Abstract
Vitalism claims that biological organisms are governed by nonmaterial agents like entelechies. The received view today rejects vitalism by presupposing metaphysical materialism (or physicalism). Metaphysical materialism maintains that the world is ultimately material (or physical), and it, therefore, repudiates the existence of nonmaterial entelechies. However, this marks a shift compared with the arguments against vitalism developed by logical empiricists, who were indifferent to metaphysical issues and were only concerned with logical and empirical matters in the sciences. Logical empiricists rejected the concept of the entelechy (vitalism), because vital laws confirmed by biological phenomena were unavailable; in contrast, they accepted the concept of the atom (materialism), since it constituted physical laws and was therefore associated with verifiable results in modern physics.
Highlights
The Metaphysical Refutation of VitalismToday most biologists and philosophers understand vitalism as a heretical doctrine in the history of biology, originally proposed by Hans Driesch in the early twentieth century.2 According to Driesch’s doctrine of vitalism, biological organisms are governed by nonmaterial vital agents termed entelechies (Driesch 1929; Churchill 1969; Allen 2008)
It was meaningless to reject vitalism by presupposing materialist metaphysics, and the possibility of future vital laws could not be denied, at least in principle. They accepted the concept of the atom, because it could be associated with physical laws and verifiable experimental results
Logical empiricists declined to view the validity of the concept of the atom as supporting metaphysical materialism
Summary
Today most biologists and philosophers understand vitalism as a heretical doctrine in the history of biology, originally proposed by Hans Driesch in the early twentieth century. According to Driesch’s doctrine of vitalism, biological organisms are governed by nonmaterial vital agents termed entelechies (Driesch 1929; Churchill 1969; Allen 2008). Like the concept of the atom, the validity of the entelechy was to be evaluated against the background of contemporary biology, and to be assessed in terms of its ability to explain biological phenomena This was exactly the attitude of logical empiricists. He claimed: “The introduction of the magnitude E, in accord with Driesch, certainly means going beyond the frame of physical laws, but in no way an abandonment of the ground of empirical science, nor an introduction of anthropomorphic, soul-like elements” (Frank 1998, 111) In this claim, Frank correctly pointed out that Driesch’s introduction of the entelechy (the vital factor E), resulted from his concerns over the difficulties of mechanistic explanations in embryology. 11 In Feigl’s words, “[Alfred] Whitehead’s suggestion that the behavior of electrons within living organisms may be fundamentally different from that in inorganic compounds can not be refuted a priori” (Feigl 1981b, 317)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Transversal: International Journal for the Historiography of Science
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
