert'asols.The qucstion tiallv in anothcr frequent commonplace.Canguilhem'spredecessor, 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

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

conceptsofthe sciencesof life. l-et us suggestthat today it is thc

cum philosophercum pedagogue. In fact, a not-so-latentexistcntialism,albeit ol a distinctive

biosciences- rvith a rencrvcd claboration of such conccpts of norms and life, dcath and information - that hold center stage

and idiosvncraticsort, shadowsCanguilhem'sconccption ofmedicine. ( )ne easilvhearsechocsof Sartreand Merleau-Pontv'searlv

in the scientific and social arena;hcncc the rencrvctirclcvance ol GeorgesCanguilhem.

themes,transposedto a diffcrcnt registerand played rvith a distincti'e llair. Canguilhem'svariantsof "to freedom condemncrl" and "thc structurc ofcomportment" arc composeclin a diflerent

In his 1966essay"Le Concept et la vie," Canguilhemanalvzecl the contemporaryrevolution under rvavin geneticsanclmolecu-

kev. His individual is condemnedto adaptto an environmcnt and affinto act using conccptsand tools that haveno preestablishec] r8

lar biologv. The essay,a historical tour de lbrce, traces the concept 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 calreconstruction 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 (cellular) milir:u arc in constant interaction. There is no simple, unidirectional 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 communication 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 reflection and uncertainty.From sociobiologiststo manv advocatesof

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 rhetorical 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 thcorv in mathematicsor Canguilhem on the historv of the reflex arc.li The irony rvasmade more tantalizing by al)usionsto the

the Human Genomc Project, the code is the central dogma.

unflinching and high-stakes activitiesin thc resistanceof one side

is as tightll proCanguilhemrejectsthis telos.lf homosapiens (or molecular biologists)think, many grammedasthe ethologists

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

then hot', Canguilhcm asks,can rve explain error, the history of

livecl in Paris, n'riting pamphlets. Foucault u'as rcvealing to us

errors and thr: history of our victories over error? Genetic crrors are nou'understood as informational errors. Among such errors,

a hi dden r elat ionshipof t r ut h and polit ics, indicat ing anot hcr

hou'ever,a large number arise from a maladaption to a milieu. Oncc again hc rcintroduces the theme of normality as situated

different forms and norms. Hou,ever,there is a ccrtain insi(ler's

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

the samcdistinctions,applvingthem to Cavaillisduring the 1930s

uhen it placesitself in the rvrong place, in the rvrong relationship rvith the environment, in the vvrong place to receive the

lhile mocking thosc who deduced that a philosophv u'ithout a

infbrmationneededto survive,to act, to flourish,We must move, crr, adapt to sunive. This condition of "crring or drifting" is not

type of intellectual, one lbr whom totality and authenticitv bore humor involved;twenty vearsearlier,Canguilhemhad employcd

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.riting a nroral trcarisc to ground his actions, he .joincd thc rcsistance \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 conc 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 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.

Panr

ONr

M e th o d o l o g y

CHapr r n The

Hist or y

The Object of Historical

C) Ne of

Science

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 is a discourse of the "mother of a kitten." The scienceof cr,vstals 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 crvstalJography, crystaloptics and inorganicchemistrvare constituted as sciences,the "nature of crvstal" just is thc contcnt of the scienceofcrystals,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 crvstal.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 - discourscthat 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 a c 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

pai<Jto a significant f;ct about tht' crnt'rgcnceol this genre: it re
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-

lorved bv the infinitesimal calculusof Leibniz an(l Ne\vton; the secondrevolution, in mechanicsand cosmology,is svmbolizedby

tilic oblcct. Naturc is not t1ivento us asa set ofdiscrcte scientific constitutcsits obiects bv inventobjccts and phcnomena.l.Science 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

is, the foundationsofscience, Cartesianinnatism was one revo-

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 ofvcrti 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 comm 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 $ i t 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 bcratc plal on lr.or
Descartes'sPrinciplesol Philosoplr.y and Newton's Principia- ln philosophy,and, more precisely,in the theorv of knovr'ledge,that lution and Lockeian sensualismthe other. Without Descartes, rvithout a rending oftradition, there $,ould be no history ofscience. 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 sciencc,Font encller casoncr l,ir lbllons t hat t hc condi 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 sensct 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 spccreoercrnrfdfi .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

historicitv ol scientific cliscourse.Bv "historicitv ofscientiflc dis-

refused to comment on prior claims to knowlcdgc. lt not only rejected the legacvofancient and medicval physicsbut erected

course" I mean the progressofthe discursiveproject asmeasurcd againstits orvn intcrnal norm. 'lhis progrcssma\i moreover,meet

nclv norms of truth in place of the old. Hence, it rencleredall

rvith accidents,be delavedor diverted bv obstacles,or be intcrrupt 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.

lle passdddpass{.Fontenellethus rcalizcdthat rvhcn Cartesianphi, losophv killed tradition - that is, the unrellective continuitv of

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 e i ght 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

past and present- it provided at the sametime r rational lbund.rtion fbr a possiblehistorv, fbr an emergentconsciousness that

previotrsscicncc obsoleteanclconsignedit to the surpassedpast

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 rnessto a movelncnt tnar rranscendedit, that dethroned the past

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

in favor of the prescnt.As Fontcnelle rvaswell aware,before the Moderns could speakabout thc Ancients, even to praise thcm,

current stateof the biologic.rl.rndsocialsciencesat a given point

thev had to take their distance.IEtudcs,p. 55] hasno his[3] According to Desc.rrtes,however,knowlcdge cosmology, torv. It took Newton, and the refutation ofCartesian fdr histon - that is, the ingratitudeinherent in the claim to begin

historicalculmination of any prior stnteof a dcvelopedscience-

anervin repudiation of all orlgins - to aPPearas a dimension of s.i"ncei Th" historv of scienceis the explicit, theoretical recognition ofthe fact that the scicncesare critical, progressivediscoursesfbr determiningwhat aspectsof cxperienccmust be taken

Note, moreover,that Adolphe Qu€teJet,Sir FrancisGalton,.lames

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 nongiven,an object wlrosc incomplctenessis tssential.ln no rvaycan

fbr example,studieddataabout hrrmansize;the collection ofsuch

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 sciu'ith their civil and ac.rdenticbicrgraphics, encc rvith its results.rndrcsultsu ith the fbrm in *'hich they hapat a particularpoint pcn to be expressedfbr pcdagogicalPurPoses

i n ti me , a st at e t hat is neit her t he logical con5cquencenor t he not o[ thc mathematicso[ Pierre-SimonLaplaceor the biologv ofCharles Darwin, the psychophvsics of GustavFechner,the cthnologv of Frederick Taylor or the sociologvof Emile Durkheim. McKeon Catell and Alfred Binct coul(l develop biometrics and psvchometricsonlv after variousnonscientiflc practiceshad provided raw materialsuitablefbr mathem.rticaltreatment.Qu€telet, 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

in t im e. I E t u d e r,p p . l 7 -1 8 ]

only at a number of differcnt scicncesbearingno intrinsic rcla-

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

and political and social praxisJOur subject, then, hasno natural

importance of his subject mrtter. This is essentiallvalrvavsthe case,evcn rvhen the historian'sdecision rcflccts nothing more

must be soughtin t he hist or yof science it self anclnowher eelse,

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 net 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

cific domain in w-hichthc thcoretical issuesposed by the rlevel-

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

unfore seenr clat ions bet ween m at henr at icsand pr act ices t hat

ti on to one anot herbut alsoat "nonscience, "t hat is, at ideologv

28

theoreticallocus in one or anotherofthe sciences,any more than it hasa natural locus in politics or pedagogv.lts thcorctical locus fbr it is this historv and onlv this histor\,that constitutesthe spcopment 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

\\.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

the clt'ments accelerateclthe pacc ol progressin chcnristrv,antl eventuallyled t o an upheavalin at or nic physics,u'hile ot hcr sci-

askedthcnrsel'esin a languagethey had to fbrge for thcmselres. , Critical studv of those
atcs its own senseof time. Just how it does this dcpcn
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.

tht' progressof scicnce permits this history to reconstitute thc theoretic.rldiscotrrseoI the past. A ne.r c]iscovcrlnrar rrakc it

l-hc history of science can of course accommodate various kinds of objects rvithin the specific theoretical domain that it

possibleto unclerstanda discoursethat waj not untlerstoodrvhen

constitutes:tlrerc are alrvavsdocuments to bc classilied,instru' ments and techniquesto be dcscribed,methods and questionsto

i t may dem olish t hcor ies once consider edaut hor it at ivc. ( Jnlv

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'

tori cal r upt ur e and cont inuit r . Such cont act is t : st ablished,as

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,

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-

it was first enunciated,such as Mcndel's thcory of hereditv, or contnc t wit h r ecent scicncccan give t he hist or iana senseof hisGaston 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-

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 es onl r

rcct itself constanth.'Ihe relation betrveenAichimcrles'method

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 ntcntions, to theories. Descartesneeded David Ferrier to grind opti-

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-

cal glass,but it rvashe rvho provided the theorv of the curvesto

ematicswas possiblebelore thcre rvasmathematics,that is, belorc

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'

mathematicshad b,.-enconstituted through a serieso1 rliscoveries antl decisions."Nlatht'maticsis a devclopmentalproct,sslun do'c-

iclc. The historv of scienceconcernsan ariological activin'. the scarchfor truth. This axiologicalactivity appearsonly at the Ievel

nir]," saidJeanC.rvaillis. lhe historianoI mathem.rticsrnu\t take his provisionaldcfinition of$'hat m.lthematicsis fiom contempo-

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,

rarv mathematicjans.Manv rvorksonce releyantto nlathematics

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

in an earlicr pcriod Draytherefbrecraseto be relcvantin historical

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 ncompJtible rvith onlinarv historv.Dmitrv Mendelevev'spcriodic tablc of lo

ol erhaust ion and m oder n calculus is not t he sam e lbl t odav's

pfrsp('ctive;fiom a ne$lv rigorousstandpoint,previouslr important 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 inspirational teachingso[ Gaston Bachelard The fundamental conceptsof Bachclard'sepistcmologvarc bv no\4'*'ell knort n' so well knou'n, perhaps,that thev havebeen disseminatedand discussed,especiallyoutside France,in a vulgarized,not to saYsanifbrct'ol the original- Among tized, lbmr, devoid of the pc-,lemical 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 obstac)e,epistemologicalbrcak lrupture),and obsolete or "ofli-

'

c ial" s c i e n c e . ' . To my mind, the best summarv of Bachelard'sresearchand teachingcan be lirund in the concluding pagesof his last epistemologicaf work, Le Mati alismerationnel.l I{erc the notion ot is supported epistemologica)discontittuity in scientific pro-qress science in of and teaching history the by argumcnts based on the twentieth century. Bachelardconcludcs with this statement: "Contemporarr scienceis basedtrn the searchfor true lviritablel facts and the synthesisoftruthful lvd digue) larvs'" Bv "truthlul" 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 tiuth pcnnanently inscribed in objects or intcllect. Truth is simpl} \\'hat sciencespeaks,Horv,then, do rve recognizethat a statenrent is scientific? By the fact that scicntiIic truth neversPrings fully blorvn from the head ofits creator' A scicncc is a discourse 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 *hose course the historian believeshe can reconstruct, it is becauscit i.ra historr r,rhosemeaningthe cPistemologistmust reactivate. "Everv historianof scicncc is necessarilya historiograPher of truth, The eventsof sciencc arc linked togethcr in a steadilv truth. . . . At variousmoments in the historv of thought, gr<-,rving thc past of thought and expcriencecan be scen in a neu' light'"8 Guided br this ne\1light, thc historianshould not make tlre error of thinking that persistcntuse o[ a particular term indicatesan 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 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 t?

\

approach,Br-observingthcsc rules hc rvill avoid the error of, fbr instance,seeingPierreLouis Moreaude Maupertuisasa prcm;rture transfornristor geneticist,"[/dcologrond Rationalit.r, pp. l0-12] When Bachelard speaks ofa nom or value, it is bccauscin [6] thi nkj ng ol his f ) vor it e science,m at hem at icalphvsics,he ider t ifies theorv with mathemati<s. I Iis rationalismis built on a lramervork of m at hem at ism . I n nr at hem at icsone speaksnot ol t hc " normal " but ol r hc "nor m ed. " ln cont r asrt o or t hodox logical posi ti vi st s,Bachelar dholds t hat m at hem at icshasepist em ologica] content , nhet her act ual or pot ent ill. and t hat plogr essin mathematicsadds to that content. On this point he agrccsrvith JeanCavaiJlts.r",hosccritique of logical positjvismltJs lost norhing ofits vigor or rigor. Cav.rillisrefutesRudolph Carnapbv shorvi ng that "m at hem at icalr easoningis int er nallvcoher entin a lav that cannot be rushecl.lr is by nature progt'ess ivc." r) As to thc natureoft his pr ogr ess,he concludcs, (Jneof rlrc lundamental problemsr,rith the docrrincol scicnccis prcciscllthat proglcssis in no waycomparablc to increasing a givcn lolumc br addingI smaliaddition.ri .rmounrrrrwhari\ nlrea(lrrhere, the old subsisting rvith tlre nerr'.Rather,it ir perpetualrevision,in u hichsonrerhingsar.eeliminrtetlrnd otherschboratrd.\\rharcorrrcs rlrer is greatcrthanr,r'hat r,r,cnt bclbrc,nor bccause the prescnrcontainsor supcrsedcs thc pastIrut bccausc thc onc ncccss.rrily cmcrges liom the otherandin its c()ntentcnrriesthe nrrrk o1its suprri()rity, rvhi chis in cachcaseuniqut . ll Ncvcrtheless,the use of cpistemologicairecursionas a historical method i s not univer sallvvalid. I t best f it s t he disciplincsf ir r t hc study ol rvhich it r vasor iginallvdcvcloped:m at hcm at icalphvs_ ics and nuclcar chemistr\'.C)fcourse.therc is no reasonrvhv onc r ann,,l rrr r dr a p, r r t icr r l, r r lr . r dr an<. . ,.11r , ,i.
. r hstr . r .t

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 cannot 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 conceptualcleavage12 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 Danvinian 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

need not discussit in detail. But in painting a quite accuratepicture 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 Aristotelianism? Is not Ludovico Geymonat right to point out that Koyr6's interpretation neglectsall that Galileo preseruedfrom Aristotelian 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 illusory.... No matter how well the groundrvorkhasbeen laid, a rcvolution is still a revolution."rTlldeologrond Rationalitr,pp. l3-15]

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

Science ond Scientific Ideologies

insight, a rvork ofgenius. Frequently the effectsofthat flash are saidto be all-embracing,aflectingthe whole of a scientist's*.ork.

Whot is scientificideology?

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 sweepawaytradition 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

[7] Scientific ideology, unlikc a political classideology, is not Nor is it falsc science.l-he essenccof filse lalse consciousness. scienceis that it neverencounterslalsehood,neverrenouncesanYthing, 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 ideologv comes to an end when thc place that it occupied in the encyclopediaof knou4edgeis taken over by a disciplinethat operationallv 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 scicnt 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

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,

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

and exp laincdhvbr idizat ionbl assum ingt hc cxist enceof scm inal atoms. her eclit ar vclcm ent s t hat com bined dur ing copula-

implics the par.rlleland prior existenceoI scientillc discourses.

tion. But it is enough to conlparc the writin(s crfl\'laupertuisand

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 ve c ns c i e n c ea n d rc l i g i o n .

It4endelto see thc magnitudc oI the gap betu'ccn a scienccand the ideologv that it replaccs. fhe f:actsthat Mcnclel studics are

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-

not thoscglcanedbv a casualobsen,er;thcv are obl ained through systematicresearch- rescarch(lictatedby thc nature of Mendcl's

ogv.To the anriscienceofreligion they oppost'dthe antireligionof science.Scierrtificideologvneglectsthe nrethodoiogicairequire-

problcm, lbr *"hich thcre is no precedcnt in the pre-trlendelian iiteraturc. lUcndel invented the icleaof a ch.tructet,bv rvhich he

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,

me.rnt not thc clementar\'.r!lcnt of hereditarl transmissionbut

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 knorvlt ' 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.Therelc,re,lr.hensciencecrt'ntuallv supplanrsideologv, it is not in the

thc element ofhcrcditv itself. A Mcndelianchar.rcccr coulclenter into cornbination rvith n other characters,anclone could measure thc licquencv of it s appear ancein successive gencr at ions. Mcnrlel rras not intcreste(lin stmcturc, fertilization or (levelopment. 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 a tool fbr separatingcharposing.rtvpe, an instrumcntr-rtanalysis, actersthat madc it necessarl'towork \\'ith largesamples.Hencc, Mcndcl rvasinterestcdin hvbridsdespitchis repudi.rtionol an ageol d trad it ion ol hybr id r csear ch.He $as not int er est edin scxual-

sitc expecte<1. and Rationalit.r, pp. 32-31) lldeolog.v

itv or in thc controversvovcr innate versusacquiredtraits or ovcr prtfirrmation versuscpigenelis. He rvasinrerestedonlr in verihi ng fi i s h r pot hesisvia t he calculat ionol com bin. r t ions. rM 8 enclel

Ilow scientiJicidcologiesdisappearand appear

ncglectecleventhing that interestedthosc *ho in rtalitv rverenot

[8] For another, I hope convincing,exampleof the u'av in ll.hich scientific ideologiesare supplantedbv science,consiclerthc Nlcndc 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

his predecessors idcologvofheredat all. The seventeenth-centurv 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 ,

and abnormal traits are transmittecl.l-{calso uscd thc calculusof

it rr,asusefil in rcsolving lc-galquestionsconccrning the subor-

36

l7

\

dination ofthe sc.\-es, paternitv, the puritl ofbloodlines and the legitimacy ofthe aristocracy.fhese concernswere not unrelated

Everything, in other u,ords,evolvesfiom more to lesshomogeneity and from lesserto greater individuation: the solar svstem,

to thc controversvbetween innatism and sensualism.The technology of hvbridization r,vasperfected by agronomistsin search

the aninral organisnr,living specitrs,man, society,and tht'prod-

varieties,as well as by botanistsinterestedin the of advantageous

explicitly statesthat he derived this law of evolution by gcneral-

relations betrveenspecies.On)y by isolating Maupertuis's [dnus phvsiquelrom its context can that work be compared with the Versuche iber Pllanzenhvbriden. Mendel's science is not the end

izing the principlcs of enrbryologr;contained in Karl-Ernst 'on Bacr's Ubcr Entwickelungsgeschichte der Thiere(1828). The publica-

ucts ofhuman thought and activity, including language.Spencer

point ofa trail that can be tracedback to the ideologyit replaced,

tion of the Origin of Species in 1859 confirmcd Spencer'sconviction that his generalizedtheory of evolution sharedthc scientific

for the simpie reasonthat that ideologvfollowed not one but sel-

validity o[ Darwin's biol<.rg1'. But he also claimed for his larv of

eral trails, and none r\.asa course set by scienceitself. All were, rather, legaciesofvarious traditions, some old, others more re-

evolution the support of a sciencemore finnlv establishedthan

cent. Orism and animalculisnru,ere not of the sameagc as the empirical and mythological .rrgumentsadvancedin favor ofaristocracy. Thc ideology of hercditvre u,'asexcessivelyand naively ambitious. It sought to reso]vea number of important theoretical and practr'callegal problems rvithout having examined their

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

fbundations. llt're the ideology simply rvithered au,ayby attrition, But the elimination of its scientific underpinningsbrought

ni nete ent h- cen t u r y Englishindust r ialsocict \ ',in par t icular ,his advocacyoffree enterprise,political individualismand competi-

it into focus as an ideologv.The characterizationofa ccrtain set ofobservationsand deductionsasan ideology came alter the dis-

tion. From the larv ol differentiation, he deduccd that the indivi dual m ust be suppor t ed against t he st at e. But per haps t his

qualification ofits claim to be a science.This was accomplishcd

"deduction" was containcd in the principles of the Spcncerian svstemfiom the very bcginning.

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 ideologies disappear,it is even more instructive to studv how they appear,Consider brieflv the genesisof a niDeteenth-centuryscient 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

Thc lar r 'sof m echanics,em br r ologv and evolut ion cannot validly bc extended berond thc
statea universallyralid larv ofprogrcssin terms ofevolution from the simpie tcr tht'conrplex thrriugh successivediff€rentiations.

aD ti socialistThus, . elolut ionist idcology r vasan ideo] ouyin t he

l8

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

CHapr r n The

Var ious

lt vo M odels

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 others 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 evolution haschangedsince Danvin, but l)arrvinism is an intcgral part ofthe historl ofthe scicnccofevolution. Bv contrast,cvolutionist idcology is merelv an inopcrative residuein the historv of the and Rationalit.r,pp.31-111 human scicnces.lldcolog.v

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 surPrising onlv if there rvcreno distinction benveenscicnceand thc history of scicncc. I n t hat casc,a biologist coul
,1o

\

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

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

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

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

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

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-

theory as the true supplantsthe false,that led to science'scontempt 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. pp. 155-56] lFormotiondu rdJlexe, Ifl ] Eduard Jan Dijkstcrhuis, thc author of Die ,llechonisi.run61des 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
\

t

standingof science is decpt'nedthrough cliscussionol the difflcultiesscientistsfacedin making thcir discoveries and propngaring their results.-fhe imagc of the microscope defincs the contcxt 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

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

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 ntrorluced a nelr. nomcnclature inlo chemistry. Ilcnce, the language

rverenor cquallv equippcd to deal ntathcmaticallvrvith the problems ol physics.Kovre began rvith Copernicusand ended 11ith

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 angu.rqcspokenby our teachers"and failing to provide ".rnv histori-, cal .r,.:count It r"as,rsthough ofthe opinions ofmy predcccssors." he understood the lesson of l]escartes,that to institute a ne\r'

Nervton, u here Bachelardbegan.Kcrvri:'scpistemologicalobservationstcnd to confirm Bachelard'svieu, that a "continuist" historv 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( G alileo, lbr exanr pJe,is m or e Ar clt ital l v mat hcnr , r t iz.t ion. r 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,"

branch of knorvledgeis in efli'ct to severone's ties to $'hatever had plesumptivelvusurpcd its place.

The hist or v of sciencet hus claim s t hc r ight t o m akc judgmcnts ol'scientific value.Bv ".iudgmcnt,"horvcvcr,I do not mcan

Thcrc are in fact trvo versionsofthe histon ofscicnce: thc hist 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 -

purgc o r execut ion.I list or v is not an in'er t ed im agcof scient if ic progrcss,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-

edge, bv which I mcan knon le
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

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 entilic plinciples haslong sincedenonstrated its u.orth.

their day,uscd to discredit othcr notions, attitudesor method5and therclbrean ef-fortto discoverin \\'hatrcspectsthe discredited pastrcmainsthe past(]1an activitr that still desenesto be callcd

A I e> , ancl 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

l t he past t aught sci entilic. lt is as im por t ant t o under st aD(uhat as it is to fin
Emile Meverson'sthan to Bachclard's,and morc kecnlr attunecl to the continuitv ofthe raticrnalfunction than to rhe dialcctics

P P .ll-l + l

of rationalist activitv. Yet it uas becausehe recognizedthe role of epistemologvin doing historv ofscicncc that he casthis Etuder

Empiricist Logicism

anclTheAstronomicalRcvolutionin the lbrm that he did. 5lalildennes 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

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 discontinuous naturc of progress.Nevertheless,while the fundamentalcon-

nalism is a rvav of writing the historv of sciencebv describinga

cepts sharea l.rmily resenrblance,they do not really belong to the samebranch. This has been notcd by Father FranqoisRusso,

to do u,ith tradition than with critical analysis,in terms of their

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

practices,and religious or political idcologies. In short, this is an attenuatedor, rather, impoverishedversion of l\'larxism,one

Though ostensiblvconccrned to preserveKarl Popper'semphasis 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"

set of events,which are called"scientific" fbr reasonshavingmore relation to econolnic and socialinterests.technologicalncedsand

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 oceduresby rvhich it seeksto satisflythe specific norms that allou,

and "normal science"rvould seem to place him. Theseconcepts Presupposeintentionality and regulation,and assuch they imply

it to be defined as sciencerather than as technologt or ideologv.

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

a theor et icdlat t it ude t owar d his specim ent heor ies;he t her elbr c

meansto do so, fbr he regardsthem as simple cultural f)cts. For hinr, a paradignris thc result of a choice bI its users.Nornral sciencc is dcfincd by the practice in a given petiod of a group of'

tists thcmselves.

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 appendix 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 ci 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

In thi s per spect ive.t he hist or ianof scienccis supposedt o adopt hasas much right to formulate modcls and hvpothcsesas scicnClearlv,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 confusest 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 scienti 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 rudcs,pp. l4- 15]

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 Exter4{'

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 practical 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 practice are studiedin an cssentiallvautonomousmannt'r?C)neimportant 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
incompctcncc fbr epistemologicalcriticism. Trvo itinerariescannot be comparedunlessthe paths lolloned are truly the same.

Ferchault de R6aumurand Maupertuis as precursorsof Mendel rvithout noticing that the prob)em that Mendel set himself rvas

In a coherent sYstcmof thought, ever) concept is related to everyother conccpt. Just becauseAristarchusol Samosaduanced

ofhis or.r.ndevising.or that he solvedit bv inventingan unprc'cedented concept, the independcnthereditarvcharacter.ll

the hypothesisol a heliocentric universe,it does not follow that he rvasa precursorof Copernicus,even ifCopernicus invokcd his

So long as texts and other *'orks yoked rogether by the heuristic compression of time have not been subjected ro critical

authoritl'. To changethe center of reterenceof celesti.rlnrotions is to relativizehigh and lo*r',to changethe dinensions of the universe- in short, to constitutc a system,But Copernicuscriticized

anal ysisf or t he pur pose of explicit ly dem onst r at ing t har r $'o resear cher ssought t o answ'erident ical quest ionsf or ident ical reasons,using ident ical guiding concept s,def ined b, r ident ical

all astrononricalthr:oricsprior to his ou'n on rhe groundsthat thev 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

sl stems,t hen, insolaras an aut hcnt ic hisr or y of science is con-

more than one age: he is, of course, a man of his own time, but he is simult.rneously a contemporarYof'later in!estigatorscredited rvith conrpietinghis unfinishedproject. A precursor,theretbre,is

say that one man finished what the other started or anricipated rvhat the other achieved.Bv subsritutingthe Jogicaltime oftruth

cerned, it is completelv artificial, arbitrary and unsatisfactorvro

relationsfor thc historicaltime of these relations'invention, one trcats the history of scienceas rhough it wcre a copy ol science

a thinker \1hom thc historian belicvcscan be extracted liom his 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 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 shiftedfioru one intellectualenvironmcntto another.Suchadaptability, of course, is odhned at the cost of ncglccting the ,,hist 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 example, have looked lirr precursorsof D,rrrviniantransfbrmism amongeighteenth-cenrury naturalists,philosophersanrlevtn journalis t s ?lrT he l i s t i s l o n g . Louis Dutens's Rcchcrches surI'orininerjesdicouvertes attribudes (1176) nr.rybe taken asan (admirtedlvextreme)case ou\ modernes in point. When Dutens \r'ritesthat Hippocratesknerv about the circulation of the Lrlood,and that thc Ancients possessed the system of Copcrnicus, rvc smiler he has lbrgotten all that Wiilia[r Harveyorvcd to Rcnaissance anatomvand mechanicalmodels,and he fails to credit Copcrnicus'soriginality in exploring the mathematical possibility of the earth'smovemenr.We ought to srrile iust as much at the nlorc rcccnt lvriters who hail Ren6 Ancoine to

,i

and its object a copv of the object of science.The resuit is the creation o[an artif;ct, a countcrfeit historical objrct - the precursor. In Koyr€'srvtrrdsr Thc notion ol a "lirrerunncr"is.r.r'erydangerous onc for thc historian. lt is no doubt frue thar idcashavc.r gucriindependcnt dcvel opmenl,that is to say,theyarebornin onc mind,andreachmaturity to bearliuit in anothcr;consequentlvt the historyol prolrlemsand their solut ionscanbc t r aced.lt is cqual) vr r ue t har t hc hisr or icnl importance ofa doctrineis measurcd by its lruitfulness, andchatlater gcncrations arenot concerned rvith thosethat prcccdcthemexcept in so far ls thevseein thcm their "ancestors" or "forerunners." It is quite obvious1orshouldbe) that ncr-one hascvcrregarded himsell asthe "firrerunner"ofsomeoneclse,nor beenablcto do so.Conscqucntlv.to regardanyonein this light is the bestwavof prcventing oneselffrom undcrstanding him.Ji

one takesto bc the winner ol the race.To ignore the lict that he

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).

is the creaturcol a certain historv ofscience, and not an agentof

Although not interestedin investig.itingu hether Hall and Mrillcr,

scientiflc progress,is to accept asreal the condition ofhis possi-

rvho may not have kno$,n Prochaska'srvork dircctlv, might havc

bilitv, namcly,the imaginarvsimultaneityof "belbre" an
been inlluenccd bv rvorclof it filterecl through "the scientific

in a sort of logical spacc.

milieu ofhis contcmporaricsand cpigoncs"(rn diegleichzeitige und

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

l\blt trcnspitittc),leitteles askshorv this epillonische wissenschaJtliche lork could have been ignorcd for so long. [{is ansrver,u.hich

accorclingto rvhich thc historl of sciencedcflncs its object in

seemsj u dicious t o m c, is t hat Albr echt von Haller 'saut hor it v is

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

a sufficient explanation.Thc theory of irritabilit), of a strcngth

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.

more apparent:rather than rchcarscthe ideasof thc pcriod, his

A precursoris a man of sciencervho, one linorvsonlv much later, ran aheaclofall his contemporariesbut before the person \{hom

inherentin the muscle,divertedattention from the intrinsic functions ofthe spinalcord.'l-his onlv makesf'rochaska'smerit a]l the rvork cont r adict ed t hem . The f inal lincs of t hc ar t iclc ar c an

[Etudes,pp. 20-2 3]

appeal to some generoushistorian to revive the great Prochaska 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

as a model for firture generations.Jeittelesthought that the man

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

forerunnerofall German universities."That man \l'asthe distin-

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 gui sheclphysiologistJanPur kinje( 1787- 1869) . The im pct uosit yof t his plca, r vhich nat ur allyand pat hct icallv

,Movement?)a leittclcs summarizedMarshalltlall's first paper,said a flrv uorcls about Hall's prioritv ovcr JohannesMrillcr, ackno$ledgc
combincs a claim for thc originalitv of a scholaru.ith an afllrma-

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

ollicial representative,not to savhigh priest, ol German phvsiol-

than our cminent, and todav insullicientlv honorcd, compatriot,

successor in t hc chair of phvsiologvat t he Univer sit vof Bcr lin -

Georgc Prochaska,lho

richlv deservesto be prcscrvcd in the eternallygratcfLl mcmory of our Czcchfatherlancl, so rich in supc-

u,ho becamea member ofthe Berlin Academyol Sciencesin 1851

rior men of cvcry kind." feittelesassertedthat Prochaskarvasthc true lbunclerof thc thcor_vofreflex movemcnt, quoted excerpts

muscularelectrophysiologybut also lbr his numerousprofessions

52

tion of the cultural valuesol an oppressednationality,is equaled only bv the brutalitv anclinsolenceofthe replv it receivedfl.oman , iller 'sst udentand ogy. E m ile Du Bois- Revm ond( 1818- 1896)N{r

anclrvho rvasalreadycclcbratcd not onlv lbr his work in neuroof phi l osophical liit h in t hc univcr salvalidit l of m cchanist ic tl

determinism and the inanity ofmetaphysicalquestionsls- summarilv disrnissedProchaskaand gave l)escartescredit fbr har'-

in diminishing Prochaska,Du Bois-Revmondlr'asreallv trving to discredit a group ofbiologists manifcstlyguilty in his eyesofthc

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

sin of metaphysics, n.rmelv, the Na turphilosophieschool. Du Bois-Reymond's1858 text rvaspublished in 1887 in thc

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
sccond volume of his Rerlenalong with explanatory notes. The of Descarteson u,hich Du Boisnotcs concerning tlre passages

and a hal[befbre Prochaska,had correctly descritredref]ex rtovevbllig Descartes... dic Rcllexbc$,egungcn meDt (er.rfcnrbeschrieb...

Reymond basedhis comments are particularlv r';luable lbr our are fronr Arriclt 1J of purposes;alsonrc ol the relevant passages rvhere The Possions thc palpebralreflex is described. ol the Soul,

fichtig\: he had used thc same analogr'(u ith reflection) to describe the phenomenon;and he also deservedcredit {br thc Iaw of periphera)manifestationof senseimpressions.l6 The passages that precedeand follow theselines on Descartesgive a clear indiintention. It lvas,first ofall, to procation of Du Bois-Reymond's tect Miiller's "copvright," as it n'ere: Mriller mav not havcknow'n

I

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 disingenuousof him to reproachProchaska,as he does in one note, for havingused the sameexampleas Descartes.It would be laughable to maintain that CharlesScott Sherringtonsh,.ruldnot harrc

about Desclrtes,but Prochaskarvasanother matter. If Prochaska

studied the "scratch reller" becauseit meant borrorving from

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

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

Furthermore,Descartes\1ns,accordingto Du Boishis successors. Revnrond,a selllconsciousmechanist phvsiol,rgist,a theorist of

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-

the aninr.rl-machine , and therefbre deserring ol the sameadmiration erten(lcd to Julien Offrav de La Mr:ttrie, the theorist of the man-machine,lT By contrast,Prochaska lvasa vagueand incon-

ol the Sou1.Although it does contain the ticfe 16 of lle Possions expression"espri* riJly'chis"(reflcctcd spirits), this expression, work, is used to explainthe mechanismof a unique in Descartes's

sistentthinkcr in whose mind the notion ofrellex rvasassociated

form ofbehavior that is not a reflex in the strict senseof the word. lf, in fhct, Du Bois-Revmondis right to contend that Prochaska

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

did not knorv rvhat hc rvasdoing whcn he devotedpagt'.rtterpage

of the reflection of scnseimpressionsin 1784,he f)iled to mention it in his Phrsiolo
ofhis Comnrcntdfion o1 178-lto thc "rcflcction" ofsensorv into motor impressions,rvhatare Ke to say,applying thc sanl('ciiter-

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

ion of judgnr('r')t,about an author who usesa pair of rvordsonly

first tinre he had the opportunity to descrilrecorrcctly thc reflec-

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-

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

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-

dcfentledits political voice ofone of its official representativcs, supcrior it yof t he m om ent againstanot hercult ur e. O nc philoso-

a vierv tarv vcrsion ol thc idea can bc traced back to Derscartes, that Franklin Fearing,as we haveseen,rrpcats scveraltimes, but

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-

u.hosr'origins hc neverexamines.+lAlong rvith thc origin of the

edly incapable of fbstering ef'fectivescientiflc rcsearch. It was mechanismagainstvitalism. llormation du rdflerc,p. 155]

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 rcumstanccs.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 concern, that is, on the part of a phvsiologistfbr rvhom "scicntism" did dutv lbr philosophy- to discover,in Descartes's allcgul anticipation ol a discovcrvthat u'asbeginning to justify a mcchanistic intcrpretation of a u hole rangc o{ psvchophvsiologicalphenomena, a guarantccand, in a sense,an authcnticationol the use that people nou proposcd to make ofit. lt was not so much for reasonsof purc phvsiologvasfor reasonsof philosophvthat Descartcs rvasanointed a grcat phvsiologistand illustrious precursor.IIormationdu 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:rent circumstanccsand moti\.ationsaccount fbr the appearanccof

A Cononical History insti[19] An cmpcror's rvish to glorifv and justilv nervacaclernic 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 BaptisteJosephDelambrc\l'asmade publishedin 1810,r,v'hile.lcan 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
I)cscartes,Willis, JeanAstruc and Prochaska,rvith JohannAugust Unzer gcncrallybeing left shroudcdin shadou.I'rochaska'snamt:

tcmporary rvith, or prior to, that of his subject. Ancl rvhen onc has receiveda Germanic c(luc.-rtion- an education that rvas,in

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

Fl enryl) ucr ot ay de Blainvillc'swor ( ls,"encyclopedicand philological"rl - one could conceiveofgiving a "course in the history of natur al sciencc. " And u. hcn one had chosen,as Cuvier had

into rvhat is conrmonlv called a settling ofscores. The storv bcI 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 cnt 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 ven- rl ,henone l ooks at it c los elv- tu o o p p o s i ti o n s .O n e c u l tu re , speaki ngrhrough the

toward the end of his studiesat thc C.rroline-'\cademvin Stuttgart, to st udr -"cam er alist ics, "or t he scienceof adm inist r at ion and economics,45it rvasonlv natural to dcvotc spaceto technology 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

living things, and to appreciatingthe cflects of seventeenth-century ph ilosophieson t he developm entof t hat science.Cuvier

noturellesis not surprised, volume three of the Histoiredessciences 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,

the scienccsif it disposesminds thinks that philosophyencourages toward observation but discouragesthe sciencesif it disposcs

of 1794,of inspired by the Marquis de Condorcet in the Esgursse the debt that modern scicncc owes to the technologicalinnova-

WhereverAristotle's method, based minds toward speculation.16 was adopted, the sciencesprogressed,rvhereas on experience,

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

Descarteschose the opposite path, and the regrettable conse-

glass,papcr,artillery, printing, the compass.In the samelecture, Cuvier, a Protestantand the official within the ministry of the

quencesof that choice lasteduntil the middle of thc eighteenth centurv, *'hen the scienceswere countered by "another philoso-

interior responsiblefor overseeingnon-Catholic religious wor-

phy that was a copv of the true Peripateticismand that hasbeen called the philosophl'ol the eighteenthcentqv
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 subservienceto theologicaldoctrine, Blainvillc and Franqoisl-ouis Michel Maupied's Histoircdes

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

sciencesde I'organisationet de leurcprogris, conme basede Ia philosophieis constructed on the basisof diametrically opposedjudg-

the logical consequence,the elaboration,of Aristotleia?Bacon's philosophy is nothing but Aristotle's;a8Descartcsrvorked in an

ments. To bc sure, thc chaptcr dcvotcd to Conrad Gesnerrecalls

Aristoteliandirection;aeDescartesbuilt on the u.ork of the great Stagirite;t0and so on. What is the significanceof our tu-o his-

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

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.

and those trvo cultural agitators,Biainvillcand Maupied,the work

The third lecture in Cuvier'sthird volume is clevotedto Leib-

contains numerous passagcs conccrning thc rclation o[ the sciencesand their teachingto the ne\v social needsof an emcrging

niz, and Cuvier drvells at length on thc grcat chain of being and on CharlesBonnet'sdevelopmentof this [.eibniziantheme.Cuvier

industrialsocietv,but theseexcursesalmostalwaysend in sermons.

statesthat "physiologvdoes not fbllovumathematicsin admitting

t...1

unlimited combinations,"and that, in ordcr to accept the notion

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

that there existsa continuouschain of beings,as Bonnet and others 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 through comparativeanatto rvhat hc knou'shc hasclemonstrated

ending finally rvith man, proclaimedto be the "master" of all that

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

pher ofGreek antiquity rvho rvasable to rcaclthat orcler,r'hich was unknown to EasternmvthoJogvrthat philosophcr u'asAris-

and no unitv o f tv p e ,

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

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

$.ent befbre. Norv, it so happensthat therc is a Wcstern philoso-

passimperceptiblv fiom onc to thc other, fiom the most imperfi:ct to thc ont: in rvhich life achievedits highest perfection.";6

1 clearlr',rvasto achioe Inorvlrdgr,,f man r.ganlAf!:tqtl-C_i-S9S!, ].uz i ng al l thosc aspcct st hat m ake him super ior t o t he anim als,a I a t ouch of t he divine. t l bei ng possessing This kev to readingthc forms of lifi: givesus the kev to rea<Jing tslainvilleand Maupied'sHistoirc.That kcv is thc notion of "mcasurc," an absolutc tcrm of rcferenceand comparison."l\'leasure"

an a ptioti not of rational intuition but ofdivine rcvclation.This afflrmation can bc read in the Introduction, signedbv Blainville

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

himselfi "l conccivedand carricd out m\ llistoircde I'otganisation as a possiblc founclationlbr philosophv,whilc at the same timc

bccauscAr ist ot lt 'm adr m an t he m easur eof anim alit v t hat Ar is-

clcmonstratingthat philosophv is one and the same thing as the Christian religion, rvhich is so to speakonlv an a prtori, rcvcaled

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.[ . . . ]

to man bv God himself rvhcn the state of socictv required it."eJ And flrther: "Scicncc in general is knorlledge a posterioriof the

Norv that we possessthc kcv to the Histoire desstienccsde wc can un(lcrstan(l*hv ccrtain authors were inI'orSTonisation,

existcnceol God through his,w,orks."5q

cl uded in t he book r vhile ot her s ner e excludecl.Unlike eclccti cs such as Cuvier ( r vho u. asf r er ; uent lvchar act er izedas such,

llorv, then, does kno*lcdge proceed?Through readtng,The preliminary analysisofzoological notions at thc bcginning ofvolume 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 stic imperative,thc scicnccsoforganizationshoulclbe atrlc to discover - 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,

totle himself is thc mcasureof truth fbr thc scriesof investiga-

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 appropri ateto t he age" ( voi. 1, pp. viii- ix) . C on se<1uent lv, t hc hist or v of t hc scicnceol or ganizat ionis governcdbv the firndamental,rvhich is to sav,divine, larr o{ the

OF

organizationof organisms- the ascendingseries.Blainville, bv alwaystaking thc idea of the animal series(u'hich fbr him was

IHE

H

uraf sciences,a complement to that author's Gdniedu christianisme. ["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 G o 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"canonical 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 neverthelcss say,havingnoticed that thc authorstook sevcralquotations from Franqois-Ren6Vicomtc dc Chateaubriand'sErudes historiques,6l that their Histoireis, in its orvn way and for the nat6l

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 the aninratetrodvfiom the inaninrate.But life is u hat distinguishes in sever als
But rhrough the end of thc cightccnth ccnturri Aristotle'sphilosoph'r'rr'.rsalso responsiblcfirr a mcthod of studling the nature an
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 -

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

poraril) t o suspcn(al clest invof cor r upt ibilit v. In rerms lessfreightcd rvith metaphvsics,Xavicr Bichat b
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

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 pr oJr hancl ,a bodv com posedof t issuesof spccif icst t . uct ur e, r nd

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

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 ,

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

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

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 > (narrox ol'phrsiologr ll construed).Thc pLrrpose ol this sturlr Icct r v ast o det e rm i n e th r' < l i s ti n
Lrnr.rrck lier ir;nus and simultancouslvin France[>r'Jean-Baptiste thev therebr stiked a claim trr indtpcnrlence \h Hr
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

Lamar ckconceivcdol lif i'as a cont inu( , us,st ci( |1'nccum Lllati 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

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,

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

positc sulrstancesu'ith the lacultv to impcde or resist thc cvcrpr 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

qradualll increascin complexity anclacquirc nerv liculties.+ [-ife beginsrvith an "act of vitalization," an effect of heat, "that matcri al soul of living bodies. "5lndiviclualsm ust ( lie, vct lile, Par t ic-

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).Certaincarelirlread68

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

tion. Fromtlris point on it makcsscnse.thcrefbre,to lrscthe term "vital fbrcrs."7

ob scrvcs in nJ t ur e" is t hc r c s idue of or ga n i c
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 relations 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

Thus, death is presentin lif-e,as both universalarmaturc and inelrrctable[atc of individual components organizedinto compatible vct fiagile svstcnrs. ol nr t ur alist slike Lanr ar cknnd Cuvier led, albeit The 'r 'or k in different \r'ays,to a conceptualan(l methodologicnlrcvolution 'fheories ol in the representationol the $,orld of living things. lile subsequentlyfirund a Iogical place in the teachingsof phvsibelievcdthat thcir cxperimentalmethologistsrvho, neverthelcss, c,dshad exorciscdthe specterof mttaphrsics.Thus, fbl example, IohannesM iiller discussed"lif c" and t hc "vit al or ganizat ion"of

individuallvvtr remain al|\,tvsthe sametvpe. IndecrJ,the aciual mit,

Ph.vsiologie tlre organismin the introduction to his llandbuclr<1,:r (1833-34). And Claude Bernard,rvho rccorcledhis tlesMenschens

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

intellectual progrcssduring thc most fertile period ol his carcer (1850-60)in hi\ Cohis (lenotet,alrvalsregardedthe n.rttrreol lif!

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

.rsthe fundamentalqucstion ofgent'ral biologv. The carc[ul consur lesphinominerde Io
body is rnore essent'.rlthan its mattcr, since rhe lattcr changcsconstantlv 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

vic communsdu\ dnimau\ et aux iplitaux (1878,espcciallythe first three lcctures)morc systematicallvthan thcv arein lntroductiond (1t365).f)l course,thc Bernarrliantlreorl la ntirlecine expitimearolc of l i [e involvedr el. r t
that keepsthore clemcnts in constantmotion rnd shilts them aborrt. 'I'hc rclationsanclconnections trmongthc clcrnents;rrenot thc sanc

ccnturv, the question"What is lifc?" becamcone that evenphvsicists did not disrLf to ask: Eru,in Schrr;dingerpublisht'da book

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

bcaringthat title in I947.At lcastone biochenristlirund chequestion meaningfcss.hcrwever- Ernest Kahane,La I'ic n'e.riste pas,

morc active its lile is, the more its cxchangesand metamorphores

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]

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

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 crtknorvll 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
basedon t he pr inciple ol incr hi stori calsucccsswasnr echanics, 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 !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 ilit v, it m av also st enl lr onr , l r eal oftcn rcfl ect s enr ot ioD. t host 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 overdetcrmination. 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' about thtr subject.Chilctv shunsand indccd
thereb\ crcdting certain gencralize
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 ol- biI t h. Whilt m anr hist or iansol bit 'logr ', r scr il>e n)vstcri ousness

i s t hc obs es s ivcp 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,

bc)i efi n spont aneous gcDcr at iont o t he lack of evidcnt t 'or unPer suasi veness of ar gunr ent st o lhe cont r ar Y,t he t heor Y t r at r vt ll gr:ncration- n D)\'th,in point to a nostalgicdcsilt' lirr spontaneotrs

bcing a human eDrerprisciis in the cn
short. Freud'sdissidcntdisciple Otto Rank argutrl in The Trouma of Birth 11929)that thc
s t em s f iom a D o v e re s ti m a ti o no l th e val 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 -

2r7). This is not t he placet o r et r acct hc hist or vof t he schoolsolA l cxan dr ia- t hc. ler vishschool r vit h Philo, t he Plat onjcschool

ority, and avcrsionto thar icleamust be seenas a consequcnceof the prestigeattached to uhat is original or primordial. lf cvcrv

*,ith Plotinus - rvhoscteachings,coupled rvith the preachingot

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

ti an doct r ine concer ning] if 'e,deat h, salr at ionanr l r esur r ect ion.

