Editing Vitalism

{{Short description|Belief about living organisms}}
{{About|the non-mechanist philosophy|the Jain philosophical concept|Vitalism (Jainism)|other uses|Vital (disambiguation)}}
{{Alternative medicine sidebar |fringe}}

'''Vitalism''' is a [[pseudoscientific]] belief.<ref name=Bechtel>{{cite encyclopedia |url= http://mechanism.ucsd.edu/teaching/philbio/vitalism.htm |author=Bechtel, William; Williamson, Robert C. |year=1998 |title=Vitalism |editor=E. Craig |encyclopedia=Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Routledge}}</ref>{{efn|[[Stéphane Leduc]] and [[D'Arcy Thompson]] (''[[On Growth and Form]]'') published a series of works that in Evelyn Fox Keller's view took on the task of uprooting the remaining vestiges of vitalism, essentially by showing that the principles of physics and chemistry were enough, by themselves, to account for the growth and development of biological form.<ref>Evelyn Fox Keller, ''Making Sense of Life Explaining Biological Development with Models, Metaphors, and Machines''. Harvard University Press, 2002.</ref> On the other hand, [[Michael Ruse]] notes that D'Arcy Thompson's avoidance of [[natural selection]] had an "odor of spirit forces" about it.<ref name=Ruse>{{cite book |author1=Ruse, Michael |editor1-last=Henning |editor1-first=Brian G. |editor2-last=Scarfe |editor2-first=Adam |title=Beyond Mechanism: Putting Life Back Into Biology |date=2013 |publisher=Lexington Books |page=419 |chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=3VtosxAtq-EC|chapter=17. From Organicism to Mechanism-and Halfway Back?|isbn=9780739174371 }}</ref>}} Where vitalism explicitly invokes a vital principle, that element is often referred to as the "vital spark", "energy", "''[[élan vital]]''" (coined by vitalist [[Henri Bergson]]), "vital force", or "'''''vis vitalis'''''", which some equate with the [[soul (spirit)|soul]]. In the 18th and 19th centuries, vitalism was [[Alternatives to evolution by natural selection|discussed among biologists]], between those who felt that the known mechanics of physics would eventually explain the difference between life and non-life and vitalists who argued that the processes of life could not be reduced to a mechanistic process. Vitalist biologists such as [[Johannes Reinke]] proposed [[testable]] [[hypotheses]] meant to show inadequacies with mechanistic explanations, but their experiments failed to provide support for vitalism. Biologists now consider vitalism in this sense to have been refuted by [[Scientific evidence|empirical evidence]], and hence regard it either as a [[Superseded scientific theories|superseded scientific theory]],<ref name="Williams2003">{{cite book |last=Williams |first=Elizabeth Ann |title=A Cultural History of Medical Vitalism in Enlightenment Montpellier |url= https://books.google.com/books?id=AvqYl4sdwaYC&pg=PA4 |year=2003 |publisher=Ashgate |isbn=978-0-7546-0881-3 |page=4}}</ref> or as a pseudoscience since the mid-20th century.<ref name="DevBio"/><ref name="ps"/>

Vitalism has a long history in [[medical]] philosophies: many [[traditional medicine|traditional healing]] practices posited that disease results from some imbalance in vital forces.

== History ==

===Ancient times===
The notion that bodily functions are due to a vitalistic principle existing in all living creatures has roots going back at least to [[ancient Egypt]].<ref>Jidenu, Paulin (1996) ''African Philosophy, 2nd Ed.'' Indiana University Press, {{ISBN|0-253-21096-8}}, p.16.</ref> In [[Greek philosophy]], the [[Milesian school]] proposed natural explanations [[deductive argument|deduced]] from [[materialism]] and [[Mechanism (philosophy)|mechanism]]. However, by the time of [[Lucretius]], this account was supplemented, (for example, by the unpredictable ''[[clinamen]]'' of [[Epicurus]]), and in [[Stoic physics]], the ''[[pneuma]]'' assumed the role of ''[[logos]]''. [[Galen]] believed the lungs draw ''pneuma'' from the air, which the blood communicates throughout the body.<ref>{{harvnb|Birch|Cobb|1985|p=75}}</ref>

===Medieval===
In Europe, medieval physics was influenced by the idea of ''pneuma'', helping to shape later [[aether theories]].

