For the mathematician and the engineer, the “tropism theory of animal conduct,” founded by Dr. J. Loeb, is of the greatest interest, because this is a theory which analyses the functions and reactions of an organism as a whole and [pg 237] therefore there is no chance for confusion of ideas or the intermixing of dimensions.
“Physiologists have long been in the habit of studying not the reactions of the whole organism but the reactions of isolated segments; the so-called reflexes. While it may seem justifiable to construct the reactions of the organism as a whole from the individual reflexes, such an attempt is in reality doomed to failure, since the reactions produced in an isolated element cannot be counted upon to occur when the same element is part of the whole, on account of the mutual inhibitions which the different parts of the organism produce upon each other when in organic connection; and it is, therefore, impossible to express the conduct of a whole animal as the algebraic sum of the reflexes of its isolated segments.... It would, therefore, be a misconception to speak of tropism as of reflexes, since tropisms are reactions of the organism as a whole, while reflexes are reactions of isolated segments. Reflexes and tropisms agree, however, in one respect, inasmuch as both are obviously of a purely physico-chemical character.” Forced Movements—Tropism and Animal Conduct. By Jacques Loeb.
I will quote here only a very few passages, but these books are of such importance that every mathematician and engineer should read them. They are, if I may say so, a “mathematical biology”—the survey of a life long study of “tropisms,” which is the name given to express “forced movements” in organisms. They give the quintessence of laboratory experiments as to what are the effects of different energies such as light (heliotropism), electricity (galvanotropism), gravity (geotropism), etc., in their reaction and influence upon the movements and actions of living organisms. These experiments are conclusive and the conclusions arrived at cannot be overlooked or evaded. The tremendous practical results of such scientific methods are based upon two principles, namely: that, (1) the scientists must think mathematically, their studies of the phenomena must be in “systems” as a complex whole, and they must not intermix dimensions; (2) [pg 238] they must see the danger and not be afraid of old words with wrong meanings, but must use clear and rigorous thinking to eliminate the prejudices in science—the poison of metaphysical speculating with words, or verbalism. These books give ample proofs of how misleading and obscuring are the words used and how basically wrong are the conclusions arrived at by such scientists as still persist in using the anthropomorphic or teleological methods of analysis. If a sceptical or doubtful reader is interested to see an ample proof of how deadly is the effect which an incorrect or unmathematical manner of thinking brings into science and life—he also may be referred to these books. The following quotations prove biologically that man is of a totally different dimension—a totally different being than an animal. From Dr. Conklin I quote only from his Heredity and Environment and to save a repetition of the title of the book, I will indicate the quotations by using only his name. (All italics are indicated by A. K.)
“It would be of the greatest importance to show directly that the homologous proteins of different species are different. This has been done for hemoglobins of the blood by Reichert and Brown, who have shown by crystallographic measurements that the hemoglobins of any species are definite substances for that species.... The following sentences by Reichert and Brown seem to indicate that this may be true for the crystals of hemoglobin. ‘The hemoglobins of any species are different substances for that species. But upon comparing the corresponding substances hemoglobins in different species of a genus it is generally found that they differ the one from the other to a greater or less degree; the differences being such that when complete crystallographic data are available the different species can be distinguished by these differences in their hemoglobins’.... The facts thus far reported imply the suggestion that heredity of the genus is determined by the proteins of a definite constitution differing from the proteins of other genera. This constitution of the proteins would therefore be responsible for the genus heredity. The different species of a genus have all the same genus proteins, but the proteins of each species of the same genus are apparently different again in chemical constitution [pg 239] and hence they may give rise to the specific biological or immunity reactions.” The Organism as a Whole, by Jacques Loeb.
“All peculiarities which are characteristic of a race, species, genus, order, class and phylum are of course inherited, otherwise there would be no constant characteristics of these groups and no possibility of classifying organisms. The chief characters of every living thing are unalterably fixed by heredity. Men do not gather grapes of thorns nor figs of thistles. Every living thing produces off-spring after its own kind, Men, horses, cattle; birds, reptiles, fishes; insects, mollusks, worms; polyps, sponges, micro-organisms,—all of the million known species of animals and plants differ from one another because of inherited peculiarities, because they have come from different kinds of germ cells.” Conklin.
“The entire organism consisting of structures and functions, body and mind, develops out of the germ, and the organization of the germ determines all the possibilities of development of the mind no less than of the body, though the actual realization of any possibility is dependent also upon environmental stimuli.”... Conklin.
“The development of the mind parallels that of the body; whatever the ultimate relation of the mind and body may be, there can be no reasonable doubt that the two develop together from the germ. It is a curious fact that many people who are seriously disturbed by scientific teaching as to the evolution or gradual development of the human race accept with equanimity the universal observation as to the development of the human individual,—mind as well as body. The animal ancestry of the race is surely no more disturbing to philosophical or religious beliefs than the germinal origin of the individual, and yet the latter is a fact of universal observation which cannot be relegated to the domain of hypothesis or theory, and which can not be successfully denied.... Now we know that the child comes from the germ cells which are not made by the bodies of the parents but have arisen by the division of the antecedent germ cell. Every cell comes from a pre-existing cell by a process of division, and every germ cell comes from a pre-existing germ cell. Consequently it is not possible to hold, that the body generates germ cells, nor that the soul generates souls. The only possible scientific position is that the mind or soul as well as the body develops from the germ.
“No fact in human experience is more certain than that the mind develops by gradual and natural processes from a simple condition which can scarcely be called mind at all; no fact in human experience is fraught with greater practical and philosophical [pg 240] significance than this, and yet no fact is more generally disregarded.” Conklin.
“Doubtless the elements of which consciousness develops are present in the germ cells, in the same sense that the elements of the other psychic processes or of the organs of the body are there present; not as a miniature of the adult condition, but rather in the form of elements or factors, which by long series of combinations and transformations, due to interactions with one another and with the environment, give rise to the fully developed condition.... It is an interesting fact that in man, and in several other animals which may be assumed to have a sense of identity, the nerve cells, especially those of the brain, cease dividing at an early age, and these identical cells persist throughout the remainder of life.”...
“The hen does not produce the egg, but the egg produces the hen and also other eggs. Individual traits are not transmitted from the hen to the egg, but they develop out of germinal factors which are carried along from cell to cell, and from generation to generation....”