P aul(l Cor . 15) , inspir edt hc f ir ndam ent alt hem esof ear ly Chr is-

riseto perfectionthroughan ascendantlcss ascension,life is a form

Indeed, the cultural cclecticism of Nlediterrane.rn civilizationsis even responsiblefor thc polvsemicconnotations(another u a,vol'

ol domination. l"Yie," Entvclopaedia, pp.7 66a-66t>l

saying"ambiguitv") ofthe term "spirit," liom .rpirdre- an ambi-

Li[e as Animotion

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

[23] We conrplctcly forget that r.hen rve speakof animals,animalitv 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

phrases"vit al spir it " and "anim al spit it , " it bccanr ean ant icipr tory trope lir the so-callednervousinllux.

living creaturecapablcof
thc intrinsic lifc firnctions, and it uas no longer acceptcd as an

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 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-

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 rcproduct ion; t he Jn 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 ofhumanitv. 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-

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 nguage,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

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

cusedof cham pioning. r nclt he posit ivistdoct r ine t hev pr olessed

Ciodformed man of the dust of the ground and breathcd into his nostrilsthe breathoflife; and the man becamca living soul" (Gen.

to tcach.-lcrthat encl,thev commented on thc varioLlsdcfinitions of the t er m s "soul, " "spir it , " "m an" an
71

7t

1855rer.isecl (l8l{), edition of PierreHubcrr N\sten'sDicrionnorrc 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-

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 pur f br u ar d i n 1 8 5 5 . 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 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 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. r blcan< linrm o rta l i n m rn ." ln 1855 ,o n c fi ru n da d i fl c rc n t d c l i n i ricrn: Tcrnrs hich,in biologv,cxprcsscs, consiclcrcd analornically, thc collcction of [unctionsol rhe brain and spinalcord and,consiclcrcd phvsiologicalll, the collcctionof firrctionsof rhe cnccphalicscnsibilit 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 objccts;thc sum total ol the neetlsantlpenchants that servein the pre\en.iti{)n ol the individualanrlspccics anrlin 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 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 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 t h r , r u g h it o n th c cxtt r n a l n o r kl.

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 Anatolc l\t.rlic Emile Chaullard,.rvhoattackcrlnot onlv Littra and Robin but afso l.uclrvigBiichncr (( ralt untl StolJ,1855 ), the high pricst of Cerman materialismar rhc timc. ln Dc la Ph;losoph;e d;te Positivedans scsrdpports.ryecI.t midccinc,Chaull;rrl cclcbratcd "thc 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 ldund "thc notion of thc rcal and living being" on "human reas 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 Eern.rr(l!\'r-ote,"For the experimental phvsiologist,thcre can bc

Life os Mechanisnt [2,1] At thc cnd ol thc Trcatiseon

(cornpleted in l6ll 'l'lan \ \ 'r ( ) t c: 166264) , l) cscar t es not pub lishcdunt il

but

t hat t hesclt r nct ionr|, llor r lr r r nrt hc I shouldlikc \ ou t o coDsider or ginsc\ r r r !bit ; s n. r t ur allrr s mcr ear r angcm cnt ol t hc nr ar binc's 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 ol it r count ( r - \ \ ( 'ightand rrrangcnr r nc s s ht . ls. ln r r r dcrr o
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 .rnd the phlsici.rn shoulclnot think that their role is to discover

nati on of . r lif e t ir nct ion - an explanat iont h. r t t ] t inv phr sicianr ,

the causeo

a vari et v of ar t ilici. r l m oclelst o cxplain such ot hcr t r r nct ionsas muscu larcont r act ionor t hc equilibr ium of lish in uat er . I n f ict ,

ile or the t'sscnceofcliseases."rL ["Vie," Lnc,vclopae-

dia, 1tp.167 a-67b1 7t)

parti cular lyin lt alv and Cer m anl, had t r ied t o im it at e, ot t cr ing

77

r G alileo' sstu 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), Franc 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 systcms like the heart and vesselswork is to build what rvc l'ould nou call "mcchanical modcls." This is preciselyr'"hat the iatrom 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 earlicst stagesof rlcvclopmcnt. But Jan Swammerdam'sobservations of insect metamorphosesand Anthonic van l-ccurvcnhock'sdiscovervof the spermatazoidu'ere initiallv understooclto confirm a speculativeconception of plant or animal generation,according to which the seed or cgg or spcrmatic animalculecontains, prefbrmed in a miniature that optical magnilication reveals,a being

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 living things - past, prescnt or luturc - u'ere, from the moment of creat ion,cont ainedone inside t he ot her . Under t heseconr litions, 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 successive appcaranceol anatomicalformationsnot geomctrically derivablefrom anteccdcnt lbrmationsl;), modcrn embrvologv 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 . co1,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 macroscopicstructures 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 science ba sedon dat a accessiblet o sight and t ouch, m icr oscopic

The microscopic observationthat did most to validate this the-

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

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

"other rvorlcl" rvithin, one could conceile of evcr more minute mi crocosm scm bcddcd onc w. it hin t he ot her . Thc m icr oscopt :

u.hoseevolution rvill proceeduntil it attainsits adult dimensions.

76

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

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

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-

thcv co nt ained. ment and an ar t isit n'rt ool. The hum an bodv n'ascom pr r er l t o a

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:

t c\ t . iDclu( l musi calr ) r ganin nr or et han onc scvcnt eent h- cent ulv ing rtorks br Dcsc.rrtes,Pascal,J.rcqucs-Bin i{tnc lJossuel{Irdils

The Greek u'ord or.Tonon relerred to both a musician'sinstru-


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

cvcrvpartol it... . lSutNature's machines, livingbcxlier,arcmachines

l-
cveniD thcir minutcstpartsanclto inlinitv. fhis is r!hat constittrtcs thc riilli renccbct.neennaturt'andart, l>enrcenthe rlivineart and

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-

or r rhu m,rna rt.l 6

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

l"Vie," fncr c/rpocrlro,pp. 7671>-68a] Lifc as Orgo n ization [25] C)nceagain, it \1asAristotlc .who coincd the term ,,organized brrrlr'."A bo
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<]cLi cclcpcndcn t of t he e\ t er n. r lunion ar isingliom c( ) l1t . t ct . 'rLess 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
*-r-

$i

ion. The rvord "part" secmed ill-suited to dcnote the "organs" 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

I

that nat ur e f can] . , , , ": t . tI n t he sam eper iod, t he physicianCar l Friedrich von Kiclmcver, rvhom GeorgesCuvicr had mct asa fel-

the "sum."

l ow studcnt at t he Car oline Academ l in St ut t gar t , dcliver ed a

ReadingLeibniz inspireclCharlesBonnct, rvhosehostilitr to mechanism had been confirmed by Abraham Trembley'sobser-

celebratedlecture on thc main ideasof an influential approach to zoology and botanv, the Rappott deslorces organiquesdans Io (179)). The organism is delincd sirie desdilldrentesorganisations

vationson the reproduction of polyps by propagation,and bv his of plant Iice. clrvnobscrvationson the parthcnogenesis

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

I am not i-ct makingthe difliculty plainenough:it lics not only in

organism is a svst cm of f br ces r at her t han a svst emol or gans.

an organthat is itscl{ composedof so manr how to form mechonicall.v

Kiclmcycr scemsto bc copving Kant rvhen he savs,"Each of th<: organs,in the modifications that it undcrgocsat caclr moment,

dilfcrcntpiccesbut primariiyin explaining,by thc Iawsof mechanics alone,thc host ol variousreldfioDr that so closelvbind all the

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

the orgaoicparts,and in virtuc of which thev all conspiretorn,ard samcgcncralgoal- bv which I mean,thel form that unity vr,hich

among u'hv imagesof thc circle and sphereenjovedsuch prestiger r ecipr ocit v ol R oma nt ic nat ur alist srt he cir cle r cpr cscnt st he

onecallsan animal,that organizcdwholc lvhichlives,grorvs,feels,

meansand endsat the organlevel,thc sphcrcrcprcsentsthe totalitv, individual or universal,oforganic forms and fbrccs.

moves,presc'rves andrcproduccs itsel[.le

In Fr anceat t hc beginningol t he ninet eent hcent ur v it was A ugust eCom t e's biological philosophy,dist inct f r om but not

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 concept ofan organizedbeing rvithout using the rvords"lif'e" or "living 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 mattcr. 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

t1

unrelated to Cuvier's biology, that sct fbrth in svstematicf;shion 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, " of functions "in reguComtc dcfined the organismasa consensus l ar anc lper m anentassociat ionu. it h a collect ion of ot her f unctions." 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

cxisting for the saheof the othersand ofthe wholc, that is, as an

notion that Comtc borrorvcd, along rvith that of svncrg\',from

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

PaulJosephBarthez,* ho * rote:

the part must be an organproducingthc other parts - each, consecluently,reciprocallv producing thc others. No instrument of art can ans\r,erto this description, but onlv the instrumcnt of u2

' [' hepr eser vat ion lile wit o1t hc of is ; r sr ociat er l h t he svm pat hics organs,as *ell ar lvith thc organismol their lirnctions....Br the

oi simultaneous rrr str<.
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

b r th c i r o rd c ro l harnl on\ol sua(:c\ t hnt t hr \ c , r c t i ()ncs()n s ti tu tr, 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

i ndi vi cl ual it yol an or ganismin it s gt - ncr ll lile lor m . Such problerrs ofgeneral phvsiologrrlould increasinglvclainr l t he cour seof his car eerasa the attenti o n ol- ClaudeBer nar rover researchera nclpr of essor .For pr oof one need onlv consult t hc

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
ninth ofhis Legontsurlesphinomincttle Ia vi,:communtdu\ animdu\ The organism is a societl ol cclls nr clemcntnrv et aux v,lp1ttour. The specializaorgani 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 B ..nur, l dubbed t he "int cr nal cnvir onm cnt , " $'hich is t hc \ut 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 '
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 concept of organism.The first accountof this metaphoricaltranscrip-

controlling that constancv,u.hich hasbccn knou'n cvcr sincc .rs homcostasis.This rvasthc original, anclc.rpital,contribution ol

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-

Brrnardianphvsiologvto the moclernc.,nceptionol living organizati on: thc c\ iSt cnceof ln int cr nal cnvir ( ) nnt cnrof . a const anc!

ti(iuc dcs rircra.,-rnaturcllcr(1827). Since the organirm rv.rscon-

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-

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 incrcasing 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 comp lex it v r t quir ecl , 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 -

encc fi om v ar int ionsst em m ing liom t ht 'ext cr nal condit ions oltheir 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

and counteractperturbations.Sucha svstemis capableofaltering its rclation to the en\ironment ll'om which it drarvsits cnergv

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

in order to maintain thc lcvcl of some paranreteror to perlbrm Somcactivity.

nristakc. The organism is ar otBdnic moclrine,that is, a machine equipped rvith a llcxible, elaslic mcchanisnr,ou.ing to thc special

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

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{

offer a partial ans\1erto an age-oldquestion .rbout lif'e. The second la*' of thermodvnamics,which statesthat translbrmationsof

p. 768a-69a] lYie," F,ncvclopacd;o,

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

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 Lrchmachines 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 organisms 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

\

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 ofuniversaldisorgan izat ionpr oclained by Car not 's pr inciplc? I s or ganizat ion order amidst disordcri Is it the maintenanceol'a quantirv of iDfbrmation proportionalto the conrplexityol the structure?Doesnot information theory havemore to say,in its orvn algorithmic language ,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, between currcnt theories of organir.ationthrough inlbrmation and

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 gnals 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

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

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 cohcrent structure as.rvcllasa command.

the com binat ionof m olecularbiologv u it h g( 'net icshasI ed r o a unified theory of biochcmistry,phvsiologicalregulation.rndheritabilitv oI specific variationsthrough natural selection,ro which

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

information theorv has addcd a rigor comparableto thar of rhe phvsi calscicnces.

86

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 nfbrmat 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 cation 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

A ug ust Weism nnn'st heor y of t he cont inuit v of t hc gcr m inati 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

account fbr antichancc.Thc mcchanicalcommunication of infor-

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-

mation bt a machinc cannot account fbr infbrmation itself, since

nent are limited by thc lact that other componcntsperfbnn inde-

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-

pendent fhnctions. Dying is the privilegc,or rhe ransorn- in anv case,the <Jestinv - of the most highlv regul.rtcd,mosr homcosraric

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

natura lm achines.

chcmical cvoltrtion to cstablishthe conditions necessarvfbr bio-

From t hc st andpointol t he cvolut ion of species,cleat hm ar ks an end to the reprievethat thc pressureof naturalsclcctiongrants

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 theor\, 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," according 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 sorganization?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 gradualdctcrior 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 ving individualsin the rvorlcl,and thc inevitability of death points up thc apparcntexception to the larvsof thermodvnamicsrvhich living things constitute.Thus, the searchlor signsofdeath is firndamcntally.rscarchfbr an irrefutablc sign of lifc,

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'individuals 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 esentcd in Be,yond fhe Plcasure Prineiple(1920), mect u.ith so much rcsistance?In Freucl'smind this iclearvasassociatcduith encrgcti 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 earlier 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 disrupting 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 mvthificat 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

I

CH,rprrs

'l

1

Epistemology

Frvr

of Physiology

A B. r r ocl Lr c Phvsiologv \

I

Objectives ond Methods [28] In 155a,when t he celebr at edJeanlr er ncl( 1. 197- 1558) collccted his previouslvpublished treatisesunder the titlc Univcrsa medicino,hc providcd a prcfacedetailing his conception of me

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,

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 of, amongother works, Ph.vsiologia metlico(Bascl,l6l0)bv Thcorlor (Amstcrdam, 165)) Zu.inger (1553-1588\, Medicinophvsiolollica bv J.A. Vander-Linden( 1609-1664) and Er ercitotionesph.vsi olo11 icoa (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-

9o

To find out u.hat llcnt on insidc, scvcraloptions rvere avail-

as earl\ as 1718,it *as undeniablv Albrecht ment.rPh)'siologiae von Hallr:r(t708-1777) uho made phvsiologvan indcpcndcntdis-

ablc: one could monitor comingsand goings,introrluccspiesintcr

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 (1757-66\ remaineda classicfbr half .r cenl:lementoph.rsiologiac

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,

tur\'. But it *as evcn car]ier, in 17'17,that von Ilallcr, afier havlnstitutiones medicinae in ing used his teacherIlerman Boerhaave's his coursesfbr nearly twenty years.dccidcd to publish his tirst

goi ng on inside t he anim al or g. r nism .Expcr im cnt at iont hr ough

in the introduction to rvhich textbook, Primaclineoephvsiologioc, 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

physicianshacllong used such procerlurcsto find out rvhat uas organablationrvasa naturalextensionol rurgicalcxcision.Andreas Vcsalius(151,{-1564), the founder ol modern anatomv,concludcd his ccfcbratedHumani corporis labrico (15.13)rvithrcm.rrkson the

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

uscfirlncssofvivisection and a discussionof its tcchniqucs,in thc courseof u,hich he rcported on experimentsu ith ablation of thc

anatomyin motion?" lF.tutles,pp.226-21) 129] It is easvto unclerstandwhv anatomy took prioritv over

spleenand kidnev in dogs. In thc sevcntcenthcentur\',the mech-

thc studv ol organ functions. In manv cascspcople felt that the best wav to undcrstandthc functionsof the organswas to inspcct

at oncc premeclitateclancl blind. If thc bo
t heir s hap c sa n d s tru c tu re s .Stru c tu re su ere macroscopi c,and

the mechanism'scogsand springs,bv destrovingpartsanclobserv-

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,

i ng thc dist ur banccor br eakdor vnol't he m achinc'sopcr at ion.

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

pp. 1075b-c] f"Phvsiologie," Enc.vlopaedia, Il)' 1780, phvsiologyhad finallv outgrown iatromechani []01

suggcstc
ani st concept ionol or ganicst r uct ur cscncour agcdt his pr act ice,

cal theoriesthanks to thc rvork ol Antoine-LaurentLavoisierancl l-uigi Galvani.Chemistrvand phvsicsrvould supplvthe nerv models. Laws,in the Neu,toniansense,rvoulclreplaccmcch.rnicalthcorems.' 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 philosophi 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 ati 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

inrcntalismofthe nineteenth ccntury. lt rvasa fiuitful pericrd,as old ideas were explodt'd by nerv experierrce.Bold speculrtion

\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 mctathev called "vital moventcnt" c-rrthe "vital prinphvsicsin 'vhat ciple" than therc u.asin what Haller called"irritabilitv." Barthez's Nouveauxdlimentsde la sciencede I'homme(l77tl)r,r'as in many tays

$'asthe order ofthe day,and traditionalmethodsgavel\'ayto intuition. It would not bc long before new techniques,many discov-

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 originalirv of vitalist phvsiologv:"Vitalism bringsout thc analogiesthat all m anif e s ta ti o n o s f l i fc e x h i b i t i n s u c h astoni shi ngvari cty,and takes them fbr its guide, but does not prctend that it can pener 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," looked at thc uhole animallingcighteenth-centurvphrsioJogists

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 themselves,while Robert Whvtt, Ren6Antoine Ferchaultde R6aumur and StephenI lalesper{bnned similar testson fiogs, buzzardsand horses.It rvas,in cvcrv senseofthe \r'ord, a bdroguephvsiologr. vol. 2, pp. 618-19] ["Phvsiologieanirnale." Hstoiregdnerctlc, The eighteenth was centur,v an age not onlv ofenlighrcn[31] 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 . Researchers investigatcdheat,electricitv,changesof physicalstate,

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

chenticalallinities, the dccompositionol matter,combustionan
s t udic dbv c o m p a ri s o nu i th th c h u ma n .

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,

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

oxidation,and their resultsoften spilled ovcr into phvsiologv,raising ncu problemsfor further investigation.Flectriciryjoined light

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-

ln r nc at e w a )s .

tant bi o logicalpar am et er s.I t wasin 171. t5hat Daniel Fahr cnhejt solved the technical problenrsthat ha
Eighteenth-centunphvsiologvstandspoiscdbetrveenthe doctrinaire dignity of the prcviouscentury'smedical svstems,u'hich

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-

bore the rvcight ofear)icr dogmas,anclthc rather frenetic cxper-

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

order to show th.rt so large a quantitv ol blood could not possiblv bc produced continuouslv by any organ or be dissipatcdbv

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

the organism,Ciovanni Alfonso Borelli uas the first to view the circulatory function, bv then well established,as an ideal prob-

B()\nton Prie\tle\, Lavoisicr,R6aumurand Spallanzani. l. . .] Contcmporarv te\ts therelble givc a misleading,altogcthcr too ac.rdem 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

calculatethe fbrce of the svstoliccontr.rction.Assumingthat thc

['ierrc JeanGeorgeCabanispublishedhis survcyof the nerv phvsi-

that the vo lum e of t he hum an hear t is equal t o t hc com bincd

ologv in 1804,hr'mentioned only u,orksand experimentsbv ph,--

vol ume of t he nr asset erand t em por al m uscJes,he dct er r nined

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

that the contractive forcc ol the heart is equal to three thousancl Roman pounds(l Roman pound = l1llu ounces).As for the pressure thc heart communicatesto the blood, an elaboratcseriesof

nt ' u ins igh tsa n d i n s tru m c n ts ." [...]

deducti on sled hinr t o t he ligur e of 135, 000pounds!

The sevenrccnthand eighteenthcenrurici are alike in that both rterc
In 1718,Jar r r csKeill ( 1673- 1719)de"ot ed t br et cssavsof his Tentaminamedico-phvsico tcr the problcms of detcrmining thc

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 cl l nrodel i n ordcr to (l e

quantitv of blood, its vclocitv and the fbrce of the heart. I le estimated that t he blood account sf br 100poundsof t he ucight of a

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,

160-poundman; the blood in the aorta iravels at a rate of fivc

l enr to w h ich t o applv t he laus of hvdr aulics. He at t cnr pt edt o contractive force of a muscle is proportional to its volume and

v ol. 2, pp. 59 3 -9 .1 1

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

Ci rcu Iati o n

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

[ 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
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(1'721\containedillustrationsof instruanv.I Iis [egetob.lc 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 characteristic 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

(1590) ol the capillarv circulation in the mcscnter) of fi-ogsand a verl grcat importancc, and so clid the tail of tadpolcs assumecl 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

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-

the solution of this problem in a sericsof papers, Surla circulation observiedans 1'universalitidu s,vstimevasculoire,l-esPhenomines tle la circulotion languissante,I es.llouvementsdu sang indipendants

rial pressure.

de I'actiondu coeurand La Pulsat;ondesartires 1171)). ["Physiologie .rnimale,"Hxtolrc gindrale,vol. 2, pp. 601-601]

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-

Respiration de [33] From Robert Boylcs'sNovoetperimentaphysiomcchanica (16691,)ohn Mavorv concluclecl, ti otris clasticoet ejusdemeJJectibus .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 sustain life. ln his Experimentsancl Observtttionson DiJlcrcnt Kinds oJ Air 11774-17),John Bo-vntonPricstley reportcd that a sprig ol air (oxvgen)to suPPort mint *,ill rcleaseenoughdephlogisticatecl 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 com bine dur ing calcinat ionhad m uch t he sam c aim s as

tions bv Marcello 1\'lalpighi(1561)andAntonie van Lecuwcnhoek

Priestlcv'ssturlies:thc analvsis, dctcction and idcntiflcationof vari ous ki nds of gascs.Thc inf lucncc of t hcscgaseson anim al r cspi

98

99

ration $'as initially conceivedas a kind ofchemical test to study the experimentalseparationof the hypotheticalelcmentsofatmohad 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

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.

sphericair,

to the Acad€miedesSciencesa de{initive paperon changt'sin the

vol. 2, pp. 595-96] ["Physiologieanimale," Histoircgdndrc.le, ofanimal heat cojn[34] The end ofthe debateover the causes cided with the beginningsof a dcbate over the jeat ol the phe-

blood dtrring respiration(M€moitesur leschaneemcnts que le sang Io tprouvedans lespoumonset su le micdnkme de rcspiration,1777),

the blood are oridiztd in the vesselsof the lung bv the action of

Us ing co mp a ra ti v em e a s u re mc n tso f the vol ume of gas absorbed.rnd thc quantity of heat relcascdbv guinea pigs placed in a calorimcter, Lavoisierand Pierre-SimonLaplace werc able to

nomenon. L.rvoisicrhad proposed that carbon and hvrJrogenin 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,

generalizeall theseobservationsand to state,in 1780, that respi-

a former assistantol Lavoisierand later a disciple of the mathcmati ci an l- agr ange,who descr vescr edit f or having f ir st r aised

ration is nothing other than a slorv form of combustion identical to the combustion ofcarbon. They rlcre rvrong, however,in

them, Ifall the heat in thc organismis first relcasedin the lungs, asked,u,hv don't the lungs drv out? Or, in anv case, Hassenfi'atz

asscrtingthat respiration is the combustion of r:arbonalone, as

vvhvaren't they rvarmerthan thc other organsof the bodvi Isn't

l avoisierrr.rsobliged to admit in his 1785 palter Sur lcsalty'rations l'oir rcrpird,in rrhich it wasshorvnthat respirntionproqu'dprouve

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

duced not only carbon dioxide from the combustion o[ carbon but also rvaterfrom the combustion of hvdrogen.They u,erealso

* it h disbl ood, in cont act u it h inhaledair , becom essar ur at e
\{,rongto dcrcribe the lung as the locus and seatof combustion, thc hcat from u'hich thev believedrvasdistributedthroughoutthe

in the blood to vield carbondioxide and \",ater,rvhich.rrercleased u ith the exhaledair. This cxplanationis roughly corrcct (except

organismby the blood.

fbr the fact that oxidation takesplace not in the blood but in thc

Finallv, aftcr mcasuring, in collaboration rvith Sdguin, who

cells themselves),but it wasnot conflrmed experimentallyuntil

volunteere(lto serveasan experimentalsubjcct.energ,rexchanges

18f7, rvhen Gustav )\'hgnusused a mcrcury pump to detcct the

in human beings,Lavoisiersummed up his vierrs in t$'o papers,

prescnccoffree gasesin venousand arterial bloocj.

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 ci p)ei s often ci tedl

Furthermore,the posthumouspublication of Jean Senebier's (1803)revealedthat Spallanzaridt-roted surIo rcspiration '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-

Comparison oI thcscresultsrsith earlierones:,horvs that thc animal-

ration in vertebratesand invcrtcbrates,fiom $ hich he. tc,o, concluded, afier thousandsofexperiments, that oxyqen is absorbed

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 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 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

An

Expe r im t 'nt al

Science

evennrole than Lavoisier, organ,Spallanzani, from the pulnronar-v btrt using his mcthodsofcomparativcphysiolog\',laid tht'{Iroundf or a g e n e ra lp h rs i o l o g v .[" Ph v si 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
dustriallv manufacrurede
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. rcsearchseemsrelativelvartisanalbv comParison.lt uas Bernarcl's al so mor e nar r or vlvbiological, vivisecr ionbeing it s
pp.231-32] IErudcs, l )7 1 Event hough anallt ical t echniquesbor r or vedlr om phr sics 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 ablation are usedto disturb the balanceofothenvise intact organisms, 'fhis traditional method $.asuscd bv Julien Jcan Ctsar Lr:gallois ninct cent h cenr ur v and br and Fr anqoisl\ 't aqendieear lv in t he 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 distinguish betwecn motor and scnsory functions in the ccrebral to t

_r EP

STEMO

OGY ')

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. Charlesu s e d i t to s tu d y th e adrenalfuncti on E douar d B r ou. n -S6 q u a rd ( 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 G l 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 transplants. 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(tec tion rvith the ne.rr.mcthods of rrophvsiologyto map thc functi 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 dccapitatcdanim 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 cnervoussvstcm , 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 independent discipline rvith methodsof its orvn, l.lrilc othersstressedits subordinationto physicsand chemistrv (Karl Ludu,ig) or mathematics (Hcrmann von Helmholtz), ninetecnth-centunphvsiologv ro 6

\\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 Sherrington anclPavlovu'e find a grcat manYovcrlaPPingstudiesand and a large numbcr of seParateand simultaneouscliscliscoverics 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 llermann motor currents,or David Ferrieror Ilermann i\'lunkthe cortical centcr of vision. As soon as mcthods and Problemsbecome to each other, as soon as instrtlmentsbecome so highlv adjuste<J 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 gindrale,vol. ), pp. +lt2-8'11 Alfemagne," ITistotrc 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 instnrmcnts 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 substi 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 ascribingall progressin nineteeDth-centuryphysiologyto exper_

reflects an instinctive need to re(:onstitutethat PrototYPeof all di ets, milk. If the wor k of Her m ann von elm holt z dom inat edr he physi-

inrenration.The theories that flernardconclemnedwere systenls 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 becausehe, justly renorvnedas an inventor of instrumcnts (such

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 researchwere to be distinguished from fruitpicking and stone quarrving: "To [re surc," he rlrotc, "many rvorkersare useful to

as thc opht halm oscopein 1850) .r vasan ingeniousexPer im ent alist rl'ith a broad mathematical background that he orved to his training asa phvsicist.When a mathematicalmind turns to natu-

sciencerhough their activitiesbe limited to supplyingit with rarl, or empirical data. Nevertheless, the true scientistis the one who takesthe rarv materialand usesit to build sciencebr, litting each

ral sciencc,it cannot do r vit hout ideas.A st udent of Joh. r nnes M0ller. rvhoselarv of the spccific energv ol the ncrves.rnd sen-

fact into place and indicating its significancewithin the scien_ tific edifice asa u'hole."28Furthermore, the IntrcductionA litude

sory organsguided all the period's thinking about psychophvsiol 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 philosophicalundcrstanding of the unity of nature that he took fi"om his teacher,whose influence is apparcntin all of Hclmholtz'su'ork on muscular*ork

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. 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 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

anclheat. lfthe 18,18paperon the principal sourccofheat in the $orking nruscJercpotts dataqathcred u,ith temPeraturt-Dreas(lring instrumentsspeciallvdesignedby Helmholtz himsell, his 1847

be grantcd that Sir CharlesBell had not found it unhelpful eleven vearsearlier to rely on an "idea," namely,his ldea oJa Nev Anot_ 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 the body, their efli'cts must be differcnr. The spinal nervcshave

rvork on the conserv,ltion of forcc, Uber die Erhohung der Krot't, rvasinspired by a certain idea of the unity ofphenomena and the inteliigence thereof. In his flnal lectures at the l\{usdum, published by Dastre as Leqonssur lesphinominesde la vic communsaur animou\ et au\ vdgdtoux (1878-79\, Claude Bernald discussed,along with other

both motor and scnsory f'unctions,hence different anatomical structures.Given that the spinal cord has r$.o roots, each must be a firnctionallr differcnt nerve.

key ideas,the unity of the vital lunctions:"There is onh one rvav of life, one physiology,lbr all living things." Bv then, this idea

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 came from.lustus von Licbig's chemical analysesand Magendie's

epitomizcd his life's u'ork; carlier, hou'ever,it had sureh guidcd hi s rescar ch.I n t he l8. l0s, it had encour agedhim t o challenge

investigatjonsof the el}'ectsof dilicrcnt diets on dogs, rhe rvork 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 Boussaingaultin their Stotiquechiniguc (1841),much asvon Liebig

in the human diet crnnot be said to havesufferedfiom thc fact that his rvork wasguided by an "idea," namelv,that what humans

wasdoing at the sametime in Gennanv.Dumasand Boussaingault had arguedtlrat animalsmerclv break dorvn organic compounds,

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, 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 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] IErunt'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 oduci 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, reported his observationsof contractions and gastric secretions in a paper entitlcd "Experimcnrs and C)bser\ationson thr: Gast 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 of surgcryollers ferv other casesof spontaneousstomachfistulas, and none u.asobscrvedin any rvay comparable to Beaumont's. Thus, an accident suggesteda mcthod of experinrent_ one that Bassovand Blondlot rvould later make systematicuse of. It was no accident,hou-cver,rhat this originalaccidcntlvasfirst patiendy 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 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 _ tion of fbodstuffs,and this had led to interest in the chemistry of digestivesccrerions.The flrst chemicalana)rses ofgasric juices uerc undertakcnbv Prout (1824). Hou.evcr,becauseph,,siologists neededto obtain thesejuices, uncontaminatcdby foo
Addison'sdiseaseor surgervon goiters, it is impossibleto make senseof progressin unrlerstandingthe physiologvof the adrenal and thvroid glands.The u ork of rhe phvsiologistBrorvn-sequard often beg. r nwit h som e m edical linding; and in t his r espect it diflered sharplyfrom the work ofcertain othcr phvsiologists, such asClaude Bernard.IErr.rrles, pp. 2 36-38] [40] Dise.rse\.\,rsnot thc phvsiologisr'srrnlv source ot scientific challenges.Healthv individualsare neither idle nor inert and cannot be maintained artificiallv at the beck and call of ingen'l- he healt hv per son t oo i ous or rcst lessexper im ent alist s. is, by definition, capabJeof carryingout tasksset by naturean(l culture. In the ni net eent hcenr ur y,t he dcvelopm cntof indust r ialsocieti es i n E urope and Nor t h Am er ica led r o r he socializar ioD. and thereforepoliticizatitrn,of qucstions
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 anoxc 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 intercontinentalpassengerl-Jightcoulcl become routine. ["Physiologie," Enc.vclopaedia, p. 1076c-11a)

Thc

Nlajor

Pr oble

N in e t e e n t h - C e n t u r v

m s of [ 'h v s io log r

Bioenergetics [-11]The r esolut ion,t hr ough chem ist r v,r r f an age
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 "Bemerkungen 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-

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 measureclin 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 carried out benveen 1881 and 1904, and At\r'ater, through experiments u 'it h hum an bcings conduct ed bet wecn 1891and 1904, rvere Ied to generalizethe resultsofearlicr wrrrk on the conscrvati on of ener gv in living or ganism s.

iology. In 1845, Maver published the results of his researchon dietarv energcticsunder the title "Die organischeBewcgungin ihren Zusammcnhangmit dem Stoffivechsel."Earlier, in 1842,

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

von Liebig had published his Organiscie Chemieund ihte Anwendung aul Ph,ysiologie und Pathologie,in which he demonstrated, through

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-

investigationof the caloric content of variousnutrients, that all vital phenomenadcrive their energyfrom nutrition.

cess;then at mid-century,fbllorvingfurther research,it was rediscovcrr: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

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 respiratorl phcnomenav"'ereidentical in plants and animals(1837). When the Acad6micclesSciencessponsoreda competition on the

rvithin living cells - are irreversib)e, due to an increasein entropv. Organisms,though,arc mechanismscapablcof reproducingthemselvcs.Like all mechanisms,thev arc capableof doing rvork, of

origins of animal heat in 1822, nvo Frenchmen,C6sarMausuite Despretz, a physicist,and Pierre Louis Dulong, a physician,at-

accomplishingtransfbrmationsthat are structuredand, thcrcfore, lessprobablethan disorganizedmolecularagitation,or hcat, into

tempted to reproduceLavoisicr'sexperiments.Dulong found that the eflects of respiration*'cre not enough to account fbr the full

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-

quantity of heat produced.This fbnned the startingpoint for further rvork to determine the amount of energy contributed by

lation that "lif'e is thc collection of functions that resist death," one can still saythat living rhings are systcmsu.hoseimprobable

t l6

tt7

organizationslous a universalprocessofevolution torvardthermal ccluilibrium - that is, tor,'artla more probablestate,dcath' To surn up, then, the studYof the organism'stransformations of the energv it borr
i nvesti gat iont hat had been applied t o t he phcnom cnaof nut r ition, assimilationthrough svnthcsisof specific compouncls,disi ntegra t ionand clim inat ion.[ . . . ] At the beginningof tht'ninctccnth centur!',nothing \1ir kno$'n

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 -

about the f unct ionsof t he spleen,t hym us,adr cnalglandsor t hr -

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 cchemis 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 rcstige to the central idcasand methodsof rrrn I iebig and his school.

ti on u i t h Ber nar r l's r t sear chint o t he digest ionanr labsor pr ionol

roi d. Th e f ir st glim m cr of liqht c. r m eat m i( l- ccnt ur \ in connecsugari 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-

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-

esisand fermentation in Bcrne in 1859 rvhen hc rliscoveredthe

b,r nature akin to death, and thcrcfbre unrelatc
Thi rodor e Kocher ar r r lJa
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, retroacti\elv, to anl discovcrvor researchrelntcd to internal secretions. \\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 l o c tl ti o n , ir c u m t o anv c thinlis to tht uork ofClaude Bernarrl,the phvst'aradoxically, ioJoeicalproblcm posedby the existenct'olglandsrvithout excrcton 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 nspect 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

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

m vr cdcnr a) ,had t he ider of t r ansplant ingt he t hr postoper at ive 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 thcrapeutic purposeson a n.ranin 1890.In 1896,EugenBaumannidenti 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 lLnction 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 Capsules."In 1856,Charles-EdouardBrorvn-Sequard Acad6mic des Sciencesa seriesof three PaPerson "Recherches 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 surr6nales,"in rvhich he reported on thc lethal ellects of rcmovasr"ell asofinjecting normal aninralsI'ith blood ing the capsuJes 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 result, Brorvn-stquardhvpothesizcdthat thc capsulessomehou produced a chcmical antitoxic ef'f?cton the comPosition of the blootl. That sameyear,Alfred Vulpian reported his obsenations in a papercntitled "Sur quelqucsr6actionspropresi la substancc The cortical cclls reacteddif'ferentlvto des capsulessu116nales." various dves than the medullarv cells did, from rvhich Vulpian concluded that the latter, which turned gret'n rvhen cxposedto 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 first hint of thc cxistenceof rvhat rvould one dav be calledadrenaline. 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 Brorvn-Sd<1uard's experimcntal results. ln 1894, GeorgesOliver to the London Phys.rnd E
than an explanatorvrole in physiology:it distinguishedthe concept ofa gland from that ofan excretory organ, But a hormone is a more generalconcept than an internal secretion:a hormone is a chcmical messenger,rvhereasan internal secretionis simply a distribution or dilhrsion. Furthermore,the hepatic flnction, the fi rst-kn owncxam pleof an int er nalsccr et ion,is specialrit plact 's a procc ssednut r im ent , a m et abolit e, int o cir culat ion, I n t his sense,theie is a dit'ferenccbetween the endocrine secretion of the liver and that ofthe pancreas:the function ofone is supplr, of the ot her , consum pt ion. lnsulin, like t hvr oxin. is t hc st im ulant and regulatorof a global mechanism;it is not, strictlv spcaking, an intermediar.v,energ,v-laden compound. Thus, to credit Bernard as the author of the fundamental concept of modern erndocrinologyis not false,but it is misleading.The concept that proved fruitful lr'asthat of the internal environmcnt, u hich, unlike the concept ol intern.rlsecretion,was not closelr.rssociated rvith a specific function; rather, fiom the flrst ir was idcntilic'tl rvi th anot herconcept , t hat ot 'a phlsiologicalconsr ant .! \ 'hen it turned out t hat living cells depend on a st ablcor ganic envir onmcnt, which \Valter BradfcrrdCannon named "homeostasis" in 1929,the logical possibilityaroseof transfbrmingthe t:onceptof' internal sccrction into one ofchemical regulation.Once the fundamental idea rvasclear, researchon variousglantlsquickly led to the i clent if icat ion. r nd ( at least )qualit at ivedescr ipt ionof t heir firnctionaleflects. It i s not sur pr ising, t hen, t hat f iom 1888 on, t he of 'r 'or k Moritz Schif] and Bro$ n-S6quardattracted man)-emulators anri sti mul at ed r r scar ch in c'ndocr inologr ,usuallv in conjunct ion rvith a desire to correct unsubstantiatedp.r(hologicaletiologies. It rvasthe studv oI diabetes,for example, rvhich Bernarcl'swork had al readvclar if icd, t hat led joseph von M cr ing and Eugene Minkowski to discover the role of thc pancreasin the metabot2l

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 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 substancethat Sharpey-Schifer had named insulin in 1916.lr rvas the studv oI acromegalvby l'ierre Marie ( 1886) that led, evcntuallv, to cxperiments in hypophvsectomybv Gcorgcs Marincscu ( 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 u orl that dis
r:nt p;t hw'ays,r eller cs, localizat ion and cent r alizat ir ) n- \ r er e b.rsedin part on analogiesu'itir opcr.rtionsor objectl that rvcrt: finriliar bv dint ofthc constructionand/or usc ofmachines, progress in this branch of phvsiologv, r'hosc discoveries\,verealso incorporated by psvchology,earned it widespreaclrecognition. A l thoug h t cr m s such as"hor m one" and "conr plcx" har , eent er ed contmon parlance,they surelv rentain morc csoteric than a rrrrd l i ke " ref lex, " r vhoseuse in conncct icr nr vit h spor t shas m adc it enti rcl y r out ine. lf the motor elfectsofthc dccapitationofbatrachiansand repti l es had led eight eont h- ccnt ur yr ese. r r chertso suspcctt hc r ole ol the spirralconl in the nruscularlinctiorr, and il the erperinrents of R obcr t Wh, r t r ( 1768) and Julien JcanC6sarLeg. r llois( 1812) alreadv had a positive character,it rvasncverthelessimpossible to explain u,hat Thomas Willis in 1570 called "rcflt'cted movements" in terms of thc rcflcx arc untii the Bell-Magcnrliclarvhacl trccn l dnnulat edand r er ilicd ( l8ll- 22) . l\ 'lar shall Hall'sdiscover v of the "
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 production 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 mulat 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 mcssagetransmitt 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 prcrinciac)?"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 nineteenth 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 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 inciple 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 cortcx. 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 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. 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 brrin, in 1874 hc insteadmapped the motor region in an apt'; in 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 bLrtairrringhis criticism nr Friedrich Goltz, Ferricr ryrotc, "Tlre soul is not, as Flourensand many rvho came after him belietecl, sonrekind ol synthetic firnction of the entire brain, rvhosemanifcst,rtionscan be suppressed in totobut not in part; on the contrary,

i nrerpret ingsim ilar obser vat ionsin t cr m s oI Spencer ianevolutionism, introduced the conccpt of a conservativcintegratirrnof neurological structurcs and lunctions, accorclingto rvhich less complex structurcsand functions are dominated and controlled at a higher Jevelbv more complex and highll dil'ferentiatedones, rvhich appearlater in rht phvlogeneticcrrd
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 derire lrom rvcll-dcflnedcentersin the cen ical cortex," Similarl\,

.rlthorr[h in itsell positivc,rtatc.

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 Hcrmann N'lunkin l8?8 to givc the first preciselocalizationoI a

\!?s the I nt er nat ionalCongr essof l\ 1t 't licinehe[ d in Lon
sen!'oryccntcr, A grou ing number of expcriments, confir-meclby clinical obscrvations,provided Carl Wernickc rvith the marerial

llomeric debatcbctueen Ferrierand FrierL'ichGoltz. I.ater,when

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 f>rainthc ,.1rlos desGehirns.But it rvasnol until the earlv ruentiet h c ent uryth a t A l ti c d C a mp b e l l(1 9 0 5 ) an
A n i Dr por t antevent in t hc hist or v of t he localizat ionconcept l i J81.at which Sher r ingt on,t hen aged t r vent y- lbur ,hear d r hc CharlesScott Sherringtonvisitcd Goltz in Strasbourgin l8[i.1-1.l5, he lcarnt'd the techniquc lor taking progrcssivesections ol thc spi nal cor d, His u'or k on t he r igidit v causedLr r decer cbr at ion (ll{97) and rcscarchon subiectsranging liom reciprocal innervatioD to the concept ol .rn intcgrativeaction oI rhe ncrvouss|stem (1906) enabled him to corroborate and correct .lackson'sfln
tion, however,was to explain, rvith the concept of thc cortex, the differencebet$een nenr'ous mechanismsfor integraringimmediate and defbrrcd movements. At around the same time, Ivan Pavlovstudied anorher cortic 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).

Stx

CsrPren Epistemology The

lirrrits

of

Medicine

oI llcaling

Pavlovshorvedhow the cortical functions could be analyzedby modifying techniquesborrowed from reflexology.When an animal (in this case,a dog) wascondirionedthrough the simultaneous application of different stimuli, ablation ol more or lessextensive 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 results accumulatcd, rvastaught to large numbers of the great 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 [...] . I u'ill cnd with a I'ew words about what John Newport Langley, 1898, in calledthe "autonomic" nervoussystem,whosefunctions, becausethev involve u,hat Bichat called "vegetative"asopposed 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 nterpretations than those of the central nervous svstem. It was _facob Winslow rl ho in 1732 coined the erpression"great svmpathetic" nervoussvstemto refer to rhe ganglionicchain. ln 1851,Bernard discovcredthe effect of the symparheticsystemon scnsitivityand body temperature;in 1852-54, Bro*'n-sdquardcontributed new techniques fbr exploring the firnctions of the sympathetic ner, vous systembv sectioningnen'esand applying electrical stimuli. Langleyu'asa pioneer in the use ofchemical techniqucs,includinq thc block.rgeof synapsesbv nicotine ( 1889) and the sympathicomimetic propertv of adrenaline( t 901). lEtudes,pp. 266-7 ll

accomPanies [44] Awarenessof the limits of medicine's Po\!er to it a sPonattributes which body any conception of the living tanrous caPacit!, in nhattvcr fbrm' to preserveits siructurc and regulateits functions. lf the organism hasits oun powersofdefense,thcn to trust in thosePowers,at leasttemporarilv,is a hvpothetical imperative,at once Prudentand shrcwd. A dvnamic bodv deservesan expectant medicine. Medical genius may be a form ol patience.Ofcourse, the Patientmust agreeto suffer.Th6oPhile sur I'histoire de Bordeu, well anare of this. u-rote in his Acchercfies cold or has somcthing expectation of method de nitlecine: "The of sensibilities austereabout it, which is difficult fbr the keen patients and onlookers to bcar. Thus, Ierv lew phvsicianshave peopie ar c nat ur a) lv practi cedit , p. r r t icular l\ in nat ions r uhr . r se ardent, impatient, and f'earftr]." Not all patients respondto treatmenti some recoverwithotlt i t. l l i pp ocr at es,sho r ecor dt d t heseobser vat ionsin his t r eat ise 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 he i nt,r met lical t hinking: "Nat ur es ar e t he healer sof discases''' rvrotc in Book Six of Eprdernics. Here, "healer" relt'rsto an intrinsi c activit y of t he or ganismt hat com Pcnsat cslbr def iciencies, t 29

r es t or esa disru 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 . G a 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,conservatoro1'healthbecauseit is the principal sh.rperof the org.rnism. 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 svvrote,,,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,

naturL"spresumedpo\{er to corrcct disordcrson its or,'n. Nature r cspect cd b1 a t hcr apet r t icsof r lar chlulness rhe physi ci a n 'r 'as and support. Bv contrast,modern medicinc \\'rsactivist in its oricntati 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 sePararcd 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 notabl 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 that is, a sysme
PP.6- 7 1

practicesoficn not verv diflerent from magic.

[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

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

irrauguratcdbv AncircasVcsaiiusancl Willianr Harvcy and celebr 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 -i ghr..,, the latter , 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

lr.rvebeen saidabout nreriicinc in the eighteenthanclnrost ol th< ni neteenthccnt ur ics. Bv t his I m ean t hat t hc pr escncelnt l per -

r lo

sonalitvof thc phvsicianrrere the primarv remcdiesin manv afllicti 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 o{ anv [46] The gradualclimination from medical understan
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 ution 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

cflcctive therapics,rvhoseustrcould be guidcd bv critical arvarencssof 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 program \\'asevcntualll achicvcd,it rvasreachcdb-vroutesquitc dil: fercnt lrom those envisioncrlbv the progr.am'sauthors. [,ldeologr

combined hospital relbrms in Vicnna and Parisr'r'ithincrcasingly 'widcsprca
pp. 5a-551 ond Rationalit.v,

LeopolclAuenbriiggcr,.fcan-Nicholas Corvisart)and mediateausc 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-

The Physiological Point o[ View

tcmatic effbrts to relate obscrvcd symptoms to anatomical and pathologicaldata.Sccond,a rationalattitudc of therapeuticskepticism was fbsteredand developedin both Austria and France,as Edu'in Heinz Ackerknecht has shorvn.rrThird, physiologygraduallv liberated itsclf from its subservienccto classicalanatomy and becamr:an independent medical discipline, rvhich at first fircuscrlon diseaseat the tissuelevel, asyet unawarethat cventually 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-

I :ra nqoi*l osephVictor Broussois [.]8] By demolishingthe period'smost majesticand imposingsvstem, th at ol'Philippc [ 'inel, Br oussaisclear cd t hc r vay f br t hc opinion advcnt of a ncw spir it in m t r licine. "lt u'as Br oussais's that pa t hologv was not hing but physiologv,since hc called it 'phvsiologicalmedicinc.' Therein lav thc rvhole progrcssin his "svstemol irriuav ol looking at things."ll To bc sure, Broussais's and he discrtritation" hincleredhis understandingunnecessarilv, 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-

carditis).Old medications,w,hosenumbers had proliferatedn,ith

osophicalnosographv"and cloctrincof "essentialfcvers,"Broussais borrou,edlrom Bichat'sgcncralanatomvthc notion that eacht,vpe

no discernible cflict, wcre discounted. And rival medical theories cast discreclit on onc another. Thc nelr- model rvasone of

of tissue,orving to its specific tcxture, exhibits certain charactcri sti c alt er at ions.I I c idcnt if ied lever u. it h inf lanm at ion, dis-

knou.ltrJgewithout systcm,basedon the collection of facts and,

ti ngui shed
i1 possible,the elaborationoflavvsconllnlred bv cxpcrimcnt. This knowlcdge, it rvashoped, rvould be capableofconversion into I 14

ol di fl cr 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 tissue and could in the long run disturb its organization.Ile stood on its head the basicprinciple of pathologicalanatomvbv teaching that thc dysfi-rncrion precedesthe lesion. Ilc bascdmedicine 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 rvcll-knonn passageoIthe preface to thc Eramenof l8l5r .,The c har ac t cri s ti ctra i ts o fd i s e a s e smu s t b e sought i n phvsi ol ogy.... Enlightcn me with a scientific analyslsof the often confusedcries of the suff-eringorgans.... Tcachme about their reciprocalin0u, ences."Discussingthe new ageof medicine in his Essaidephilosophie mddicale,Jean Baptiste Bouillaud wrote, "ls not the fall of the systcm of Nosogroph;e phtlosophique one of the culminating 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 that had governed thc medical rvorld a revolution ro,hoscmcmory will not fade?"raln a more lapidaryflashion,]\,lichelFoucault put it this u'ay in lhc Birth ol the C,/inic:"Since 1815,the doct 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 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' ferent tvpcs ofexplanation (he ref'ersto "Bichat's great distinc, tion" betrveenoccult and irrcducible gualities), rvasthus able to observein 1865that "s hile theory in medicine once \4ras suspect and serred onh as a target, so to speak,fbr the facts that demolished it, today,orving ro its subordinationto phvsiologicallans, it has become an effective instrument of researchand a faithful rule of conduct."l6No doubt Claudc Bernardu,asright to saythat Broussais's phvsio)oqicalmedicine "rvas in realitv bascdonlv on phvsiologicalicleasand not on the essentialprinciple of phvsiologv."l7 Yct Broussais's idea was rvell suited to become a progrcm and to justifv a medical techniquequitc different from the one 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 doctrine and transfbnnedit into a method. That is rvhy Brouss.ris's svstem brought about a different kind of revolution fi.om other

svstems,Physiologicalmedicinc, even if it mimickcd the tbrm of a svstem,markcd a decisiveshift fiom the era ol systemsto the ige ofrescarch. from the ageof revolution to the epoch ofprogidca looked t o t echniquesn it hir r each ress,bccauseBr oussais's ol conte m por ar ypossibilit ies.I f t udes,pp. 136- 38] l:rongoistrlagendie 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 hi ng but t he physiologvof t he sick m an. "l'r Just onc year af t er (1808), this man had publishcd Htstoiredc phlellmosies Broussais's his fromen dc ]'oction de quclquesvigdtaut sur la noille dpiniirc, |lc lounde
rl 6 tl 7

in t hc l a b o ra to rvra th e r th a n rh e h o spi 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,

in Bern:C'smcthodological writings that $'erc fbr him inscparablc: tl orv and progrt'ss.Experimentalmulicine is progressive, he argu, , becauseit elaboratestheorics and bccausethosc theori cs arr - hcm sellespr ogr essive, t hat is, open. Benr ar d'sr ieu is

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, , c s e c o n duar i ni ti al l r grccted * ,i th O l r hes(th re c d i ffe re n c e sth

summccup in tu,o obitr'rr/icto: 'An cxPerimentalistneler otrtl i veshi , vor k. I le is alr r ar : sr t t he levcl of pn>gr r ss, "r nd "\ \ 'it h

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 sccr 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

theoric lrerc are no nror( scientitic rct'olttiont.Sciencegrorrs graduall1111st e. r dilr '. "{l A
brr\\ecn the t\vo.'fhe practicc was held ro stcm fiom a materiand successu.ould rcsultin thc tempration to alistphilr-rsophv, errendthe expcrimentsto man. When accused of experimenting

ccssof t ,: other - an(l vou havcthe lbur componentsol a medical ideolog that clearh' mirrored the progressivcidcologl'of midni netec'h- ccnt ur vEur opcanindust r ialsociet v.I n light of m or c recent r ncepts, such as Bachclard'sePistcmologicalbreak and

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

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-

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 aborvhcre pitieDts corrl(l bc qrouped rrrd stricliedcompara...r141r'

mate cr cistn. ln Bcrnard'sdar'.physicistsstill IoLrnrlin Ne\r'ton rncl P i t : - Sim onLaplacer casonst o bclievein Pr inciplesol con-

onrl Rdtiona]it.v, tir.h'. [/rlcolo1ir pp- 58-59

sew ati r Ru
CluJe Bernord u'riting the intro[5t)l A vcaf befbrc his death, Claude Bern.rrd, drction lbr a planncd Traiti de I'expiricncetlanslessciences miLlicales, litcrallv a u'c]l-kno*n quip of Magcndie's. took Bcrnarclrepcated sclf-characterization: hii pred('cessor's "lle uas the ragpickerof

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 industri al m; r ine. I n 18?2,t he G er nr anphvsiologistEm ile l) u BoisRcvmo-r(of rvhom Bernardhad on sevcraloccasion\exprcssecJ

Ilc rv.rsmerclv the initiator of erpcrinrentation. Todav phrsiologr. ir i\,rdiscipliDethat hasto be crcated,a mrrhorl."{)ForBernard,a ragpiclcl r,trsno
a rathe "ont em l) t ur >r ropinion) displavedsulTicicntc, r nlidcnce s

i

i n Iapl ian det er m inisnrt o pr e( ] ict r vhcn Englant llloulr l bur n 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
ogy . I n sh 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:rhapsno 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 agricultural societicsin rvhich time wasgovernedby q uasi-biological rather than industrialnorms. The son ofa vine grorverlvho maintaineda deep attachmentto his nativcsoil, Berrrardu,asneverable to apprcci.rtefullv that science requiresnor only th.rr the scientist 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 economic 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 morbid clisordcrsarc controlled by the nenous svstem,+2 th.rt diseases are poisonings,and th,rt inf'ectiotrsvirusersare agentsof ferment 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 ond interest in cellular pathologv or gernl patholog,i.Lldeolo11.v 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./ta tion 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 beginning 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 stethoscopc to the most modern magnetic rcsonanceimaging equipmcnt, 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 acticc 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

. houghmedi ci nc may set 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-[ 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-

tablr' l.rther of the runrcrical mcthori." It mav berof sonreintcr(.st to rc call a lit r lc- Lnor \ n judgm cnt conccr ning hint . I lenr v

. i th o u t d i a g n o s i s ,p rognosi sand trcatnl cnt, ques t of < l i s e ,rs cW there is no medicine. Here we finrl an object suitable for stu(ly

I)Lrcrotn vde Blainvill<:said t his in his Hi. st oir cdest t r cnccsde ol 1815: I'orylanisation

in tcrms o{ logical and epistcmologicalanalysisof thc construction and testingof hvpotheses.We also find ourselvesat the dau n f)occorsu'erejust bt.ginningto become ol me
\ to .rnimal Pinelbeganbv applringmathcm.rti{ A nr.rthcmatician. mt-cJr;rnics: a phiLrsrphcr,he crrricd on u ith an in rlepthsturirol'

arvarcof an epistemologic.rllimitation alreadl recognizr:dirr cos

in appllh< madeprogrcss n)entrlillness;a nituralistandobservcr, ing the naturalmerhodto medicinr:randtorvardthe enrlhc l.rpsecl

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 quantificationofdata. But rvhatkind ofmeasurcmentcould there be in mcdicint'?One possibilitr $,asto m('a\urcvariationsin the

bv cnrbracingthc chimericalicica backinto his carlypreclilcctions to nrcdicinc,or nrcdicalstaol ,rpplving thc calcrrlus ol probabilitics

phlsiologicallunctions.This uas thc purposeol instrumentssuch 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

r oLr ldalli'ctt ht inlinit c vr r iar discascs ti sti cs.r s if t lr e nLr t nbtol rrr, rlict, Iocaleandsoon. rvhichinllrrtnccthcir ri()nsoI tcmper.rlnc

kvmograph. Anothcr possi[rility \1asto tabulate thc occurrence

lr om inr lividual t o inr lividual. i n< .i d cnce andm akcr hemsodiver se

ofcontagiousdiseases and chart thcir propagation;in the absence ofconflrmed etiologies,thescdatacould be correlatedrvith orher 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

This jutlgment is \r.orthrcmL'mberingli)r the light it shcrlson the 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 6pist6.mof ogique," Histoirc,pp. 19-20)

to the calculusoI probrhc hostility of the prrsitivistphikrsoqrhcrs (ours tle Philosophtc abilitir:s.The Forticth Lessonof the positive

PhilippeP;nel

statesthat mc(lical staristicsare "absoluteempiricism in fiivolous 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

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
in London rrl Francis Bisset I larvkins'sElementsol ,l,ledicalStatistrc:s (r'hose outlook uas.rs social .rsit lvasmedical), Those rvho cel-

Hiroirc, pp. 20-2ll

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-

Pi crrc-Cha rlesAler o ntlrc Louis

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

15 3] I ou is uscdsr at i. t icsin a dillcr
the revised edition ofhis ftaiti mid;co-philosophique surI'aliination mcntalc.Fdu in lleinz Ackurknt'cht savsthat Pinel rvas"the veri-

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 nt 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

A M edical

Revolut ion

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 sensepassively,"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

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 evoluhad tion in medicine, so that, strangelvenough,thcseresearchers

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 computerizedprocessingof biomedical and clinical dat.r.One recent consecluencc of this technologicaland epistcmologicalevolution

a grcaterimpact on clinical medicine than did contemporan clini cal pract it ioner s,Past eur a, chem ist wit hout m edic; r Jt r aining,

hasbeen the constructiol of "expert svstems"capableof applying various rules ol infert:nceto data gleaned f}om examination and then rccommending possiblecour5csof treatment. [,,Statut epistemologique,"H istoirc,pp. 2l-221

Pnstcurdiscover!'(lan etiologv unru,latedto organ functions. By revealingthe rolc ofbactcria and viruses in disease,h
i naugura t eda new cr a in m c
not onl v the lbcus of m edicine but t hc locat ion ol it s pr act ice. Traditionally,patientshad been care
t 44

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 ' sso (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<
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
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
attend t 'dlect ur cson pat hologicalanat om vgivenbr JuliusCohnhei m (t 83t ) - 188- 1)a, st udent of I {udolph Lur lr vig[ r ar l \ ii[ chor r ',

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

rvh,r *ould later shorv that inflammation wrs causedbv tht passageof lcucocvt est hr ough t he capillar y r vall. Vir chou's icleas

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

rcachedEhrlich through JuliusCohnhcim. Neverthelcss,if cellul .rr pat hologvplavedan indir ect par t in t hc invcnt ion of chcm o-

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-

thcrapv,the rolc of bacteriologvand the discovirl of immunitv \\a\ mr)redirect. Thc prob)en that Ehrlich sratrd anrl solvedcan

ognizcd in tbe notion ol resist.rnce,in the f)ct th.rr sonreorgan-

be for- m ulat ecl as f ollor vs: lhr ough r vhar cher nicalcom poun( ls

ismsare mort'sus(:(.ptiblcthan othets to, sav,the cholerabacillus.

u i th sp ecif icaf linit v lbr cer t . r ininf ect iousagcnt sor cells coulr l

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 uminating conccpt yct to conrc, fbr u hich microbiologv haspaved

one act dircctlv on the causcrather than on thc st nrptoms of
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 . p ra c ti c t i s sci enti l l c i f i r provi < l esa t hc er a ol b .rc re ri o l o g vA 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 ning $. 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

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 surroundi 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( simultarreous 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 increasing t he ac t iv i t) o fth c s e ru m. Nevertheless,Ehrlich, rvhom Koch put in contact n,ith von

them, and that organismssometimesdefendthcmseJves, p.rr.rrloxi 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 :

Behring,dreamedthat chemistrv could one day endorvman with

si nce cel l s choosebet r vcenst ains,let us ir r ventst ainst hat will

ponr er sf . r r bcv o n c lth o s e o f n .rtu rc .{ { ' H e h i t upon the i dea of

i nl al l i bl v choosep. r r t icularcells.

looking for sub!tancesrvith specificaflinities fbr certain parasites

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

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-
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

Kiyoshi Shigahe discoveredthat Trvpan red destroysthe trypanos 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

goal . It * as not unt il 1865 t hat F. A.K6ku16publishedhis paper

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.

that the cartronatom is tetrar';lcnt, Kekul€ determined thc stntcture 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-

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 scoveredin pursuit ofhis fundamentalhypothesis:that the affinit 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 svstemnti 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

"The Composition ol Aromatic Comporrnrls."Alter confirming

cal intt'rest in the daysof Magenclieand Bernard. l'he theoreticalcreation of new chemical substanccs \\'asconlimrcd on a vastscalebl the chemical industry.Alizarin. thc principal 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

Horvard Walter Florev and Ernst Chain. fhis is not to say rhar t her apeut ic ssi n c e th e d i s c o v e ryo I c h e motherapyhas been rc-

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

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

prestiAiousname on tlre German flrms Baclische Anilin und Soda Fahri k1B A5l lr nd Anilin Konzer n.

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

Thus. trvo of thc preconditionsnecessarylor the devclopment of chemoth er apvas a r epJacem entlbr r he t hcr apiesassoci. r t ed

146

| 4<)

\\'ith thc old medical thcorics \\'ere a new symbolic represcntaand a ne$ technologvfo producing tion firr chemical substanccs

analvzingrcalitv.for him, thc laboraton n'as.rplacefbr renorking given bv nature or art and a placc for ficcing dormant subst.rnces

org.rniccompounds,u,hich supplanteclthe old extractiveproccsdates;their place ses.These \\'erecvcnt! rvith fixcd, ascertainable

or blockedcausalmcchanisms- in short,a placefbr revealingreal itv. Hcnce, laboratorv rvork *.as dircctlv aflcctcrl bv what rv.rs

in advance.Hencc, chcin historv coulci not lravcbeen cleclucecl rvithout a certain level of scimothcrapv could not havc cxistcd

going on in thc uorld of tcchnologv. 'I-hc rcvolution in mcdical thinking bcgan rvith the develop-

cntillc and industrialsociety.Betu'eenEduard Jcnncrand Ehrlich c i s c o v e rvo fa n i l i n e , n,hi ch no onc coul d c am e t he indi s p c n s a b l d

mcnt of t\\'o methods fbr studying the propertiesol crystals:stercomctry and polarimetrv.l)issatisflcdrvith EibhardMitscherlich's

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

cxplanationsofthe elfect of polarizcrllight on tartratesand paratartrates,Pasteurdiscoveredthe clill'erentorientatiolt of the hc-

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 creat 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-

ets of paratartraiecrvstals.Aftcr isolatingthc nno clifferentkinds ol crvstal s,hc obscr vc
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

crl stal rota t cd polar ized light t o t he r ight , r vher easa solut ion

thc rcalitv and thr.:rationalitv ofcolor."a8 lldeolollvand Rational-

matlc n ith the other rotatcclit to thc lcfi. Whcn the r\\'o cr!s-

it r ' ,pp. 65- 68 1

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-

The French School

mentcd bv thc eflcct ofa mold, Pasteurnoted that onlv the right-

[ 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 tcchniqucspcrfcctcd at thc cn(l of drc nineteenthcenturv,I shalllook

polarizinglbrm of thc crystalwasaltcrcd, I Ic thcrefbre inferred a

.rt the u.ork of Pasteurrather than at that oI Koch, partly becausc

connectionbetrveenthe properticsof microorganismsand molecular asvmmctrics,Dagognethassholvn horv microbiologv began

it cam<'firstchronologicallyand partly becauseI'asteur'suork u.as of morc gcncralimport, fbr "it not onlv modified the relationship

u ith this ingeniousreversalof a result in bioclrr:mistrv.A microscopic org.rnism,a rnold or a ycast,\\'Assho*n to bc capableof

betrvccn biologv.rnd chemistrv but changcrlthc rcpresentation bcings,and the lunctions ascribedto chemical rcactions."4'l

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

Frang.ois Dagognetargues,contrary to a u'idclv hcld vicrv,that it \r'asn()t trccauscof tcchnical problcms raisc
structuralcontrastbetweenthc asvmmctricalliving organismand the mi neral, and hence just if icd in r eject ing anv explanar ion

artisansand aninralbreeders("malaclies"ol beer, * ine, silklvorms

receptivcto the notion ofspontaneousgencration,Pastcurlinked gcrm, fermcnt at ion ancldiscasein a unif ied t hcor et ical f r am e-

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

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
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-

imental mrxlification of natural pnrducts as a theoreticaltool for

cl uent progr css,doubt s, r ct r cat s or cvcn t cm por ar y er r ( ) r st hat

I5 ( )

Pasteurnradc in elaboratingthis theorv. llLleolollrantl Ratlonalrr r ' ,pp. 68- 70] An Applied Science 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 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 extcndccl anclrefined Pastcurianmedical practices but dcvcloped into an autonomousbiologicalscience.lnrmunologvreplacedthe rclation of virus to vaccinatc(lorganismlvith the more Pasteurian gencral relation ofantigen to antibody.The antigen is a generalization ol the aggrcssormicrobe. The histc,ryof immunology has becn a searchfbr the true meaning of the prcfix antr'-.Semantic 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" ? 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. ;\s irnllrr:nologvbecameawarcol its scir:ntificvocation,it cons r.ru g h i ts .rb i l i t ) to nrakeunantj cf ir nr ed it s r c ic n ti fi c s t..rtuth 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 striking examplebcing Karl I-andsteiner's discovervin 1907of the human blood tvpcs. Consistencyof rese.rrchfin
Ilowever tempting, it would be a nristaketo vierv this phenomenon as bctokening a rediscovervof the concrctc individual paticnt set asideby the ven medicalscierrcerr hoseprogresseventual l y reveal edt hc cxist enceol t he idiot vpe, AJt houghim m une identity is sometimesporrravcd, through abuseof ternrinology, as i nvol vi ngan opposit ionof "sell" and "nonself , " it is a st r ict lv objcctive phenomenon. N4cdicinenlay sometimesappear to be thc application ofbiological linon l..dgeto concrete individuals, but that appearanceis deceiving.The time hasnorv come to consider thc epistemologicalstatusol medicine as such, leavinghistorical matters aside. Given u,hat u,e know about immunologv, genetics and molecular biology, or, looking backrvardin time, about X-raysand cellular staining techniqucs, in nhat sensecan w e savthat me dicinc is an appliedscienceor an evolvingsynt hesi sofappl i ed sciencr : s? [. . .] It is appropriateto describemedicine asan "cvolving synthesis ol'applied sciences,"insolir asthc rt'alizationof its goalsrequires haring not hing t o do wit h ir s the use oI sci ent if ic
which its bcginningsare forgotten, then it is worth noting that u'hcn doctors today need to do a blood transfusion,they verilv thc

assistindividual human beingsuhose livcs are in dangcr,cven il' 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 Inorving thar the tests th('t arc ordcring are the product ol a historl'

sui t ofknor vlcgr : ,can it claim t o l. lecalleda science? A c l t' veran
that can be traced back through immunologv and bacteriologv to Ladv i\lontagu and EdrvardJenner,incleedto a typc of medi-

hasexanrinc
cal practice that doctrinaire phvsiciansoncc consideredheretical, That practice startedmedicinc dou n a road that brought it 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-

ccpts of " nor m al scicncc, " "par adigm " and "scient if ic gr oup" could be applied to conceptualadvancesin clinical mcrlicine; he concluded that Kuhn's lramerrc'rli,rvhile uselul fbr rrnrl<'rstandi ng medi cine'sincor por at ion of ar lr ancesin t hc basicsciences

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 not incomp.rtible n ith ctiologic.rl hypcrtheses an
lor si nce the e ar ly ninet cent hcent ur v,il inadequat et o. r c<.
What cxl)(.rt is qualified to decidc thc epistemologicrl status of meclicine?Philosopherscannot bestorvupon themselvesthc 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-

plcxitv and variabilitv of its object. He concludeclhis papcr * ith a quotation from Lcibniz: "l rvish that medical kno* ledge rere 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 philosophvtraditionalh knorvnas"rheorv of kno* lcrJgc."Because

anal vsi s,Rot hschuhr epor t st hat Kuhn oncc char act er izcdm ccli' ci ne asa " plot osciencc, "r uher eashc, Rot hschLr h, pr cli r s t o call it arr rrperaticrnal5cicnce (i?.r.-lriond!ellitsenschaIt\.'fhese tuo

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 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 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 than dcduce critcria of scientificity fiom o prion categoriesof

appellationsare worth pausingovcr. "[)rotoscicncc" is ingenious bccauscit is ambiguous. Proto-is polvscnric:it suggcsrr"prior" as rrel l as "r udim ent ar v, " but it m av also r cf cr t o hier ar chical prioritv. "Protoscicnce" is a term that might u.cll be applicd tcr

understanding.as wasdone in thc past.it haschoscnto take those 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 ehorl i roni c t o use it \ 1hensom c physiciar sbclievet hat t he t inr 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 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 arguc th.rr pa(ientsought to be allorvedto consult thc machincs di rectl v. )ct "opcr at ional science" sccm s no m or c appr opr iat c

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 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 it is a mattcr of some interest to detcrmine rvhether that senseis a tenuoussun ivnl or an essentialvocation?To put it in somervhat

a tcrm than "applied science, "uhich som e ninet r cnth- cent u r y phvsiciansthemselvesapplied ro their discipline as thc! beganto

different ternrs, arc rvhat used to I)e d.fr ofdiagnosis, dr'cision and treatment abotrt to bccorne ro,/crrncilhr.y t.) somc c!)nrput-

treat pati e nt son t he basisol t heir unt ler st anding ol phvsicaland chtnri calm
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 tt1

' .':

frl

N

rtt

tr rcmainspresent.'fhat object hasa human ical choice, nevertheless form, that ofa living individual rvho is neither the author nor the

v on Helm holt z o n a n i ma l e l e c tri c i ty l e d G ui l l aume-B enj ami n Duchennc de Boulogneto discovernew w-avsof treating muscular diseascs.llis major works, publishedbet$'een 1855 and 1867,

masterof his own life and who must, in order to live, sometimes rcly on a mediator. I lorvevercomplex or artificial contcmporary

bear titlcs incorporatingthe u'ord "application." An instructivcexampleis electrotherapy.It suggeststhat medicine was impelled to become an applied scienceby the need to

mslicine's mediationmay be - rvhethertechnical,scientific,economic or social - and however long the dialogue betteen doc-

discovermorc ef'fectivetreatments,as if in obedienceto its original imperativc. Later, ofcourse, the "scienceofelectricity" led

tor and patient is suspcnded,the resolve to provide effective treatment, which lcgitimatesmedical practice, is basedon a par-

to the devclopment not of therapeutic but of diagnosticdevices such as the electrocardiograph(invented by Willcm Einthoven

ricular modalitv of life, namely,human individualitv. In the phymedicine is truly a synthcsis sician'sepistemologicalsubconscious,

(JohanncsBerger,192'l)and in 1903),the electroencephalograph cndoscopy.By treating the patient as an abstractobject ofther-

because,to an evcr-increasingdegree, it applies science to the task of preservingthe fragile unity of the living human individ-

apy,it rvaspossibleto transformmedicine into an appliedscience, with the accent now on science.Like any science,medicinc had

ual. When the epistemologicalstatusof mcdicine becomesa matter 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 epistcnrofr:rgv.["Statut 6pist6mologique,"Histoire,pp. 2 ] -291

init ial objec t . Earlier,I called medicine an "evolving synthesisof appliedscicnccs." 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 epistemologicalstatus bv developingnew methods and achievingnew results.A science evolvesbecauseof its interest in new methods fbr dealing with its problems.For example,the existenceofchemical neurotransmitters u'as acknowledgcd(not without reservations,particularly in France) u'hen the work of Sir Flenry Dalc and Otto Loewi filled in blanks in the resultsobtained bv electrical methods a centurv carlier. So much for "cvolving" - but what about "synthesis?"A synthesis 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-

tt7

156

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 rcason'seves,but u-c appearto viervthc cells in a plant section \4itlr thc sanreeves\ve usc t() look at evt'ry
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'rdctcrmincutir>ns mar bc ,rrlrledas thcy arisc, cvcn u'ithout systemrtic intention. BiologvcJasscs havefimiliarizcd all ofus u'ith rvhat is norr a lairl,, st.rnd.rrdinr.rgeof the cell: schematically,epitheIial 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 consciouslyborrouing 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 st 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 fundamcntalbuilding block and to an individual labor subsumedby, and contribut-

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
ing to. a largerprocess.What is certain is that affectiveand social valuts of cooperationand associationlurk more or lessdiscreetly

Thcodor Schrvann,the man regardedas the fbunder of cell theorr', rvasinlluenced bv both imagcs:he belieled that a structurel esssub st ancc( t he cvt oblast em e) gives r isc t o t hc nuclei . r r ound

in t hc b a c k g ro u n do [th e d e v e l o p i n gcel l thcorv.

uhi ch cells f br m . I n t issues,cells I br m u'her evcrt hc nut r ient

162

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

" ,rni rralsand plant s t hat can m ult iplr an
make.r remark that has considerablebc.rringon uhat I rvirh to argue hcrc: "What rve fincl, then, is thar a small numbcr of basic

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

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

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.

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 -

Thc hvpot lr esisr hnt or ganiTedbcingsconsistof pr im it ive or 1.rnicprrts is thc onh onc. Buflirn nrgucs.c(rpableol arrridin{ the

callv when thev trr to philosophizcabout thcir cxpcrimenr.rlfindings.Theoriesariseonlv out of carlicr thcorics,in somc cascsvcrv

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-

nld oncs. l'he ficts are merelv the path - anclit is rarell a strnighr path - br rvhich one theorr' leaclsto another. Auguste Contte

t hat her cdit l is unimal culism .Bot h ol t hesc t heor iesassum ccl l areral:ovist s, f bll, r ', r 'ingRegncr dc Cr aal, claim cr l t h. r t it was

shrt'rltllvc.tllcrlittention to this relationof therrrr to theory \\'hen he rerrrlrkcd that sincf .rn cmpirical obscrvation prcsul)posc5a

matcrn,rl,u hercasanirralctrlists,follorring Anthonie ratrLrcu* en-

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

hvbri clizat ion, believcdt hat her edit vm ust be bilat er . r l. , r is s clear

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
hoecl ,11gu, , ,t1hat it r r aspat cr nal.But lbn,alcr t t o phcnonr r naol 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
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 rcproduc 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 complex svstemsof matter. Without such a forcc ofattraction, realit 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,

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, oi living martcrcan bc rt'latedto that same all ol the phenomena l;rcc ofattrnctioncouplerlrvith the lirrceol heat.By lit'ingm.rttcr I orcannot onl'r'allthingsthat livc or vegctatcbut all livingorganic disperscd andspreadaboutin thc dctritusor residucol' rnolccules organized bodies.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

[:or Buffon, the hvpothesisthat "mattcr lost its forcc ofattract 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

Thi s, I believe,is t hc logic behinclt hc t hcor y of or ganicm olecul es,a biological t heor l t hat owed it s exist encet o t he pr estigc ol a phvsicaltheory. The theorv of organic molccules is an

a corpuscularsubstancc:

exampl eof t he analvt icm et hod in conjunct ion r vit h t hc cliscontinuous imagination,that is, a penchantfbr imagining objects bv

'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

analogvu ith discreterather than continuousmodels,Thc disconti 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'

clispcrsion throughimpactof its infinitesimal parts,so,too, canlight

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

be convertedinto anyother firrm ol ntattcril, throughthe attraction ofother bodies,its componentpartsarcmadeto coalesce.T

is the nccessarlconscqucnccof thc arrangcmcntofits parts,Truc, l i vi ng i n dividualit vis m olecular ,m onadic.

rcachof their sphereol attraction.. .. And just asanvform of matt 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

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 nra\ plrr it thar rra.! ) ol each ol irs .rctivcmcrle
Imagination [60] Charles Singcr and N,larc Klein, asircil as Ernile Gur(rnor, tlrou gh to a les s el dc gr c c , t jid not f ail to norc rhc.."al, au",u Okcn fbr rhe fbrmulation of cell theorv. Oken bclonged to the

Romnnric schoolol narurephilosophcrs fbuna",lby 5i;"11;n".ru Thc spcculations of rhisschtnl harlasnruchinttu.,n." on ""iiy nin( t ( , . n l h -(c n rU r\ C trm .rn ians

Jn,l bi oi ogl \t. n.,,n,r," ,, l rh rri 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\ hetrr..n r)k,.n.rn,l the firsr biolo{ri\tsthat u.ould offer deliberate emplrical sufport tbr ccll thcorv. j\,lathias Schleiclen, Jacob rlho f;rst t;._rt"," l ,rr p l ,rn r.i t l ti s fl a 1 1 7 4,u,17apfrr.roycnc,rs ( t8 .t8;,rarrghr i i \e r.i r\ .: r: ,t 1, lhr' t.: l.lln o l J rl l a . rrh e rc me m,r (,\ ol ()Lcn,. teJch:ng \\'erestill fresh.Theodor Schrvann,rvho bctu.een lgig an,l lg,li gener aliz e dc e l l th e o rv to i l l l i v i n g th i ngs, had seena good dcal of Schleiden and his tcacher, Joharrnes,\liiiicr, ,, h., hud be"n a nat ur eph i l o s o p h e ri n h i s r..ru th .rrS i n g er i s rhus l i rl l v j usti fi cd i n remarking that Okcn .,in a senscsou,erl the irjeasof the authors r eg. r r dedi n h i s s tc a da s th c o fc e fo r.rn d c ri l l thcorr.,,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 lili' li-rrrnsis merclv a Iogic.rl crrnseclutnce ot a rrl()re b.rjic lrotion, 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 larger 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 "_ 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 \.; r h tl

t h<,.rssociation oi primitirc anirnalsin the grriscot lir ing llcsh shorrlcl nor br' thought ol rs a rrechanjcalcoupling ol orrc rnim.rl to rn.rhcr, rs in a pilc ol srnd rr.hr.rctbc onh rcl.rtirrnrmong thcgr;insol.rvlrjch 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

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 , 1, lr , , . , lr rr lr , \ , r r i, ( , , j r l, ilh, . r , , r l. r , , irnrandrrorLrrrvarrl.runiqrrraorlcornmonl.Llncti()n. orperh)rmrhrr l i rnct ionin pur suingt hcir or vnt ndr . ller e,no inr lili
\\rc.rrc, along uar lr onr Bt r llir n.The or ganism is not a st r ntol. elc_ rncntar vbir , logicalcnt it ics: it is. r at hcr , a hi- qht rent it r . r rhose cl cmi n f s ar c subsunr ed.\ \ r jt b t , xcm pJan. pr ecision,O Len anr ici_ patcd t hc t her . r r ol r clcgr <. cs ol indir i( llr alir \ .-.lhis *as nr or e t han Justi ' ll )r clcnt im cnt , t hou{h it di( l aDt icipat ($, lr at t cchniqucs ol ccl l an clt issut .cul r ur cs, r , oulr l t cach cont cm por ilr . . lr iol<, . 11ist s abor:td if f i'r . enccs bcr ucc. nr lhr t Hat s pct er scncllled t hc , . inr li_ l i rJLraIlili ", r r r r l t hc. ', pt olcssional iit e', ol. ct lis. O ken r hought of thc org anism . r sa kin
r()t{ i{'9

Comparisotris inc!itnl)le betr'een Okcn's biological thcories rvhonr 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 Kdnig Novalisinfluenccd so dceply.Novalis'sGlaubeund I iebe:der dic Christenheit odet his Europo un
his deat h bv (tu\ onilt t ou\et our ligdr our ' publishcdat t er n)Ltns "an J! t 'r t Pat -"f ' lc. t h'' "r {Jniim J\ ,tr' ,r. ," ttt U- t o. r le'cr ibcd Pr ln( ll'l( 'r I l n(nrJr\ (i ll\ or or gani: 'm : . ''lher cbt 'lllir m ingt hr t ant aDloulltt o is This const ir uent s' Jutonomy f br anat om ical bcha't iust asrheuI'ould itt", a.tt' behavein association them for ".r..,itg \lere lhr s^me as that crcated ,,r ,r"f"it"" if the rnilicu rvorcls' .*.,,it" *" organismbl thc action of nealbt cells ln other though' Notc' os th?' do in societ)" ..1f. ,,rrl,J li"e in libertvetoct\' the lilL' control that srrbstanccs ,; O"rr;"*, that it the regulaiive slm e ln n t he and inhibit ion at e ,,t th" ." l t t hr ough st im ulat ion int cr nal envir onm entof t he or gan.,,t,ur" nl t ; . ". "il' o' in t hc cclls I ive in liber t v' Never t hcless' ,r-,' ,,n" .. nn, r , saYt hat t he bv meansof a colllPalison' n".n.rd, L.,ping to clarif,vhis meaning r lr inq "'r t J- (r t \ \ \ ilh il' '^r n .r.k. u. t" c onr ir letJ ( om l) lc\ lir ing t ni''r I h( \ Jm ( r ( lentr ( Jr \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 innd nn,l th.i rorrr"generalcaplcitics labor and skills' t,,-atti " * ., uaYst h; oush t hcir specialized ur ot c"'Thc cells ar c t r ulv In 1899,Em st Heinr ich Hacckel ot r r l) odv' t he cit izens,billions o[ 'r '] r ichcom pose i ndependr . : nt the "assemtrlvublicatl? ccll tlteorv or a bclie"er in ccll thelrrvl>ccausc -f,, fr" sure' Bernardan
:i +i ::2::,i iiiz = = = ii,-:,t:=1 '1:27+ii = i i i ;2;;, : i==i 1=:=TZt Z Z i+ i= i : =:jai: t Eiirzz;;=_ i;= : il ?ii:==, .j,= ' r : = = rt 1 ? ?-=-.+ =i r =l= 7 = :, :2=? : s ; :

; iiii:iiliEi:zi: j t =; ; =1ii1:,ii E i zil::i ;::=rti::i: =+ii,1:=,;1j = == ; 7 il, =-,il

: ,| 2 1=: ,: =, i * ; i, _i ii 7 i

r 7; i 1 I 1 = =ia

==21,==2{== i :i'i: :i j ; ; l t: : i :i; ii

i ;=i Z :i =; i ::: 1 ;t1i i 1 =, +i 2! ; i: i

:j1t= u ilZ=.i iz:iii i:ii1=11;, = :1

, =: i:=2- : ==+i : t1 =:=1 = i 1i=:11 =: 1i, 7 :i=: j. i ; z i;i - ,t:Ii t i z ' ,' zii. i ii: "=i i +i :,= : 1i= ::==,;,z : + : = : ! = Z =! i : ii : z =Z ; z i: =ti l = i : = = :i = Z i t;

= i 7 i ==:i :; = i : =i:!= -,ii ;;: 7 =r=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 sses ofcl topl asm u.i th sc.rt-

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

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 svncvt 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,

in whercthis is not the case)arudillicult to understand processcs oroanterms of tic ccllular stateor the thcor.vol cellsas inclcpcndent ( Jir cn shich or qanism [ , eh; r ves, r he ccllular t he wav i, r i vnr. [ - . . 1

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

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, initi 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 s sim plv par t sol a * hole be cl cment . r r rindcpendcntcr r ganisnror tlcpentlsentirelv on hov se look.rt thingt." In rc ccnt vcar s,incr ( asing
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-

Zcl [enO r 11ont sat ion t har int er cellularr elar ionsanr l e\ t r r cellul. r r

nism: thc ncrvous system,say,or hctrntonalsecretions.But the connection ol most cclls to the ncrv()ussl,stemis unilateral and

i ubstan ces( such as t hc int cr st it ial lvnr ph and noncellular elenl ents ol'conncct ivet issue)ar c jr lst as im por t ant biologicallr . r s

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-

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

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. petersentherefbre remarkcd: t 71

Robin, in Frincc, rvaslookcd upon .rs.r cantankerous,old-laslriont'
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(srrchasthe collagenofthe tendons) orr, lunclamcntalsubstances n'lustbe secrctedby the cclls, evcn if it is not possibleto savpre-

ari sc, ofth e t r ot hv uave t hat bor e \ t nus ot t it s f ir am ?Char les N aucl i n,a Fr ench biologist r vho canlc close t o discover ingt he 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 rcverscd.Of cout sc, the cxPerimcntnlargument in such a theorY is ncgativcin naturc: thc researchertrusts that sulficient Precautions havc been taken to Prevcnt the migration of cells into thtr

that thc p r ir nor dial blast cm c was t he "cla\ " m cnt ioned in t hc Biblc. r')This is u,hr' I haveargutrdthat thcorics clo not .rriseli om thc licts thcv order - or, to Put it more preciselv,f)cts r/o act

lcellular substancein rvhich cclls arc seento cmerge' In Francc, of a rabbit cmJeanNageottc had observecl,in the dcvelopment to bc a homogcnebryo, that thc corneaof thc eve first appears ous substancccontaining no cells during thc first three davsof grorvth - vet, in light ol Virchou"s larv, he bclieved that those cells that appearcdsubscquentlvmust havcarrivcd there through

as a sti mulus t o t heor v,bt r t t her neit hcr cngenclcrt he conccPt s that provide t hcor ics r vit h t hcir int er nal coher encenor init iat e thc i ntcl l ect ualam bit ions t hat t heor ics pt t t . sueSucham bit ions come to u s f r om long ago,and t he num bt r ol unif i ing concePt s i s smal l .That is uhy t hcor t 't icalt hcm cssur vivcevt n alt er cr it ics are pleascdto think that the thcories associatcdu ith thcm have p, 791 becn refirterl.lConnoissonce,

migration. Yet no such migration rvasever observed.IConnoiss 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
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 anrongdescripti on of aut om at ic nr ur onr uscularr esponscsjexpcr im ent alst uclv ol .rnatomicalstructurc! and their lunctional interactirrns,and fbrmtrl 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 rcason 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 heuristi( - 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 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 In rhc rineteenth century, the mechanisttheorv, based on the g
if one substitutcsfbr logic somecurrentlv more prestigioustem, the essenceof the caserernainsunchanged.Inclcccl,cv<,nif tlreo_ ri t:seng t 'n
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,

t his t t 'lls r : s lit t lt ', but t hat rht' y are inser t ed. r rNlor phologicalJv, physiologvofmorerneDt. Everynene little sufficcsfor Descartes's

P P . l- 6l

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,

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 untary 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 epistemologicalquest 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 muscleenables us to rlecidervhethcror not Descartcscould havcanticipated,

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'ns()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 t rl av of d if llr ent m echanism s. r The 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 .

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

\l hcn thc. r nim al sccs,f ccls. t ou
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 organis 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-

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,

t.rnceol t]ris lict cannot be overemphasized.Dcscartes'srvhole conception of animal movement deriveslrom this principle to-

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

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

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

ofdc Sou./,Dcscartesclaims l66l ID Article l0 ol The Possions 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

difli'rent from action in all of its elements and ph.rses,lFornration tlu rillexc, pp. 3+-l5 ]

chamber. Whcn releasedbv thc brain, thesespirits are transmit-

[67] Basical$ the concept of rcflcx consistsof more than just a rucl i m ent ar vm echanicalcxplanat ionof m uscularm ovenent . I t

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

al socont ainst he icleat hat som ekinr l of st im ulusst em m ingliom

their transvers.rl expansion,contract longitudinally,thus moving thc articulatedlronestructurcsor organssuch asthc cye in $'hich

moti on is t hc f act t hat it
r8 2

r f'J

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

lies , u it h i n th e g rn u s " m o \e D re n t," thc spcci fi c di fferencebet \ \ ' 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 inciclentmovement and thc rcllcctecl movement. In Descartes's theory, 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 mcchanicalphenomcna. fF.)rDtdtiDn tlu iJlttc. p.11) rv h i l c i t i s tru e th.rt D cscartes' snork conTo s u m trp , [ 68] 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 cept ofrefl ex, Thc dorvnfill 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 was, rvasrT'cllarlarc that thc cxplanationofthe he.rrt'sl-novcments 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 causesand for anv theon purportingto crl>lainthe neuromtrscular 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 it dif f ic( r lt t o. r r g( r ct hat t he was a r nusclc. bec. r m c h ear t that thc 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 conccpti 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 usru 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 rc i s srronl v bv vir t ue ol t he r hvt hm of it s lut r cli
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

nuscular cxplosion causedthe musclc to contract and thus Propp.60-63] rluccd movement.rt lFormotiondu rdJlexe, Dcscartes,horvever,is Willis fiom What distinguishes 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

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-

l)cscartes,Willis does not assumethat thc structureol the nerves them to play dif'ferentroles in thc scnroryanclmotor funcallor,vs tions. Thc nerves,he argues,havc a single structure, fibrous and

chyma - and fiom the pcriphervback to the brain. On the u,hole, horvevcr,ifthc flow olblood rvasa circulation, the flow ofani-

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

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 circulat 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

capi l l ar r ext cnsions;som e of t heseor iginat c out si( le,and independcnt 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 Though neccsdoing as regardsthe problcm rvc are acldressing. sarv,however ,t hev $er e not yet suf f icicnt . Willis's or iginalit v is

rr.ercnot those of either arithmetic or geometry.ll Descartcsheld that the spirits u,erccxpelled from the heart and sped torvardthe

more ap par entin t he por ver sof im aginat iont hat causedhim t o

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

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

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 nitrosulIurousparticlesto thcir o$ n salt spirits, igniting the mixture and setting offan cxplosion, asofgunporvder in a cannon.This intrar 86

pursuethe ultimatc consequences of the explanatorvcomparisons

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 anst87

m is s ion,t hc exc 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).t9fFornation
in t he br m and subseguent lv ofan i denti fi cat ionor classif icat ion of empirical intcrpretation. a principle of 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 listinguishedbcrrvccnrrrluntarvmotionsgovernc(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
place in thc medulla, When animal spirits, stirred bv some stim-

soul - fbr there is onlv one - insofar as it esche$,scalculation

uJus,rverc carricd to the brain by the nervc, they encountered

and reasoningand conf incs it sclf t o im m ediat e, hcnce uncon-

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,"

scious,sensibilitv.Phvsiologicallv,this rneansthat musclescon-

thqy might enter thc orifice of a motor ncrve siruated at that pr c c is cI oc a ti o n .[...]

tract onlv if innervatcdand scnsoriallvstimulated, which mcans

l

that they must be connected to the seat of the soul. Of course Whytt vvasnot unmindful ofthe argumentsthat Haller, rvith the

Like Astruc, Robert Whytt of Edinburgh rejected the explanation of svmpathiesin tcrms of extracerebralcommunication

aid ofhis theories,drerv from the observationofmuscularmotions

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 -

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

ity distinct from sensibility.ile u'astherelbre fbrced to propose a truly novel conception of the functions of the spinal cord. In

an cxtension of thc brain and cercbellum. It is probable that it preparesa nervous fluid of its ou,n, and this is the reasonrvhv

his Essa.yon the Vitdl and Other Involuntary llotions of Animals (1751),Whf,tt attemptcd to prove bv observationand experiment

vital and other movementspersistlirr severalmonths in a tortoisc rr.hoscheadhasbeen severed."[...]

that all motions are causedby the soul, in responscsometimes to an explicit perception, sometimesto a confusedscnsationof

Johann August Unzer (1127-17991wascritical of Whytt on the groundsthat nervoussensationis distinct from sensibilitv pcr sc .rndthat movementin living thingsis not necessarily causedbv the

a stimulus applied to the organism.The central idea of his theorv of involuntary motion is that every involuntarv motion hasa

in decapitatedanimalsand scparatcdorgans.This led him to sus-

soul, cvcn if it cannot be explainedin terms of a mechanicalphe-

manifestpurposc,namell, to eliminate the causesof disagreeable impressions.For example, u.hen thc pupil of the e,vecontracts

nomenon.Thc animalorganismis indeeda svstemofmachines,but

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-

cvenin theirverv tiniest parts,asLeibniz had cxplaincd.An animal-

mitted to the retina and the optic nen'e. "The gcncral and wise intention of all involuntarv motions is the removalof everything

this that the ncrvous fbrce in a brainlessorganism is merelv a nrcchanicalaction. l he ncrvous fbrcc is a fbrcc ofcoordination

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 si tate to compare to an

and subordinationoforganic machines.For this firnction to operate, i t i s e nough f br ganglia,plcxi or junct ions of ot her sor t s t o

immediate, prclogicalmoral scnsc)that precludesunderstanding

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

those machinesare natural or organic, that is, they are machines machinenced not havca brain and a soul. It doesnot follow lrom

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-

destined fbr one organ or another. l'hc movementsof thc brainl esspol vp , f br inst ance,can bc cxplaincdin t his wav.The expla-

ing the u,holc of the Stahlianvicw." The "sensitiveprinciple" is not the "rational and calculating" soul. (lr, rathcr, it is the same

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 idenr 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 phenom 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 observations on rlre functions crfthe spinal cord u.ith Unzer's hvpothcsesabout cxtcnding the refler function outsidc the brain. In De lunctionibtr y,stematisncnosi commentoth(178,+),Prochaskaargued that the 1>hlsiologv ol thc n
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 r nd Ast r uc had descr ibcd:occlt t sionol t he ones that L)e scar r es evel i dsand snee/ ing. Pr ochaskat leI ined t hc r elat ion ol r t 'f lex he bet t er t han anYof his pr cdecessor s: moti on to co nsciousness cxplicitlv distingrrishcdthe aspecto{ obligatoryautomatismfrom thc aspectofo pt ional, int er m it t cnt u nconsciou\ ncss,and he supported 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
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
'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 anatornical structure. Unzer alsobclievedthat the l.rw governingthe phenonlenon 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 numbcr 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,
r 94

Corrections 74 l aki ng rhir Jclinit ion as, , ur \ lar ling point . r r e cr n \ ee Pr eciselvrvhatelementsstood in need ol correction. One of the best des rcl'crcnccterts is JohannesMtillet's Handbuchder Phrsiolollie 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 interprctThe ing phcnomenadefined as"movententsfollor"'ingsens.rtions." thcoreti calcont cnt o[ t his conccpt consist cclof lu'o elem ent t . onc positire, the other negati\'('incgativelY,thc corccPt rcjccted sensorvand motor fibers;posibetrT'een thc theon ol anastomoses 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
c 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

( 18 1 1 - 2 [...1 2). lau' rvasa necessaryingrcdicnt fbr the forThc t3ell-Magendie 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 conjunction 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 conccpt 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 sensation, 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

onc ought t o consider t hc cent r ipet al ( anast alt ic)im pr cssion and that the rvithout relerencc to the brain or to consciousDcss, 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 reflcx Oblong.rtaand the N'tedullaSpinalis"exPlicitlYdistinguishes movement directlt controlled fi'orn voluntarv not onlv movement 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 centralsour 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 mechanisticconccpti 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

trcen broken bv decapitation,thus rcmoving the interconnecting sensoryorgan,the brain?Although Miiller disagreedrvith Whytt,

rellex movemcntsto a teleologicalprjnciple ofinstinctivc organic sell:prescnation. But as Fearinghaspointcd out, Nliillcr's interest

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

in the phcnomcnaof associated movementsand radiantsensations and his elaborateatternptsto explainthc latter in terms of a rellex

Prochaskafbr havingpointed out that a ref'lexmight or might not be accompanicdby a conscioussensation,he rcgardcdthc rcflex

lirnction ofthe brain and spinalcord show that hc *as a Iong rvav from conceivingofreflexcs assegmcntaland local mcchanisms.In

asthe effect of a centripetal action propagatedtou.arclthe spinal cord bv the sensorvnerve, rvhich thcn might or might not conrinuc on to the common sensoriumand, thus, might or might not

lact, Miiller's obscrvationsof associatedmovemcntsin narcotized ani mal sand gener alr ef lex convulsionsled him t o t uo sim ult aneousconclusions:reflcx movcmcntscan involve the entire bodv

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

in responseto the most insignificantlocal sensation,and thc nrorc extensi vea r ef lcx nt ovem entis, t he lessit is slnchr onized.

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

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 possibility that a local sensationmight produce reflectedeffectsthroughout 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 physiologists 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, gener 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 conscnsu.rlphenomcna,u hoseirtcrprctation had previous)vdivided proponent 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

rvhich enabledhim to cxplain soul (Rtckenmarhsseelel, a nrcclrrllary on the othcr hand, drer" a actions. Hall, the purpose of reflex 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 generalizedrellcxcs as an objection againstProchaska'sview, though it is true that N4iillcrn ascareful to notc that this occurred onl,v"in a suitably 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 philosophicalcontc\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
Unzer, George Prochaska).According to Prochaska,the rellex

lbllow sensation"(notus rellexusest qui d ttn\ioncPrueviaimme diotus dependens, illico retorqueturl,whereasProchaskahad said

conccpr prcscrvedthc cxplanationof svmpathiesin terms of the tcnsorium co munebut located the latter outside the brain in thc

that " one of t he com m on scnsor vf unct ions is t o r cllect senst impressionsas motor imptrlscs" (prcecipuaJunctio scnsorilcom-

meclullaoblongataand spinalcord. Unlike Wh,vtt, Prochaskadis-

munisconsistatin reJlcxioneimpressionumscnsoriorumin mototid\). Nliiller beganhis chapteron rcflex movcmcntsbv saying,"l\1ore-

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.tffironsery 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 concommuncPfliiger believed in the existcnceol ccpt of a sensorium

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 appearcdt 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 "affercnt" in 1839, .r major step rvastaken touard distinguishingbet $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 ofsensibilitv (/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 publications is its importation fiom physiologv into clinical rvork, rvhich bcgan rvith Ilall. Thc lattcr was thc first to use the disruption or disappearance ofcertain reflexesas cliagnosticsvmptoms. 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 svmptomatologv and clinical examination,it inlluenced therapeuticdecision-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 physiologiststcnded 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 ref'lexes,llere surpriseclto cliscoverthat such reflexesrvereneither constantnor unifbrm, and that thcir abscnct'rvasnot necessarily a pathological symptom. It rvould not be long bcfcrrcphysiologis 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-

cl i ni cal obscr vat ionst hus f br ce( l phvsiologist st o considcr scgmcnts i n t hc cont cxt of t he or ganismasa lvholc. When Shcrringtondiscovcrc
ulus and muscularresponse.

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

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 neurons untler the microscopeand technologicaladvancesin histo]-

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

ogv dcmonstratcd,o1-coursc,that ncrvescould be decomposed analvticallvinto smallcr- in somc scnscatomic - structures.The

i ntcrprct ingt he r esult sof his phvsiologicalcxpcr im cnt sin m et aphvsi calt er m s,

concept ofa scgrncntalref'lex ruastherebv corroboratcd. New

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 alsoceascdto be seen- asHall had sccn it - asnothing more than

Cuapr r n

Ob jects

Biological

a simple mcchanical reaction. Through a scrics of corrections, it had become an authentically phvsiologicalconcept. IEtuder,

Nr n r

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 scicnce 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 icdisci 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 neveractuallv rvrote. Strikingly,this prefaceis concernedrvith generalproblems of animal organization"as one travcrscstheir entire series 201

liom rhe most per{act to the most imperfcct." fhe idea of a hierar 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 onsrvasexplicitlv 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 pubNotur lir der l.ebenclcn lished in 1802, Biolollieoder Philosophie 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

rhat cnd , I dir ect t he r eaclcr 'sat t cnt ion t o t he cnd of t he histori cal pr ocess.For cont em por ar ! biochem ist s,t he lir nct ionsof .rnrJsclf:rcgulationarc charsclflpreservation,self'-reprocJuction 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 ical 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 rcason.rbleto ask rvhether there is not some principle ol thcrn.rtic consen'ationat *.ork in thc historicalconstitution of biologv.On bv thi s vi c*, which cont r ast suit h an idca of - scicncccl. r bor at ecl 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:stions 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

a ncw logic, looking at tho studv of Jir.ingthings, which r.:ntailecl rvasin fact limitcd by the tradition.rlassociationofthc standPoint

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-

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-

oloq) ontl Rationalftr', pp. 125-28]

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

Various Monilestotions of the Biologicol Object

conceptssuch as pt'rfiction or impcrlcction, normalitv or abnormalitv. 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 historv 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

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 organi zed bodv. I t is anim at ebecauscit is or ganized.I t s soul is in f ; ct act, lbrm and cn
and eighteenthcentuties In thc scventeenth by [77] D escar t escont r adict cd Ar ist ot le's pr oposit ionsPoint

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

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-

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

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.

tcfm o.rtdnonto designatca lirnctional part (nrorion)oIan animal

as the model fbr an automaton or vice versa. \'et therc was an ambiguity in this reversibility.fhe intention behind the construc-

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

i, t,j '

tr ,W i

tion ofan automaton tvasto coPynature,but in the C.rrtt'siantheorv of fife the automaton servesas an intelligible equivolcntol nature. There is no rcrom in Cartesianphysicsfbr an ontological diflerence betwcen nature and art. "[S]o it is no Iessnatural lbr 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[ . . . ] ' 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

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

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

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 llippocra te s .

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

Lifc's tclcological proccssis not pcrfcctlv cflicicnt and infallible, houer'gr.'l-heexistenceofmonsters shorvsthat nature does

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-

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 anceto l o n n . F o rmso r e n d sa re n ot necessari land y uni ver-

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

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

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-

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

bc si ck than t o be healt hr , anclsicknessis not a cor r upt ion of '

characrcrizcdasabnormal. ldeologv antl Rationalitv,pp. 128-29)

abl e, as a nim alsar e, t o t hc silcnt lcssonsof nat ur e concer ning " sel f-rest it ut ion. ""Et er y m an is capableof being his or vn physi-

206

)07

cian."5l Evenfbr Descartes,sellpreservationrcmainsthe primary

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 (l?06), tht orqdnisnlier nrc.drlrtn?i delcnded, inhis De divct.ritote

r

unr uJ.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 bodies ol specif ic living t hings in lbr m s shapcr lbv l .rti ng t he internal nolds. Thc latter, (letermined bv the firrrn ol thc org.rn-

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

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.

ordinotio,disttibutioare all used constructio, structure lstructurLt, 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-

rrsLcli n sm elt ing and nr asonr vt o inr posc. r ccr r ain t hr cc- dim cnsionalshapc.Etvmologicalh,the qrrrd is rclated to "modulus"ancl

Considerfor a moment the intelnal mold metaphor.l\'loldsarc

"rrodel." In con'rmonusage,it indicatc! a structural norm. ln liv-

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

i rregul ar it ies,t o nhich Bulf ir n r eler son nr or e t h, r nonc occasion

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

asanonralies(ltresonomaur).An organic.rnomalyis n()t thc satne rs .r phvsicalilr egular it v, hr lvevcr . I nit iallv, Buf lbn conct 'ivcd

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[.. that bcgins of and physiologv anatontv It is not onlv the histon

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

ing organisms,horvever,the structural Dorm cin nccommoddte

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 ,

l ong cal l ed " nat' uas l i vi ng thi ngs, thci r i n c l u d i n g th e c l a s s i l i c ati on of ur al histo rv ," 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. 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

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 .

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.

prol esscdt o believet h. r t olr scnat ionconlir m cr l t hc t cachingsol thc B i bl e.t 5

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-

l'ierre [-ouis ]Vloreauclt l\4aupertuisrvar bold
ndturdc.l...f fer-redto this coexistenccas the occonomia 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-

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

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

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

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."Organicmolrl 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

I

thc fi rst individuals.The phcnom en. rof r escnr blance, m isccgenati on nn d nr onst r osit vcoul
sc not explainin this llay how liom just trvo individualsthe L--an

fbr survivalin novcl ecologicalsituations [)arrvin thus aclvantage substit ut eda r andom f it f or a pr cor dainedadaPt . lt ion'Nat ur al organisnrsdie; the sun'isclcction is eliminative. Disadvantaged vors arc all different in one degrcc or another. Thc reader u'ho

nrostdissimilarspecicscould havemultiplied?Originallvthe; may havcsrcmmcdlrom lbrtuitousproductions in rvhichthe elcmentary partsdid not retainthe orderthevoccupiedin the lither andmother animals.liachdegrecoferror could havcprorluceda nrw specicsl

takeslitcrallv such DarrT'inianterms as"selection," "advantage," "adaptation," "favor" and "disfavor" may Partially overlook the fict that telcologv hasbeen excludedlrom Darrvin'stheory Does

andrepratedcrrorscould havcgivcnriseto thc infinitecliversity of that rvesectodav. aninrals

both here and in contemporaryaccountsofhereclitary biochemical defects .rsground and cause o[ both normality and abnor-

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
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 coopc 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

I)anvi n a causalexplanat ionof adapt at ioncould not abolisht he "r ital nreaning"ofadaptation, a meaningdetermined trv conrPlrison of thc living rvith the dead?As [)aru'in otrserved.\'ilri'rtionr

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-

i n nat ur t r t r ul
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-

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

it r . pp. 129 -3 5 ]

so simplc a beginningendlcsslbrms most beautifuland most \\1)n-

ln thc ninctccnthcentury

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

It is tcmpting to read this text \'\,ithspcctaclesprovided by contemporary biochemical and genetic theorv. Orderand errorocctJr

b.v.l,leansol Nat[78] Thc pubf ication of On the Origin of Species ural Selection;or the PrescrvationoJ FavouredRacesin the Struggle

$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 oduced a nervcriterion ol'normalitv into biologv, a criteritln bascd

for Ltlein l8 59 occasioneddoubts in the minds of somc carlyreadcrs becauseof the traditional mcaning of certain concepts mentioncd in the titlc and frequentlv alluded to in the bodv of the

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.asccrnsiclerecl to lre thc

work, The thtory ofnatural selection statcsthat ccrtain deviations liom the norm can be seena porfcriolito provide a tenuous

l. it

fl

regulatorof the quantitv of lifii (Buflbn) or the sanctionimposed lbr infiactions of nature's ordcr, thc instrument of her cquilibr 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

onh t hc lir st hist or vcxist s;t hc secondis scicncr : s, i n thc phvsical Phvsiologv is to thc motion of living bodics lbun<|. to be norvherr: andsttfbrth. . . hvdrottatics drnanlics,hvllraulics, \r'h.ttastronomv,

ol living lbrms, lbrms elaboratcdwithout preconceivcdidta, as tleviationsfkrm normalitv are convcrtcd into chancesfbr sun ival in a changedenvironmcnt. Danvin purged lrom thc concept of

.1reto the motionsof incrt bodies.The l:rttcrh.rvcno scicnccthat to thc Ibrmer.l8 to thcm ls PathologlcorrcsPontlr corrcsponds

adaptationanv rcfcrenceto a preordaincdpurpose,but he did not separatcit complctelv from the concept of nomalitv. In thc spirit

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

of Danvinism, horvcvcr,a nonn is not a flxcd rule but a transit 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 gcnerateclescendant 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 ation 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 -encompas 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 dual 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

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 Like thc mct.rphoro1' theoremsol macromolcculat-biochcmistrv. the " i ntcr nal m old, " t hc im agesof "dcsign, " "plan, " "guiding

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

idoa" an
uninterruptecldclcgationol'orclinalpou.er.What diflcrcncc does it makc if, in SalvaclorLuria's rvorcls,"evolution operatesrvith

gro\\' th,or ganiz. r t ion, r epr oduct ion,her edit ar ycont inuit ! - can bc cxpl . r inedin t er m sol m olecularst m ct ur e,clr em icalr cact ions,

t hr eat s ,no t p ro n l i s e s " ? 5 7. f. .]

enzymcsand genes.lltlcoloo.varu1Rationalit.v, 1>p.lj6-)91

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: phvsiologv ,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

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
ol phcnomcna in w hich thc vital lbrceshavcthcir naturaltypc Ieads

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
us to that ol phcnomcn,r in * hich thosclorccsaredistortecl. Norv,

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

ti ons of r r h. r t I h, r vepr oposeclc: r lling t he pr inciplc of t hcm at ic

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

conser\'(rtion. I anticipat cone possibleobject ion, hor veverI' n looking lbr a clistinctiveconcept of normalit) in biology, have I not confuserl

gcnetic anomalies,I shall mention only "innate errors of metabolism" - 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 pathologic 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 ngt 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 hypcrthvroidism), 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 mplif 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 festa2 r4

the i ssu cby consider ingdif f er ent or der s of biological object si r\stronomersfiom Sir William Herschelto EclrvinHubble rcvoltrti oni zedt heir disciplinebv m agnif yingt heir object t o an unim agi nabl e degr t c, r evealinggalaxiesbevond r lr c solar svst emanact cr iumgene, rvith observations at one level and explanations.rt am I dcaling another ?Nor m alit v appcar st o bc a pr opcr t v of t he or ganism , btrt i t clisappcarrsvhen *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
Pa nr F oun

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 sicknessand dt'ath are not problems of phvsics.Thev are problem 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 neclb v c c rta i n n o rm s o f b e h a v i or and adaptati on.(Juestions 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
I

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 r er eaclnit h t his hc l rop e t o lear n liom it ? I I is cor r espondence, qucstion in mind, givcsa strong imprcssionof a man r",ith a u'ide curiositv al>outpractical techniques and keen to discover principles 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 outincs 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 ovi 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 admir 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

l )cscartcs'sr lillingnesst o "lo*cr his t hought t o t he leastol t he ( 1, 185) t hat enableclhim t ( ) ( ( ) ncr ivc of ' mechanics'invent ions"

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 calproblerns:smoking chimncvs,watcr pumps and marshdrainagc,mcdi-

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

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

r ef lect ion in gcncr al. of phil( ) s( ) Phical natLrre Il orl did l) cscar t esconceiveof t hc r clat ion bet t een t heor y

a srtord thrust, thc sound of bells. l)escartes'sinterest in artil-

.rnrltechnologv?lb ans\r.erthis questi()n,lct us turn to the texts. he clepJor edt hc f iilt r r c ol ar t is. r Ds to In anv nu nr berol passages

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-

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,

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 comprehcns 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

scir : ncc.I I c h. r dcont em pt shoul dbc subor dinat et o it s associat ed ( 1, r lit hout under st anding 195)and invent or sr ''it h l br technique out meth od ( X, 180) anr l r vascxt r em elv r var v ol ar t isansu'h
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,

rcfi rsedto t ake his clir ect ions( 1, 501,506) . f hc m ost signif icant

to llv like a bircl. Nledicalobserv.rtionsare scatteredthroughout

in this regardare to be fbund in thc Ru/crfor thc Dirccpassages (t tfu tion tllind. [:rom thc outsct, I)cscartescontraststhe diversit\

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

of tcchnologicalskills uit h t he unit v of t hcor ct ic: alundcr st and-

primarvpurposeol his stuclieshaclalrvaysbeen to presenehealth,l and hc probabll bclir:r'cd,as Constantijn I luvgcnsrcportcd, that

ing and proposesusingtheorv t() achicvctotal knou lcdge.As each

" 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

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-

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 corresrvel las i n the Opti cs. pondc nc crv i th D a v i d F e rri e r(1 5 2 9 -1 6 3 8)as

abl v and c f licient lv. . l his abilit v is t hc r csult of a susr ainecl ar t en-

As fbr his rcscarchand cxpcrimcnts rvith mar:hincrv,apart fiom

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

the f:rrit'ltrt'atiscon lifiing cngincsrvrittcn fbr Iluvgcns in 1637, *c havconlt Adricn Baillet'saccountof t)escartes's relationsw.ith

nm()ngthe illt r sionst hat his r llet hod t enclst o clim inat e t hat ol peoyrlervho "stu
V illebr ess i e uth , 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

anv propcr plan, constructn( w instruDteDts. . . ."1Counteringsuch prcsumption is tlris a
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 attacking f br t r c s s c s a , p o rta b l c fb l d i n g b o a t f i rr crossi ngri versand a

I

$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's tc'chnologicalinterests,insignificantthough it mav sct:m, is nt'vertheless\\,orth remcmbcring bccauseit uas 7 zc)

-l

I II

thi ngs tha t ar e ar t ilicial ar c also nar ur al" ( lX, l2l) . Th. r t is uhv "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,
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 technologicallvposThus fhr, there sible bv studving rvhat is theoretically necessary. 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.

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 or moraliter opinion at any rate, are such machincs, but not ph.vsice yet would require springs so light so pou'crbecausc it logucndo, 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

tions on the conversionofknou.ledge into action. I)escartcssaw

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 hinki ng. D c scar t esm aint ained t hat onc should bc able t o deduce

obvious "difficulties" in moving from theorv to practice rvhich not cvcn pcrfcct intelligence could resolvebv itself. Evengiven

empirical rcsults from intuitive principles that he callcd "sceds absolute]natures."An effect of truth" or "simplc [or occasionally,

perfectknowledge,the technologicalembodimcnt of that knowlArchimedeanmirror, even one polishcd by an angel, could burn

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 : llion the gible. The celebratedpassageof Part Six of thc Discourse

an object a leagueaw,ayunlcss it rvere made extremelv large (1,

.l4ethor1 in u'hich thc impossibilityof completelvdeducingelfects

109). Evcn ifan angel were to give instructions,basedon theory, for building a stcclyardbalancecapableof rveighingobjects up

causesin terms of their ef]ects" clearly inrlicatesthat technologi-

In [)escartes's thinking, howevcr,thcre rvcreimportant restric-

edge would in some casescontain inevitable imperfections, No

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

liom causesleadsto acknorvledgmentof the need to "jtrdgc thc callv usefirl "forms or tvpes of bodies" mav bc impcdiments tcr

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

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,

instrument must thcrcforc be calibrated empirically, Descartes rccommends. Five vearsafter formulating a theorv of lenses,he

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-

$,rote Marin Mersennethat in lensmakingthe gap between theorv and practicc was so grcat that thcoretical perfection could

ous and r vit hout dist inct iveident it y, t he t echnician,r r . hor elat es

ries ol optics and levers,u'hich were among thc earliestsuccesses

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 technologv is greatly elucidatcd, I thinL, L)vanother passage, rlris onc

ol Cartesianscience.Evenmore explicitly, Descartesheld that if men could not fly, the problem was not theoretical but practi-

from the Prncrplesot' Pbilotoph.r, u.hich proceeds in the other di recti o n, f r om t echnologvt o t he( ) r \ ':

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 scusscdthus far - mirrors, lcnsesand scales- involve the theo-

2)J

\lcch.rnics an<1. in gt ner.rl,all thc artsin w hich knrnrltdge l\lerlir:inc, rnal bc usclulfravebut onegoal:to applvscnsitive rrf physics tndics

"the occasion"fbr thr'orctical Pt rfections crftechnoio{v provide researchai med at r csolving "dif licult ies. " Science,t her ef or e,

in suchJ \'iv that,o\\ ing to natrrralcauses, 1) onc .rn()thcr \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

grows out of technology,not in thc scnsethat the true is a codilication ofthe useful,a rccorrl ofsuccess,but, r,rthtr, in the sense that technologicalobst.rclcs,sctbacksand failures lead to qucs-

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 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 esson 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 scover 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-

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 permi ssi onl rom any t heor ist . But \ r 'her cdo such t echnologies ori{inateTNot in the l.rculty of un
According to the Optr..r,knorvlcdgeof naturcdcpcnclson technologt 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

crror he stressedthe primal importanceofthe u ill. 1'heseemphascssuggesttha t he believcdt hat lif e. uhosc philosophvconsist s in the desireto live rvell, cannot be apprehendc
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
tual j udgnr(nr s. Thus, t he convict ion t hat r echr , iogv cannot be reducedto scienceand constructioncannot bc rtrluccd to trnclcr-

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 ).

))\

s t andin g ,to g e th c r \1 i th th e c o n v e rsebcl 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,technologv $as alwaysto some degreen svnthetic and, as such, unanalvzablelbrm of action, but I do not bclicvc that he viervedit c()nsequentlvas unimportant; rathcr, hc sarvit asa lirtm of crcat ion, t h o u g h a d mi ttc d l v a n i n fi ri o r o ne. is correct, one (luestion remainsunIf the fbregoinganal,vsis ansrvcrt:d:Why is thcrr.:no theory ofcreation in Descartes'sphilos 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 . e i n te l l i g i b il i tv ol real i tr deri l ed from t he< , , r\.[o r l )r' s c a rte sth 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-

The Theory of the Animal-Machine is instTarablt'li"om thcory of the anintal-m.rchine Ill2] t)escartes's his lamoustlicttrm, "l think, therefbrc I am." The radicaldistincri on bct \ acensot r lan
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

it alr sr t lves t henr lr ec. r use th< sup
aspccts.Anrl althoughhc sa\l.movementas thc sourceol all nraterial varietr',he simultaneouslrprecludedhimself from nising tlre

inglr',*e finclthc samcrrgument stood on its hcltl in .r lettcr ti
issueofdiversiflcation,u'hich is one aspcctof thc pr-oblcmol cre-

morc th an m achines,t hen wc shoulclbecom e Pvt hagor e. r ns. r n, l gi l e up our dom inion over t he be. r st s. 6'l- his at t it ude is r vpic. r l, r i \\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

ation. As wc knorl from the Discoursc on thc .Itethod,he candidlv h a cl i ts l i mi ts, but he mav not adm it t c d th a t g .o m c tri c a n a l v s i s havcrvishcdto ackno* lcrlgc,or admit to himsell, that the imposs 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," Irar aur , pp . 7 9 -8 5 ]

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 animatc - asa meansto an (:n(1. S uch 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-

220

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 theorv, 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

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 onological scnse,by God, as efficient cause,and bv a preexistingliving 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 mechanical 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 living 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
rvhich, although man-rna
is inscribed in life in thc same\\'ay: in order to imagine the pas-

various rvars;but I anr supposing this machine to bc made by the

sagefiom one to the other, onc has to imagine an cxtrapolation to infiniti-, that is, to God. This is rr,hatDcscartesappearsto mean

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

bv the final remarksof the above quotation. Hence, the theorv of the animal-machineis to life asa sct of postulatcsis to geometrv, 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,moreover,b\ a contemporarvanatomist,thc celebratcdNicolausSteno, 'who dclivere
= ii ; z ii == i1:zi 1; ='i i!iz ? =z:= :=;i:t+

t1 tii = :1 e';:i i : :'.i:i= : ?:ii : +; i=1 .=, ? , = : t 1': E : Z=i i i l r = * 1=, : = ::=i l : v : 1

-+i ! z=1= it .=i;i-i;tii,:i, .++ t= zi= a i i1 ; n t=:i i =':i =i ' =: ia ; i i2 = i - t : 1 ; i i t E: e: E |. .,:

7;.';1!':a

:,ii1

= ::

z'

i

:72:::;i

,2a =, ==ii=rZ : ;= 1; +i =i :a,i iii= ;:-=,i ;t z ,at1z =a==:, i 2 ,i ; z =,rz=:ti :: i ;=,1 i 1r' ,i== + ii : i = : i,=7: a 2 1 ii t =i i-:=i, r=u= ==_:7 i j i 22,;, =i: i :t ; = ,i,1" zi i i : == i i i?ii 7 =i 'z= == it E; t 5 ; =i : : t=;:i tif ii : ;

; i ci i: i i: 'iis ii?ffiZii; it ii i:ii? ;!'+Z;!=,i=ii ::y1:7i:iiliiz; i

: , liirt?i=:i7+!zit+:i: =Ei, i;i EE ii2

,:!=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 pellic 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 phenomenon r v boseh 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 mechanism 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 hims 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 practical 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 , c d i stri buti on of rhe spi ri ts [ 85] A c c o rd i n g ro D e s c a rte s th upon leaving the brain depen
ol the i n st r um cnr . r l Secondis t he posit ion of t he pineal glanelbr ind clser vher ein t hc Tteetise on,{|on. ln the P m.tecogitdtionescirca onillcncrctionem rnalium, I)escartes invokes the connodo and incomrll,o
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 proj1l )

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,

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,

and, firrthcr, that "one ol his chief rcasonslbr confessingthe hilur 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-

in t hc anim al or ganismis also ar t ilici, ll, given t hat i nech.r nic. r l, itrtontittonsconstnlcted,asit lrerc, br (lod? anim.rl-machincs,'tre

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\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 -

. 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 r e Jttcnrpt to rcducc ani mal m or c hol< l l r'I, u o u l d a s k .rv h e th eth biologr tt.rmechanicsdid not revealthe resistanceof vital phenomena to lirll cxprcssionin mechanicaltt'rms. I carlier alluded to thc passagcin the Prrntaeco{lit.rtionesin \\ hich comrnodaand incommodordtllr.rc\rere secn to influence the movementsoforganic 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
of nlechanicalparts?Sincethoseencls poratedinto the assemblage surpassour undcrstanding,holr'cvcr,cannot ancl:houlcl not the in sci cnc r .of ' living t hings leavet hem out ol it s accc l no dilli'r cnct 'bct uccr - rt he living aninr . r anr
atons,rlhich arc much more splendidth.rn,tttilici.rl,rncs- namelr,, the animal5."ll Another passage expresses the sameirlca:"lt is no

i sms,rveabsr 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,

lessnatural 16ra clock constnrctcdrvith this or that set of rvhcels

i n the spt cial caseof nr an.t her c is no r r ir v t o avoi
211

r lt

"God's transcendentpurpose,namely,that the lau'sofmechanism alone should sufficc to engenderand preservemachines whose parts are arrangedso as to firlfill the requisite conditions for a

C g ,q l r r n

EL L vIN

Comte

Auguste

union of bodv and soul, that is, a relation of meansto end"18does this not implv, then, asGueroult suggests,that if rve assume rhat machineslack this "same organizationand interdependence of partsand whole,"zewe must acceptan "incomprehcnsibledivision" betu.eenmen and animals?Indeed, without such interdepcndence,u hich allorvsa mechanicalrelation ofstructure to be transformedinto a teleologicalrelation of fitnessfor purpose,the indivisible functional unitl' of thc organismbecomesinconceivable. Thc inc om prehensibledivision is tolerable only when presente(lasan "unf;thomable mystery"that situatesman in relation to Godrs\i,isdom.lo In short, onlv a metaphvsiciancould have set fbrth the princi p l e sof a m ec hanisti cb i o l o g v rv i th o u t fa l l i n g a t once i nto contradiction (contradictionthat must in any caseemergein the end).

The Montpellier School [87] Afier being banishcdto Nlontpellier fbr his role in the closing ofthe EcolePolvtechnique,AugusteComte took courscsat the of Medicine, u'here Paul-josephBarthezhad taught until Facr,rlt,v his death ten yearsprior to Comte'sarrival.Thc man r" ho actually

Fervhistoriansol biologv havenoticcd this, and eren fewerhistori-

introducedthe fathcro1positivismto biology uas Henry DucrotaY de Blainville,a former professorat the Musdumand the Sorbonne.

cally minded biologists. It is more regrettablc that philosophers havemaric the samemistake. lFormationdu rdflere,pp. 54-56]

I l avi ng mct hi m at Claude Hcnr i de Saint - Sim on's,Com t c at tended Blainville'scoursc in generaland comparativephvsiology fiom 1829to 1832.He admiredhis teacher'sencvclopcdicknor"ledge and svstematic mind. The Cours de philosophicpositive \\'as in fact dedicatedto Blainville and Charlcs Fourier, and its fbrtieth 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 biologv in broad strokes,dralr,ingon a keen awarcnessol the intcrrelatedness of biological discovcricsthat hc took from Blainville's lecturcs. A striking example can be found in the fifty-sixth lesson 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

stateof PhvsiologY"'meintaineclth.rt Barthez's"r'ital metaphvsical 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

the citations provcsthat Comte uas genuinclv learncdin the subject, rvhencethc cascvvith rvhich he attaincd.rloftl rtrntageliom

Unlike so manl ol his ou n contcmporarir:sand scr Stahlassume<|." 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 subsritutcd a ne\\' namc fbr l hat Stahl had called "thc soul." On this

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 - 6 31 [88] In a note in the nventv-cighthlcssonof the Cburr,Comte haileclthe illustrious Barthezas "a f)r more influential philosopher" than Condillac, and in his prefice to the Nourcouri/dmcnrs clela scicnce tle I'hommche praiscdit as a tcxt "ol eminent philosophical pouer" .rnd an "cxccllcnt logical theorv," lir superior the fbrtyto thc "mctaphvsicirn"Condillac'sTraiti dcss_t;stimes.ln thircl lesson,Barthezis praiscdfbr havingcstablished"the essent ial c har ac te ri s ti c o s l ' s o u n tl p h i l o s o p h i calnrcthod, aftcr havi ng 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 sc 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 discoven 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 osophr',rlhich hc bclicvcclrvereconllnned by Picrrc-SimonLaplacc's

point, hc nraclea prolbund anclPerrincnt remark: "For so chimerical an ortlcr of idcas,such a chanqc in terminologv alrvavsinclicntcsan 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 librart'that Barthez \\'r-otcin the secondrolunrc ol'his.4ncrtonrico/ bclieve
onalvtique de la chaleur.

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

It should norv bc clcar rvhv Comte, * ho characterizedGcorg t:rnst Stahl'sdoctrinc .rs"thc most scientific firrmulation of the

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

2 J6

I l9

1796 E\positiondu slstdmedu mondeancl Fouricr's l8)2 Thiorie

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 abstractconc 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 conceptsoforganization, lile and conscnsus. This debt to Barthezmay explainComte's tcndencr to prescnthim asthe sole rcpresent.rtive of thc Montpellicr 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
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 phrsan assertionofthe ical sciences.The coining ofthe \4ord suggests discipline'sautonomv,ifnot ofits indepcndenceComte'sbiological 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 disaPpointments 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 irrational 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 biologv 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 ustlil 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 1824) or [ t ienne not haveknown t he u. or k of William E
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, uni ntel l i gi bl e." r; 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

to * hom h e . r lludes,enablcdhim t o see,in t he car licstf br m ulati ons ofccll t heor v,t hc lir st glim m er ingsof a t heor l of "cJcgr ccs ol ' i ndi vi d ualit v. For " Com t e, t hc vcr v concePtof t hc ccll ir nplied a nrislcadinganalogvbctrvccn organic bodiesanclinorganiccom17 pounclscomposedof indivisiblc molecules. lEtudes,pp. 6 3-65] [91] Clear lv,t he icleaundcr lvingall ol Com t e's posit ionsor t

Comte's successive .judgmentsof Lamarck are revealing,holvever,ol' the deeper meaningof his biological viel s. l. . . ] Bevond

bi ol ogv rvast he neccssar vdualit v of lif c and m at t er . I n biological phi l osophv,t he eight ccnt hcent ur v bequcat hc( tl \ \ 'o t em Pt ati ons to the ninet ccnt h: m at er ialismant l lr vlozoism ,t hat is, t hc

the first conscquenccof the Lamarckiantheorv of the milicu -

(loctrine that rnatter is animate(lor that mattcr an(l lile are inscp-

n.rmelv,the variabilitvofspeciesand the gradualinccption ofnerv

arabl c.C om t e, likc l) cscar t es,bat t lcd on t r vo lr ont s, and his t actics \vcre, if nothing else,Cartcsian.I'he matterrlifc dualism uas clualismot' the positivistecluilalentof thc CartesianmctaPhv:iical

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 pass 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

extcnsi onan
asideof Larmarck'sinsightsin lavor ol'an uncompromisingmathcmatical approach.

th.rnasincr t .bccause t he m cr cn( ) t ionoi lilc ir nplits t hc cxist cncr

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;

beingscanc\ isr ol thi n gsnor endo*cclr r it h it . . . . Lllt inr at clrliving , and onlv irr inerrmilicus,\l hich prori<Je rbcnr\\ ith both .rsubstr;rtc :r di rcct or indir ectsour ccol nour jshm ent . . .I.t evcr r t hingr r cr c

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

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 prcponrl c r ancc of t he iner tnr ilieu.l8

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)

[: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 antsanclanim 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
transition fiom one speciesto another along a chain of being;

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-

Comte therefbre proposedreplacingthat tripartite schemewith a ncw one consistingof tu,o "empires" (living and inert). He was

tions - an argument that Comte elaborateclinto a guaranteeof continued progressthrough developmentof a preexistingorder.

convinced that "vital sciencecannot exist u ithout this irreduc-

Comtc claimed to have achievedcomprehensive,critical insi ght i nto t he biologv of his t im e. lf I havecor r ect lv ident if ied

( 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

ible dua l i s m." re In essence,Comte sau',betu'een Lamarck and Descartes,a parallcl that no onc rvould think of disputing today. Perhapsmore perspicaciousu,ith respectto the future than accuratein his perception ol the present,Comte anticipated the conse
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

This rvould lead to a "rcstorationofCartesianautomatism,which,

arrangedin such a way that in the Cours,"everythingis necessarily existenccis possible."lr'I'heharmonvbetu'eenfLnction and organ

though incompatible rvith the ficts, continues in one fbrm or

"does not go bevond what actuallilb requires."alSince,moreover,

another to mar our leadingzoologicaltheories."al

organismsdepend on their environmcnts, living things arc subjr.:ctto cosmic influcnces.Biologv is thcrefbre relatcd to cosmol-

which at the verv leastimplies that inner motives are decisive."a0

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 sensualism.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) thinking than thc l.amarckian idca that thc biological functions are independentof the organsthat embody them (and may eveninfluence the developmentof those organs).True, Gall did map cere-

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.

bral topographvby studving the mental functions of his patients,

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

but in doing so his intention lvas to rcfutc, not to corroborate,

Positive,experimental phvsiologv.An organism,Comte argued,

244

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-

and thnt ol Kult ( lolr jst ein,t o lind in r ht kr r ncr a phcnom cnologic.rlbioloqv ovantIo lcttrean
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 -

posi ti vi srinspir at ion.I n lict , Com t e had an idea, albcit a cc'ngoing. f he int cllcct ualf lnct ion *as fi se< lone , ol r r her e he , "Tas

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

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-

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

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-

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

ol ogv and nr ) t in ps\ chologv.I Er ur icrpp. , 67- 71] [!)]] Conr t e's biological philosophr , t hat
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.

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

This u'asnot the onlv place rvhere the positivist method violateclthe principle of rvorking fiom the simple to the complex

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

.rrrdthe knorvn to thc unknorr.n.In celebratingthe promotion of

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

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 canatonr . 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

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 i n(l i vi (l u. rot l ganism st hat st enrllor n elser rhcr c. "Thc collcct ion

that thc animal kingdonrccrnsists ofa number ofdistinct branchcs rncl to acceptinsteadLamarck'sand Blainvillc'sth('or\ ofa unique

ol natura llr odiesdoesnot lbr m an . r [ 's
series.Once again,his grourrdsfor making this choice involveda

thi ngsculm inar ing,logicallvas vvcllast elcologicallv,in m an, uir s

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

evcrrtuallvtranslbrmedinto the iclcaol lliocracv asthc necessarv condition ol Sociocracv.This uirs the positivistcquir'.rlentof thc

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

ti i;

immediate" datum uc hi\'(.rf Comtc thus clainredto be keeping laith rvith his gcncral program,"uhich consisrsin al\1aysrcason-

l

ing fiom thc bettcr knorvn to the lesserknolvn," even though he cominsistcdon arrangingth< lninral seriesin ordcr of
ol d mctaphvsicr lidca ol a Realnrol l nt ls. f lr udcr , p. 73] Positivc Poli tics

I

i J

fl D (

[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 uhat others lnrcnt."Thc ditcovcrv tlrat the inrentor ol positivr.poJiricsclaintcd as his orr n \\,asthat "thc natural la*.s that govcn the m.rrch of civilization" are deriveclfrom thc laus ofhuman organization.Tb the t'rtt'rrt that "thc statcol soci,tl 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

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-

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." terminologl., S('eminglvfiithful to Claude Henri dc Saint-5inron's Comte gave thc name "phvsiologv" to thc "general science of organizc
$

$ I

t;

not just a discipline recentlv institutecl lbr the study of man as

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 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 circumstancc,ifailed to prevent "the advanccof civilization," u hich in

living being, onc w.hosemethod could scrvc as a model for the

f)ct "ncarlv alwavsprofits fiom mistakesrathcr than being
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

to naturalize,as it rvere, the most distinctive f'eaturcol human historv,namely,the labor or industrl rvhcrcbysocietv pursuesits

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

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 rank i n the nat ur alsvst emas indicat ed by t hr lict s, som et hing

havinghoped that hc might learn to repair anr disturbanceto his or-qanization nnd eveDto rcsistanv destructivelbrce, lman] finally rcalized that his efforts rverc firtilc as lonq as they did not cooper.rtc u'ith thorc of his organization,rnd still more fi-rtilewhen

i :1

of er planat ion. "[ . .. ] not susce pt it r le '[ his limitation of man'sporverto kno* ledge ol nature'slarvs

thc nro rverec.'pposed." And further: "Thc fict that many illnesses

and prcdiction of their effects,hcnce to harnessingnatural lorces

u'erecurcd in spite ofdefictivc treatmentstaught physiciansthat

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
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 zati 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[medical thoLrght,so, too, werc therc t$o schoo)sof political thought: thc "po)itics of imagination" involvcd "strenuous t'lJbrtsto disc 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

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 containssuch 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-

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-

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

movc the obstaclesthat empirical metho(ls place in the rvayof a

human racc act ing collcct ivclv or t o an isolat edindividual" - a

246

21')

LNITEFPP€T

to thc P rcscnceot 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 that rtcll lrefbre he rcsistance.Flom this I venturc ttl conclude and Barthez's addcd Anthelnrc Richerancl'sElinentsdc ph.vsiologic tlc I'hommeto thc annalsof posi,\burtaur dlimcntrrlc la science to sal 'rbout anitivism, Comtc haclreatl rr'hat troth authorshad movemcnt i n the m al m ov e mc n f. R i c h e ra n d l v ro tc o f " zi gzag in his Nouvelle spaccbcttleen two Parallcl lines " And Barthcz' de I'homnrect desonimou\' discussed micaniqueclesmrtuvemcnts rvord oscil.r'o"", ond reciltrocatingmotions' Comtc also usetlthe l eadi ng to 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 to Barthez' improvemcnts in the social ordcr, hc again ref'erred to nttcanique'tricrJ rclute the tc, thc Uarthezrvho' in his Nouvclle (han that the ground irlca that animalsnovt {br no other reason Chaprepels their ftet And again. it rvasBarthez- specificallv' [rorrou'cdthe t", F.ru. .rf Nour.nur Uiments- {iom rvhom Comte lau r elati n gs tre n g tht() rc l l s ta n c e and purTu r.,. r.,p,tht:n, Comte left thc Ecolc Polvtechnique to thc the preflce suc(l the studv ol biologv' as he indicatcs in Potirife At that sixth and final volumc ofthe Cours
cJPacit Yas an jllher cnt ocrfect thcm sclvcs.Bv int er pr ct ing t his 'ir,rp"r,y ot,tt. notr.,..:ut t"gani''trion' hc rvasable to kccp l'rith \\'ith the PreccPtsof Positivism' Fann'On D e ccm ber 25, 132'+,Conlt e wr ot t J'r cr lues- Pier r e srrcietv ttxla,r is a long rrlv \ialat: "The state in rT'hichrvc {ind statcol crisis" Bcc:ttlsc fiom nom.rl,... Jt is. rather,.rvt'rv violent of organisms'he hc vic*ed organizationas a normative propcrtl .,,,,1d,r,r three diflerent occasionsch'rractcrize1>oliricalllrojccts on firur tlcc'r()r ptacticts as"monstrositicS"or "monstrotts" ancl " or behalior as"delective Thcsc terms sionscharacterizec<-rn
I to

and vivid im.rgervehaveofbiological research most comprehensive in Franceover the p.st centurv or more. The Soci6t6'sfirst gov-

Comteantl Positit'ist l.rtertranslateJohn StuarcMill's book ,'1u1;ustc P hi l osophint v o Fr ench. subsequcnt lvachjeveda lim e t hat has

crning boald rv;s chaired by Dr. Raver, u,ho later becamedean of the Facultv of ll'ledicinel Claude Bernard and Charles Robin

rcnded to overshadowhis earlv interest in biologv. His nnme was CeorgcsCl€menccau.

Brown-S6quard servedasvicc chairmcnl and Charles-Edouard and

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'

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 philosophy. On June 7, 1848,Robin reada paper"On the Direction That the Founding Membersof thc Soci6t6de Biologie HaveProposed 'fhev llave Chosen." In it, he discussed

to Answer to the Title

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 ssion 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 G l e y rcad a report on the evol ution 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 anatomicalcomponents rathcr than the fundamentalcomponent of living organis 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

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 hispp. 7l- 1) l torv ofmed ical scicnce.I Er udes, [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
mcnt \\'ith Herbcrt Spencer,'r'ho arguedin the "Classificationof thr: Sciences"th.rrhierarchvought to be replacedbv interdependcnce. Littr€ held that no changein the relatire rankingol the scic 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

cal thcorv knon n as "organicisnr,"firr ncglecting thc irretlucibili tl ol the pr oper t iesol living m at t ef . Not c, bv t he r , 'av,t hat bot h

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-

du ColloqueEm;lel.ittri, I 80 1- l,\ El, pp. 27 l-7 )l [c)6] ln rvhatrt'spcctsdid Xavicr Bichatinflucnce Emile Littri'

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

Litrrc's Dicriorrxrircde lo longut fron6oireand his Dittionnairedc contain artic]eson thc rvord irr1ducti6lc. rnr'r/ccine ["] ittrc,",4crcr

.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
ol biologr, lirr rthich ther lack one thing, nanrelt' the char''rcteristic 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

had taken up thc sensor\llnctions bciirrc in Phsiolollie,N'lagenrlic consi deringnut r it ior r . 6rllut t hc m ain t hing t hat t he posit ivist s

a modern tcrn, .rn implacableentnlv of "reductionism " In 1846, lbr examplc. in a studv ol JohannesMiiller's Hondbuclrder Phvsil-ittre cnnlc to the dcfcnse of thc "irreducologie des,l'lcnschcn, ible": "lt is imPortant to dcterminc thc irreduciblc ProPerticsof

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

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
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

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

rncl mi cro sclr pict echni<1ucs, *hich r r cr c dispar ag<
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 ir r edLr c i b l eth , c i n l ma n c n t l l ro p e rti e sof l i vi ng matter' rvhere' rs

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

the irrcdrrciblervhile crorcisingthe occult' tlichat harlrecognizecl 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'sofPhYsic 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.+

and treatm entr vit h acicls.liuc, t he m icr r scopesavailablcat t he ti mr * cre m cr liocr e,an
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
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

I

-

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 !
"thc allcgcdlv tl pical or primordial organic ct'll."6l When Littr6 reviewe
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

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

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

trl'o kinds of brain cells, affectiveanclintcllcctualr Wasthis a the-

Franqoi sEm m anuel Fodi'r d ear lv in t hc ninet eent h ccDr ur v; it

oretical conccssionor a merc stylistic convenience?61 In u hat respects,moreover,did Frangois-loseph-Victor Brous-

ha
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-

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
ries of physicrlogicalmedicinc, l'hich were b.rsedon a bclief in the identitv ol thc normal anclthc pathological.as rvell as on a

and react ionsbet r veennr ili, : us. r ncl or ganism s,hum anr includer l.

refilral tcr vierv diseaseas introducing lnl nerv lunctional processin tltt organism (a casemade even beforc Broussaisby _lohn

,\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-

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

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

positivestageof development.Pathologvhad thus become "phys-

a number of scienccst hat had achieveclt he st ageof "1>osit ivi t\" ' - phv sics,chem isr r v and biologv. Thc t er r n also scr vcd in

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

for thc notion ol "climat(," !1.hich Partasan ideologicalsuLrstitute h.rdbeen used extensivelvbr c,ighteenth-centurv authors, p.rfric-

be onc of the obstaclesto undcrstandingnricrolriology.But for the moment, let us ask ourselvesrvhat thc practicaleffectso[this

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
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 -

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

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 dis2t 6

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

N ot a w ord \vas 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 \i c ro org.rni snrs, s ai
must bc .rtt.rchtrlto varitrtts.rrticlesthJt .rPPeiredi n i m p()rt.rDce the vcrr Clrrrles Renouvit'r'sjournal, Io Critiquepbi.lostT,irigue ' . 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
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-

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

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

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-

Pasteur's*ork, Nevertheless,Littre's rcmlrks on public hvuiene in the third articlc are g'orthy ol attention. l:or Littr6, historv.rnd

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

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 iniste ri n gth e e a rth , a n d a s c i v i l i zati on rdvances,that arduous administrationdeman
i ts ch.r r t crin a lianklv Posit ivistspir it at r
remarkst() offer on thc subject of ccologr, rcars before the word rvascoinerl."')And no one can deny the claritv or couragc rlith

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

\\'hich he cxpressedhis astcrnishment that no civilizcd nation had

them. llis 1855 ar t iclc on Nlagcndiccn
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 attention ncc
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
"Experimentation" ends rvith the sanreconrparisonthat Bcrnard

CH, r t 'r r x

Twt t ! 'F

borrorved from GcorqcsCuviel the observer)istens,tht'cxpcrim c nt c r q u c s ti o n s T , h c a rti c l e o n " M e d i ci ne" menti onsB ernard' s

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 Clatt
cases,scicntistsassumedrcsPonsibilitvlbr u'h.rt h'rd prcviouslvin 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' mathenrari(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 hasbecomc an integral part ofmathenraticsitseJf By contrast,the trail blazcrl bv ClauclcBernardhas been ncgJcctr:dbv latcr phvsiologisrs - so ncglectcd, in fact, that rvhcn phvsiologiststodav feel rh c 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 cq 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
icsJChcmistrvlWho knorrs?Ic is [x ttcr t(l tlo anatonlr.fiohannes] trl nl l er,IFri edr ich]Ticdcm annan

elirreon a ner,vlvdiscovere
26 ]

a questionof phvsiology. Neitheranatomynor chemistrvcanans\,\'cr What is crucialis experimentation on animals,rvhichmakesit posofa functionin .rlivingcreature, sibleto obsenethe mechanics 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

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 ' of a discoverYthat rvasa suriltically pursued the consc
xhich cannotbe studicdin anr other\\nv. Prcclictcd.

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

Thc lccturesat the Colldgede Fr.rncefirllo*'ed Bernard'scom-

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.

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 ofexperim 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 adventurc. 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 ci 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 entific 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:

showedthat that thc liver can Bcrn.rrd,in his uork on glvcogenesis, sl nthcsir e glucoseand, t hcr cf br e, t hat anim alsneed not obt ain p. 9l thjs substancefiom plants. IPrcfice, 1.cqons, f102] For our pur poses,it is not im por t ant t hat Ber nar dobtai ncd his r esult bv dint of f lar vsin his chem ical analvt ict cchTl- r cf ict ni qucsand r ough apploxim at ionsin his m casur em enr s, 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 cl o thcir r vor k. \ et Ber nar
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

Fi rst , he ur r r Jr : r st oor t hat l lr e had t aken t he lir st st ep t ouar d thc solut ion ol r 1>r o[ r lenr r hat dat ed back t o t he t 'ight eent h

rvaslooking tbr. IFtucJci,pp. 1-+a-a6]

<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

The lmplicqtions of a Porodoxicol Discovery

probl cm t hr , r ugh. r ser iesol exper im cnt s int ende( l t o det r r onstrate the ne\ \ 'concept of "int er nal secr et ion"11855) ,a phr ase that onlv a 1c\\'vcitrstrrlir:r'rvould havclrccn takenas.rcontradic-

[ 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 phdnominestlc la vic communsou\ dnimau\ cl dur r'1gy'f.?u.,r stcms first 161

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

philosophical,or, to usc a term Jesssuspcctto thc scientillc mind, logical.That ideacan bc summeclup in a scntcnccfirst n.rctaphvsio

lrit upon an argumcnt c.rpableof exploding a theorv flrmlv establishcd in the minds of contemporarvchemists.Whatevermisgivingr 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

\\' ri ttcn i n 1878:"Thcr c is but one uav ol lif e, one phlsiologv, fbr all living things." ["Claude Bcrnar
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 rvcdspotson the sun, he dclivcrt'cla clecisiveblorv to the old Aristotelian distinction besusceptibleto generation twccn the sublunarvrvorld, supposeril,and corruption, and thc supralunarvrvorld, supposedlvcternaland incorruptible. Hc taught mankind to scc analogousthings in analogous uays. Similarlv, rvhcn Claude Bcrnanl discovcrerlthc glycogenic 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,according 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

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, acknouledgi 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
plant and a n i m a l .

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,

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

or raclicallvdistinguishingbenvcen thc tuo, in the manncr ol the frcnch naturalistsand (lerman naturc philosoplrers.Thc Nervttln

*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

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-

human t'vr.:to scc lifc in a nc\\ rvav,rvithout rlistinction betrvccn

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

phcring their o* n structurcsanrl firnctions.Rcjcctingboth mechani sm .rn clvit alism , Ber nar duas ablc t o clevelopt cchniquesol'

kingdoms do not lbrm a hierarchl, and there is no teleological subordinationol one to the other. l his discovcrvpavcdthc rvay

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 ,

fbr a gcncral phvsiologv,a scicncc of the lif'e lunctions, and this clisciplineimmecliatelygained a place in thc academvalongside

In 1c(on.t pr.obablvunrvitting,br.:tuccnthe lblloll ing two p.rssagcs. yie sur lcsphinomincs (l-csronsof Dcccmber 28 and dc la ph.rsique; 10, l 8l 6), I - r anc; ois, \ lagendie r vr ot e,"l set t he lung r s a bellous,

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

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

cr.rblectlerence bcnveen the blood's rclation to the lun(s .rnd its relatrn to the liver. In thc ltrngs,the organismintcracts \\ ith

arc satisfledonlv rvithin thc living organism."Thus, rvhile Bemard

thc inorlanicworld through the blood, rl hereasin the liver thc

took {rom Lavoisier and l-aplacc bv u'ay of l\lagendic *'hat he hims 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

organisnintcractsrvith itself. Thc point is important cnough that

ol the lriologicalconcept ol the "internaI cnvironrrrent,"the tonc 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

coulrl bt no ideaol an internalenvironment.,rnds ithout thc idca

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 , of11hat [ 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 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

it bcarsepeating:rlithout the idea of intcrnal secretions,rherc ot an i n: r nal cnvir onm ent ,t her e could bc no aut ononr ousscience 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 thcorv 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

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-

sur ltr piinomines alt I(1| ie communsau.\ (1nimau.\et aut riqitoux. Bv so dtrng, he rr,asabl
tcsts of Romantic philosophv."Ancient sciencervasable to conc 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-

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

inc an interndlenvircnmcnt.Ibelievethat I rvasthc first ro express this idca clearlv and ro stressits importancc in understandingthe

sharplr:-om tlre nr.rtlrenratical or nrechanicalmodel: the cell rcvealeda.vpc ofmorphological structurequite diflirent liorn that

need lbr experimentationon living things." Note that the concept of the intcmal cnvironm('ntis given here as the theoreticalunder-

of carlie "artifacts" and "machines."It becamepossibleto irnagi ne rvay,ol analvzing,dissect ingand alt er ingliving t hings using

pinning ofthe technigue ofphvsiologicalexperimentation.In 1857, Bernard$ rote, "The blood is made lbr the organs.That much is

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-

true. But it cannot be repeatedtoo olten that it is also madc by the organs."What alloued Bernard to propose this radical revi-

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

sion ol hematologvu'asthe concept of internal secrctions,wlrich he had fbrmulated trvo vearscarlier. Aficr all, there is a consid-

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-

the uhr e, t he com posit e. r ndt hc sim ple, in a r vayt hat dilleled

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

de mitlecine analvticalstudv of firnctionspossiblc.In the Principes nrote, "For analvzinglilc phcnomcna, is c\peimcntdle,Bcrnar<J

attempting to analvzclifc bv studying the partial lives of thc various kinds ofanatomical elements,wc must avoid an error that is

e\anrincdfiequentlv.Somc savthat the lor,er animalsare simplcr. I do not think so, and, in anvcase,one animal is ascomplcte asthc

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

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

of the anatomical clements." In othcr uords, Bernard'sgcncral phvsiologvgrervout of a comtrinationof the concept of the internal 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 Romanticism. 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

it bettcr to studv higher or lo\\ er animals?The cluestionhasbcen

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 phvsiologicalphenorncnon.I n phvsiologv,r list inct m eansdiller ent iat ed,and t hc firnctionallvdistinct must be studicd in thc morphologicalllcombecause plex. In thc clementarvorganism,evcn'thing is cor-rfirseri m cchanics ar e e' ervthi n g is conf bunded.ll t he I awsof Car t csian

and a fiithful disciplc ofBlainville's introduction to thc Coursde ph.veiololTie ginircle et comparie. For all three of thcse authors Cuvicr, Comtc and Blainville - comparativcanatomv $'asa sub-

best stud icd in sim plc m lchincs, t he lavvsol Ber nar dianphvsioll4c) - 51] ogv are b est st ucliedin com plcx or ganism s.I Fr ur lcr pp. ,

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,

Life, Deoth and Creotion

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 usionsconcerning the naturc and use ofeach organ." Bv contrast, Bcrnard sarvcomparativeanatom! as a prerequisitefor developing a gencral phlsiologv on the basisof cxPerimentsin comParativc phvsiologv.Comparativcanatomy taught physiologiststhat nature laid the groundrvork lbr phvsiologvbv proclucinga varictv 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

ll06] All of llernarcl'slork bearstracesol thc stru.qglrthat \r'cr1t on in his mind benr,eenhis profbundbut not unconditionaladmirati 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 pcrsistentlvcxploiting 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 chcmistrv 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 environment vet another rcason not to be a mechanist. lrlechanisrn implied a geometrjc representationof things: the mcchanistphvsiciansof 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

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 phvsical .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'nthesistheseterms referredto that asPectof lif'e that Bernar
not rooted, as $.c representit, in metric space.lndecd, the exis-

l t hc t er nr "or ganic cr e. r t ion"t L) l i ' i ng things, "TrBer nar r applicd 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-

tence ol thc internalenvironmentnssurcsthe "highcr" organisms o- c allcc bl c c a u s ei t p o s s e s s ern s i n ternal envi ronment - of an

. r cat ionor . \ olut ion strovedb v t he f ir nct ioningof t ht or ganism C: r,rasthe living cxplessiono1'tlrcorganism'snt c
" obv ious i n d e p c n d e n c e ,"" a p ro te c ti vemcchani sm," .rn" el asti citv."72Thus, the relation of the organismto the environment is

ter. ["Clau
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

nDt one of passivedepenrJcnce. What is morc, it u'asbecausr Bernardrvasnot a mcchanistand 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 languageofscientists and philosophers.Thc macroscopicorganism'srelativeinde-

[107] ln Bernard'smost carefullv 'ritten tcxts - thc Introdttction. the RdppottanclL,r Scienrcetpirimcntolc- he distingLrishcd bet* cen / . r r , s,u hich ar e gener aland applicablet o all r hings,anr l rvhich are spccilic to organisms.-l.hisspccilicitv lormsor proccsses, is somctimcstermerl "nrorphological,"sometinrcs"evolutionarv." In fact, i n Ber nar cl's lcxi

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

172

) 7)

pcndence of thc enr ironmr'nt was cnsured by the determinatc

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

6 t oo, t hat her edit v,uhich u, r s thought or t nechanism s. "tRecall, still ln obscureconccpt an(l ber'ondntan'sreachin 187(r,neltrthelessscenteclto Bernarrlan essenti.rlclcmcnt of thc lar,'sol nrttrphology,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 of phvsicalconcept s and i n delianceof t he r cigning supr . em acv 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 :
others. Is it too audaciousto suggestthat with thcsc concepts, cquivalentin Bernard'smind. hc intuitivelv sensedrvhat rvc might

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

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

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

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:

r l alism t hat ol a l brce, he r eallr uent ber ond t hc nr ct Jt ) hvsic.vit he con
Il spccialmarerialconditionsilrf nccr'ssarv to crclte spccilicphcn()mcn.t ot nutrition or er()lritiou,that docsnot meanthat thc Iarv ol ordcr andsLlccessi()n th.rtgivcsmcaningt(), ()r crcatr!,rel.rtions 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 lnlrorluctl
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 ophv, many phvsicianscven today Lrclic'r'in an etcrnal anclprimorcl 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<-is r 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 evoluti 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 lblci ng mer licir r enot t ( ) r cnounc( llilt pot r . r t csbut t o
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; contemplative and descrip,,rb...r'", ion, lnedicine ua: Passive, is aggressive science'"With the aid tive. Ex[)cril-.,ntal medicin, ,rf th. .ri ,i r" . 'rrr^"ntol uir 's' man bccomes an inventor of phe-a the fa.loryof creation and there is no limit nomena, 1 man in to the p\ow( h.rt hc may t'ltain ovcr naturc "8L BY contrast' an 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 "observationalmedicine examahorg.r rr.r,- rg."8lln Ptrt).trlar' but does not touch riiscase " explainsiliresscs ines, obs."r.r,. '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 ( o u ra g (n J turt' \ .' \tn tcndenci cs.ttr r em r . die .- i .r. " 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 , 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 p ri o ri ty , and rvho $as concerned . u, ,.i n ,.,, Pa ti e n th i s :' P - ok . diseascs - rvho chosediagnosisancl above all 1 al',rincand .1.rr'.' ' (\' \\e rc ( l te n" rsol ol i ' ts: Thomas nr oqn( , \ j i - d l r< J l l n e n l . 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 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.xrc essencesthat manifestedthemers u h() hellhat (liseases selves mraortrilcn tlran not imPure fbrnr' In;ddition, Bernard brancle.l , asoft naturalistsrthc phvsicians,including Rudolph Vircho*...7, uiusince the 5;r' ofGiovanni BattistaMorgagni and Bichat, . pai,nked fcrr e116lical relations bctn'een changesin a sn d .:l e c ta b l es y nl P tomsi n thc hope of anat om ir i o a l ,c .rtc tu rc rhe basisof a scicnce of dismokin. f,[,gic.rl anator .nerr l d ra rd , h c l i e v e i n the eri ' rencc ofdi scase. F q , - 7,/f ""a r < 1 ' u l rr)rl i , ' t g o a l o f cxperi nrcnt.rlmedi ci ne u tr-rte t inc t di-.. li. . ;4 zaq ti ri rr, rh e s n i )\' ,1 r. a n d rl ' r .rrr,rrrr i th parh,,l ogi cal \ ^J \ lo L ,f!' tl " tt ,,1,l i s 'a ' :h e r" ' rreonI r' rg' rni sm'i n normal r n. r ( onr \ . /f' a ,l i n the l ' n d i ti o rrs ' 1 1 J i s e a sics j ust I di stLrrbancc or abnor,/ )\i.,logicJllirr.::)ns. Experimentalmedicinc is the or ganis n rl [l,yri.rltll ,,f-. m.,.bid. "PhvsiologicalIa'r'smancxpcri r.ttr1,

"Whatcvcr cxists ilcst themselvesin pathologicalPhenomena."85 and explain it sclf phvsiologically. "86 m ust pr esent pathol o gically fhus, it follou's that "the experimental phvsicianshall bring his once he knorvsits cx.rct dctelrninin[]ucnce to bear on a clisease Irm, tha t is, it s pr oxint at e cause. "87I t uas indecd t im e t o sal fireu,ell to expect.rnrnrt'dicine. Pierre lean (ieorge C.rbrnishad c;rrlierdistinguishctllretrveenthe Ancicnts' art oI obsen'ation.rnd the lVloderns'artof exPerimentation.Bernardsarvthe historl' of sci cnti fic m er licine in sim ilar t er m s: "Ant iquit r does not seem to haveconceiveclof t he idea o[ exper im cnt al scicnccor , at anv r.ate,to have believeclin its possibilitv."stlBut insteaclof linking mcdicine and obscrvationto the Ancients,asCabanisdid, Bernard urgc
)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

vcari th at had passcdsince his f ir st cour se. ') lHe r vassur c t hat progresshad been ma
to c\pfes\ a feu thorrghtsconccrningrlrc prncticalbcncfits ofirrit 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

sust ainr 'r l coul d be d
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

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
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 ndepenc 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 methorls 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

mccl i ci nc,in t he senset hat . r ccr t ain num ber ol pat holot icalphcnomenacan 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,taini ng thc e ar liestr r sult \ . r cr t s ( ) n t he phvsiop. r t holoqlof
uav for a medicine \\'ithout svstems,v'as Franqois-Joseph Victor

nt.rl crpl.rn.rtionol thc ol thc livcr-f...1 For [Jernard,thc expcrir.rrc validir r oi t hc pr inciplcs mechanismol di. r bct es
Broussais's. [ftudcs, p. 135] 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 [ 110] 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

o1 thc l ans ol hcalt h and disease;t hc pr inciple of t hc
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-

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

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

pri nci ples.Jhat r lonc. Ber n. r r dr venton t o r c5cLr tehe r r eu t lis<: ipl 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-

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

<.rbl! rrerltledt'irhcr t,t onroi
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 opmcnt is no\1 certain."')lIn the Princrpcs, he sutnmeclup the tlvent)

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

)7 8

27't

phcnomenon and vitalism an aberration.The discovervof internal secretions,the fbrmulationofthe conccpt ofthe internalenvi-

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-

ronment, the demonstrationofcertain regulatorvmechanismsand

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-

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 smugnes s ,t hat th c re r+ ,o u l db e n o m o re re vol 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

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 himsi: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

come about in thc first place. And once it could be shown that the proccssesresponsiblefbr thc svmptoms ofa diseasesuch as

essenti allvt hat of exper im ent alm edicine. "etllowcver , no doubt

diabetescxist in thc normal as well as the pathologicalstate, it bccame legitimate to claim that the proper approachto under-

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

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-

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

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

remcmbcring that he had written in the Intrcductionthat "art is

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. Someonc 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-

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

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

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-

attempting to situate Bernard'slntroductionhistorically and con,

28o

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:

cine (preservedat the Colltlgedc France)."Scientific cmpiricism dif'ferentll.om sciencc, i5 the oppositeof rationrlismand radicall_v

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 onsti tu te sa c l a i m u p o n i t." [[ru d cs,pp. ]l E -.+ l ]

of t he f act s. . , . N4cr Jical sciS ci enccis baset lon t hc r . 'r t ionalism rnce i s thc sciencein uhich u'c r at ionally anclexper im ent allv

The Limits of Bernardian Theorv

in or cler t o pr cdict or alt er t heir pr ogr css. "qt cxpl ai n
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

i ng, but it nr usrbecor net hc scicnccof healing.The ar t ol he. r ling ln a r vor k i s empi ricism ,Tlr c scienceol healingis r at ionalisnr . "J8

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

(l evotedt o cpist t nt olcr gv, t he aut hor uill pcr hapslr c lllor led t o

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

cxprcssa prefercncelirr thr: ternr "rationalitv" ovcr "rationalism," rvhich is out of place bcvond the historv of philosophv. In .rnv

cightccnth cr:nturl bcquc.rthcdto the niDeteenth.Olall the disc 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 naturalisticpalarligm,rvhich rightly or rvronglvclaintedrhe authority of a llipPoclatic tradition revampeclto sUit contemporarytastes. W hilr insi 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.trcatDren(fronr knorr ledgeof their pracricalt'flc
firr a proposcrJwork on problems raisedbv the practice of mcdi-

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 illon plinciples of physiologyand r nar ont r '. . r nr l nessi s o ne l>. r sed not on mer e cm pir i
I lan
l Louir P. r sr er . r r 's P athol o {\ 'r t er t h. r r sh.Alt h, r ugh lr . a1>plr r r t rof rclitation of rhe rhettrl oI spontaneous gener.rrion,hc nr.r'(r imlg intd hovv fiuitlirl gernr rhcorv .rvoulclprovc in rrr.rring
took up thc ternr "r.rtionalism," fbr cxarnPlein his Pincipet de midecinccrpirimentoic(1irst published in 1947) anclin his notcs

i \n obsc ssionr vit h t ht
252

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

it would have thc ncrvesexert an influcncc on infectiousclisease, 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 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 prophylax 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 arJject 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
284

Pr o b l e m s

C u a Pr r tr

Knowledge \ cir nt r '

l)

.1nd . r n, l

l tl r l N

the

Living

lilt

The Vitolist I mperqtive Il l 2] V i talismasdcf incr l by t hc eight ccnt h'cent ur vN{ont pellier Barthezex1>)icithclrimtrl to lrc r continu.rphvsicianPaul-Joseph ti on o1 tlr e Hippocr . r t ict r adit ion. This llippocr , r t icancc5t r yu, as morc important than thc rloctlirc's other ibrebear,r\ris ;>rob.rblv totel j nnism ,lbr uhile vit a] ism bor r or r cr lnr uch ol it s t cr nt inologt 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.rti 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 svopuov) that or th.rnanv I lil)pocr:rtes uscd ldcicns 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 llippocrati 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 aqnos 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 boldnes s Vi . ta l i s m a n d n a tu ra l i s mw erc thus i nextri cabl yassoci 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 st ot lc ' s c()n tra s tb c trv e c n n a tu ra l mo vement and vi ol ent movement. Vitalism lvas.rn expressionof the confldencc among the <-rfli[e, asliving consciousness living in lry', of thc nrin
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 ;rsvchoanalbv rsi s ol knoulcdgc. l- hat it m av havt 'som cr ncr it is st r ggcst cd contmcnts on C()nstantin its convcrgenceu'ith Walthcr Ricsc's biological theories: "ln von Monakort''sncurovon N1rrnakovr"s bi ol o{r' . r nan is a chil
scnsc vit.rlists.Thev rcgarrledthe univ
f'aracclsus,describ,..
288

2l l 9

thing rather nrore akin to the generalol an army than to a workman. lt marks a return to the Aristotelianconccption ofthe lrody

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

assubordinateto the soul in the samesenscas the soldier is subordinateto his captainor rhe slaveto his master.lViralismattacked

" onc o f t hose ent husiast st hat ever y cent ur v needsin or der t o pp. 91-921 irsroundthc scholastics."ilConnaissance,

the technologicalversion of mechanismat least as much as, and perhapseven more than, it did the theoretical version. IConnaissance,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 vitalisrr of the Rcnaissance wns 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 nostalgia 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

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 general, 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 contormi 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 osophv,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

ofa sharpenedflint or adzc than ofan electric timer or a camera. In the realm oftheory, one must be sureofa theorv'sbackground

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 -

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-

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'

ism in thc PrSoddo a reactioDagainstthe nt('chanismofAnaxagorasi, In anv case,there can be no doubt that vitalists rvt'rcafter a certain pretech nological,prelogicalnaivetdofvision, a vision oflil;

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

as it uas befbrc man created tools and languageto extend his

description in the Mcditationsof a deceptive Goci or evil gcnitrr eff'ectivelvtranslbrmsman into an aninralsurroundeclby traps. If

29.J

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 p. 87] beingsso much et'fort?[Connairsoncc, 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 at 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 - 11iv en, all, s , r lv e
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 assenrblv 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
or-q.rnism-machinc cannot bc tr(ate(l separatelvll-om tlrc technonamcl 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,

ol kincm , r t Tht po int ol t his br ief r evie$ of t hc lunr lam ent als i cs i s that it allor vsnr t t o point up t he par ar lr xicalsignilicance ( li( l scienf ist s usem achinesan
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 ci ence.The usualsol ut 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

functions?On< problem lvith anv mcchanicalmodel is its source of cnergr'.A machine, as dcfined abovc, is not sclflcontaincd:it

logicallvand chronologically,but I shall try to show that the con-

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'

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 vertcbr . 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-

cnergv.? [:or a Ionp t inr e, t hc cncr gr r hat \ et kiDenr at icm achinesin moti ()n c.lnr ef r cr mt hc m uscularellbr t of hLr m ans or aninr als.ln 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"

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

cl ependenton m uscularef br t f br it s sour cc of encr gv. Hist or ical 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'

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).

structednut oDr nt nlt hc vcr v uor t l suggest slr ot h t hc m ir acul, , t r s

192

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 comei i mmedi atel y at any

rrfute the Aristotclian conception of the relation benveennature and art. AII that notwithstanding, it remainstrue that the use of

rate, fi<-rmthe muscularel'fort oI a human or animal. IConnois-

nrecha nicalm odeis t cr r epr esentliving or ganisnr sim plied t hat and invariantstructhosc organismswere conccivedas necessarv

pp. 102-10,11 .sonce, [ 117] A ri s to tl e , I th i n k , to o k a c u stoD 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 anatomv 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 Arabic shorvsthat the perceptionoforganic lorms rvasshapedin part bv technological norms.eThis cxplains whv phvslologvwas traditionallv 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 looking at things. though ofien rvith more rhetoricalenergythan practical consequences. As long as technologvservedasthe sourceof models fbr explaining organic functions, the parts of the organis 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 sci ence: $,i th the theory ofstored energv and delcrrc
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 disp
lit \\'asput togcthcr. Although the parts \!ere seen, in dynamic terms, assuborriinateto the rvhole,.justas the partsofa machine

thcorv of prefbnr.rtion. Dcvclopmentthen bec.rmea simplt'mattcr of incr easingsizc,anclbiologv becam ca kincl of geom et r v,as

uere subordinateto the uhole machine, that functional suborclination 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]

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

The Social Model

thc cl cvclopm entof an or ganism involveclt he em er gt ncc ol a seriesol nonprefbrmcd stnrctures,honever, it becamencccssarl to rest or er esponsibilit vf br t he or ganism 'sor ganizat iont o t he

[ 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

organisnritself. That organismuas not random or idios-vncratic, antl .rnoma]icswere unclerstoodas liilurt's to dcvclop or to Pro-

happcncd. Iiirst, trvo basic riiscip)ines,embrvologv and phvsiologv , 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

gressbevonda normallv intermecliatestagc.I lcnce therc must be some firrmativetcndcncy',rvhat Wolfl'called a nr.rus formolivusand

methods and concepts, achievedthe statusofcxperimental scicnces. Sccond,thcrc w'asa changc in thc scalc ofthe str-uctures

JohanFrie
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-

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

tion of parthelogenesisin plant lice, no biological phenomenon \l-asmorc difficult fbr eighteenth-centurytheoriststo interpret in

.rnother.No part is madc fiom anv other; in lict, nothing is m.rde its o\\'n ol things of the sametvpe as itsclf. No machinc possesses

tenns ol technologicalmodcls than that of morphologicaldcvclop-

formativeenergv.

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 -

A little more Lhana hundr.cdvcar,jago, ClaucleBern.rrcldevclopcd an iclenticaltheorv in his Introduction i I'ltudc dc la mdtlccinc

ogy ficqucndy associatcthe epigeneticvierv of rlevelopmentu'ith mechanistbiologv; in so doing, thcl ncglcct the closeand all but

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

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

our evcsunder condit iot r speculiar t o it sclf and in accor dance rvith a definite iclea,* hich cxprcsscsrhc naturcof tlre living thing

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

and the essenceof lift itsclf."rr Like Kant, Benrarclgavt'the name "iclca" tcr the morphological (i ptioi, a\ it \\'ere,that dctcrmines

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 perccptible in the present,then there must havebeen one at thc incept 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

I

the formation ancl shapcof cach p.rrt in relation to all thc rcst througha sort ol rt'ciprocalcausation.An
any \r'ayakin to human agency,Strangerstill, after ruling out, on explicit grounds,any possibilitv of a technologicalmodel of organic unity, Kant hastenedto suggestorganic unity asa possible

an organism rvasa set of strictly rclated basicmechanisms;conccivcd in terms ofan economic and political model' though, an organismwas a set of structuresthat grew increasinglvcomplex

organismto that of a human society.ffrudes, pp. 325-27]

and diverseas thev assumedspccializedrcsponsibility fbr originallv undifferentiatedfunctions.Betweenthe levcl of the elcmentarv ce ll and t hat of m an, Ber nar d explained, one f inds euer y

fl19l Claude Bemard acceptedcell theory, as he had to in order to make experimentation in phvsiology possible. He elaborotedthe

degrec of complerity as organ combines with organ. The most highlv developedanimals posscssmultiPlc systems:circulatory,

conccpt of the internal environment, and that, too, r,vasa neces-

respiratory,nervousand so on. Phvsiologv$'as thus the kcy to organic totalization, the key that anatomyhad failed to provide. The organsanclsystemsof a

model for social organization.llBernardused the converseof the sameanalogywhen hc compared the unity of the multicellular

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 analytic 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

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 environment identical to that u,hich the actions of nearbyparts constantly 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 provided an explanationlbr the fact that the structure of the rvhole

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,

organism is subordinatr to the functions of each part. Made of cclls, the organismis also madefor cells, fbr partsthat are them-

an cconomic and political one. Complex organisms\r'ere now

sclveslesscomplicated rvholes.

thought of as totalities comprising virtuallv autonomoussubor-

rvell asfbr societies.Conceivedin terms of a technologicalmodel,

The use of an econom ic and polit ical m odcl enablednineteenth-centurybiologists to understandrvhat the use ofa technologicalmodcl had preventedtheir predccessors from grasping. 'fhe rclation of the parts to the n,hole is one of irretrdtio, (a conccpt that latcr met r',.ithsuccessin neurophvsiologv),r'iith thc

298

299

the sametime as Bernard,suggesteda model for the organicfunc-

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

Y that those viclualcells n'ere satisfled;l]crnard had hlpothesizcd wcr e t nkr ll ot t t ol cells uhcn coD di tionscoult l also bc sat isf ied t hat an aPPr oPr i'lt c thri r associat ionwit h ot her cclJs,pr ovided did it act uallt 'm ean r vhat .rrti fi cialenvir onm entr vascr elt ed. Bt r t the inhibilirl the cell to livc in freedom, that is, libcr'rted frorr int egr at i( r nint o t hc ti ons a nd st im ulat ionsst em m ing lr onl it s in societ v or{ nni sm ?I n or dcr f ir r lif i ir lr cedon r o r cplic'}t elif c ith an cnvironmtnt u th" ccll nould havcto be provided ".r.rctlr', ir r thl r agcdas it did. t lut t hcn t he lif e 'r f t hc cell nould llr oceed \ \ 'ould r ir )t it paral l clr ', it h changesin t ht '. r r t if it : ialcnvir onm ent ; a cell be inclcpendent.Iiurthermorc, living in fieeclomrcn
survivalofthe P.rrtsl)eing the ultimatc cnd: thc parts \\'erescen 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 * hcn u hat rvould later become ccll thcorv rvasstill at the stage of philosophicalspecul.rtionand prclintinarv microscopic exploration, the tcrm "monad" lvasoficn used fbr the atonlic componcnt of an organism; it rvasonlY latel that "monad" lost out to " 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 " theThe i ndi rect but 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 and real influcncc of Lt'ibniz on the earlv Romantic philos<-rphcrs the celi to sal ol allolvs trs theorr bioiogistsu ho drcanrerlup cell rvhat Lcibniz said of the monad, namely,that it is a Parstotalis' It is not an instrumentor a tool but an in(lividuill''l .sublcdin relation to its lunctions. Bernardficquentll usesthe term "harmonr" to convev rvh.rthc mc.rnsbv "organic totalitY." lt is not too diffi-

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 hasbet'n ablc to teconstitutcstrttcturalunin' Analvsishrs nevcrbccn

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 so, .r'ith the recognition of the cell as thc baric morphological 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 oforganization changed:the ,r'hole rn;lsno longer a stl'uctureof

succectlctlbv sr nthesis.Rv rn illogic'rl ebur( "l langtrage'onc oltcn lls . 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 that do not rcllecl cithel thc \truclure or cohcsionol the tissucliom

S i mul 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 the tl -' l di ti onal c hanged s e t rrl th e o rr rl trc )o p mtn t t aneous l\ ,t h c 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-

r r h i cb th ,r va r , tr l cn .r r In other wot-
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' lE r r r r lc spp. , 3 2 9 -3 1 ] The Orgonisnt Is lts Own /llodcl ol ' expl anted ccl l s' [ 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 ' r as that thc structure 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, s ho died thirn vearse.rrlicr,h.rd indee(l suggertedsuch 'rn analogr, using the societt of his orvn timc asa model The organist't't to maint.rinthc lile ofindiensuredthat the conditions nccessarY loo

ti
th u s co r r e ctctl th e

coDcept o{ organic structurc. Bcrnald hatl .rllo*ecl himsell trt lx: 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

i

I 1,

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 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 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

l ol

to assertan .lrbitrar.yprcdicateofa given objcct. The flxitv,rfrepctition ol bt'ing constrain\ thought to i(lentirv ot .rssertion.The natural hicrarchv of cosmic forms rcquires the hierarchvol definitions in the realm ollogic. The conclusionofa svllogismis neces 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 intelligible. 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 ofconr em plat ion a n d re p ro d u c ti o n ,i f o n e g i vesi 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

conceprseit her som et hingr nor c t han hum an or elsesom ct hing rransccndinglife ( tuPravitole\. A scconddilTicult 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 sicsstatesthat mathematics has nothing to do rvith the .ll,:toplr,t final causes,l0rvhich is cqtrivalentto iaving that thore ar( intell 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 knorvledge ol lif c. Hence, t hcr e is no m ; t hem at ical r nodcl of t he livAristode desoibesnature.rsingcniotrs,creatit'cand ing. Althc,Lrgh 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 Arisrotl 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 and aninot becausehe is a phvsicianbut becat t schc is inhabit e
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. O n e i s then fbrccd to ask w hat

the conccpt in t hought , in t hc f br m ol an encl r cPr cscnt cdas a mo< l cl.is an e piPhcnom et t on-Ar . ist ot le's anr i- Plat onism\ \ 'as 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

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,

( r hat is' essenti alat t r ibut c, and it ll'. r sonly t hr ough kn
has the r'l}ect of sep.rr.rtingintclligencc from lili:; it lcts something fronr outside(BupaBev, in Aristotlc'sterms)enter the human

an i deao f G od. I I r u. 7cs,pp. ] i6- ] 8]

eBrbrv(),,I\through a tlorrrwat, nlntelv, thc e)itranaturalor tr.rns 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

N omi no lisnt [122] A f ir r t herdif ] icult v of Ar ist ot elianismconcer nst he ont ologicaland gnoseologicalstarusof individualitv in a scienceof life

l')4

lo5

animal, is a naturalist's
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 classification bv genus and species?If the concePt ol a living being ontologicallv presidesover its concePtion, what mode ofknowledge is thc individual capable ofl2A system of living fbrms, if

st'rvcclas a model fbr nineteenth-ccnturvphvsiciansin developi ng thei r nosologies."The r at ionalit yof u, hat t hr t 'at r nslile, " he ll ! lr I

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 possibilities. 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

it

\\'rote, "is identical to thc rationalitv of lif'e itsell-."But there is rationalitv and rationalitv. l -he mat t er of univer salsu'as,of cour se, an im por t ant issue 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 varicd but unchangingarsenalofarguments. Becauscthey n'ere not alrvaysengagedin the samestruggle, horvcver,diflerent nonrinalistschosedifferent \r'eaponsfiom that arsenal.Yet all,rl tht'nr.

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

fiom Ockham to Htrmc bv uay of Duns Scotus,Hobbcs, Locke anrl Condillac, sharedone common purpo5c- to show tlr.rt uni-

and flcsh to that ghosrlvabstraction,the universal?Without such a gift, "universal" uould have no me.rningin "life," and u'ould

n.rrureoI t hings t hcm selves.O ckham callecluniver sals "suppositi ons" (rlr at is, posit ions ol subst it ut ion) ; Hoblr escaller i t hem "arbitrarvimpositions"; LocLe called them "rcprcseDt.rtions insti-

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 manifestations, $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

r'.'rsalsare merely a u,ay of using singular things and not in the

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 authenricequivalent 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 circumstances;that guality is rveighedbv abstraction,that is, bv "considerationof the common asdistinct from the particular." lt can thcn scne asa valid representationfor all particularideasbelonging to the same tvpe. Unlike Locke, l-lume ascribesto thc f.rc-

ANO

ultl of generaliz.rtionnot onlv n porvcr to rcproducc sensations itt nremor! but .llso to transposcthe order in u.hich inrpressions are reccived;this porverbelongs to the imagination. rvhich may be Lrnfaithfirlto the lessonsofexperience.Nevcrthelcss, he argues that sinrilaritvof ideasguidesthe imaginationto\lard certain habits, or unifirrmitics, in dcaling l ith the t'nvironmenr.I labit telescopesr{)gerhcra rt'lrolehost of indivirlualcxperieDccs.lfan1,one 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 that cxJ)eri(.nceconjures up others,.rnd rve vield to the illusion ofgcneralitv. (t is easvto sec rhat thcre can bt'no comlbrtablc norlinalist 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, 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! $.hat those eightt'entfi-ccnttrr.tauthors rr'ho ncre empiricists as to the cont(nt of tht'ir knou ledge anclsensurlistsas to the origin ol its fbrms rcallv give us is a mirror image of Aristotelianism, I b".uur" thev sought to find the knorving[/e connaitrelamong the kn()$,n,to lcarn about lii! n'irhin the order of lifb. Hunranbeings, thcr sar,,arc endou.edu ith a porver (r'hich might cquallr. rvell 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, to arrangeother living beings in an orderlv flshion, but onlv on condition that those beingsexhihit certaincommon charactersor repeatedtfaits. llor! can a nonrinalistspcakofnaturc or naturcr? Llc can do vvhatFIunredid and invokc a lruman nrturr,, *.hich is to conct'de at lcast that thert'is uniformitl among humans,cven though llurne held that human nature u.asinventive and. more 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 does tlris accomplish?lt inrroducesa clcavagein thc st,stemof living bcints, bccarrsethc narurcofonc ol those being: is defined bv an artilicc, bv the possibilitvofcstablishinga conventionrathcr 3t r 8

NF

rhan cx pr cs! ingt he or cleroi nat ur e.I lcnce, in Locke and I lum e as i n A rist ot le, t he pr oblenr of hou conccpt s ar e conceived is sol rcd in a $'ar t har disr upt st h<,pr ojccr of nat ur . alizing knou, l_ edgeof nature. lfrudes, pp. 339-42] Tronscendental LoBic [12]] Philosophl.is better rhan thc historv ol scienct,at rcvcaling the si gn if icanceof t hc dispar it iesbet u. c, t , nt he scient jf i< t er li ni qr:eso1nat ur alist sand r heir im pJicitor cxplicit Lr nder lving phi_ l osophv.This can be sccn ir a m ast er lul t ext bv K. r nt on. it hc reguLrtilcuseol thc idcasofpure reas()n.t.]Ilerc Kant introduccd rhc imnqcof a "Jogicalhorizon" to accourrtlbr the regtrlatirc, but

j;ilil;::::,il:i; ;:i;l:;:::xT ;::i;l'i1;::i::i:::1

gcncra).A logical hr r r izon,accolding t o Kanr , is a concept ual ri e\r' poi nt t hnt enconr passcs a cer t ain r egion; r vit hin t hat hor r ron, thrrc arc multiple viervpoints,eachdetemrining firr.thtrhori_ zonsol s m alleram bit . A hor i/ on can bc, lecom po. set l onlv int o oth(r hor ir ons,just , t s a concept can be analvzcrnnlv l in t "r m s ol other conccpts.Td savthat a horizon can be decomioscclcrnlv into other horizorrsan
R e a s o nthus assumesthe rol e of . s im ult ane o u s l \a b o l i s h e d[.,.] in that realm interpreting the rcquirenrentso[ the un<]erstanding uhcre the sciencc of life pursuesthc heuristic task ofidentifying and classifvingspecies.Those requirementsdcfine a transcendt ' 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 concept amongothers,Thr: dichotomv that neither Aristotlt' nor the empiricist nominalistshad been able to avoid w,asgroundcd,jusrified and exaltedbv Kant. If, hou'ever,we havegained the legitimation ofa possibilitv-

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 underst.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 producti 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

that of knorvlr'rlgethrough concepts - ha'e we not pelhapslost

*hich concel>tsrvould bt' not onJyob)ectsofknowledge but a)ser,

the certaintv that, among the objccts oI knowlt'dge, there arc manifestationof the some,at least,rvhoseexistenceis a necessary

frr useLeibniz'sterm, original roots of being. Kant holds that the line arts arc arts ofgenius, and he regardsgeniusas nature dictating 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

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 ofreasoning mimic the hierarchyof living lbrms, hcnce there is a guaranbetut'en logic and life. tanscendental logic, teed correspondence 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 ving 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 Critique 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 structurc, in vuhich the interrclation of the parts is regulatcd bv the I lo

identifv the logical horizon ofthe naturalisrsrvith rvhatone might call the poctic horit.on ol natura notDtans. pp. 3.+3-.+5] lEtu
use by centurv biologists, a source of concePtsand methods fbr rr t herdis c i p l i n c s [...1 . 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 probresolve,or ,lt anv ratc recast in more nreaningfill Icm that positivist lriologv h.rd avoidedand that mechanistbiologl ha<Jresolvedthrough conllation ofconccpts: to rvit, in what senscis an ot-qanismorganizcd?The naturalistsofthe cightt'cnth centurv h.rdbccn obsesseduith the qrrcstion lndccd, it tvasnot a (luestionrhat lent itsclf to easYsolution in terms ofmeclranical models.Pretormationism,the theorv that the grorrth ofthe adult organismh om the original secd is simpl;-a matter of cnlargemcnt of structuresalrcadvcontained in miniattlrc in the seed- along 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 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 rt,fcrred the u'holc issueoforganizaticln back to Creation The rise of embr,,rrlotr .rsa trasicsciencc in the ninerccnth centurv nrade it possibleto rcfbrmul;rte thc questiott For Bernard,the 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 lile ir phisical antl chcnrical terrns was rvlratmad'' gcnerrl physiologv a d i s ti n c t s c i e n c c .[...] bv one idea: that the organizedliving Bernard$'as possessed jddcc'lirertricc, a guidthing is rhc tcmPorarv manjlcstation of an ing idea. The lan s ol physicsand chcmistrv clo not in thensclves explainhort thcy arc hrought to trearon the compositionol a parr 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 sur lesphinontines de Ia vie: Lc1ons 1\'1 er 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 . ' ' livTherc are, I belicr'c, oi ncccssitv,t\\'o {)rderso1 phenomcn;rin o1*ital crcrtion or olaanic !r nthesis'and pheinil things:phen
l rz

it of phcnornen;r is without dircct analogucclservherc; trro classes rvhat living This sr nthtsis is things. evolutive is peculiar.specilic,to i \ rrulr vilal. l l ence, lbr Bcr nar d, a f unct ioning or ganism r vasan or ganism rngrged in dest r ovingit scll. The f unct ioning ol an or gan uas a phvsicochcmicalphenomcnon, that is, de,rth.Wc can graspsuclr phenomena,t le can under st and. r nclchar . r ct er izct hem , an
KNOWLEDGE

ANI

.':t a purelYchemical substance' ; toplasm, howeverb"rt., ', It has an origin that a si-pl" im-ediute principle of chemistrv' protoplasm of an ances.,lud". ur. It is the continuation of the and that structor." In other words, protoplasm has a structure' substancc'We ture is heredit.rry."Protoplasm itself is an atavistic Now' recall that by do not see its birth, only its continuation'" the lixed direcevolution Bcrnarclmeansthe law that determines manifestationsof tion o[ constant changeithis law governsthe For Bernard' life both in its inception and in its PerPettration in this sense' morcover. nutrition was idcntical with evolution absolute the Thus, it can be argued that Bernard did not make and mordistinction bct$'eenmatter and fbrm, bctrveenchemical that the chcmical phologicalsynthesis.He had at leastan inkling obeYa structural protoplasm ,n,"ri"ng", occurring within the assonreimperative. He also sa*'the structure ol the protoplasm the knorvn thing *,hose reprt duction requiredsomethingbeyond ofhercditYrvhich lartiof phv.i., und chemistrv' It rvasa product orvn words' this his In coul
rlith toclav'stheorv of hereditv can be imputed to Bernard,becauscthe concept of hereditv itsclf u'as totally nern'and unlikc anv idcas Bernard miqht havc had about generatiolt antl evolu-

I r4

lr t

tion, We n-tustbe carelirl,therefbre,not to seeanalogiesin ternl! onc can st ill ar gue t hat t he rakenou t of cont cxt . Never t heless, qenetic Bernardian"message"hasa fLnctionalallinitv with today's code, That aflinity is basedon their common relation to the concept ol'information. ConsiclerBernarcl'srePeateduse of cerlain guiding idea' vit.rl design.\'ital Preorrermsand phrases:message, dainment, r'ital plan, directeclprocess.If genetic intormation is a coded program for protein synthesis,then Bernard'srcpeated rust,rf such conr cr git t g m ct aPhor sr vould appcar t o r cf lect an .rttcnrpt to pinpoint a biological rcality fbr rvhich no ade
the lan ofthe sericsin the stance:/..! serieisuarrlmoPerutionum, mathcmnticalsenseoI thc tenn, a scriesof operations This almost 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 discovt'rvof molccuinterprete
;rcknoulcdgethat there is a /ogosinscribcd. preserredanrl transnri ttcd i n living t hings. l- ile hasalr vavsclone- r vit hout u r it ing, llng belbrc * riting cvcn existed - n hat humanshavc sor.tghtto r r ld cl uences, tlrev arr:but \t hat thcv are in the proccssol becoming. To define lile asa meaning inscribcrl in matter is to acknorvledged-rt:cxistt'ncc ofan a prlori objcctivc rhat is inhcrcntlv material .rrrdnot mcrclv fbr-mal.In this conncction.it seemstcrme that thq rrudv of instinct in the nranncrofNiLolaasTinbergenanrl Konrad Lorentz, that is, through the demonstrationol the er,istcnceof innatc patternsol b ehavi
argued,is not a pattern, not a geometrical form. He *as correct. Within an organism there are no distances:the rvhole is immediatelv prcsent to all the (pseudo-)parts.Thc essenceof the living 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 [...] . If life is the production, transmissionand reception o[infbrmation, 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 mutatiors, One objcction that has ofien been raisedagainstthis theand a fair number orv is that manv mutationsare sutrpathological, lc t hal, so 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 ceptthc 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 overcolnes crror through further trials (and b,v"error" l mean simply

thc activitv of knorving?Earlier, I alluded ro thc studv of instinctive behavior,of behavior structurcd by innate patterns.An aninral 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 ucturally equipped to receivemight as well not cxist as lar as that animal is concerncd.In u,hat we take to be thc universalenvirontnent, each species'structuredeterminesits o*,n particularenvironment , as Alex von UcxkLill h. r sshoun. lf nr an is alsr .lbr , nt ed l rr he r edit y, how
a deade n d ). What, thcn, is knou,ledgci'lf life is concept, does recognizing 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

lr9

TC'HAPTr r r l'<. r uH r r r r

The

Normal l n tr o d u cti o n

and

the

Pathological

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 impetus behin
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-

jzed rcaction designedto bring about a cure; thc organismdevelops a diseasein order to qet nell. Thcr.rpvnrust llrst tolerateand, rcinfbrce thesehedonic and spontaneouslytherapcuif 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

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

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

destroyedthe beautiftrlsinrpJicitvofa doctrine uhose scientific veneer fot a long time hid the Persistenceofa reaction to dis-

t\\'o representationsof diseasc,betrvt'r'nthese tllo kinds of optimism, alu'avsfinding some goo
easeasold asman himself. lf rve feel thc need to reassurcourselvcs,it is bccauseone anguishconstantly haunts our thoughts; if rve delegatethc tasl

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

of restoringthe diseasedorqanismto thc tlesirednorm to tcchnicai 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

,/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-

practices,oflers a conception ol diseasewhich is no longcr ontologic 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

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

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-

abscnceof a definite principle, or bv an alteration of the total organism.This heterogcneity of normal and pathological states

stanccsare the occasionbut not thc causes.Man's equilibrium consistsof lbur humors, u hose fluidit,v is perfectlYsuited to sustain 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 discorc 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

of human t cchnique. \4edical thought hasneverstopped alternatingbetween these

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 pathological 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 loving lif'e- wantsto regain.Hence, thc theorcticalneed,dclayed

cfl cct ivc act ion is such t hat r he conccpr of diseaser r ould f inallr 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 thought linking ir trr phvsiologr.Thomas Sydenhanr( 162,1-1689;

norm is such t hat , in t he end, ir annulst hc pat hologicr l.Disease is n,r krngcr the ot)ject ol anguishfbr th.'healthv m.rn; ir has[rcconrc inst eadt hc objcct of st uclv f or t he r hcor istof hcalt h. I t is i n pathologr ',*r it lar ge, t hat r ve can unr avcl t hc t , . 'achingsof heal th, r '. r t hcras Plat o sought in t he inst it ut ions ol t hc St at e thc Iargerand more easilvrea
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 and determined.Therc are diseascspeciesjust as there are animal or plant species,According ro Svdenham.there iJ an order among dis eas es 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 found amonganomalies.Philippe Pinel justified all theseattempts 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

(NP\, vicesol tlrc in
P P .lt ] ] l

his Nosographie philosophique(1797), rvhich CharlesVictor l)arembcrg clescribedas morc the rvork of a naturalist than a clinician. (1682-1771)creation Mean*'hile, Giovanni Battista,\'lorgagni's c r la s v s t c mo f p a th o i o g i c a a l n a to mvm a dc i t possi bl cto Ii nk the organs lesionsof certain 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 phvsiology, so pathology became a natural extension of physiologv. (Sigeristprovidesa mastcrful sunrmarvofthii r:volution of mediJ) l he end r<:sultofthis cvolutionarvprocessis the fbrcal 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 variations, grcater or lesrcr according to corrcspondingphysiologic 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,1peror 14po-.\\rhile ret.riningthe ontological rhcory'ssoothing conf 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 qualitat 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 rtcstablishcontinuity 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 la I'ltritation et de Dc Broussais's treatise Jolie .di|cl Joseph Victor n usc. Comte credits Broussais. adopted the principle fbr his o\r\, and bef or ehim , Philippe Pinel, r "'it h Xavier Bichat , rathq: rt han ackno*'ledgcdas such ar e onlY havi ngdeclar edt hat all diseases and that disturbancesOl rital ftrnctionscoultl not take s\r'r'lpt()nrs pl accr 'r 'it houtlcsionsin or gans,or r at her ,t issues.But aboveall, addsConrte, "never before had anrone conceivedthe fundamental relation bet'veen pathology and phvsiologv in so direct and asconsisting describedall diseases satisfvinga manncr." Broussais t is"in t he excessor lack oI cr cit at ion in t he var i
)17

r spherc,to the particularcharusel lnessin the plrysicochcmic'al 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, condition in ordcr to meaclear-cutchangeinto eachdesignatecl

ol thc norlnal proPcrto elch Phenonlcnon Ior.crlimits ofvari.rti()n rvithoutcvcrbeingablc to Pr(xluccrc.rllvncrvPhcnom_ organisnr, cn||1hich \loulcl haYeto a cert.r;ndcgrccanv ptrrclr phrsiologicalanalogucs. l5

itself.la variation ofthe phcnorrenon surerlirectlvthc corresponding

Consccluentlycverv concePtion of pathologv must be bnsc(lon pri or k nor vledgcoi t he cor r cspondingnor m al st at c, but convcrselvthe scientiflcstudv of pathologicalcascsttecomesan indis-

N<xr',in biologv thc variationimposcd on one or scvcralof a Phen( ) 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

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-

be containc'dvr.ithinccrtain Iimits compatible w ith the phcnomenon'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 phenomenon u, hich 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. principlew hich w ill scne Accordingto thc cmincntlvphilosophical lronr no'n on asa dircct, gcncnl basislirr positivcpathologvand \r'eo$c to thc bold.rndpcrscvering rvhosedcfinitivecstablishmcnt sta(c thc pathological ol our limouslelLrrvcitizcn,Brorrssais, gcniLrs si th statc, 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 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

126

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
I2' l

lrc do Dot knorv from rvhat vantagcpoint Conlte stltes that the 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 oHorv logical phenomenon, anclthat it is nothing radicallv nerv' is .r sclcrotic artery analog
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 nonna) or phvsiological,linallv clarified by this concept ol harmor_r,amountsto a qualitativeand polvvalcntconcePt,still more .rr' ' rhe t i.and m , 'r . r lr h. r n: t icnt ilic As lir as the assertionof identity of the nornral phenontenon and the correspondingpathological phenomenon is conccrned, i t i s c
Jll

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' siologv 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 illuminatesanclclominatr:spractice. Rational therapcttticscan be sustainedonlv bv a scicntific pathologv,and a scientific pathologv must bc baseclon phvsiologicalscitnce. Diabcttrsis one cliscaservhich posesproblems rvhosesolution Provesthe preccding thcsis."Common scnsesholts that if rveare thoroughJvacquainted u ith a phvsiologicalphcnomenon, rvc should be in a position to , 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 patho)ogicalstatc:ph\siologyand pathologvarc intcrmingled and that one and thc samcthing."r0Diabctcsis a clisease are essenti,rlly fLncti on. 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 "Fr'<'rl clisersehas a correspondingnormal lirnction ol u'hich it 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 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 sis not vct sulllcientlv adt'anccd trsc torl.rr,it is bccauscphvsioJogv 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 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,.rcentitv. supcrrvasan extraphysiokrgic,rl crrrclingto * hom
pl arrt r vor ld t hr ough it s f eecling;t hat blood nor m allv cont ains sugar,anclthat urinarv sugaris a product gcncrallvelimin.rtcd bv thc kjdncvs *lrcn the rate of glvcer-njareachesa ccrtain thresh' ol d. In ot her r vor ds,glvcem ia is J c( ) nst antplr enom t 'nonindepencl cntof f bod int ake t o suchan cxt ent t hat it is t hc absenceo1' bl oorct[rr ghcosur ia l r.' r cl r csult s. . . . lt is ir npossible t ( ) pcr ccivrlhc o. 1r ) ! ir ir ) n lr,irnthc nrrrrr.rlti' the p.rthologic.rl st.rt(, .rn(lnr)pr,)blcrn sh'r$\ lx r tcr t h. r ')Lliil) et r tshc int im alclir sionr r l phvsiologr , r nrp, l r t h, r logr . Jr

INP,pp. ](J-l2l ' nar d,unlikc Br oussais anr lCor r r r e,suppot t ed Il 3t] ] Clau
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 et 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 cxaggerat 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, Who doesn't see that the discordanccof normal phenomena."16 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,dispr 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 betweenhis normal life and his pathologicallife. being establishcs an illusorr appearanceth.lt the scientisthrs the )egitimateobJigation to deny?Ifthis annulJingofa qualitativecontrast is theoretic 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 []ernard, 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 theraexperimenlalPathology,$ hich in turn cannot be peutics.rssumes scparatcdfiom physiology."Phvsiology and pathologv are identical, 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 reciProc.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 normal state,representsonly an incrcaseor a reduction. It is undcrsroo(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 oIan .rdvent and still be another bchavior. The progressiveness does not exclude tht originality of .rn evtnt. The lact that a pathol ogi cal sym pt om . consicler edbv it sell, expr essest he hYper activitv 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,rmptonrs. 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 ali 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 c

.)

i := z= , i =i= : , a i = ; zii=i--= = 1 i=+-i: +=? i = i ::::=: ! ; ,= i |- i=+t :;:t:

i : i := : 1 i =;+ ti = :i, t:i 1 -=

. ? i =1 1 =*i =ri t+ i ; ; : z ;i;?=i

i

i =,:7 ,i

; ii=:i :;1

:rii l; Z ? i= = : 2 '; =; : t : i

az:-=:=i i;:Zi:;l E=i! t i Z a= ?, I -o-| > z=: i zi+ ^;

:: : t ?i-i :i=,'-' ;j :-i z ::+

5 :.::Ll+:;:'-!

FE

salvation rrith sin;andin hisaccountof Ii eorjamctlita andsickness 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, perhaps, 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 philosophvof 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 important 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 concept devoid ofmeaning; it does not follo*,that there are no negativc 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 becausetherapeuticsaims 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 sccond 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
lld

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, "obviouslv 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 structurc) arousesr eact ionsof hcdonic value or self '- hcaling or self : restorjngbehaviors. INP, pp. 126_27]

ll9

PotholoBy os the Bdsis ol Phyiology

rovarrlt'd bv the Socii'ti' de Nl6decine du Gar
[ 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
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<.
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

phvsiologv bv itscll lorms tlre natural firundation of medicine; that

/i,70&c it is obvious th.rt ifone asseltsthe real homogeneirl an
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 <

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 experienccsoccasionsol nerv grorrth that human consciousncss 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.rgTo 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,

tancc lor practical nrcciicinc. Aftcr having challcngt'
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 unthcir permancnt)ogical necessitv.Just u hen doubtedll cxpresses 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 cstablisheclphvsi,rlogical medicine, this,i.rmetheon rvasprovokingthe objec t ion so l a n o b s c rrrr: p h rs i c i a n ,o n e D r. V i ctor P rus,u ho srs l.+o

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
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

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,

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,

\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.

and conscquentlvruc can spcal of biological normativitY There

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 :

are hcalthy biological nonrrs .rnd there are pathological norms, and rhe secondare not the sameas the first.

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 nediro< -,t

We did not refer to the theory of natural selection unintentionallv. We want to dra$'attcntion to the fact that \rhat is true of the expression"natural sclcction" is also tnte of the old cxpres-

It is r 1.rcrthat the organismhasan .rggrcgatc of propcrtiesrrhich bcl o ngt o it alone,t hankst o which it wir hsr ands r nult iplcdcst r uc-

sion vis medicdtrixnsturoe.Selectionand medicine are biological tcchniques practiced de)iberatelyand more or lessrationally by

tivc forcf\. Without thercdelcnsive rrncrions,life rvouldbe rapidlr r:xtinguishcd. . . . Thc livingbeingis r blc t o I ind inst ant aneouslr t hl ,

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 rrsion 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.

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

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 c linr 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 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 techof human tcchniqueswhen it is the niquesrvithin the framer.r'ork

chcnrirr-lt ir thc firstamongphlsici.rnr.[-hc1]uctuations ol thc cnvi, ronnrcnt
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

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

is nornrativethat vital technique is judged such by comparison.

of clck nsr:anclstnrggleagainstall tlrat is oi ncgativevalue is rx,

t 42

i+ I

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 spcns r ble ligh t o l h trn rrns c i tn c e . IN P , p p . 129-31] Nature ls the End Point of o Teleologicol Process cxpiriIl]61 ln u'riting tlre,lttro./ucrionA I'itude de la midecine mcntclc,ClaurlcBernardset out to asscrtnot onlY that eflicacious action is thc sarneas rcicnce, but also,and analogously,that science is idcntical lr ith the cliscovcryof the laws of phenomena. On this point his agrccment u'ith Comte is total. What Comtc 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

ol the n vo - physiologvand pat hoJogr- onlv t he lir st involr ecl ol it s object , it \ \ as not nccl au' sand post ulat cdt he det er nr inisnr essarvto concludet hat , givcDt hc legit im ar edcsir c lbr a r at ional pathologv,thc larvsand cleterminisnrof pathologicalfactsarc thc samelarvsand determinism ol physiologital lacts. \Vc knou' the rnteccdentsofthis point of doctrine liorn llcrnardhirnself.In the at the lccture devotedto the lifb anclu.orksof Fr,rngoisN'lagendie to\iquesct m;dicamentcuscs bt'ginning of the legonssur 1crsubstances (l l i 57), Ber nar dt ells us t hat t hc t cachcru hosechair hc occupies anci r'hosc tcaching he continues "(lrc\\ (he feeling of rc.rl sci-

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 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 French."l beliere I rrn rhc Iirst to havc introduced this rvord to scicnct', but it has bc.'n used bl philosophersin another sense.

cncc" lrom thc illustrious ['ierrc-Simon Laplace.Wc knou tlrat I-aplacehad been Antoine-l-aurcntLavoisio-'scollltrorator in the

It rvill be use[ulto
ing the cxpcrimental anclmeasuringmethods endorsedlrv physa cl i sri nct t . r st elbr phvsi
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 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 phvsiologrrvhich met thc dcnrandsofscientiflc phvsicalchenric,rJ

detcnninism is not a m et hodologicalr t 'cluir t m cnt ,n nor m at ive researchpostulatesuflicicntly llexiblc t,' prcjudice in.rnv rvavth(:

knorr'lcdgc,that is, a physiologvofquantitativc lau'sverified by expcrimentation. Llndtrstandably,carlY-nincteenth-centurv Phvsicians,iustifiably ca€erlbr an cflcctive, rational Patholog), saw in phvsiologvthe prospectivemodel rvhich came closcstto their and in meclicine,rvhen icfeal."scicnce rcjccts the indctermindte, opinions arc bascdon medical palpation, insPiration,or a more or lesslague intuition about things,r','eare outsidc of scienceanrl arc givcn the exampleof this medicinc of fantasy,capablcol presenting the gravcrt pr,-tilsas ir dcliversthe hcalth and Iivesof sick 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+

researchon anim aJr espir at ionanclanim al hcat , r hc f ir st br illiant successin researchon the larvsol bi<-rlogical phenonrtna lbllou,icr arrl chemistrv. As a rcsult ot this rvork, l .rpl.rcchad ret.rinetl

i tual l .rther sand, at leastin Fr ancc, , t Daut lior ilr t i\ e and aut hor i zcd l athcr of t he doct r inc dcsi[ nat eclbr t hr t cr m . I - r r rLaplace,

Iorm oft hc r esult sr o r , r 'hichit lr : ads:it is r e, r lir vit sell, conr plct c, cast nc r dr ief ur in t he lr ant cwor k of Ne\ r t ( ) Dianand Laplacian mechanics.Determinism can bc conceiveclasbeing opento inccssant cor r cct ionsol t hc f br m ulac of laus an
North Whitehcad's dictumi "Every special sciencc has to assume results from other sciences. For examplc, biology presupposes

point of a nrcclranjstor materialist biologv. One might sav that l ong agoAr ist ot le believcdin a pat hologicalm cchanics,sincehc

physics. lt will usually be the case that these loans really belong to thc state of science thirty or forty years earlier. The presup-

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

positions of the physics of my boyhood are today pctwerful in{luen 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

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 a st one is t hr oun in t lt c air . I r can bc said t har , pl ace, a s 'r 'hen rlith G.rlileo and I)escartcs,progressin Inorvledge of the phvsical t,torldconsistedin consideling all rnovenlentsas natural,that

it ex11 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

is, as conforming to thc laws of narure. rnd that likerviseprogrL'ssin triologicalknoru]edgeconsistedin unilving the larvsofnat-

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

rrnl l i l e and pat holoqic. l lif e. lt is pr ccisclvt his unillcat ion t hat

statc, prrhology, with thosc of the second.The historr ol Phenomen 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.

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-

Ncrrv,in thc phvsicalsciencesonlr rhe firsr historv exists, ntver the

r.rl.rndv iolent nlovenr cnt s. r bsur d, as iner t ia is pr eciselvan inr lif -

sccond. Phvsiologvis ro thc movernentol living bodies rr hat .rsrron_ ()nes:thcsr l.rst h.rvcno sciencc at all rhat corrcspondsto thtm as

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

parhologv corrcsponrlsto thc [irsr. For thc s:rnlereason,rhe tt'holc

nutri ti ve syst emcr I assim ilat ionand excr et ioncxpr esses a polar ,

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

itv. When the rvastes<-rIdigestion are n
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

al l i ndee
Thcrc are t

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

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

Augustt'Comte dreanredol and Cl.rudeBernald llattcrr:d hinrsell rvith havingacconrpJishcd. as wasseenal)ore.To tlre reserrations

The Normal ond the Pothologicol os Quolitotive Contrqst Finally, as a r esult of t he det er m inist posr ulnt e,it is t he Il j 8l reducti onoI qualit v t o quant it v r vhich is im plied bv t hc essent ial 147

HE

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
PATIlOLOC

CAL

hrs no r it al qualit v,ir cannotbc calledhe. r lt hvor nor m al or phvsi ol ogi ca l. Nolnr al an
tain that thc pathological state is rcallv and simplv a grear('ror lesscrvariation of the phvsiologicalstatc. I:ither this phvsiologi-

antl nee
cal state is conceivcdas haring one qualitv and value lor the living man, and so it is absurdto e)itcndthat ralue. identicalro itsell'

blorxl. Thcse quantirarivelvrliflerent rcsults*,oulcl hare no <1ual-

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 su n ma rv o fq u a n ti ti e s , rv i th o ut bi ol ogi calval uc,a si mp] 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

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

tion of quantitativeprogressionfor qualitativecontrast in no way annulsthis opposition. It alwaysremainsat the back ofthe mind of thosc u'ho have chosen to adoPt the theoretical and metric

lII

Cuepr t n Nor m alit y

Fr l .tl r n -

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 manifest 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 gcncral, 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

,l

;l

rffL t l' i

&l ,l

fl

3 to

ili {l

fl

term we mean merely the abscnceofa previouspositive condition or state.From the biological, socialand psychologicalpoints ofvicrv, a pathologicalstateis nevera state without norms - such a thing is impossible.Whcrever there is //e there are norms. Life 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 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 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 I' etrrecn h, alt h . r nr l, lise; r , . .I lr . alr h i. m or ( . r hJn n. , r m alir r ; in ' 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. l tl

_...r

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 conflicts. Any normalitr opcn to possiblefuture corrcction is authen-

hencc u,ithout flexibilitr,, rvhich is cssentiallva suc_ rr:vcrsibiJitv, ccssfuladaptation.ln cerrain industrial districts in Gcrmanyancl Englandthe gradualriisappearance ofgrav buttcrflies and the appearanceof black oncs ofthc samcspecieshasbccn obscrved.It

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

r',, aspossibleto establishthat in thesebutterfliesthe black coloraaccompaniedby an unusualvigor. In captivitv the blacks tion \4.as

incapableol adapting to ncw situationsis a normalitY devoid of normative intcntion. When confronted rvith any apparcntlynormal situation, it is thercfbreimPortant to ask vvhctherthe norns that it embodiesar-ecreativenorms, norms with a for\\'ardthrust,

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

or, on the contrary, conservativenorms, norms rvhosc thrust is torvarrlthe past. IMS Normalitict normativ l, 1. lr]

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

Normality and Species normal and [140] In the biologv ol species,the problem of the thc pathologicalarisesin connection rvith thc problem of variat 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

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

respectat variancervith a dcfined statisticaltvpe, a sick individual or a biological innovation?Is a fiuit {lv vu'ithno n'ings,or vestigial rvings,sick? Biologistshostilc to evolution or skepticalof mutationist explanationsinsist that mutationsare rccessive,often anclsometimeslcthal. If, houever,one holds that subpathological, 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 Ti:issier's experimentson $ inglessdrosophila,fbr examplc,provcd thc superiority of that varietv in a draftv environment. IMS Nornaliti 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

5olution to operate in preferenceto another, the number of rcprcsentativesof cach varietv varies,and a varietv tends morc and morr tona r d a species.[ . . . ] llcnce, flnallv, rvc see how an anomalv,particularlv a mutati 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

ir

$ ,fr

i n thei r av er agedim ension.O t her r vise,it u, ould havet o be said that a mutant individual, as thc point of departurelbr a nelv specit's, is both pathological,bccauseit is a divcrgencc,and normal, becauseit maintains itself anclrcprocluces,In biologv, the normal is not so much the old as the neu,fbrm, il it finds conditions ofexi stencein vvhichit *ill appearnor m at ive,t hat is,
#

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 Thesc tl'o exPressoth(r Po\siLrlcnorms of in itsclfpatholo-tgical. 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

Goldstein calls "pllcrrcd bchavior" and "cat.rstrophicreaction," ln respondingto stimuli liom tlre environment,an organisnrrirres n()t use 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

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-

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'
logical normi it is another norm, btlt onc that is, comparativelv s peak ing p . u s h e da s i d cb l l i l !. fN P, p p . 8l -8l l is as it ma] Ila2] No enviionment is normo.l.An environment b('. No structurc is rormal in itsell. It is thc relation betrveenthe

reJction is one t hat pr event sr apid adapt at iont o changingenvirr,nnrenr alcondjt ions. f he concer n r r it h avoidine( . . t t ajt r ophic reJctionsthereforc rcflccts thc organism'sinstinct of selflprcscr-

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{ dclviat 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 hence rlore viohle.In llrms rrr.l proveto be ntorc aclvantagccttts, to multipll and a sPecics it allou's cnvironmcnt is normal rvhen changcs dirersifi in it in such a \!av as to tolcrate, il nccess,lrY,

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
Normality ond I ndividusls

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
f1,13] From thc stanclpointofthc biologv oi individuals,thc probdou'n to what K urt lem of the nonnal rnd the pathologicalc,.rmes

ol thc enr'ironfftenr7 This is truc cnough of thc hum.rnsocialenviroD tne nt ,r vhcr e inst it ut ionsar c f undam cnt allv pr eclr ious,con_

)t1

I t5

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.rptat 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

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 -

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 possibiliri esofr cact ion. t - if eof ien f allsshor t of it s possibilit ies,but when can surpassexpcctations.[NP, pp. 197-98] necessary

ing creature does not live among laws but among creaturcsand eventsthat varv thesc larvs.What holds up thc bird is the branch

The Problem of Psychologicol Norms

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

fhe Child and the adult

soiutions,At such a Ieveiol-analvticalabstraction,it is no longer

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

a question ofenvironmcnt for a living being, nor ofhealth nor of

inro it. In childhood there is an intrinsic forrvarddrivc, a capac-

discase.Similarlv,l'hat the fox eats is the hen'segg and not tbc chemistry of albuminoidsor rhe laws of embryology.Becausethe

i rv l br scll- t r anscendencc, t hat f lour ishesif r he child is phvsicalh robust,intcllectuallvperspicacious and allorveda certain fieedom

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,

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,

everythinghappensin the form of evrnts. Here is hou' the envir 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,

"Tomorrou l rvill be a grown-up." Aristotle makesthis magnificent obserr.ationr onthropos onthrupontem{1,man cDgcn(lersman.

it s his t or y .

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 suppJiesthe 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 educati 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 ical 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

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 discussion 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 maintain 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 nsexper 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

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 thout human value. Grcek pe<Jagogy w.ts thercfore bascdon the

manncras Plato. Jcande la Fontaineis fimous fbr havingsaiclthat he took pleasurein f)irv taics.but his fibles are harclon childrcn,

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 -

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,

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

such things w,crcconsicleredabsurd. Paradoxicallr',it u.asthe ninetecnth ccntulr,, rvhich is olien

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

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

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,depcndent 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 confl i ct, crur' l )y demons 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 acc 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 ssi calpr:ri ods.Thc sevent eent h- c cn 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

i s a ge niusin it s uay, and evcr vgeniusis a child. [ . . . ] G eniusis a delil>eratcreversionto childhood.) lr uas poets, long before psrchologists,rvho proposedlooking at thc child's rnentalirvas normal 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 lthil osoph l cam e t o t he r escue:t hev pr ovidc
an adult whosc culrurc \\'asof thc sort thar piagct rcgardedas normative for his time, that is, for \a,hichscientific and rationalist valucsstoo(l at rhe top ofthe hierarchv.Conrparcd wirh rhc rational mentality, children's thinking could be charactcrizedbv 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' lack or absence.Note, horvever,that Piagct'sadult is rvhat Nlax Webcr and KarJ.faspers call an "ideal tvpe." To be sure. it can be argucd that this normal type is not onlv normative but average and characteristicof the majority, But the,,mentality" ofan age is a social fact. dctermincd by t,ducariorr,If, in fact, in surveys, the ideal type turns out to reficct thc.rverage,it is becausecom_ pulsory'cducatronhasestablishedcertain norms. Here again,man engendersman, and if the norms imposed on many generation5 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 should come as no surprise rhrt, in c()mparingtodat,'schildren to todav'sadulrs,it turns out rhat children lack many of the traits 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 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 is inextricably intcrt.w,inedrvith that ol generations.At anv given point iir time, rhoseu,ho happcnto be aduits.rrefbrnrerchilclren who were raisedby other adults. lt takcsa generationto test the 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 gener.rtions)lbr philosophical valuesto become rooted as hab_ 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 tokens of respcctfor rhe positivist vaiuesof thc pcriod lg60_9f), which gained favor u'ith the educational reformers of the late 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 probldmcdesmentolrrls, II, f. lr, 2r, 3r] gap betv,.eena child's dcsires [146] Therc is a characteristr'c 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 thereforecrcatesa uorld of representationsin rvhich desireshave the abilitv 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 l6 o

rhem . The child can exper ienccplcasur r only : u, it h per m ission or bv deJegat ion.llc is st r ict lv dependenton adult s r o t ncct ir s ri tal n ecds.Thus, t o obev is r ( Jlive. At I ir st , t hcr e is no diller , ence bet $, eensocial obligat ion and phvsicalnecessit r '.Adult s. rhen, arc both compensatioDlirr and incscapablcrcmjnd,.,riol'tbe Freudianpsvchologyhad thc grcat merit of chilcl'shelplessness. rc' ea lingt he t r ue esscnccof t he child's t hought . 1'hc child lives i n i l l u sion bccauschc livesin desir e,anclbecausehe f eelsdesir c Iong belor e gr at if icat ir - r nis phr sicallv possible-So long as it is inrpossiblcto act on the norl
Y_

The adult docs not neccssarilvbelievein thc inevitabilitvofprogress,of knorvledgcand industrY.Adults knot that there are epistemologicatobstaclesto Progrcssand areasrlver lvhich thcorv is \et thcy do not feel compclled on that accountto seek porverless, 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

* 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 but also its inverse. is a correlativeofthe scientificconlciousness, oclir lr r r r r lion. nol J on( . P ,,cr r \ i\ J poet ir '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 t o bccot Dct hc conr renr.rina child in r he : ensc t hat h<'deser r es

t lr os ec on ta i n e
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]

suggcstth.rt the pucrilitv of mvth is supcrior to scienceancltechnologv.The modern adult haslimits that must be ovcrcome' but thev .dnnot bc overcomeb.vretutnin2l to d mo(le oJ thought which

hi

illnoresprccisclrthdt theteorc limits to desiein realitt'anclobstacles to rolucin $ittanac. ' lo bc s u re , c h i l d h o o d d e s e n c s to bc tteatt' d as a norm b,v .rdults - or, rnthcr, not a5 a norm. preciseh, lrut ls a nornlative -l-hisnormativesuperrcquiremr:nt,somethingto trc transcctrtled. hum . r nirl o I c h i l d h o o d i s n o t to b e c o n ftrsed$ 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

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 on rvhatbasir rvejudgeclthc narivcsrrf the countai.qncvvon
and c f iec ri v e .f...]

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

In short. trecauscthe child is not a con)Pl(tc being, he exhibits a generositr thit compensatcsfbr his avitlitr': this gcnerositY can l>epr,rp,rsedasnomal lrecauseit is norDdri|c.that is, an allir-

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
m at ion of v a l r:c .

rvasdeemtd urol>i.rn. J he scvcnt eent hcent ur r idenr ilie
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 creduIous. 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

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

ate u.hat thel deem to bc valueless.The rclativism anrl tolerance ol the eightcenth century were inscparablefrorn the esscntiallv

more terrifying than prisons.To be sure, the eighteenth century

normative idea of progrcss.[3ut progresswas not conceived in terms ofa relntion ofvalues; it was identified rvith the final valuc

witnessedthe f irst glimmeringsof relativisnt.When Montesquieu aslied"llorv caD nnlone bc a Persian?"he encouragecJ his contemporaricsto 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 civilized u'hitc man as the standardof rcferencefor all mankind grcw

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 lVlarquis de Condorcet on the progrcssof the human spirit and recast them in the fbrm of a las, the law of three stagcs(theological.

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-

nretaphvsical and posit ivr ) . I n ot ber r r or ds, it t r icd t o lbr ce psychol ogicalspeculat ionint o t he Pr ocr ust eanbcd oI nat ur al sci-

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-

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

bat againstthe nen. Diderot's purposein rehabilitatingthe primitive, in the Supplement to Bougainville's Voy,oge, was essentiallyto

that sociologr'(or,ashe sa* it, the scicnccof mind) rvasindepenrlcnt o1 biologv in terms of object and method. The positivespirit

discredit Christianity.The Christianreligion rvashoist on its own

rvasdeclarcdto bc the ultimate fbrm of the human spirit; thcologv and mctaphvsicsrveredevalued,the first asa primitivc fbrm

pelard: whateverpreccdedthe adventof tnrth rvasdoomed to dis.rppear.IIistorical precedenceestablishedlogical perspective.Tol-

ol spirit. the secondasa transitionallbmr. These fornrsimpeded thc dcvel,rpmentof spirit't firll potential, so spirit rcjccted thern.

cranceraisesa similar problem: tolerance is the recognition ofa plurality ofvalues, the refusalto erect anv valueasa norm; intoler 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

D i ssat isf icdr vit h f lct ions, spir it cr eat edscience.Hence, scicntific 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

oI normsis comprehcnsibleonly asa hier.rrchy.Norms can coexist

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.

ol an cver closer and nrore f:aithful.rpproximationto the intcllcctual nomr. For Comtc, thcologicalthinking rvaslikc the thinki 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

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

race.And thc maturationofrhe race,he implied, !1nsjust asineritable and necessaryasthe maturation of thc child.

on a fboting ol equalitv onlv if drained of the normative intention that callcd them into existcnccascodified, normative dcci-

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 crl6,t

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'sevolut 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

u as reallv arguing rvasthat primitivc thought rvasnot prelogical but heterogencous,and scnsing,too, that championsrvould soon

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 posteriority are onc and thc samc.Anterior, Iesscomplcx and inferior

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

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'

transition from one fbrm of mentality to another involveda certai n l ossof cont cnt ( m oder n t hought is not as r ich as pr im it ivc

researchin cmbryologvshou'cdthat certain anatomicalanomalies lvcre the rcsult ofarrestcd development.A club fbot, a harelip, a

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

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-

comc fbrrvard to defend the merits of fbrms of thought "clillirent" lrom modern sciencc,soughtto rcstorecontinuitv: the prim-

thought ) as r vcll as t hc consolidat ion ol a cer t ain clisposit ion (moclcrnthought is more methodical). Wc can easilvundcrstan
books). de Philosophieafier publication of L(:vy-BruhJ's tlre essenNocrtheless,both groupsof philosophcrsprcservecl

opment at an intermediatestage.What is normal at one moment in time becomesabnormal later. dansIes mentales \Vhen Lucien Livr-Bruhl publishcd l:onclions "plclogical" tcrm usc of the his initial in 1910, sociitisinfirieurcs

l ti ,rl r. r t i, , n. r list . r nrposit ivir t nor nl\ : r |a\ on i. \ ulcr i. lr t o m \ slir 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

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 mcnrol;tdsprovided argumentsto justifi a normative concePtion of

de; mentolitis,I, f. 2r, 3r]

the history of thought. At last, there tvcre criteria fbr choosing sidcsin philosophicalcombat, lor distinguishingbetu'cenfruitful nerv ideasand survivalsof thc past, for separatingthe backrvardlook 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 example, 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

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 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. Phcnomcnologicaltheologianstherefort: decir lcdt hat onlr one r eact ionwas possiblc:all m vt hologic.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,abandoncd the Inquisitionand thc srake,it w,asneccssary to saveothcr 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 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 ofsavagervin all its fbrms. The fricnd of primitive mentality rvill 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 of civilian populations.But no one is savingthat the modem men_ tality or, fbr that mattcr, any constitutcd norm must be prefi:rred over primitive mentality. Themodernmentality is not a ,tructwe but a tcndency, To prcfer it is simplv to prefer a tendcncy, a norma_ t iv c inte n ti o n .[...] The primitive and modem mentalitiesare not coexistingabso_ Iutesbut successilert latives,Technologyis clearly progress*-hen it demonstratesthe failure of magic; sciencc is ciearlv progrcss rvhen it grou'sour ofthe inarlt,quacloftechnologv. The modern mentalit_vhascertain adrant.rges over previousnorms. advantages 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. M od r:rn i tt i s n o t n o rm a l i n th c senseof havi ng achi eved.r definitivesuperiorstatc. lt ir normatitc,horvcver,bccauscit strives 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 right: a true mechanicsmn) not exist, but a true mysticism is a contradiction in terms. l)espitc Bergson'sobjective sympathvfbr 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 onar y 'r ev a l u a ti o no f i rra ti o n a l i tv , . .] [. Modern man is experiencinga crisis in the sensethat r]omination and masteryof rhc enyironmcnt elude his grasp. But the 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 in reaclv-madc form but renrainsto be invcnted,

are tormotive,and that havebrought thosc valuesto consciousncss a normative dircction is norm.rllv \1orth pursuing. Il\15 /.c ,\brmal et le problime desmentaliri\, l, t. 6r, 7r] Normotiveinvention [150] In t he evolut ion of t he individual,t hc m cnt alit y of adult hood co m es af icr t he m ent alit y of childhoodi in t he evolut ion of mankind, t he m oder n m ent alit y t bllowst he pr im it ive m cnt alitv. But whcn we refer to adulthood or modernitv as normal, we do not mean simply that they succeedearlier stagesofcxistence. Eachof thesestatesis normal in the sensethat it cflectivelydevaluesanotherstatehobbled bi internalconllict: betrveendesireand realitv, or betrvecn porver and scicncc. To be sure, just because thc moder n r ccognizest hese conllict s and t o a lim it ed degr ee resol vc st hem , it does not t her eby const it ut <'t he [ inal st ageof el ol uti o n. The expect at iont hat t odar ''sunder st r ndingsu, ill bc transcendcdis a nor m al f eat ur eol t ht 'Dodr r D m cnt Jlit v. Hencc there is no rcmedv lbr modernin''s ills in merelv rcturning to old norms.The onlv truc rcnledv lies in the invention of new norms. C enero sit vof spir it is t o be im it ar cd, but belief in t hc ef licacv of i mmediat e solut ionsm ust bc r eiect ed.Nor m at ivit v is inher ent in the kinds of changcthat brought modcrnity to consciousness.It is t his nor m at ivit l t hat m Llst in t he nor m al cour se of things be perpetuated. 'lo sum up, all normalitv must be judged lith

referenceto

the pos sibilit vof devaluat ionin a nor m at ivescnse.Ther ein lics the only method fbr detecting m.vstilicdtion.

The modern is modern onlv bccauseit hasfound solutions to 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_

P ath ologycan som ct im csm im ic he. r lt h,lf sicknessis of t en a rcl ugc for an individual in conllict uit h him sclf , ot her s or t hc cnvironment, revolution is olicn a nr('ansof avoiding nccessarv 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

-

ansof thc sameera undertook to llx thc usageol the Frcnch language,it lvasa qucstion of norms. of cleterminingthe ref'erence,

tomorrow is an infallible oracle. Norms and valuesare tested br situationscalling lor normative invention One can respondto a challengccither bv seekingrefugc or exercisingcrcative ingcnu-

anclof defining mistakesin terms of
itv; oftcn the t\4.oresponsesseem deceptivelvsimilar. Yet there to Put is one surecritcrion for identifring creativitv:a \4'illingness norms to the test, to asccrtaintheir Ialue fairly and u'ithout trving

thesis:"Usagc is tccnrh centurv this is Claude Favrcde Vaugelas's 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.

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

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-

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" and "normal," is the equivalentof the Crerckdl8oc.Orthographv ortholFrench, othographc, but long ago ortbographiel,orthodoxv, of concept l f the c o n c c Pts n o rm a ti v e pedic s , a re Prc m a turel v

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 sevcntccnthccnturv 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 inst r uC onvent ionand Napoleon Bonapar t ear c t he successive nrentsof the samccollcctive clemand.It bcgan*.ith grammatical normsand ended nith morphologicalnonns o1-mcnanclhorsesfbr nationaldcfcnse,tlpassingthrough inrlustrialanclsanitarvnorms.

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

l )efining indust r ialnor m s assum esa unit v of plan,
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 -

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

callv anthropologicalor cultural expericnce,it can scem normal that languagehasproposedone of its Prime fields fbr this experiencc. (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

the conf'trsionol eflbrts, the cletailof proportions, the diflicultl and slorvness of 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

somcthirrgundtr pain ol jrrridicalsanctions.Whcn the grammari-

" (i un-car 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.

] 7o

a7l

lThe definiticrnofsanitary norms assunlcsthrt, liom thr: political point of vicw, attention is paid to populations' health con-

ti ons bet r veent echnologicaland jr r r idicalnor m s, I n t he r i- qor ous and prcsent m eaning of t he t er m , t echnologicalnor m alizar ion

, 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

consistsin the choice and dctcrmination of material, the lorm and dimcnsionsof an object u hose char.rcteristicslrom thcn on

trcarmcntsperfectedby rrredicine.In Austria Maria Thercsaand JosephII conferred legal statuson public health institutions by

become necessar ylor conr ist cnt m anuf act ur e.The division of labor constrainsbusinessmento a homogeneitv of norms at the

crcatingan Impcrirl Health Commission(Sdnitdts-Hot'deputdtion,

heart of a t echnical- econom iccom pler u, hosedim ensions. r r e

1753) and bv promulgatinga Haupt ,VcdizinalOrdnung,replaced in 1770 by the Sonifits-notmati%an act u'ith fbrty regulations the training of surrelatedto mediciDc,\,eteriDarvart, pharmac,v,

constantlvevolvingon a nationalor irrternationalscale.But techrologv developswithin a societv'seconomy.A demand to simplify can appearurgent fiom tht'technological poinr of vicw, but it can seem premnture frorn the industrial and cconomic point

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.

of vierv asf)r as the possibilitiesof the nroment and the i,rmediate futurr are concerned.The logic oftechnologv and the inrer-

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

csts ol'the economv must conlc to terms. Nloreoter. in another respect,technologicalnormalizationmust bewareoIan excessof

rvithin the context ofother norms. At a given moment, thc experienceol normalizationcannot be broken dorl n, nt Icastnot into

rigiditv. What is manufacturerlmust finallv be consumed.Ccrtai nl r, th e logic of lor m alizar ion can be pushedas lar as t he nor -

projccts.PierreGuiraudclearlyperceivedthis in the caseofgrammar u hen hc *'roter "Richelieu's founding of thc Acad6mie[ran-

malizationofneeds bv mcansof the persuasionofadvertising.For al l that, should t he quest ionhe set t ledas t o r vhet herneed is an

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

obj cct ofpossiblenor m alizat ioror r t he subjectobliged t o invent norms?Assum ingt hat t he f ir st of t hescr wo pr oposit ionsis r r ue, normalizationmust provide lor needs,as it does fbr objccts char-

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

languageat the sametimc that it scizedthe instnrments of produc 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.

acteri zedby nor m s, m ar gins lor diver gence,but her e r vit hout guanti l i cat ion.The r elat ionof t echnology t o consum pt ioDinr r ocl ucesi nt o t he unilicat ion of m et hods,m odels,pr ocedur esand

l3etrvcen1759, rvhen the u'ord "normal" appeared,and l8]4,

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 administrativcorganism responsiblefirr cntcrpriseon a national scale.I The concept ol normaliz.rtionexcludesthal of immutabilit\,,incluclesthe antic-

when the lvord "normalized"appearcd,a nonnativeciasshad won thc povverto identify - a beautiful cxample of ideological illusion- 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

ipation of a possible flexibilitr'. So rve see horv a tcchnological nornl graduallvrcflccts an icleaofsociety and its hicrarchvofval17t

ues, ho\1 a (lecisionto normalizc assumcsthe rePrcsentationol a possiblc whole of correlativc, comPlementarr or comPensatory I his rvholc must bc llnished in advancc,flnished ifnot clecisions. 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 - and without ignoring the fict that it hasbeen do.5aNeverthcless 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 vconnectedto a \\nr economyor thc cconomYol totalitarianregimes\\remu\t see.rboveall in planningendeavorsthe attemPtsto constitute organsthrouth u hich a socictvcould estinrate,loresccand .rssurrcits needsinsteadof bcing redrrccdto recordirg anclstating thenr in tcrms oIJccounts and lral.rnccsheets.So that lvhat is denounc cd ,u n c l e rth e n a me o fra ti o n a l i zrti on - thc bogevcomplac 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 of sociallile pervarietyof the cult of nature- asa mechaniz.rtion hapsexpresses, on thc contrary,thc need, obscurelvf'elt bv societv, to become the organic subjcct ol needsrccognizedas such. It is easvto understandhorv technologicalJctivitl and its normaliration. 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 calprot 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
s of l au. The m agist r at r : uho cleci<Je, t he bailillisr esponsiblelbr carryingout the sentence,arc personsidentified u'ith thcir ftrncti on bv vir t ue ol nor nr s,inst alledin t heir lunct ion * it h t he clelegationofcompetence. 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
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 -

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
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

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

171

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 organism hcld as a basic typc of structure. hasbecn singularizedbv so mrny resrrictiveconditionsthat it could havt'no more consistencr

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 behavior 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.

t han a m e ta P n ()r.

In the caseoIsociety, regulation is a nced in sc.rrchof its organ

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

and i ts n or m sof exer cise.

as to its o\1.nfinal purpose- be the parts individuals,groups or entcrprises\\ ith a limited objective- are externalto the adjusted rcmembercd,ap, m ult iple. R u l c s mu s t b c re p re s e n te dlerrned, 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 repres 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 serrants 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 protrlem 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 organism. It rvould be onlv a machineif the collectivc'sendscould not

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 mani l csrsi rself and is sat isf iedbv m eansof one appar at us,so it s r egulariorrexprcsses the inte{r.ltion oIparts within tht rvholethough it operatesby meansof one nervousand endocrine svstem.This

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

is the rt.asonrvhv,strictlv speaking,there is no distancebetrveen organsrvithin the organism,no externalitv of parts.The knorvledgethe 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

an.rLltonratic mode socialisrfbrnr r,feconomytend perlrapstc-,r.ard thi s ten(l encv 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

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.

still encountersobstaclesin facts, and not just in the ill-rvill of skepticalperfirrmers,u'hich obligc the organizersto summon up

]l INP,Pp.2s2-s

their resourcei lbr improvisation. lt can cven be askcd r'thether in 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 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-

[153] Social regulation tcnds tou,ard organic regulation and mimics it u'ithout ceasinglirr all that to be corrposed mechanical 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

ization consistsin its infbrming itiell asto its possiblepurposes-

speakoI a society'sneerlslnd norms as onc spc.rksof an organi sm' s vi t al needsand nor m s, t hat is, unam biguouslv.The vit al

i76

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

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

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

fillment and cxcellence,a re.rlizationinrmediatelydcrived from knorvl edgeof an or der of per f cct ion. Wisdom is t hus clear ly a

norm is not intcrnal, and, finally, to rvhat cxtent the society,seat is far fiom settingitsell ofrestraincddissentor latent antagonisms, up asa rvhole. If thc individu.rlposesa question about the finalit 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' vi -Stra u s s a v s :" W e th e n d i s corer that no soci ety i s qotxl, but rh.rtnone is.rlrso]utt'l)l-ad; thev all oller hrndament.rllv 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 remain more or lessconstantand pcrhapscorrespondsto a specific incrtia in social life fesist.rntto all attempts at organization."5e

IN P,pp .2ss-56] 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 Thus, at thc origin ofthe somethingthat it is possil>leto posscss. 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

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-

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 common parlance,philosophyis a certain dispositionto acceptcvcnts and incvitable,to subject prejudicesand phandeemcd necessarv toms of thc imaginationto cold scrutinvrnd criticism, anclto regulate one's conduct in accordanccrvith firrr personalprinciples m or eovcr ,t hat ofj udgme nt and evaluat ion.lt seem s1>r ob, r bJe, insofir as those principlcs are lemotc lionr e'errdav life, pcople as ut opian and ir lle speculaare i ncl i ned t o t hink ol philosr , 'phv 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 cnt r cony scnrc, the n, seenr st o lcar l t o t r lo cont r a<] ict r r rjudgm 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 elIectualga 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-

of a gap betrveenan cxistenceand a ncccl. Wisdom is more than scit'ncein the strict and contenrporarv

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.

ol 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 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,

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

178

I7.)

concem wirh the ultimate meaningof life rathcr than rvith immediate 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[values,a valuesystcmtotally diflerent from that offeudal times.This

tution that [ulfil]s a collective need fbr securitv or aggrcssi()n. Philosophy is an individual quest, horvevcr.ln the Historyof Hegel says,"PhiJosophybcginsonly rvherethc individPhilosophy 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 hout the me diar ion olan\ inst it ut ion. Philosophv is an asocial activity.Thcrc are no philosophicalinstitutions.Sclroolsarc associ 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 judgment, 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-

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

phy reinforcescommunal beliefs, in llhich caseit is poiltlt'ss, or else it is at odds with thosc beliefs, in u,hich caseit is danger-

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

give them."

comrnonsensccriticism that philosophy is not usefirl, which is strictlv.rccurate,is intended to suggestthat it is therefbrc absolutely v.rlueless, it errs only in its identilication ofvalue with utilitv. 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 just 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 religious 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-

ous, " P hi l o sophv, "Ar ist ot lc said,"m ust not t ake or ( ler s,it lr ust The upshot of t his
cst; an institution is the codification o{ a value,the embodiment

emphasizethe norm.ltive:in defining philosophvasrpiritudl mc./i-

ofvalue asa sct ofrules. Thc militarv, fbr cxample,is a socialinsti-

cine,thev assumethat passionand diseaseare one and tht'same.

lAo

jlt

Novalis sayssomething slightll diffcrcnt *'hen he calls philoso-

and crc at ion as subor dinat ct o cont cm plat ion. I t com pr ised a

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

physics,a logic, an ethics,but no aesthetics.Ancient thought rvas

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 philosophics.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, ofbeing, that it hasthe Po$'er can penetratethe decpcst abvsses

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 philosophv. 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

not onll to knorv but to rcfbrm existence."6l(Notc, in passing, that Pascaland SchopenhaucrshorvedNietzsche thc u'ay to the

cstablishnormality through the application of a norm. A nornr

path of theoretical pcssimism.) Givcn that modern philosoph! cannot useancient u'isdom as

ing. The esscnccof a norm is its rolc. Thtrs practicallyand functi onal l v t hc nor m al is t lr e oper at ionalnegat ionof a st at e which

a nodel, can it perhapsbetter serve thc infention that animated thc ancient loversof wisdom? The connection bctrvcen ancient and

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 .

modern philosophy is deeper than a sharedidcal; it is a shared need. Thc nccd that gave rise to ancicnt philosophy was for a

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

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 troubling, unstable,painful and therelbreabnormalcharactcrof ordinar y c x pe ri e n c e[...] . The ancient mind neverthelesslacked the notion of a.tPi.rtual sublect,that is, an infinitely generous and crcative pou'er. Ancient philosophy trcated the soul as subordinateto the idca I t i2

that hasnothing to regulatc is nothing bccauscit regulatesnoth-

ol mincl to give valueto human experiencethrough critical exami, nation and slstematic apprcciation of the valuesspontaneouslv embodiedin civilizationsand cultures,The scienceslittle bv little creatc tr ut h f br hum ankind. Polit ical anclr eJigiousinst it ut ions 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 philosophv takesmvth as its first object ofreflection, In the past, philos 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.

Critical

Bibliography

Cam ille

Linr oges

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$ard thc varioushuman f'unctionsthat it proposcsto judge. Its goal is to discoverthe meaning of those functions br determining lro* thel fit togcther',bt' rcstoring thc unity ofconsciousness.The businessol philosophvis thercforenot so much to solve problems as to create them. In L6on Brunschvicg'srvords,philosophvis thc "scienceofsolved ploblems." that is, rhe questioning of receivedsolutions.Norv ne can underrtandwhl philosophy hasattracted hostilc reactionsthrough the ages:philosophy is a qucstioning of Iifc and therefbre a threat ro rhe idea that everything necessar!to Iife is alrca
This bibliographvis dividcd into t$-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 primari 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 publ i c l ect 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 ious 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
ld 4

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

t hc m , b(t b < :c a u sC e a n g u i l h e rnh a sa l n.rvsmai ntai ned.r stri ct distinction betrveenthc rvorks of the author (1'oeurre)and thc

hi \ pol i(i c s ol p.(i ti \nr, rnd l rrer bec anrLrn:(ti \(

"traces" oI the inte]lcctual and profcssorialcarccr. intL'rested in Frcnch As a bibliographcrrvho is alsoa researcher

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 ,

contemporar\ intellectual history,it hasbeen mv contention th.rt 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 CanguiI hcm's remarkalrleintel lcctual trajectory was \,\,elllvorth pursuing.I am confident th.rt many readcrsr+ill shareml opinion.

)5 rrnre to (ri c c t

rc s i s rnn(Lmc ml ' r.r. l )c s pi rt

th,
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 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. ). (: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-

l rrl v,l i s ti ngui drc d: i r i n< .l url c dR av mond

l .an' P rul S artrt..rnd P .1ulN i ?an, ^n,n. 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 'rrong

Ita r t

a

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

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 ( 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

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
o i th e lvcic Hcnri l \' i n l 'ari s. C angui l hrrr

. 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

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. \\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 ' \t D i pl nnrc d' atuder \upi ri eun s w as punuc rl upon c ompl eri on ol unrl c rgradui 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' 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

C .n gui l hem $ n,r. i t \l ),,( c ommc nr,rrr i ,' , ,,1l ),,ugl i (19?l lI.

( 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 readi 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. A l ,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-K i 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 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

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-

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 genr : 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 1 9 2 4 , ( ' a n g u ilh cm e n te r u r i tb e Eco le No rmal c S upi ri cure, rherc,;rs:n 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

I 11b

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 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 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 ourragc o,!\ -,:,,r I ' LI I i I i s.r( i , , |) rt,.s ;nrc l l ec ruc l s

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

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!,

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-

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

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

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

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

ol tl ; he rc mai ned a dev ()teddi s c i pl e thri )ughout hi \ l i i t

!'ngs (scc Clrdr.,,to, intellcctuellc, pp. 326-28) and provides substantial mate-

.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

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

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

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-

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

. 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-

sas p ubl i s hed as a montbl y from N l arc h 192? to S eptc mbc r 1935r s rc

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 E c<,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'

llichel AIcrcntlrc: Lelons' tcr-rsl, /.trr.r Jeanne Alcxandre, ed., En Souvcnir tie (P ari s : Merc uft. df Franc e, 1956), pp 499-51' 1. In l 9l l -12, C angui l hem

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

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

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

/,brc r P rofor c l ui c k l v

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-

( 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 -

{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

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

I'r r t err s i tnc d ' C . C angui l hem."

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
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 ,!

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

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

/ o r d f f i , c . P r D l Vig n r u r . r r h o r r lr ld

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.

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)

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

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,

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

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).

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 .

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 K cyserl i ng," 1i bf.i p.opor ( l \ 4 i r c h 2 0 , 1 9 2 7 ) , p p . l8 - 2 1 .

at thc hc ol e N (J rmal ..

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

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

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

'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 . B c rn:rrl l ps eud.l , "C ommc ntai rts et doc uments

A dres rt ; l r I i grc dc s

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

l l i t i c r , 19 2 7 ) . 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," l ,bf c ' f.opo' (Marc h 20. 1929),pp. l i 5

( A r g . 2 0 , 1 9 2 7 ) , p p . 2 ' 1 il- 5 1 . 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). " 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. 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

lu

"l e S o uri rc dc t' l aton." Lurry c 20 (1929), pp. 129-)u 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 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 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

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 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. 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 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.P rafa.. (l c 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 \ A l can, 1927). 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 sscrtat 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

"i \1i \i mc I.()\,

D c s c ortcIc s phi l as Ly tuau tnas quc ."Iunpt 2t (1929),P P 152 56.

Revie\!. "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

(l pri l 20. 1929), pp. 190 9). Ittv i c s . "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 , l. l, p p . z l l -l l . U n i v e r sitilir e !d e lr ln ce , 1 9 5 .1 ) vo

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 *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. "l 'ri 'j tgi !

192 8

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 ,"

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

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

1929

C a n g u i l h r m co n r p L tc< lh is n r ilita r - rxn icc

I i hrc spnpat (j ul y 20, l el 9),

in Ap r il 1929;{sumi rg hi s usc o{ the

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.

1 9 ()

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 mc eti ng oi thc r\\r.)c i .rri on, i n J anurf\, h. hrd c ondc nrnc d rhc c i ghtr

l 9l

i:li;

i l:=

==:=i

-; :;

:;i i :

+ i r: -' = =+jzii ;i1;=t 'i ' :: : ; j'

!i

:

- .: i j : - 1t . '

Zt,;S:

i

:7: i , ; i: i i=i, l ,: v t ii: :i ji ;: z =112 = iilj :i ,.i ai ; i i :E . _= ;

:: ;?i it i ; : {: ii = = ;v:ii i 1 ,.;i = i zi;

i : ; : i , i:i ai iz j,,-: ii t i= i : :j j!=.! =: a1: ZZ1

=,=i ; i : : , i i 1 i = , , 2,:==E,

+ i:::i i ,I ij i,,t,ri i:i ;r:it:i i::ii ' . ia

i E i I i; : i;, : ! ; i:*l r z ':, ii=4:;ii: =!i i? ; iiii; i I :

=: ; i i; j 1

:? tl i. ;,;"

?: : = ; : ? ? + 2,1 i

i t ii -ii!1 ; :) +iri:i:; i:i i l -:'r z : + 3 1 r *i !;E i i lg ;; =;::-2 : i; :zi) , i , :tl=F=ii I i; . : E: ; = "= i: ' -::= ; , -! io" =:'-= : ;n ii Zz1'-=e ,: '. :t;:;!i; -: ' j; : i=z:ti Z i ;:;- ii i : t + i r : i i l;;; i ' : -E : i '= i ; ! i\ i= e = = i: i t;' ;Z i i iet==trrii;Ji ig'+:: i it =f:l=z.i :E- --t;;i;

i=47=++=z: ?7

'

F

:

:.;:. *:,

i?= |

ii;i'

;: ;j =

-t1;=:;+

j: ;

:1t :

-;{-;:.'

S

!

:--'rr';:

i

.

;;

; . a --r= o.!

-::

4:?ol! i-:i-.::

-

i:i=!:-/-

;::

-: i

f

+ ;..

:

=!r

,:::-

| :!

1

t rr> -.: , rt : Q ! : : *- Y=

!

-!-

-- ;

9 -:

'

E ==..-

c : - - ' . Li

:,

=

-_

1 tr-x'

E

,

",

ra

1.

a " i+

1

=:,;

.t r I ;t- /:- r = =;.:'c

c .

i

I

'. + :

';^- :;:r a =

::r ai 7;

f:a ' ::

;^i

7

' =:

-

a. :La -l

\;-r-

-c?

^;e.- ::/

;

t

j;

j:

=

-' =

1 ':.1

l al l

',i .=;a

*: z

---

::

-

:'r - ) >e:- ; a = I

:

=

-

!

! l?

.:i + = ;=

:

- - .'

I

r

r

= -;::; F I;

;t

1

i

i ^i i

aaa

:i az

!

ii\

-

t +: I5i :i i i j iil: a iEi E a : i

:.:

= r-:

i=

E;i

.-

-+:

i r.!:1:-,",1

!=i=l ,,4-i.a .sj,iie i77

:

=

:=,

:t

: . -= = ,=t

;

)

;. ;i

-;a ;:-! -.'.:::a-'=ii i :;::t + l;: ! ;: j ===:t ; ; : i=it:1t: : i ri " .::-; j :ii ,: i:r:==i!!:tii'; ;:

, = . = i ;::;:==:ii=ii -: -Jl

; iiz

irj::* i.'-=i;i:=E

t i:;;;:1i'E; i =-,

i

ii;

.:

j:

i

':

]:

;i! - : i

! ! =; 2. : ' i

ia:ii= := i:! , i i i j:i:i2a ;: ; i= ii: : : :!:::: i; r 4i; ==:i;1,i;. := '; i:

=; : .:= i ::= i ::= ,_-, i: ri

=1=; r:

!

'

;-=

: =:

:1 ii ii; =i =j: : :: =7 :::;,i i :,:i : . : . =; ii"-i1i!!= i .! 3 ti = i .? E : i s i i: a +i ' . -

\

"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. S i gned"C .C ."

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

( P r r i s : Kr a , l9 ll) . " 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 rot 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 ) N c . v r cg u la lio n sh llb ccn

P p. 124 2s

e n icr e d a t th c Lcol e N ormal t suP (ri (u( \P f-

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-

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.) 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

"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 ," i '1... pnfo' { D ,.. l (r 1l ). tp.567-72. S i gnerl ' (i .(-." "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

l 93 l) ,pp.s83 8E. 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
1932

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 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 c|tun r.

L ' l J n i v ctsitisr n d icd lin cin Ju n e 1 9 3 1 . ' 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. Itf! i es .

p r o p o r( A u g . l9 1 l) , p p . 3 5 7 - 5 1 1 . " 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 ant i n e . B n' xe lle s. l9 l0 ) ," /iAr .' JPr o Po i( Se Pt l9]l ). P P . 415-16 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 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 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. 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 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),P p 462 67 "l c Coin dcs ruadcs." 1tbrespnryot lt)ct. 19) I ), p. 48 3 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 c r i t i < 1 uco fCa n g u ilh cm i

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

r cvic| ! o fO. L e h rnann R i i ssbul d's book (l i bl cr

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 .

S i g ne d"{ i.C." " 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'

"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. 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-

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 /i 6rc s propoi s rrmrrari z edi n J anuary 1912 (pp. 36-37). -l h6odore R ul s s en, 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 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 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 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.) "[)ocum c n(s . Franc c- Lc s l ntel l ec tuc l sc t l c < l i rarmement,"Irl nJ l ropdr (A pri l l 9l . l ), pp.20t 201. 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 ansp l us dc rts erv c qLr' auparav ant," l i 6rc sprdpo' (A pri l l 9l 2), pp. 210-13. 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

R c vics.

196

"t a I,,ri x ,dui . Il i i s par Ic dr,,i r")r,, C i nS ui l

197

A c c orJ i ng to S i ri nel l i ((;(;n(i d!i or nt.l l t.tutl b,

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 . \ \ : , 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

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 ments rl rr retus de toute guerrc nrti onJ l ." { \c r i b(r!(, s ec ri rrdentrv undc r

2 S6 - ; 8 . ' ' F l , c r i o o s l9 1 2 ," /ib r e ' p r o p o ' ( Ili\

p. 596 n.l l ), rhi s r.\r

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.:!

l9 l2 ) , Pp . 259 61.

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

S i g ne d"C.C." I I'ensci gncncnr P hi l osaP hi quc

" 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

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

( N ' l i ! 1 91 2 ) , p p . l7 - 2 1 . l f i d o r le h r < l r c( n tlv

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.'

b ccn liu n r lcd b r CeorgesB i 'nrl z€l l 3tl ti -l q7l l ), an

, , 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 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

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 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 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

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.

arti fl er i r) i /bar

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.

.rrl d res rl s etc hi ng hi s c areer(s r:el r.l n,rr,/., { )c t. 21, l 9l J l ).

" 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),P P 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 A n < 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 S up6ri 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 fC onmc nts onl \nd

n " r r l a c co u o t o l L u cicn I I( r r in 1 q 7 7 . " 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.

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 r r r r rr r r r c n l' lir lr cnzu r Ijn l[]h r u ,, n

' cin

l) e r r l crr.ed. Jul ;r'' S chmi dr (B crl i n:

W i \ t ( r mr n , 1 9 l2 ) . 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

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 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

i ngthi r.rrri rl e,

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 < rrj ). fti l os ophi qu. (l .rn. l el

l /,j rhoJ r.A dru../. i .nrc tqtmr:

pl . l O-l l . "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 ," mfh rv ud (l rl ,. l 9l ]). pp. 2 5-27. l l o i c r. ''S urLrnc Int.rpri ' ti ri ,)n de I' hi s roi rc ." / tbrc r frol o! (11i (h

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

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

t9l l ),

pp. I55;6.

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

199

i n rhc nrrt i s s Lrr.,rt/r/' r..r

r EL

" 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)'

OGRAPHY

t 935

P P l 57-59

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 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

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 " 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 roP or (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 E doual rl Il erri ot i n 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 .

':{l ai n. /es /)rc ur (N rl , l 9} 1).' turopc R c ri trr. Frtr.rtr

' Li brespropos " 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

-17(19} 5), pp..+ 4s 18.

{ .,,nr thi ! foi es

* ere rrpri nrrrl i n rhr i j u.i i c rrnr1i

I'.1'\odatnn J t\ dni \ I.1/orn 20(f)rc . 196.{ ),pp. II

ll.

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

( l \ l . r v l s ) 1 ) . p p .2 7 2 - 7 5 . 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 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' Ini ti ati on .i 10 P hi l ost)P hlnn " 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^. ' icmporaiD. (L.r Rrnaissancc du Liwc). J. tsenrubi, lir Sourcesct /cr .ourd'tr dc I ' r p h i l Dn t) h ft.o n tu ln p o r o mcn c fr a zc ( Alca n )"'[rl rt;f. ]l (l 9l l )'

pP '151 5l '

(P ari s, 1935). 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, 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 *'as created i n res pons eto the l i ebrurr) l 9l ' 1 ri < ,tsi n P ari sand the threat 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 atti nrl v mt

I9 3 4

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'

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' n r a n n , lg ll) ,

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 ,

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

1 9 1 + ) . pp . 4 0 - .1 ,1 .

a m l lu le s lsa r c, I9 t1 - L c Probl i ntcder ori l l i nu dc kt oLteruc

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 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 (;c F i n frs c i s t Ittrl v ' \gri c ul ture ' n(l the rons equenc es oi l .rs c i rr rotal i rnri nni s m i n

"agri cul tural c ri ri s ," i nd "N otes on

( P a r i s :Ir icd r r , l9 ll) . "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

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
S i ri ncl l i , Gi nl ror,on tntef

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 , 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 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

s(i r then pr( ol rhc phi l < .' r,rphv progrrn, ol thc Iv c i e - rhi c h s ere "l < ,r' th-

' ' P . l \ 1 . S < h u hl. I:sa i sL trla fttr n < xio nJc /a p cn ca r c rguc(A l 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. (A l ri n' 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 .

l 9l s)"

1940-t912

1ur?l

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! 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 -

193'1

comt i "Dercartcs ct la tccbniquc," in lro'our t/u L{' Contlrisintcrndlnndldc Phih\oPhic 19l l ) pp l l 35 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 )' 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 l th is r ' i( lcr ' p p . 8 7 - 9 ); in clu < lc
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\.

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

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 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. l a'a). 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 -

193 8

I '':\rti\it(

1 t (h n i( lu ( tr tr ,lr tio n .'

t < , u l o L r sa ind| c p h ilo s< ' | h ic ( \.:

in Co m m u ' r i"rrl onr cl rl rturri otrt S dci 'tc

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 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

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

thc S ,rrt,rrnnci n P .rri .: he c ,rn' i nc rtl (l nqri l h,:m

il'

t,r rc 1rl a," hi m i n C l c nnonc

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

s le i7 a n r l le i 8)' 2nd w ri cs' P P sl -i l 6

26' l 9l l t A 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 l i r , ' t n < , r ctr Cr n g tr ilh tr r ( J,. it6 ) in d icr tt\ th it

vrni t'


{

ol the ti rs t 1r.rc t,)l thr rc s i :

r 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 ttuc //t.p. 599:

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

..tuvcrgne1910-t91.1l P ari s : P rs s es dc l .r c i ti , I9901, p. l l ).

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 \ 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

B ul l u tn < I Ia l ,(rl

dri l .c rrrrrr/c-\rrorl ' rrfrr20. I (l 9.l 2), pp. I l 0 I l .

A bi bl i ogrrphy (l ;r s n,1l fnl s pri ' pari ng tht (c rrl )rrr.rs

I t , , b e r t e t 1 lls, l9 le ) thc l l i bl n'thi quf 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 l rhc v(t' ol '\l ar{ i l l e 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 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 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(

402

t r<.n Lt l c phtl oi + hi 4 C

pi rt oi thc i r

rhi ( c (' nrpl c m(nt\ the bi bl i < ' { ,i phv pul ,l i s hc i l bv

.ri l l i s i n rhc /j ui /drrr th( ptu\rors l rnr.

"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 dt:1turc t de S ta^houra2l (l ().12),pp. l 2rr 1t rn< l l ee-1,1.

,lo I

i t Z i l:= ii-=1 , i 1: l it =:i :1 2 i , =; + 'ii :t= z : ;- r l ; =;7|=z:" . a ,=4 '!az r.i = Z ?

; E i Siarj+1

:=

;1 :

i:

:r 2: ::

;i

i

z; :

:i7 =

=

=

,=---i ::

--

:

, ;:;l.ij:"=ii =r)=r=:?i::i r" : t

': :i i

a

," =tii = -,2i: :

i=,_==i

i :

: : :

!7

=: ;

=:

i= :: ;i

i+. =:i.

=:j"-

;' :2 ': !i5"l =-ii=7:zZ l- :; :::l-I i t Z := :; .odif i . ! : 1--: ' ; ;zit=;:i?-!i:1iai l::: ; E tl E Er i l E;i t:1 r+=j F_i T ::j := E=

ii-= zz,1

I :: i

:

.ij::

i =: : i : =; i i i z

=z? :7 i z i:: i7: t iii, 1: , =j :ii,t=;);, r;===:!;i:= i ': 1 1 =r ;i i

i

1i =,;:=. a =ii rii- :i-,_ ,;ij i

: i=: : ': ir ti i + i - = - ,_ !i

i :'

.

i :

i :r z

:

)

-6+i

;ii

gF: d : = E

::! t'E

4i

? ;,i j

;

4a i:

iir+ ; i=

i :

i: t t ; 1 : S

$ ;i i ;::

13

=i=t:i

o=*=;iE

;i'r=;;:ji',= : : ! ii, --* e i. = : = | +7': I

is

'=

lli= liali; i? -

,t ,=,=;-i1 -'== i;,;1z ra ;11 ;:::i ;i ::t= , :izl

' , =iii; ;i.:

., Eta- = != a =

i ; ; i ' ; +' +: : - "1 E

: i t=?=ilZti;11: i;"2:::i=: u

;=i :-1 i: j i1'=:ii;i+-:

i: ii: = iz ' i: i = 2-r:.:v:';';:i

i=zj ;,2i1:;Zii. i::; i::ia+ 'i -ti i = :- i i :t- = :f:ir=:ziift "":!c::c!:

I A

J

TAI

5T

RAT '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

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 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.

SPin o /' \l' r a tis: Ca l l i rnarl , 1916)"' B ul l tti n tI 1a

" C c o r g r s F r i ed n ' a n n , f.ib i/ t

Jt

.rfti r(i .fi D i !/dtrc (P rri s : V ri n. 19.19).

"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 \,

Rer ir:s

R rf(i c ,ntrrnorrir,rl r ,l r pl i i ' s ./* i i

].l t(l Q4q).

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!^ e t n or n ,cs d t I' h o n r n r r a u tr a va il."

"Ililitu

i rl l crnol i ondu\tt

''l l egcl r:n l r:oc t," 'D ci ol otl i e

2 3 ( 1 9 , f 7 ) , p p . l2 { ) l6

frtrac ts l rom rhi r arti (l c $(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-

" 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 r t l n \ . l e li) ,

rc publ i ' he,l i t.l l taaz nc

l i tt[tdi r. )< r\

(N ,^. l 99l ), pp. l 6-2().

, / r r r , c /( P i, j' : ( ;a llim a r d . 1 9 1 6 )

< l c l a F a c u ltt d e s I cttts

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).

pp. l l l 2-97.

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, ' 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

t']u['l i c'rti on\

tlc Str .r sb o r r r g fa . sci cul e l 0l (P ari s: t.t' Il cl l ts

IILrrnrnn. l e5l ). ptr. l l l -.1l .

p p . 1 .tl- ;t{ .

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-

5rrr /n \ \ 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' Fri ncc' dr t a 1 1 r 1 uct c lo th io r tt le l< t icicn .. ( Pir i\: Pr cssestl ni tcfsi tai res

gui l hrm.

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 '

"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

1915' " 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
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 P ari r: Lc s U el l esl .c ttres , l 95t)).

4l B , l l ' ' l, r ' r , ' . 1 " 1 7 t. tt") o i la p h ilo sophi c t'i ol ogi quc " R cvur t/c F r a n r t l) itc cn " N o t c s u r l a situ ltio n |,

'

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

f(1..

\\' i th a nc $ "P rrhc c (l ( l .r deux i i .nrc i di ri ,,n."

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. 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 ,

unti 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'

ii,,l

11t')

A

V TAL

RATIO\AL

ST

cel l ul ai rc" (pp. 2l l

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

N ote s ur l c s rapports dc l a theori e c c l l ul ai rt et

l 5),

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 ). , \i( \ .h o isiE e t p r i' se n te sp a r ( ie,,rgesC rngtri l h.m ( P ari s: B c s o i n cs t t c n d o n < ,:r Ie

The scc ond edi ti on,

ri ri s i e et rugmenrae," $as puhl i s hed br. \1ri n i n

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 ) . 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 h ich r va sp u b lish crJi D rhL cr)l l fcti on "Tcxtcs " 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 b i o l o g i s r s; n d p h ilxo p h e r s,

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

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 and S panis hj n 1976. "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 (1e52), pp . l 7l -i J 6.

d l'histoirc

t 953

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 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 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"P rcscntrti on de

"l a S i gni ti c:tion dc I' ens ei gnc mc ntde l a phi l o5ophi c ," i n t t D ' ti anl n.

dc I.t

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 .

P P . t'7_26 .

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 rccc< k .d,pp. l l 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 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(P p 5 6)i l n"l ntri ' 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 (P P . 7-12)r 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

15. b! .r " l ),l c h.rri on c ommunt rk s trptrrr,"

hv (i ui do C ,rl ,,ger,. Georgc sC rngui l l rtm, Fugc n l i nl .

ri gned

I),,nJ l (i Il ,rc l i nn,,n,

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 berto P i ne ra Ll c ra. C angui l hrm s t{ ,\r i r rhc grnerJ l pre!enrrti on (' f rhe * 1)rk (1,)n. br rhe

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'' (P P . I2'1 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. 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\ \VJltl: " r ! r r r r , , r . r h, ; lr r l' + ,' p h r r l, r n " 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

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 fhrl 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 (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..

prLl i shcd' i n

unti l hi s reti f.ment i n l e7l .

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 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 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,

td l :D tmdti on
' i i c t.r

(pari \: I)n,,\.s U nj -

Ltrtres' P rcP arcduncl er 's sa" prrttl i thcd bv V ri n cdi ti on t h t , l i r cctio n .,1C.r ' tr tn l]lch cla r d . ' \ r tco n d C a n g u ilh cm ' s Jir sr r ta tio n ftr th e Do cto rJ(

i n l ' r ? 7 . I.h c b o o l s*

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 'cnrd

as

'icc

' n(nrl l r prrs i dc nt,,l tht rc adc mv i rrm l 9' /l to 191i .

tr r n sh tcd in r o Sp a n ishi n 1975 and Jrpancsci n l 9E E '

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

"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 t/crrcic nc c r. 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. 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.

8l '

" O r g t r n i s m c se 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 .

''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 cpri nrc J i n E tu< l cri r ni ttoi rc

N , , t a r .:r ic., b u r ,r n a n r lr \is o l l) csca r tes "S i 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 isA:uLri er'195l )' o f h i s Dcsco r r cssci,n

l rom thi s rni c l c rre i nr l udc rl i n thi ' ,c .rrl c r.

pp. I2- 2 5. phi l ow rl ,hi qu( .,n l ){ ,(mhef

l N . 1< )56.

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

ilo 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,"h r r :r its o l I cr ich .' s in te llcctu.rl tontri huri crns. tbl l ow i ng

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

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
t('i.hc

phl l 6ophi (./., nLn(,ri (l 9ar8)r { \rr.rc rs

"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 ),

t.e rturc gi !en.rt (h( (,,l l i gr 1956

A { ,m m r r \

i n 1960. l l c

(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 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 (196S ). ' 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.

rt tl c p l rl t rop,brrJ c s

in l9 5 l. 1959 l9 5 ;

( ;. l l otrl i gand et.rl . //onnorti
"P l l hol ogie (' 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 trs9) . pp. l 7-92. 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

S trrsb < ,urg.on l anuary l { ). I95u. R rpnnred h E rul tt J hi s toi rttt dc phi l os o phi . .i . ! r(k n. c ' (196u).

2 l ( 1 e 57 ) , p p . ) 8 + 0 0 . 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$)'

/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 (\ 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 appcaredi n l 915. publ i s he(lb\ thc "Li l )ri i fi c fi l i \

t9 5 8

(193.1)

A 1(rn," tht mrj or I renc h

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 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

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,

+l r

rl c s s ri rnLt,i rrri rs l frhD i rl r).\.

!

I CR

T CAL

B

ALIOGRAPFY

( ) 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' 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 l hrce orhcr tl c tranct < 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 B achel ar
"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

another dci 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
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 &

' ' 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 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

.l 'hi sto i dc ss .i enc es1l .l (1960), pp. 8l 9' 1. Reprinted in I.udcr d irkbn( d h fiilosaphic ,/,:t trirnccr ( l!)68 ). Review of / l'c .4urobiorray>hrol Charlx ltortin (N($ )brl: l)ovcr, le58), .'1r.hr'vt' i ntunauonal esd' hi rtorrct?ess ri c rrc r l 3 (1960). p. l 5?. 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 nrunn!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\\.

19591,.1rc hi v cisntern.l ttanol es < lhi s rc n,:.16 ni rn.rr l l (1960), pp. I57-59.

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(,()).

p. 159. 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 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 I'ht'bi r . des s c i .n(s I ] (1960), pp. 159-60.

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: e t " L e ' C o n c e Pts ( lc' lu tte Pr ) u r le xistcn cd et Altrtd Russcl wall'rc e ," Confifttu\ du Polorstlt h l)dtou Charle r nar* 'n v r . r c ( P.r i* 1 9 5 9 ) , { r ic D' n o . 6 1 . on JanuarY P ub lic ltctu r e g ivcn a t th e Pa la isd e Ii D'couvertc' i n P ari s' (1968)' rc/cn'6 e r
''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).

pP .68-71. P a pc r pr|s ented rt rhc "X \rl '

C ongri s i ntLrnari onal rl hi i rr> i re dc l a

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 d'hi sroi rctt tl c phtl os ophi r: r/c rs c i c nc c(1968); i nc l uc l edi n thi s rc a< kr. s "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 ," ' hrhni 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.. l l tttoi r c gi ntrol e d.'

1960

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 80. 180 81.

d'6pi st6mol o 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 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 ot rht c"n' 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 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

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. "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

' upi ri c ur

l

(l q6l ). pp. 5-{ 5. 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

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.'brrn 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,:.' B ul l ctn

l a -\.r.,i .i l r.l ,,(dtrc J,j

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 .

1961.un(l c f rhe.rus pi c c sol thrt)i !i \i on

,,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 S artrc do i endrni r 'S artrr,' " ,,l rrJ, / c t r r c r, Sj,,,t,,r /,r , llu Jtg r /.,lin . ll- 1 7 ,8 0 a ( ]()61).pp. l l

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 , vers i trof()x i ord,htl d(,nJ ,,h9-l j .

l 4.l

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 (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 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:.

"l ntro
i n (.h.rrl i ,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 i o X I X ' siicl.." L la lis l1 lir le 6 0 ( 1 9 6 2 ) , pp. l -6s. 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

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, 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/ S pfti .r (rs 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 ; 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 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). " 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.

.{nnot.l & ntni rc rs i i tl .

dr,(j ;rs ron l ].rc hc l arrl .,.

n/r,1 j t l 96I ). pf. t1_ t9.

Repri ntrrl i n E tudtsJ hi s totret,]a pfri toropi ri der d nrfn..j (1968). tr.rns l .rredi n1., Ital i an i n 1969,and C enn:n i n 1979. "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 t. ph i l o' oph 66 l t96\ ). pp. 11i -5t. ^. 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 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. 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,,

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. "l 'hi sto i re dos s c i eni :c sdanr l i reuv n,i pi s tc nol ogi tl uc

i r)

C o , n d ,$ d ,.r ./. /d fi. ( 1 9 6 5 ) .

"(;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. RepriD&11in Irurl.r {/hnare ct }L phto;qhr,/rr

l r'cirici. {r.rnslrtcrl into

ItJl i rn i n 1969.

, 6 2 : R appon l c .tl . Iti cnnc S ouri au. I C , , n r m e n ts in ] lg r ig o tto n . Ph il' ,so p h iet9 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 P 6dr

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 A ugu (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 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 ' 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),

(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 A l exanrl 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 (i .! i .i c n..\ i 1968). ''I c C onc ept dr rrl l ex e au X l \, ,i ec l e," i n K .t . Il orhs c hrh, c rl .. tbn /nrA oorr.

PP.507-21).

4 t4

in 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

ll

(1968i ; c x trac ts from (hi s arti c l e are i nc l uc l edi n thi s reader.

unl l 9

"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' 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

(196s)p., 110. Itev i eu.

tt\ \'i rntt\ 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'EtienneGcoffro.vSaintHilatre," Isr 56 ( 1965),

(re6lr ).

pp.2.{-{-46.

u r r c ct l' } le ron dc I'h('nrnrt''' '4r'hncs tnr" ' ' C a l i l c t : I a Sig ' ) i{ icitiDn d t l 'x ' 209 22 d c6 r .icn .cr I7 ( 1 9 { ,' + ) PP n d t i o n .,lcs.!' h isto ir L ectu r e g ive n a t th c tn slitu t lta li' n . in P rri r, on June I

l 96f

Revier'. lgrdgation de phtlosophi.. I96i:

i )n thc

R,rppon
R cpri nted i n 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

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

(19681' EtuJes<1'hrnirc a
N ati onal , I965 ). Mi meographed.

vu e p h ito wr p h itlu c s ur I'i nadaptati on tl ans l c monde i C o n r m e nts in l ' Po in r d c l 3'+-l e 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

''Philovrphie et Sciencc," Rcvu?dc l'lnscignentcntphiloirphiqu. 15.2 (Dec. 1964Jan. l 96s ), pp. l 0-17.

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

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. "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-

196\

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

d c ]a vir ( 2 n d e d ' I' a r is:Vr in ' 1965)' L a C o n n oissa n ce 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

1965 (s ee abov e entry ). on Frenc h educ .ti onal teLev i s i on,* ' i th A . B adi ou,

strrtl l ' ! \ 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

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,

" 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

l 9(,5 .

l hi s edi ti ('n

b r s b e e n r .p r in te d m a n Y tim e s. in Extr a cls lio m th e stco n d tr liti' r n o f thi s book ( 1939) arc publ i shed

1966

il

l l ) i q r e a d cr . " 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 r1u quantnc c.ntcnd|" d. h rr'ort
.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

P u b li( . lcctu r c g ivcn a t th e Pa l;r ird t l a l )'couverte, i n P rri s' on Ii ebl ts sci cncts 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'

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 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'

"L'lrlie rle m{rlccint, r'rptrimentale selon Claudc Bcrn:rcl" Collrences 'lu 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

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).

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 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. Fi cha nt, "GeorgesC angui l hem et I' i d€e de l a phi l os ophi c " 119931,p. 38). 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,

1t7

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

rorrr c r dc phi l orophr de: s .,fn!.' (1958). l h t Ghn\

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

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 -

hjs \tud€nt\, Ylett€ Conry, lrrnqois Dagognet, Nlichcl Foucault ant-lCanillt

ti rnol ogi c dc I' E c ol t N on} al t

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

Loui s A l thus s er.

id ( Diicn l to r hi s ont) !nti l 19l J'l .shtn tht "tr c " C o l i e d i on Ga lie n " ce a se dto e xist. l h c tcxt th{j n aP pear€d,unrevi sed,i n f o u r t h a n,t iilth e d itio n s

t h e n t w co lle ctio r ) "( lu r d r iSc" ( Pn ' ists tln iversi tJi rci rl ( F'rncc) 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

S upi :ri rurc . a grorp ol s tu,l t' nts c l o\e ro

P ubl i s hed i n Fngti s h i n 1980;i nc l udc rl i n thi s n.rder. R evi ew of "l \' 1.D . Grmek , ed., C l audc B ernard, C ahrr de notes(1E 50-l l l 60) (l ar i s r (;al l i nrard, 1965)," R c v ucd hrs rtrrcc /c , l 9 (1966), pp. 405-406. ' c i €r.f! l a S i ngul i c r et de s i ngul ari t6 en i pi s t6nrol ogi e bi ol ogi que," R oue i nterf"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 " 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 osoP hi ques, '

The s urnmarl ofa l ec ture C .angui l hemgav e to the S oc i 6t6 bel ge dc 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 f r o m t h i \ a r ticle r r c io c\r ltd

l 96t

in th is r e .r d cr '

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

olx

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.

"-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

Wolf, cd.. Pnrlosopi;c ct ndtho
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. 8 . r s cdo n tso p u b lic lcctu r e s g ive n a t th c Fc
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-

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 reS ai ntl oui s i n B russei s,

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

re dc phi Lmphi c 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


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. .lgrlgatnn

dt phitosophrc, 1966: Roppon & M. Ceorlles Cangutlhcn' prisident

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 P 6
1979. E x trac ts frorn thi s arti c l e art i nc l udc d i n thi s rc ader. "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. l -ec ture gi v en at the D i partenrent de phi l os ophi r, Ll ni v c rs i tede Montri .rl , j n thc 1;l l .,t l e66: i nc l uded i n thj 5 rrn(l c r. "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' " 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
,1 1 6

599-6t8. Lssavrrevi$v of l\lichcl Foucault, lcr ,tlors cr /cs.fiordr (Paris: Gallirnard, 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). "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, 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. U N [F-]i (i [.1. no. l (J an. l e67), pp. 39-69.

4r9

T 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.

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

" 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 P onl 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 .

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),

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.

publ i shed i n I965; 1968 "Th6ori e c r tec hni quc de I' ex p[ri nrentati on c hez C l aude B ernard' "Claude Bernard et Xavier Bichat,",4dcr /u XI' Congris intemational d htstorre

(pp. l 4l -55) , prev i ous \ unpubl i s hc d;

det s.ien.es ( 1965 ) 5 \1968), pp. 287-92.

"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

Published in Erudesd Iistoirc et de philosophE.!esrciences(1968). Etudesd'histoire er de philosophiedesscicn.cs lParis: Vrin. 1968).

ence, i n Wars awand C rac orv ,on A ugus t 28, 1965;

Includes:

"fEvolution

du conccpt de rnethode de Claude Bernard i Gaston Eachc-

' A v a n t- p r o p o s" ( p . 7 ) j

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

" 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,

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-

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 S oci 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;

l ard" (pp. 1 73 86), publ i s hc d i n 1963i

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

"Gaston B ac hel arder l es phi l os ophei ' (pp. 187-95), publ i s hed i n 1e6];

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 E col c

"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-

N o r m a l e Su p 6 r i€ u r ein I9 8 4 i

207), publ i s hed i n l e61;

" 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

"D u S i n gul 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 .

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;

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 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. 37s 0 ) , p u b l ish e d in 1 9 6 4 ;

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'

" 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), publ i s h e d i n I9 5 7 :

l i shed i n 19 53r

"La Philosophie biologiqu€ d'Augustc Comtc et son inllucnce en France

"P athol ogi 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),

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

publ i shed i n 1959r

" L ' E c o le d e tlo n tp cllicr ju g ie p a r Au BUstcC .,rntc" (pp. 75-80), publ i s h e d i n l9 6 l;

"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

" 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 -

l

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;

"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

" 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 i n E ngl i s h i n 1963;

"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."

publ i shed

120

421

.{

t

CR

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

l

CAL.

B

BLIOCRAPts\

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; 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. P agi sand rhe fol l ow i ng "N ote" bv Canguilhcm. both of rvhich can be found in thc R.vuc d( nitaphvsiqk

et

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

"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

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 i n 1 9 9 1 .E xtn cts fr o m th e fifth e d itio n ( 1 9 8 9)ofthi s book are i ncl uded i n 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 K l i bansky, ed., I o Phila'oph'! .ontenporoine, Chtoniqucs, vol. 2: Phtosophie
l

1969), pp. 129-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 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 rt the Ll ni v er\i Ir ol S tras bourgand, l ater, thc S orbonne. "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 ,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 p / r ? r ' c 8 ( 1 9 6 3 ) , p p .2 4 - 5 4 .

Thi s brnL i r I.:c ourt\ mas tc r\ rhes i s ,prep.rredrndtr tht s uptrv rs i on 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. 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 ] (P ari s: l 0/18, 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 260-62. "R6gulation (epistemo|tgie)"

"lean Hyppolite (1901-1968)," Rcvue/e mitaphrrigue er dc rr.rfdlc 7.{ (April-June

L'Eprstenoldqiu

Lncvclopaediauntvrrrd/r I4 (Pitris: Encyclopaedia

L l n i v e r s a lisF r a n ce , 1 9 5 8 ) , p p . I 3 . R c p rin tcd in lir llo sin u t' d itio n s. " 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. 1 9 6 ? - J . rn .1 9 6 8 ) .p p . 5 8 6 4 .

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 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," 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 /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 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,broadc 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'hkr o r r r ia r r r r a n r ci, l: tle n te n tse t in sttn cntr. Ir.\r.'r.,l i oi r;r(P rri srH arhette. ' o l.

!a Psvcholozlie tlvnomqu.i'r/,,f.nJ.. vdruc(ParisrFl.lmmirion. "C. Koncze.rsLi. i6l (1971).PP.ll9-20 iel0). ' Rd uap,rrr/oroph,,luc R r! i c t!.

r 970 ). ' A va n t' p r o p o l' ( p p . iii- v) b v Ge o r g e sC angui l hem.P ubl 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 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 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 d h i\r .ir c d ( \ \ ie n ,.r , r d e ' r c, h n iq u e'. '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. 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 S ci e n c e a n d T cch n o lo g r o l th e Po lisb Aca d emy ofS ci enccs, i n Warsaw and Cracow, in October 1969. Itcprinted in Id;ologic ct ratipndl'ti tlans I'hinoirc 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

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

P P. 20- 25. 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 mard, l 9?0). "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' cn.l,( B t.ar.rpfrt(N es Y ork : S c ri bner, Iq?l ), ro1. I, P P . l -i . "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 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{ ) 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 :(: 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 S tr . 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. " P r € s t ' n t a tio n ," in Cr sto n Ba ch t.l,r r dfa . r ,/.r ( P ari s:V ri n, 1970). pp. t- 10. 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

Sal('mon B)r'et, J. Sebe\tik, lntfodu.rion ri / fi,rroire d.' ntc'.cJ' !ol. 1: Obi':t' ni tl oi /c , trurrp/c r. Ic rrc r.i otrl s (P .rri s :I l .i .herte, I97I) 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-+ ). I o nono l t h patol ogi to(Mex i c o: S i gl (,rti D ti uno edi tores . l 97l ).

b e t w ee n l9 ll a n d l9 l.l. "iudith Swazev,Re/leresond )toor IntefFotion: Sherrington\ Comcpr of Integrativc .4rrton, I Iarvarrl University Press," C/to .4led,rd 5 (1970), pp. 364-65.

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 the |renc h edi ti on of 196r,,i nc l udi ng i rs nes s c c i ,nd part.

Revicw. ! n t r o d u c tio n l

197 2

"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 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

"P ri f.rc e.' i n

Ini l i r

tu L,tnortk , P r6:tnti : par U r\

I nr * us { P ari \: V r.' "n.

2 3 . 1 ( 1 9 ? 0 ) , p p .7 - 6 .

l ' l l .)l .pp.

\tc hon. C j l l < x n.Lru' \'

l -,1.

"P 16l i c t," i rr Gas ton B ac hel ard,L' E ngogc nttntr.rrr' dr.ri ,rre (l ' ari s : P res s rsIIni 1971

vers i tai rc rde Franc e, 1972), pp. 5-6. ''P hvri o l ogi r:ani mal e: H i * oi re," I:norl o2oec l i auni ruk

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 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.

l 2 (P ari s rLnc y c l oP i tf-

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; i ncl Lrdedi n thi s rc ader.

424

's

di a U ni v c rs al i sl rranc e, 1912). pp. 10' t5-i 1.

125

''l klie
et la pr:riquc mi:dicales." rUAicctri, Jc / /romn,c

. 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:, tt)1)1.

"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 (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 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 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. E xtracs l rom thi s edi ri on arc i n c l u d r d in th is r e a d cr .

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 S i \te,on N ol c mber 11, 1971. "(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 , 197.1),v ol . l . pp.65-6?.

lo ,tlothindtisotion des doct.ines infom6: nrenrt' lc l Llnivcrsiti d! Pa s,

pl i g uer (J ul )-S epr. 1974),pp. 293-97.

'oD'

Colloque tcnu d I'lnttitut (1'hktairc .les

Ia dircction
I l r r D a n r . Ie 7 2 ) .

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 l url , ts erl j n,V i enna: U l l nei n, 197' + ). 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,

l 9 l I ) . PP. 7 6 .1 6 9 . 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.

IeT t).,o1. l .l p.

125 28.

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 . ()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
A s hort l etter by C angoi l ht' m ans $eri ng ques ti on\ rc { .rrdi ng oppo:i ' 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 i m p o r ra n ( e h isto r iq u e ." AL t.s.h

"P our la phi l os ophi e," l d N duv c //cc fi ttqu. (N l ay 1975). p. 2e.

Xlll" 0 o nyl ri sl nttnoti onal d'hi sroi rcdt

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. R cp r in te d , x ir h m o d ilica tio n s, a n d u n der a
ld socitti, t82)," L?:;t:tu.l.\ ftilaso-

anrw ers gi v en bv !' renc h phi l os ophers $ hom thc j oumrl c ont.rc t* l * c r: pub l i s hrrl under thi s namc . Itnorno l e e t potol ogi c o(R i mi ni : Gurral di , l 97i ). T.ans l ati onol the 1972 s ec ond,rev i v rl Frc nc h c di ti on. La Jbmocidn .l.l n)ncet>rorfc rcfltio n hs silllor I f1l.r' .Y[/// (\hlencia, Brrr elona: l ua n I l i teras , 1975). 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

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

I t e t n o r t
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

" 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)"

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 angui l hem w rote the i ntroduc tbn (s eebc l or' , s ec ond entrv undc r 1980)

( 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)"

I o conoscenzadella vita ( Bologna: ll l\lulino, 1976) I:1':onocinicnto de Ia vida (Barcelona: Editori.tl Anagrama' 1976)

( 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).

t977

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

Lltulogic et ratiandlite dans I lrirrorredcr rcrcn<.'r,/c ld ttr: No'veller itul6

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 ,

dess .i tn(c r (P .ri s : v ri n, 197?). ct d. phi l os ophi e

1 9 7 6 ) , pp . 5 2 1 - ) 1 .

tnc l udes :

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

"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 X IX ' s i ec l e"

de Ia bac t6ri ol ogi e dans l .r fi n dc s Thi ori es medi c al er' au (pp. 55-77). bas c d on a l ec ture pres entc d i n B arc el ona i n

A p ri 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 '

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 .'

d'histoite

in e n d u o n a les d'hktone des sci ences 26.98

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?+ ;

(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

"S ur I' tl i s (oi re des s c i enc e: de l a

.+29

'ie

depui s Ihr$' i n" (pn. l 0l -l l 9).

A

V TAI

RAl

OI!AL

BL

ST

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

OGRAPHY

S u pi ri c urcl 319(N l arc h 1977). pp. l 2 l l . 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,

f , ' r r h " lli' to r r "l \.icn ce in llo - o t. " 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" ( 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 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 S ci encr.,i n JY s;sk)l :i .

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 as o l hi s bi ography bl C h.rrl c sA ndl er. " Lfs mac hi nesi go(:ri r," I e i tl ondc\A pri l 6, 19' 71). 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 ,

I . i n l a n d , in .lu n e - ju l1 le 7 3 . 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 I'hi ptral notl trne1 (P )ri s : l ns ti tut de I' env i ronnrmc nt, I976). C angui l henr

F n g l i s h in l9 li8 a n d Ita lir n in 1 9 9 2 . 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

X V 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, e d s . , / ' //lc

t976

d e 1 6 llu la tio nd o n s /e r r tr n r r s (P ari 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 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 lion in scirnce. {n cxtcndr:rlversion was publishtrl tht samc vc.rr in /diologic

( 2nd ed., Paris, Vrin.

''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."

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 /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

t9J"/ |. 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 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 " 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

lio m th is:r ticle .r r e in clu d e d in thi s rcadcr.

"Jacques Rufii6, De la Btolo5lica h culture (Paris: 1976)," tn

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 rri sc s l i v e ques ti ons .rhi c h C angui l hem ans rv rr\(pp. 58-6(l ). "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 i upi ri c urc (1978), pp.29-12.

" C o m p l6 m e n t b ib lio g r a p h iq u c" ( p . 2 0 2 ) . l x t r a ts

l 7 (19i 8), pp. I l -26.

R ai s onpri s c ntc+ t' (19 t 8 ). pp. s 5-68.

er fttranaliti don\ I'ht'toft .l,Jsvicnres de Ia vie. I o I'onotion du .on.epr dc ri/1ete out xt ll' et I l/i/'riir/er

''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

Tlopocdia u w:-!alts

( P a r i s :En cvclo p a cd iaUn ive r sa lisF r a n cr .:,1 977), pp. 378 ?9.

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 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

te 26) . 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()

Rlviov. " 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 (l l ordrec ht: R ei rJ el .l 97rl ).

r r i c n r cr2 T ( 1 9 7 7 ) , p . 3 .+ 0 .

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

R cvis. " 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

.+lo

Zon e B ooLs j n t989r ex tr.rc tsi nc l u< tc di n rhi \ re,rder.

4] r

A

V

IAL

RAT

AL'']GRAPtsY

ONALIST

"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.

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). 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 l he ori en' i m

1979

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 .{ -

" L l l i s t o i r e d e s \cicn fcs d e lb r g a n is:rio r n d e Bla in vi l l eet 1'A bbdMauP i cd," R rvu.

i 3). l i rs t publ i rhc rl i n F-rc nc hi n 197.1.

. l ' h i s t o i r .dc\ \.icn cc' ]2 ( 1 9 7 9 ) , p p . 7 l 9 ) . I n c l u d e d in th is r e a d e r .

1960


(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. 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

1 9 7 9 ) , p p .1 tO. 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 . "l-'ogg.tto della stori.l (lcllc scienze." in GasparePoli//i,.d., l o g i a i n Fr u n .io ( t9 0 0

Scicnto ?.1cpirtco]^-

1 9 7 0 ) ( T u tiit L o e sch cr E cl i tore. 1979). pp. 200-16.

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

i n Pari s .R epri nre(l $ i th ()mc c orrc c ti ons i n 199l . "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: f.votution
nidicol \troshourqeos\l'

i\:

l i .n nann, 1980). pp. \ j i -r i i .

,l ht:t,;trt u lc phtla:ophic d.s \L).nr.' (1968). ttt's?nschoftsg$.hi.htc und Epis'[email protected]:{'csannttu

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 .'

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.

.1ul:iitte, Wolf Lepenies.

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 (P ari s :N l al oi ne, pout un?thi orrcJ c /o bro/o< 7rc l 9U 0), p.7-l (1.

V c r h g , 1 97 9 ) . A r e ad e ro l Cr n g u ilh e m \ r r r r ls. in clu d in g:

''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.

"Di. (;cschichte dc. \l'i\scDs.h.ikcn im cpisremd,,gi5chco \\/erk Ci\t,,n

''\\ hat is P s v c hofogri ' IJ r:ohtotond C onx i ourn.IrT (198f)),pp. j 7-50. 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 .

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 : (pp. 22-17), l i rtt puh " D c r Ge g e n sta n
1981

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

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 ).

Itans l ati on ol the l i rs t Irrenc hc (l i ti ,rn (1977).

in )9'7'7. " 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 " 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. 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 ;

412

Uiolo

c rt totion.tliti dans /cr rc,cnccsJ,: /rr ric: Nourcl/cs car
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 I:ng l i rh rrrn\l i i ri (,n i D l ei J 8

, +tJ

rras publ i s |c rl i n 1992, and rn

/

R

" 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.

IOI,R]PHJ

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
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

" 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
(Paris: Conlita

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. "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.

l qS l rpp.

]l l -"1

).

F\trrc l s i nc l udr(l i n rhi s rc i ,l ri . "V orw orl ," 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 \ 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 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). 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 "P res c n t r t i o n " b \ F licn n c Bilib ) r .

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 n./l i ..g r { P rri ' : \i i n. l c R 4 l . pp ?-l ().

) d Do ' n iDiq ue LecoU rt, pp. v-vi . A n.\,

i d t n t i c . r l e d itio n a p p c;r k( l in l9 ti5 . " 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 : ! 1 l T P r c ss, 1 e ti.1 )p. p . i\ \ii. 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. " 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' ti,,nal dc svnthi:sc, lircs lu anlbqu. l:mib Lnt.i l80l-1881. Paris.T 9 octLlve / 9 , 9 i ( P r ris: Alb in Nlich cl, 1 9 3 2 ) ,p p .2 7 l 8 1 . ' 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

A n i ntroduoi on to rhe proc c r< l i rrgrol r c ,,nI r,:nc ,:,orgrni z c d trl C angui 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 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 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 si tai resde Franc c , 1964). un< l tr C anqri l hem \ \uP c rfi s i ,rn. "P ui ssJ nc c c t l i mi tes rl c 1a rrti on.rl i re.n

mc deti nc .

i n C harl es N l arx . ed..

et rcchniqv: Rccutil ,l'itl..lct rilqics i I'ocLosnn
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 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 P art l i vo, cntrv under l 9 i l . 1 , f o r t h t n :lr n n cl r ) th r cititj,) n ) .

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 U i l a nc i (,c ri ti c o di una c pi s rc nro)dgi .r." "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

411

. '] t

l .+ .

"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,

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),

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,

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

i n 1 917.

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-

"D i scou rs dc Mons i c ur C c orpes C angui l hem prononc 6 l e 1" d6c enrbn' 1987 ,;

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

I'occasion de la rcmist' ,lt' lr Midaille d'or du CN RS." .rr'ldoillc rJbr du CNR.\

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.

/9t7 (P ari s :C c ntre N ati onal de l a R ec herc hcS c i enti fi que, 1987).

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

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.

" 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

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,

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 tsS rl omon.

ol ltliorn,i

':t

L Potholoatquc.

"P rel i ce," /Irtt' rr und l rrhnol og_r' 4 (198?I, pp. 7-10.

" 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.

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

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.

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

1986

n:l i s s ueofthe proc eedi ngsol that c ol l oqui um. "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(S cpt,/N ov. 1988

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 Fouc 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 (st

1991 'n

b e l o r l , fir st e n tr y u n d e r 1 9 9 1 ) .

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). Trans l ati < ' nof the s ec c rnrl rc . ri s c < l Frtnc h edi ti on (1981); ex trrc ts i n'

l9 E7

cl uded i n thi : readrr. "P rascn tati on," i n )res S c h* anz . Fy i nel l .t

" 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

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

( 1 9 8 7 ) . p p .4 l? - 5 4 .

1i6

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 .

"P r!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). lapancse translrtion. bv (\amu

Kananrori, ot I o lorntotion tlu nnept

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 !). rlt

"P r61i 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

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 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.

I h c te xt o la le cn r r e g ivcn r t th r tln ive r si (v oi S trasbourgi n l l av l 9l i 8. 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

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."

cpi s ti nrol ogi quc s . l 9R 9), p. x i i i . "P r6s c ntrIi on," i n,l .l i Lhtl FouLouhphl os ophc : R c nc ontrei ntc n.tti onnl 4 P dri s9, 10, tt j dnrter /988 (P ari s :S c ui l , l 9l l 9), pp. I l -12. 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 l e C c nrre Mi c hel I ouerul t. "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 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),

pp.:44-46.

dc mor.,/c95.1(1e90). pp. 125 29. t{ t!i c $ ol I:r.Ir!oi \ t)ag,,gne(,I /,)4,jd. /i )r/.. ( P .),i \: \rri n, 198.)). Id S an ti . ,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

F r r n t e . 19 8 9 ) , p p . 5 1 6 - 5 3 .

''R app< ,n dc l \{ . U angui l hc n s ur l f di rti teur

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 nc l u d t d i n th is r ta r lcr .

dr: l l ns ti tut

drpo,J r p,rr l \1. N ti c hc t fouc rutr, ' n.rnu\c ri t l ran(.ri s rl t l l ambours . L,n ruc de l ' oLti .nri on rtrr

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 .ngui l hem' s rrp,rrt (i pri l

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). 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 i n t h i s r e a d cr .

19. tt)60) on Fouc aul t' sdoc t< i raidi s s trt.r-

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 .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 : Fl .rmnrari on,l 99l ). j ,p. l 5 U -6l .

.+]8

419

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

( ) 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 P ri ze ro I(an-P i crre

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 l
"Qu'est cc quirn philosophe €n Francc aujout
Saris for his book ,tlocfiin( ct tonnmicdtion

filosoficd.lle

lPari;: Vrin, 1987), ar the Ecole

scicnrc(Florence: La Nuova Italia Editricc' 1992 )'

Trnns l nti on,$ i rh .n i ntroduc ti on bl l ac quts C ui l l c mt

N o r m n le 5 u p ir ie u r c, M r r ch 1 0 . 1 9 9 0

(:ee bek rw ' P a*

Tw o). by P aol aJ c ni s ol the 1988 Frenc h rev i s ededi ti on'

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

1993

I 'Honnc de ltdsohdansh non.I d? Coptnic (Pitis: Lahorat
m is < leI' Eco le n,rror.rl c B ul /rri n 186 'upl ri eurc,


( D e c. l9 9 l ) . p p . 2 0 - 2 3 .

199 3), pp. I l -l l .

C) :rJe a nHr p p o lir e . "Prelice,"

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

in Fr.rnsois Delaporte, The Historv oJ Ycllow /:.rer (Cambridge, N4A:

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' )-

M I T I' r e ss, l9 9 l) , p p . ix- r i.

qrap hi ng has heen rt' es tabl i rhed(tec p. 1l n l )'

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.

Japanc:etr.rnslarion. bv Os:mu Kan.rnrori, Shunsrrkcfvlatsuura,Shoujift,rr

lo et "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 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'

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 P ress,l 99l ).

I9rl I ).

l htstotc ct dc ph onphic d.\ scitntcs.

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."

Pa r t

in Jcan Ga,\on, t
Tw o

. t l o ml,u J- Dt1 o n\Pa r is: L ib r a ir ic Ph ilo scrphi qrre V ri n ' l yon: In5ri tur i ntcr, 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. " 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

l

SEL Fc TI o N

C { J MME N Ts o : l

{ rr R Fv rL w s

C^Ncull

lII 11's WoRKs

^ND

i ctu]

1933

/ o u ca u lr ( Pa r is:Ga lil6 e , 1 9 9 2 ) , p p . le - .+ 2. 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
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)' pp. 96 99. 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

GcorgesC angL.ri l hem"' 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 (19'+(')'pP l l T- i {)' B u l l t t u t tle1 o ta cttti < te slcxr cd e Stt' r r b o u r tl4 r>fthe earl r w as 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 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 ptrbv 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 ct dc norol t de ni rcP hv'i qu< Rcrue in th e l i s l r t d , in a slig h tly sh o r ttr fo r m ,

c t d, 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' \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 ) (195e), pp. l l -31.

1964

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 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

5 l ( 1 9 a6 ) , p p . 3 5 5 - 7 0

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

t9 s 6 1967 P . D e l r u n n v, Rcvics o f Io Io tn .ttio n Ju co n a l

le

l l c"

(P ari s: P ressesU ni -

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 ( 1 e 9 6 ). p p . l6 l- 6 2 . F.ll., Rcvict ol t,r fonnorn n Ju conc':y tlc rll"rr

au I l //

't

Jfi n Li croi 11,"Le N ormal rtIepathol ogi rl trr' ,"1c )l onde,l an.l l -9(19b1),P Rc v i ov ol the 1966 c (l i ti ,)n ol the booL puhl i s htd Lrnderthat !i t l c

x l'/t'" Iiicl'r i Prr i\:

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 '|@ P ile' ( ) nly th c iu th o r ' s in itia ls a r c g ite n

r95',:

t \ n , , n \ ' r ' r u sl.

ll.

t{ e !i.s o f t,i F o r n o tto ntlu < o n tt1'tdc 'LJl f\' du\ '\ | //' et Il '///'

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 . r < i ! r ro r d l.6 l ( 1 95 7 ) Pf.9 9 - l{ ) 1 .

1968

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

(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,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

ti o.d l c s.1' hi s toi rc 2l .82-i J I (196E), pp. 196-97. < 16 ' c i .rc c J

1970 l9 5 E

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 1955) P htosLph and { l / / / ' !ta .1 c\( Pir is: tr r r \\c\ Un ive r sita ir csJt Francc' 56s 69' l f i i n o n cr o i ,q ico / Rcr ca r .} lil ( sfPt' 1 9 5 7 - Junc 1953)' P P

442

\l,ruro Di (;iandomcnicr,,Revirs of I.rur/es d'hittorc er dc phlotophicdrr r.r'..r .1(1970).pp. I I l-1.1. (Paris:\i in, 1968), /:ptrrcmr ln Itrli.rn.

.1 4 l

.-. RIT]CA

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] S ti enct9 ( 1 9 7 0) . p p . 1 0 1 - 1 0 S. Revicw ol Erutlcsd h,rrone et .le philotuphic .lessc;tnces(paris: Vtin, l96ti).

L

A]B!IOGRA

Pts Y

hi stoi re dc r rc i enc es ; Ie rari onal i s nreappti qu6 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 publ 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.

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.

t97 2 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). 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.

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

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. Jean Srarobinski, Revieu of Itudes r/lrstoi,c et dc phitosophie.]er r.ren.er (paris:

J.A . S chus ter,R ev i ew of l o .U athtnoti s ati ond$ do,:tt,nc si nfome\ (pari \: |i e. 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 Jamcs L tarson, Revie* of Erurjcsdhistoire et.lc phitosophieder rcieD(.J (piris:

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

V r i n , 19 6 8 ) , Ir s 6 4 ( 1 9 7 3 ) . p p . ll5 - 1 6 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. l 9 ? 3 ) , p p .5 l- 5 6 . A
,\{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), pp. i x _rx .

agai nst att.rcks made t,r F.

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: Vrin, 1954).

under 1980. trerctt N lc nrl el s ohn,.,E di rori alN ore,,' i n C ;c orgesC angui l hc m, On the N trnnl and rhc P othol ogi ot l D ordrec ht: R ei det, l 97B ). pp. rx i i j -rs i r: ci useppe Q uarta, "tdeol ogi a 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. '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. 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

1979 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

198?

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

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 ) ,

l n t rr r d u ctio n to th is r e a d e r .

p p . l l i- 2 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), RNntu c tt.d .lt \toti.t tltlh llksolia l4 ( I') 7r)). pp. 2 26- I l.

i '.

1980

Onrella Costa. Revieu ol idiolo17icct rationnltl .l
A rer i.$ ol On rhc Ntnro/ ,rnrtrhr.foriolooroi {l)onlrccht, l97n). '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 th? P at hol oU !rc |. on ?p. tS + 1.

1983 C hri stophc r Larrrenc e, R ev i e$ ol (;(orges C angui l hc m, On the N omot anrt thc P othol ol l i Lal(D ordrec hr: R c i drt. te78), anrl ofl : K r;upt Tarl or, /i c C on oJ IIlness,Dkeoscond )1thus (Canbridge: Cambridgc Universitv t,rcr(, ':epts 1919). B ri hh l ourntt b h. rk ,,f -\.k ' ,n. j 6 (1981), pp.9t_96.

: N ote on C eorgesC angui l 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 h L r n , l
1984 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 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 S ci enc 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 i nnouncc menrs ,' /' i r 75.2 (198.1),p. 157

( l9 liO) , p . 6 7 ,+ . R e i d e l , 1 9 7 1 1 )/si,l1 ,

198.

\ \ 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 , 1 9 7 8 ) , C lio .a h d ico 1 5 ( 1 9 8 1 ) ,p p . Il5 - 1 6 . 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

( r e8r )P . P.l 9 -2 0 .

,.Gtl rgts 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 , 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 France, 1984).v ol . I, pp. 16r)-65. A n 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.

416

r h t P athol a4K olL)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:

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' '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 ' cr sio n r i o n o f l e No r m o /ct /c p tth o lo tliq u .. 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

Je an-C l audcB eaul ne,"C anqui l hem, Fouc aul t rt l c s autres ," pp. Jl -20r 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.rl i tc," pp. 2l - 2 5;

)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

A n ne Fagot Largc aul t."l ' c rs un nouv eaunatur;rl i s me,"pp. 13-38; D eni s V ers ant,"E pi s temol ogi e de I' i nc c rtai n," pp. l 9-46r

r,cur, in 1981. Tcrmi nal e (1937-1938): U n 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 E s r i d c t6 m o ig n a g e ." p P 6 3 - 8 3

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\ 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< l a t e r i n Pa r is.

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,' 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," P P . s2 62 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 , o r g cs Ca n g u iJh e r ni ln S orbonne"'P p. 84-92. B e r t r a n dS a in t- Se r n in "Ce 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 [ ; \ n o n v n r r ' !s]. "Eib lio g r ip h ic

t

( lcs tr tr viu x d e Ce orgts C angui l hem," pp 9s-105

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 anqai scvue des L|S A ," pp.53-59; Irra n{ oi sR av eau,"P our un di al (} guena(urc /c ul tLrre:Les V uesde I' anthr< r p<,l oq i eD r6di c al e."pp. 6l -6)i ( h i rl es E ri s \c t, "La' l )ouN e'

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 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

rhi ,rtric ...." pp. (tl -66;

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'

1 9 1 8 ) , B u llctino l th t Ht' to r r o f M e d icin c5 9 | 1935 )' pp l 32-33

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 :

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
l9 E6 C.M.P.Nl. I Iertogh, Btthelard en CanBuilh.n: tP'\tenolo{lische Discontttu'Ictt en 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). 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: P re:res U ni 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

1987

N ornral ' en 16,ol u,

ri on pe rmanente," pp. 77-79. S l La( f. S pi c k er,' A n Introduti ,)n

to thc Medi c al E pi s remol ogy of (;eorges

C anguil hem: l \' l ov i ng bc rond N 4i c hc l Fouc aul t." The J ourndl ol

' ttedi c i ne

ontl P hi l os op l 2 (l 9l l 7), pp. l e7-411. An .rnalvsisofOr rrSc,\'ornol antl rhc Patholollical. \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 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)

416

C drgdtl nen (t.os P al ac i os ,V i l l afranc a:A .M. Lorrnz o, 1987),pp.95-126.

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

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/ 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 (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

1988

(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. C a r ) ( ; u t t i ng , .tlich cl lo u co u lt s Ar L h a ca b

firll j,rrion. Rttn'u
C a m b r i dg t' Un i' ,:r sit1 Pr t' ss.1 9 8 9 ) . 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, 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 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.

J. i t.,.r/.,4r. I I(l e9l ).tp.

167 70.

(;. K.irn1. Relict! oi tladoqy and Rationaltt! in th. Histar). ol th. I +; Scjcn..\ (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 Jf.r.r q (l 9et). P P . l 7I i -1. 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

A n 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 .' 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. 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,

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 E ngl i sh. \'1. Ercshchkl., Rcvicrr of/Jcolooy ond Rdtionalttv in th. llisrr

ol rhc Iift Sctcncs

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 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 21 (r99 1), P P .494 96. 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 , 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, A crrcl f rl B i ol orr 65 {l q9{)). p p . 5 8 59 . S. Cilmu,

1992

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 . 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 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. C. I ax n nce, lteviex ol /r/eolo17r' onrl Rorronalirr in thc Histor) ol th? I if. S.i.n.cs ( 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-

.15()

P.rfr Osrlvald,Rerirw of i hc Norntoldntl rh. ldrioli,a/r..r1 (Ncw york: Zonc U(xrks.l9tt9)./orrrr.//.tth.lliston ol ttu B.ho'ior.r/ J-.icn.c' 2lt (Ocr. 1992), p ? . 1 ) 2- ) 1 . iacquc;Cuillerme,"Pn.senrrzionc dcll'edirionciralirnn:ceorgcsCanguilhem, un en,e modcrno?,"in C.rnguilhem, I.tutogioe t
l' ,.n/,| del\.1 vit.Jj Nuav, rru<1,
1993

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 rri otrrrc . pp. 20l l -22; I-ra ni ;,,i s D el rporte. "l a P robl €nati rl ur

hi s tori que dc Ir v i (," pp.

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 dxmbre

1 9 9 0 ) lPa r ;",:Alb in Nlich € 1 ,l9 9 l) .

E d ite d b y th c < ,r g a n iu e no t th c cr n lo q ui um: E ti enne tsal i har,l \l i rei l l e 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

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 angui l hem , ' pp. 2+ 1-50r 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 D onri D j quc Lc c ,,urt, "La Quts ti (,n de I' i ndi v i dr d' apri s Georgc sC angui l hem , ' pp. 262-70;

l n c lu d e s:

A l ain P roc hi antr,"Lc Mat6ri al i s medc (;u,rges C angui l hem,"pp. 271-781

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,"

Franc i s c o.JV . arel a,"' l e C erv eauet l a pens ee' ,"pp. 279-l .i 5i

pp.37-48;

P i e rre Mac herev , "D e C .rngui l hen.i C angui l hem en pas s antpar FoLr,

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

ci ul t," p p.286-94; A l ri n 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.

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 J e an Pie r r e 5 6 r is, "L llist.) ir r ct la vic," pp. 90-l 0l : 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; Claude Debru, "Georges Canguilhem et la normativiti du Pathologiciuc: 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 Anne Marie i\{oulin, "La l\4trdecincmodcrnr sclon Gcorgc' Crnguilhem. ' C o n c ep ts e n a tte n te ' , p p . l.ll J4 ; 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,!chol o g i c - r "p p . 1 3 5 - 4 4 r

)ves S c hrv artr."Ll ne R c mont6e en rroj r r.mpr: Georgc sC angrri l hem, l i vi c, Ic tri t!ri l ," pp. 105-2l r and Mi c hel D egu_,", "A Il oc uti on de c l dturc ," pp. 12.1 i 0. l nch' des a l ettc r rc c c i v ed from C angui l hem, on p. l 2' + . 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. Rcvir\

ol C!d.q.J Cdnlluilhen: Philosopht, h'\r[rin

d.' rcicnrcs.A
.o//oqu.1I,rri 1:A l bi n \l i c hel , l 99l ). 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.

Rcvies ol Ccorgcr Canouilhot: Philosopht. htttoicn
tlctesJu

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 E ssai 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 pathol o g i q u e," p p . 1 4 5 - 5 7 i

coi l or7rc ( P ari s :A l bi n M i c hel , 199I ). Marc R egon , "K i ng C ang," Lhi fdrk ,

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;

(Feb..1, l egl ), pp. l 9 21.

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

Notes

l rom the tcncr 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 rrteo 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 P i e t r o C o r : i , lld lin e \tr in , ir cq ( r c\

S chsartz' w ho prrvi
(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
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

dansI'nrrc dtu:11uc rrc(P ' i ,ri \: I:.rv ard.l eui J ), p. + 65. 2. Ibi d., p. 599. 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 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 .

Fi scrrr (Nor Y ork : Z,)nf l l tok s , l t)81)). +. 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\ rar\ l fi \tor\

ol S c i c nc c .' i n l dc ol o

i n C ,' nnmp(f

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 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

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

toi ft.|de l h i b

phi c < l c rr.k r..r(5th ed.. P rri s : \' ri n. I98I).p.

10. l bi d ., p. 16 a,rd Ie Ip.25,26 ol thi s n..r< 1,:r. l t.

454

,id.. p. Iu.

lt t

IL

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
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 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

on thi s commonpl ac e here w oul d tak e us too f;r afi c l d. l . Quotcd i n MetTger,l a Gc ni s e,p. 195. 4. Thi s i s, j n part. the s ubj c c t ofa s tudy by J ac quesP i quemi tl .

c t d ( m o r dlc I ( 1 9 u 5 ) P 3 0 1 4 . l b id ,P

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

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

K orks 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 B i '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 see p 205 ofthi s rudcr' and l 2u ' 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' P 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

orher practi ces. w hether ' empi ri c al ,' ' tec hni c al ,' or ' i deol ogi c dl .' .. . Th( theoreti 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 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 B rew 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 E rLtdes 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 ' ll.

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'

rv i thout Frenc h may !v i s h to.on\ul t ri l y as a Ii terarv c ri ti c . l nteres te< readers l

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 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

?. Gast<,nBacbclard. I? llatdriahen. kttionnrl {P:rir: Prcssts Unjvcrsitiiirc\ de France, 195 3). 8. l bnl .. p. 86.

ith o tl' o u o n d tiq u e c t fontol i snc: E s\oiru l e P tobt'm' /d l or' m u r .tr j.' a a r r q u(eP' s r r is:Ile l]nl nn' l ql 8)' R fm'rrgl rcj 'u'

2 ' + . J ca n Ca va illis, l u l o n < t tn cn t r ? .t

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: (Ambi;let: Pitrc Laleure' I'raa )lon t)t Jun Gvaillis' in Lct C'trncs lc Bourleror

te'7 61.

9. S ee A nn c FagoC spaper, "Le' l rans fi rrrni s mc ' de

l \taupertui s ," and mv

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 , 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 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) 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 a l l e m a n d ." Er Pr it( Ni,\' . l9 ]l)

1rr. Jean C ] .l v ai l l c s S , ur l o l ogtqu

l a thi oti . dt 1o v i c nc c (3rd c rl .. t' ari s :

V ri n, 1976), p.7 0. ll.

l . l n r ( ) Nr r NIEI tIo D( ) l ( ,cY (P 'rri s:A l can' l 9l 8)' l . l lilr :n c M ctzg e r , 1 o Ccn iced t: Ia vt' :nccdc\ 'ri rf'rur 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 For cxrmP l 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 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

4t 6

Ibi d., p.78.

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' 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< |, 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 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 \ '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).)

1t 7

rI {

h a sb ce n studi ((l l rom the standpoi nt 1 3 . T h c r esp o n * t.r Da r r vin in F r a n cc ( ir n r ,r ' I ' ln r a xlucoon
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 nr;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 1 4 . S e e A lcxa n ttr e Ko lr i' "Ga Jili' e ct Pla to n "' l6 6 - 9 s' and E ruJesi Tal i i i cnncs(P ari s: r . k r r , r . t u c ( Pa r is: tia llim :r < J, l9 7 l) , p p K oyri statts that ht 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 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 nun 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 )' 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 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 d p p l i q u i \ t 9 4 <) \. A rm'rnd C (ni 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 P rri \: chrl l cnges thr rnd modrl 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

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 J 1-1 11911).Fathrr R us s < li i equentl y rc l c rs t{ } the i mP ortant rv ork thi l osry hi c A l an N l us graw (ntl .i sn and thcC rc * h o/K nortJ c dgcc, dl terl by l mre Lak atos .rrrrl (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 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 j 'aul I-e y erabt:nd 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" 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 \ 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 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 cncc." in.\.C .C ronbi t,

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)' 1 6 . L u r l o r ico ( icym o n a t, G' r l' /coC' r /i/" 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 1 8 . i r c q u.s f i.lu cn r a l' ' AsPccts r lt h P' r n sce 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 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' 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 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)' 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 pp.61 11. hi storl ol xri encc' 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 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 p. l'1 td'r")P ordr'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 rl so "l 'A cnral 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 < lc l a fti couvcrte' P ari 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 R atbn')l i sn1c 'tP P ti ttut' 2 1 . l l a ch cla r r l' l' Actjvjti r d tio n < th tt'p S Seeal sol c It /cI]u/'rftl 'r' l t corrccr'' ( l( r ( s n o t' b e q in ' lt th in kin g " R i ti( ,n .r li\t l l 2 : f.

.+58

i r{

trl ., S c i c ntry ' thanS r Tc(Londonr l l tj remann. l 96l ).

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\l rrJr.rl C l l .rgc t.c d., C ri i nl tl ni rcri t r

c tl ., N l adi s ,,n: P robl ensh tht H Lrtorrol S ri c nt,:12n,1

oi W i rons i D t' rc \\, l 96l ). p. i 0l .

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* Il opki n s Ll ni v c rs i tv P rc !s , 1957). 10. Str: Kovri, thc lsrrononjcal Rcvohrton: Coperni&', (tp/i'r, Borc//i. tr:ns. 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 ). ll.

Foratri ti quc .s tl r1i c hel

Fouta,,l t, Ih.Onl c rol

Ihtnqs :1n,1rc hoc ,,1L..1t

ol th! IIw nan S (i .nc c s ll 9r,6l (N c * r(,rl : V i nragf, l 97l ), pp. 115-65. 32. S c c I)i quc mal , ' A s pec ts dc l .r pc ns i ' ede \4endc l ." ll.

K ov re, ftc .,l nrononi c alR ev ol uti l n.p.11.

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 .1rc prc k tts c hcl l c i i l undc (P rague, l 8s 8), v ol ..l ,

un3enl " !,c rtc /l ohrrrl ti l i 1

pp.t0-72. 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 ." ol hi s 0 hc r ,l i c Grc n/!t/c r N orurc rl c nnc nr{ 1874). 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 {l t i p,i g. 1887), \ol . ), p.20' + . Thc terl rl

,+t9

rl )i s ad(l ' ' (' s \rrs l i rs r publ i rhc rl

(Bcrlin' I85 91' in thc ,lbhandlungen tler Aka
2 O5 '

l b i d , P. 3 1 7 .

42. According to F,itz Lei..tnc' Lei4Adcn M

Gcschi'hte du tl'dnin

\194))'

oP ernti 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 is n o t m c nti oned i n Feari ngs te'
T h e "sci enceoffi nanc€"'i n$hi ch

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 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 ')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 l 8 ' 1 1 - . + 5 )v, o l. l, PP. l4 - 1 5 kuts d? I'oryani sal i onet 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 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 4 8 . I b i d., vo l. 2 ' PP. 2 5 3 1 7 ) . 2 8 { ) ' -19. Ibid.

54. l bi d., P . x v i . 5 5. l bi rl .,rol .3' P

la

56. l bi d , v ol . I' P ' 246' 5?. tbi d.' P . 284. ' 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. ln rhe prel;ce to 'UilDDirtsPtur rervrr d l'h"td'rc Perrault, architcct and anatonrist a hc w rote,' ' l t has been nec ts s aryto agre€on naturcl l edesani nau!l 671-76), l or s av s ' one does i n arc hi tec ture- 5o that' w hen Measureor a Modr-rl e,as one htad atmal l v enrri c l e' and an unc ompl i crampl e , thatadoghas an el ongatc d the parts o1 the thes e P arts s ' i th ol cJred l e g, i t i s onl ,\ b) €omP ari s on ' rl l 'll Dagogn(t' Pour unc thiarie giftrob du formts hunr;n body." Quoted in !rd'rqoi' 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 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 l 5' nd l l ?i pP H rs roi re'v ol l ' 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' 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 60. l bi d., rot l ' P 61 . l bi d., v ol l ' P

'ii 16'

62. l bi d., P .529. 61. Ibi d. 64 . Ibk l . v ol .2, P .58'

P A Rt Tw o: E P l s i €MoL()c Y 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 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 2. Ibi d., 11.2,art.25a' P l 84' l . l bi d., 11.3,P P . 196-203' '1. Jean-BaptistcI amnrck. Rcrirruiti

vivd sur /'or174nis'nion 'las 'orPt

lParisl

fayard. 1986).

s0 . ib id. , P. 295

et L' A (t€or' 1809)' c ogtqv (P rri s ; C htz t)' ntu S. Lamarc f, P hi l os ophl nol

51. Cuvier,Hn'ire, vol. 3. pp 55-5{t' s2 . Ib id. ,P. 61. vol' I pP xiii-xiv 51. BlainrillcandN{aupied,l/isroirc.

!o1.2, p.6. d':s s'ien':csndttttttct 6. Ceorgcs Cuvicr, Roppoa llistoriqut \t)t h' Ptogtis

461

46(|

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).

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 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. 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, B nrr', l el e). 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 nsandS mi th I:I

I l. Claude Bernarrl, Intnduction d 1/tu.l. d. 10 ni.lc(inc .xPirin.ntolc \ltatis

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). c r l ,r t,rr,1' rrL Jr 15. t { rnri A tl an. "N l ,,rt ,,rr ri tl " i n I' Or5l onts ornnhr,t/ogl ,1rrL / trl '"),rrr,,n (P ari !: H e rm,rnn. I972).

Y ork: (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

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 . R c o i ' t) csc.r r tcs," lic) tise o n ,\' la n " ( Al X I.)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 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

21. Comte, C oursdc phi l o,j ofi i c pos i ti v e,\ol .4, l (\s (' n' t8

.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 Y o r k: R. Br ( n n cr , le 5 2 ) .

P rcss l el i '1-91)'

l a morc hcdc s i di es c r < i c t

(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 1S . Brrnarrl , A apporrrv 6

prr11n\t )t nonhc J c 1.,p,bl ra/ogi cai nri rul cc n

/rr:nrc (l ' .rri r: L' l mpri meri ( InrP eri )l e, 1867), p 2l 1 n 209 .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

v , , 1 .I , p . l 0 l 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 dc phn.l oti t

i r l . . 1 7 , p . J 4 6. 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

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 \ 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). 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 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 ? . 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 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 :

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 ll.

N l . r r t ! r ) , 1 6 1 I ll6 6 q l) .

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 (

thcraprc i r Fc gel i uc r rv ahrl nrl rl c ' I9.j arhun< l c ns . Ortmc trhts thc l rtttttttunLl 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 tor.tol mc di dn? 16.5l t96)). 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 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' ,

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 par la nitanique ct la poft .hin'( (t686). 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," inIdn

dc l ' ho' rl nc (l ' rri ' :

(;ouj on c t B runot. 1806), rol .9.

7. Ibid.

l].

:.'. t ' aul -j ri s c phB arthez . N ouc c ourdi i mentsel ch ti tnc

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).

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 ( ( ) \ 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. 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,

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 rcl ttt\ <1,: 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 . 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 : V i ntagc, 1975),p. 192. 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 . }7. l n rnar(|, P rn.rr\,1. ni d(n. 18. Ci t({ l bv B oui l l tru(l i nIs ai

rpi ti nc nk l c .

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

p.1+ 2.

s url a phi l onphn ni di c ol e c r s ur l c s ,ti ni ntn[s

461

19. Bernarrl. i nrradurrion d l'itudc de lo n6
2. Robert llooke, ,llicrogrcphia. or Sont PhvsioL,arcolD$ri/'o^ Bodks Madc bv

a0. tsernard, Pr,rc?er de nddecint expirinentoh, p. 44O.

ol

inute

ognifvintt Glass.with Observarionsand lnqurn'r lhocupon (l_on,

don, 16 67).

. r l . l b i d., p p . l? 9 - 8 0 .

3

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 rccherchesroxic 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 ?.

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.

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.

8. t bi d.

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); i, Fel i x Marti C f i c m o r h € . d p ,a 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-A nti 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

7. I bi d.

t.ti ci nc 18 \19t4).

p p . l - . 2L

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.

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:P ressesLl ni versi tai res rle Francc, 1957).

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,

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

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.

l r a n c e . ] 9 5 ]) , p .2 0 2 . . + 9 . D a go g n ct,,i/ltlo d e \.t

ll.

d o cttin e d a n s l\teuvrc dc P d'.rr (P afi s: P resscs

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 .

U n i v e r s i t a i r ts d e F r a n ce , 1 9 6 7 ) .

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.

5 0 . l b i d ., p .6 7 .

l 95l ). 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

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. 2?. "l t i s i mportant to k no* the true c aus coi thr hc art\ morc ment rhat

$ i l l i n g t o t r dm it. 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 Ioqi( VonCelluhr

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

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 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 "

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 1 9 . C h ar le sNa u d in , "t L s Esp ice sa llin cs ct la thi ori t
$

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 sP i ri ts

I

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

,&

" 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 P nrts 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

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 : 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 \ 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"(A I X l l 66)' i n i b i d . . v o l . I, p . l( ) ' + .

2 2 . D e sca r tr s. l) isco u r s( . F ( ) u r in "OPtir s "

(A l

.l I illarch 1618" iAl

ll.6?1. ii Thc Philosophn.,l llrttiryls ol Dcscortes.rc!. ),

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 1 c rv ;rti on. 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 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

I

fifl

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. S rr "t-rt ters to B os w el l (?), 1646 (?f' (A T

M686 and 695), i n C harl es A danr

.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. 686.695.

V l l 09-14)' i n 'bi d.'

pp. 16.+-66. 21. t bid .

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 ,

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

;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 .

IA T X I.2a5l , i n i bi d., p. l l 9).

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-

hi bcttr s Lrl mc rus mus c ul us , c nrne tantum et tendi ni bus more c ortrrorl rm 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. 2 5 . D e rca r tcs, Disco u r sc F o u r in "Op tics"

(A I V I.l 09-1'1)' i n i bi d.'

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

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 -

..frt., (1 670), i n Op.n otrtni d.v ol . l . p. 661 (' i ' \ .l ,ri , l i .l uc t

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

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") 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

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

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!

p r o d u cin g vari ousel l ecs" (A l 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,

m, pr.) .k \c ti pti a

.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 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" 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) r D e / & b r ; b u rI l { ' 5 9 ], mutuatui ' 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 , W i l l i s , D e s on g u in r s 3 2 . C f . i bid ., vo ) . I, P 6 6 1 . ll.

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
rnurruturi .i n v ol . 2, p.6rl l . 4fJ. "W e c al l ' rc fl ex mov ementi mov emc nt\ duc to a ni mul o-motor nerrous 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 . 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 trcti on, lbr i t i s not (h( nrov ement w hos c < l i rec ti on c hangesbLrt the nerv ous 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

a sti l l , 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 terms 'l l i sti l l l , 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 provi des remarkabl y 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"

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 -

"l magi nati on necess'rr) 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 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

v,l . Il , p . l l 2).

. . 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 'ertect. J C orti ' l 9'+])' . 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(P ari s:

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 , Ieqons sur la phlsiologi. conpoic

dc I'honnt

t dcs oninour IParis, ll]7ii-791,

+1. SeeW i l l i i s D c anna brutorun (16' 7)J . 42. J.A. Un/er, l:rstc Crnnde einer PhtFlogic.lcr cigenlichn throrrricn Notur th

rLh? n K 6ry t l tJ l l ).

s c c .49S .

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

,p.296,298. in 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)

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, 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

) p c r do m n i d , vo l. I, PP.6 8 0 - i3 ' + . 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 de o W i 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

th,,seol ,ruthors mrrl e ex pl i c i t us e oIrhc noti on oIrc l ]ec ti on. "ho 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 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 .

rdi t-t?).b|.

I.th.

l ..et.

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" 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''

{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 ,

r901i -9 2) lr ..r .

h. 1e. 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 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 ) " 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\ ' , 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 nrl 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 ) "S pi ti tus 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' j8.

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 , ti rcnch, l l t8 2 ), I.5 . '+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. +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).

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)S c! al so D c ntz'ra 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

P hi l as oph-

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 . 2. art.6, p. 58.

C c r c b r io n a to r n c.p . 3 l8 ) .

in l^

i .ol hi i ti ngs of D es .,trtc r,rol . l . p. 2l tl t.

5r. I bi d.

s2. r bid.

469

tl ni verri tai rc' , c tl,td e cinL lcso i' n tn rc(P ari s:P resses 5 L S e c F. Auiu r Sh u sr e r L

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 theory ol the "dc grets ol the s c ns es "i n' A urhorr

d c F r . r n c r : ,1 9 7 2 ) , ch 1 . 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)' 5 5 . S e e , fo r e xa m p le , Bu ilo ' r ' s a r ticle o n "T h e A ss" i n /l i rl oi re 'drur"'

R c pl i es to rhc S i rth S c r o1

( )bj ccri on! (41 \:11.,136-)v ). i n i bi tl ., rol . 2. n.(. 9. pp. 294-96. '/'!

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: 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-

st'. Scc On thc Ori4n oli.hc jPc.ier, ch. r+.

.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

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

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 ,,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

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

( 1 8 ( ) l ) ,v o l . I . p p .2 0 - ll. i9.

ma(hi ne an(l organi rm, s c c "A N erv S y s trm ol N aturc and thr: C om-

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

P hi l os ophrol Ic rtLrs onLl P o2c rs .trl ns .

.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 (), .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\(P nri s:V ri n'1966) 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
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 .

6l -66.

pp.2?5-iJ9. B i ol o1|i N ew )ork: Ihsi ( 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

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 at.r.S cc,l orc x ampl c .hi s c orrc s pondc neerri ththrI)uk (i )fIl anov .r(1676

B o o k s . 1 9 6 5) .

7q)

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

P A R T l t o t r R : INT I RI' I{ l IAllo Ns L R c n i t) e ltr r tt\, lV.t9),

' T " [T h t l\l,tr q r r tsr ' ;{

Ne \\c.}s(l tl . Ocrober 16+5" (A I

in Ihr Philos.Phtcolliitttnlls of Dcstarter'traos John C()ttingham' Robrrt

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 P rerr'

otfo So.irttit nt D.ut'.hldn.l /u .ltlnehnltn

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,

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, 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 ntrrted 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 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'

pp. .l{F21. 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 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' 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

l'

art.4?, p. 1.16). + . P a r t 5 .Jt "l) isc.u r sc.r n th c M e th ( xl" ( AT V I 40-t'0)' i n i bi rl . !ol

l'

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" (A T l V 570-76) i n i b i d . , v o l . l, p P l0 l- 1 0 ' t 5 . " T o Mo r c, 5 F e b r u a r ;-l6 a s" ( AT Vl6 ? - 7 0 )

470

i n i tri d., P P 160-67 On thc

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 .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 . 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

.(r!.{, v{,1.l . tt. 9e. 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 -

m.r(hi ncs t! i rhout i n!ok i ng r 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 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 D rsrorter , tarnr. F.S . l l al < hnc .rnd (i .ri . L R os s 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).

471

[(A l -x1 .520], i n Oeurrer& D l rJ .drter,v ol . l l , p. 520).

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)' in The Philosophical l'ltt.irgr o/ Der.drfer, vol. I'p Il

21 . ' A c c reti o dupl ex es t:.rl i .r mortuorum c t quac non nutri untur, l i tr;ue

ll5.

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,

See Ra1mond Ruver, E/lrncnrs dc pr1.ltl-6id/orir (Paris: Pressts tlnivcr'

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

s i t a i r e sd e F ra n ce , 1 9 4 ? ) , p p . { 6 - 4 7 . 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.

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

"Treatisc on l\14n" (AT Xl.l65), in lhe Phlo\oPhicdl Wntingr ol D$&n's'

, . 1. p. \66. i nq' ol D es c orrc s!ol

v o l . I , p . 1 04 .

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.

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-

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.

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 A n d r 6 B r i d ou x, d .,

p. 5tt.

Oe u we se t le ttr e s( Pa r is:Ga lli mard, 19s3). [.Ihi s passagei s

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 P htl 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. l e.

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'

Ibi d.

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

p.867.

ll.

r 6. r bi d .

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),

vol .6. pp. 150-51.

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; B ri doux'

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

p.866.

I l. Au8lstc Comte, S'5tinrc Jt: plitiquc positire (t'aris: I'rtsses tlniversitaircs

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

dc Fra nc e. l q?5). v ol . I. p. 584.

ibid., vol. ll, p. 519.

]4. C omtc , C ours ,v ol .6. P rel ,]c e.p. x v u.

19. ,\lartial Cuerc,ult, Descotes rclon Iordrc lts rorsons,vol l: I 1n'' d Ie

15 . C omte, C ours ,l brti €rh l c \\on, l ol . I, p. I5l .

c o r p s ( P a r i sAn : b icr , 1 9 5 3 ) , p 2 4 ll. 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 P hi l o' 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. 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
tl

15 . C omte, 5rrt,.a?? ./. pol i ti qucpos i ti v e,v ol . I, pp. 57.1,592. 650.

:

17 . C omte, C ours ,l orty l i r;t l es s on,v ol . 3, p. 280. 18 . C omtc , S frfi mc d. pohti qft p.\i ti v t, v ol . |, p.410. 19 . Ibi d., v ol . I, pp. 518-80. a0. l bi d., v ol . I, p.602.

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, scmP er

41. l bi d.

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'

i fut 1 ( l l l i l 0), p. l 5 l l . i \nrt," l o P htos oph rc S ' ot 66. " l rans rati on.tl

. { 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 , S vstin 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 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

' 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 . -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):B e ac on, 198.1).p. l l 6. 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 -

Il,rsson. l9{X)).

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:

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 bl 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

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.

I' a n ' lto nti cet cl el o phvsi al ogi ei n

r'1. B rrn;rrd, / 11r:nrrur )c sphi nonti nc sdc 1at rt'r,' rrrr/rr .,r/r dn,mr,r/\.r .,r/r

lsl{6.

rl a.j rour (P a ri s :I i brai ri t J .B . B ri l l i are, 1879).v ol l , p.' 10

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:

7a. Bcrnard, Rdpporl nr lcspngrit et la narthc Llelo ph.rsiologicgtnintlc cn

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 . 5). Littrt.,llidrnt

/ran
et miJccrrx, p '1l3tr.

75. tlernrrd, /ntrodurrion i I'ltu
s l . l b i d . , p . 41 1 7 . 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 E 31'

J.tt. B i i l l i ,rr c , 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 ' 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 P ress' 1969)'

77. B ernard,l c qons s urbs phi nonti nc sh h v ri ' .rol

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.

7s. l bi d., v ol . 2, p. 5).{ .

230. 5 ? . L i t t r e , i u - Si,r n r e P. ,

ttO. l bi d., p.5:.

5ll. Ibid., p. 231.

S l . B crnard. Intral uc ri "n, p.' 70.

59. lbid., p. 260.

E 2. B c rnard, l ' j ri nri pc sp. . 26.

t'0. tbid., p.261.

8l .

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.

i,l) ict e t s oDbur. se\ rtl i ti ons '1\cr ')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

l bi d., p. l s 2 n.2.

i i 5. B c rn.rrd,/ntrorl ui ti or).p. 165.

t i 2 . C h a r l c s R o l' jn , ' l) c h b io lo g 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 . 8N . & :r n.rrd, P ri nri ptt. p. 119.

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 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.

9tl . Thc ful l ri tl i r ol rhc s orl

l L i d . , p . J- lt.

i s "l ,r N rtrn

i 171

l , p i ' 11

17t

oppri nc L p.rr l l mi dc c i nc

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 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). 91. Bcrnard, lrincipes
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 ). 6. Franz R eul eaur, Thtorc ti s rhc K i nerl ,dti h:Grunbtj .l t: c i nc r theor)c dt ( B rauns c hu' ei g,\' i c u rg. I l l 75 ). .tl osc,l i nrv c s en 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.

E dsard 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 B ernard sur l a 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. 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, It)65). p. 126.

an arciclc in thc Gazcrtchibdonadoirt ,lt .lllJ,ntu

.t l. Chiruryi(.

l b i d ., p . I1 7 .

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

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-

\ophi cal l hi ti ngs of D c s tortts ,trans . J ohn C otti ngham, I{ oberr S r.rrthotl anrl 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 . l0l.

(P ari \: V ri n, l 96tt), p. 306.

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

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

l0l.

l 'hi stotrcet dc phi l os oph,.dc rrt.' .fi

vol . 1, p. I34.

Bernard, Pcnsic's; nores
12. CIaude l l ernard, /nr..,.l u(.r(,n (186s ). pt. 2, c h. 2. s ec . l . ll.

P , r n r I t r v r : P R o a L Ir !s

K ant, C ' ttguc ol J uU mnt,

rrans . J .11. B c rnrr(l (N c \

Y ork : l l al nc r,

l 95l ), sc c . 65.

L Emanuel Radl, Gesci;chteder b;oloyllschen Thcortenin der Neurcir {2nd ed., 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 ', 2. \\hlther Riese, I'ldic
A l c a n , 1 9 3 8 ) , p . 8 ; se c a lso p . 9 .

1.1. Eernard,/ntroduc aon,pp. 356-57. 15. lbi d., pp. 159-60. 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), 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 1 \ , . s Y , , r l : R an .l,' m H,' ,,\' . le + 7 ) . L .ll. . { . 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 P r r i s , ( ; . E Q u jlla u , I7 5 l) , scc.6 .+ ,q u o ( d in Ch n r lc ! V i l i or D aremberS ,H r'ro,r€ 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.

476

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 . .\ppcodi r l l trl th.rt rrorl , rftr' \ rh( ,,l nri { )n! bo"ten

c el l rhenrr' .rnd rhr phi

l osophv o l Lc ' i hni ;. 18. [ti ennc \\i rl l i , "tts C ul turc s rl i ' rg,rnesembnonnai res ' i n ri trr' . " R rrar r.,c,rl ,qu. (l uav -J une l .)511,f. t8e.

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 , 1 e 6 5 ) .p . l 7 l.

j c an R os rand, l l ont r\.l e i ri ti :

ll.

patteur.B [nonL

tonttnettc ,I.o R t.hc

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. 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 r D . / t . d ' o r ( Ne $ Y( ,r [, Di) u b l( d i) . t9 6 6 ) , p . a 2 5fl . 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 K no\l 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. 2 3 . I b i d., p p . ll7 .t2 . 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

42. Ilr:rnard, lnrrorludbn Li I'ttu rt:rrl ,rc ni l trn, I.!7;C ol l j rr. l 96l ).p.96. +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! 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 roph,9ucr .+( l 9 l 4- I s ), p. 198.

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;

44. Xavicr Bichat, l".rtonit gininjl. dppligu'c ri to phrsiotogit a t) Lt nilcttnc (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

2 s . I b i d ., p . 1 7 5 .

+!

2 7 . S i g cr ist,.llo n d r r d V&lid n e , p . t0 9 . 1 8 . C o mte , Co u r j, p p . 1 7 5 , l? 6 .

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 ,

chs. I an d l . 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 \:

L i l ) r a i r i ( J . B . Ila illit:r ' . l3 ? 7 ) . p . 5 6 .

18. l l l atu. f,4r S .fi rJ r. I j 9b. i tntr,. A .t

rbid.

thc S ,tphrv dn,/.i c s r.,.c ,n.,r. l rrn\. i n(l

Tarl or, c < 1.R . K l i l ,anrIr and F. A ns c onrtr,

ondon: N el s on, t,16t).

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.tfunorr, 2nd r:d., 1958) TR ^N s .]

1 2 . l b i d ., p p .6 5 - 6 6 . 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,

1 5 . l b i ( i .. p . 1 6 0 .

l9-58),p. I09.

i (r. C l .ru(l ( l rv rc < l e \i rgrtar.

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. 17. f.M. (iuardia, Hisrorc dc l
,t tt ,u*ti.in(, ) rols. (tj,l\rl,n:

R i t hrrl rrn and I ord, I812). < rt. l , pp. 20-21.

26. r bi(t., P . I7 9 .

ll.

tpphcLtn f\nrtnqt

dc ld phL,gnallc. ou nouvc c tloctritu nittiLot.

( P r r i s : P a n c k ou clc. llll5 ) , L . 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(. rn ntstr i clle dt l' f nt.vcl ol'e.:I rc l.d n e i sc ).2 lt9 18). + 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).

47R

R c norguts ;ur tn k tnauc l ' onc .ti \t (t6+ i t.

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_ s.ri pt\i cs ttrbl i rhrnc nrol nati onal s tLrdl arnrs ana rrox )unt depot\. 52. (l ui raud, ta Grc nnoi .,p. 109. 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,. 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 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 studv ol D r. I l c l l mi c h, Lbrrrfi c r rtu N o' :rl tun.t Oa2j ). 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

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 ,,. R evued'hrtot. des\.i c nc c s| (1979), pp.7 S _82 and 90_91.

Accir s/.,fr r(ele ip zig r [. D cuti ckc, 19]4;2n
"Vie," Encrclapo.dia unive6rlis t6 lts.jt), pp.762r,6(,b, J6h_(,9c. "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), t01S -'77d .

r96 7). 50. JulicnFreund,I tssentc du poltiquclParis: Sirey,1965),p. 332. 5 7. lb ;d,,p. 293. 58. SeeI lenri Bergson,fhc TwoSourc*of llorollT and Acligion:"Whether humanor animal,.rsocic(yis aDorganization; it impliesa coordination an(lgenerallyalsoa nrbordination of elcmcnts;it thercforecxhibits,whethermerelv

pp.

"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 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 ). pp. 591-98, 601-601, 618-t9. "La P hy s i ol ogi cc n A l l c maS ne,' ,j n TanrD ,ed., H i \toi rc

embodicdin life or, in addition,specifically formulated, a collcctionof rules

l i j ti nb J c ,c )c nc c s . 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

lrtstesTrcpiques, 59. Claudet-6vi-Srrauss, trans.John and Doreen Weigh. ma ntNe " )i'r k : Ar h' r r . um , lq8lt . p 18i 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 Nictzsche Bricfwcchscl(Bcrlin: Walterde Gruyter,1977),p. 100. 61. Nie(,sche,fht Brth of f

l'l'"mmc .+3 (,March 1912J, pp. 6-1. "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 : 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), p. l 2I5.r.

qcdv,trnnr. \!hltcr Kauihan (Ne$ lbrk:

Vintagt,1967).

"Lc S r)tur api s ramoi ogi quede l a medec i ne," H ntotr dnd phtos oftr oJ the / i /i J, rcr,c , l 0ts uptt., l qx x r,pp tS -l a. ji

So u r ce s

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 righted works: 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., P ari s: V ri n, 1989), 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,

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. I
S.icnccr (c)mbridge.

MA:

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. 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 X yl l l , si i (h.s\2nd ed., P ari s:

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,

I t6--t2. t55-56.

460

ll0

L

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, 76, 79 , t)6-u7,83_89, 9 i _92. I02 l o+ , l r(,_r5.

"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 ?), pp. 79_1j 5. "H nroire de I' horl nrc c t nature der c hos es s el on;\ugus te C omtc drns l t Plandes trcvaut sctenifiqu.J'nicessdnes pout tiorqanncr k) n(iiti. t,q,!2,.,i cr frUJ.J ph i losophryucs(197 4J, pp. 291-9't. "E mi 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 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 /e6i (P ari s :A l bi n Mi c hc t, 1982), pp.27t-7? anrl 279_ttO. "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 56-57, s60_62, 566_6tt. "P rel i ce," i n C l aude B ernarrl . ter:onss ur tesphi noni n.s .tc Io v i c :ontnruns ou\ ti \'nou| .t ou! v i { l .ru\ (p.rri \: V ri n, I96tr). p. v .

4al

=,.. !aox

-. 3

i>- - !

*r

!
ic 12; .==t- cF

'=.2 = r a: 2

i

^.

:

=

,a 'a

-6=. +

+. 4 . =