===Early modern===
Vitalists included English anatomist [[Francis Glisson]] (1597–1677) and the Italian doctor [[Marcello Malpighi]] (1628–1694).<ref name="Charles Birch 1985, pp. 76">{{harvnb|Birch|Cobb|1985|pp=76–78}}</ref> [[Caspar Friedrich Wolff]] (1733–1794) is considered to be the father of [[Epigenesis (biology)|epigenesis]] in [[embryology]], that is, he marks the point when embryonic development began to be described in terms of the proliferation of cells rather than the incarnation of a preformed soul. However, this degree of empirical observation was not matched by a mechanistic philosophy: in his ''[[Theoria Generationis]]'' (1759), he tried to explain the emergence of the organism by the actions of a ''vis essentialis'' (an organizing, formative force). [[Carl Reichenbach]] (1788–1869) later developed the theory of [[Odic force]], a form of life-energy that permeates living things.

In the 17th century, modern science responded to [[Isaac Newton|Newton]]'s [[action at a distance]] and the mechanism of [[Cartesian dualism]] with vitalist theories: that whereas the chemical transformations undergone by non-living substances are reversible, so-called "organic" matter is permanently altered by chemical transformations (such as cooking).<ref name=Ede/>

As worded by [[Charles Birch]] and [[John B. Cobb]], "the claims of the vitalists came to the fore again" in the 18th century:<ref name="Charles Birch 1985, pp. 76"/> "[[Georg Ernst Stahl]]'s followers were active as were others, such as the physician genius [[Xavier Bichat|Francis Xavier Bichat]] of the Hotel Dieu."<ref name="Charles Birch 1985, pp. 76"/> However, "Bichat moved from the tendency typical of the French vitalistic tradition to progressively free himself from [[metaphysics]] in order to combine with hypotheses and theories which accorded to the scientific criteria of physics and chemistry."<ref>{{harvnb|''History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences''|p=238}}</ref> [[John Hunter (surgeon)|John Hunter]] recognised "a 'living principle' in addition to mechanics."<ref name="Charles Birch 1985, pp. 76"/>

[[Johann Friedrich Blumenbach]] was influential in establishing epigenesis in the life sciences in 1781 with his publication of ''Über den Bildungstrieb und das Zeugungsgeschäfte''. Blumenbach cut up freshwater ''[[Hydra (zoology)|Hydra]]'' and established that the removed parts would regenerate. He inferred the presence of a "formative drive" (''Bildungstrieb'') in living matter. But he pointed out that this name,
{{blockquote|like names applied to every other kind of vital power, of itself, explains nothing: it serves merely to designate a peculiar power formed by the combination of the mechanical principle with that which is susceptible of modification.}}

===19th century===
{{further|Alternatives to Darwinism}}
[[File:Sample of Urea.jpg|thumb|right|The synthesis of [[urea]] in the early 19th century from [[inorganic chemistry|inorganic compounds]] was [[counterevidence]] for the vitalist hypothesis that only organisms could make the components of living things.]]

[[Jöns Jakob Berzelius]], one of the early 19th century founders of modern [[chemistry]], argued that a regulative force must exist within living matter to maintain its functions.<ref name=Ede>Ede, Andrew. (2007) ''The Rise and Decline of Colloid Science in North America, 1900–1935: The Neglected Dimension'', p. 23</ref> Berzelius contended that compounds could be distinguished by whether they required any organisms in their [[Biosynthesis|synthesis]] ([[organic compounds]]) or whether they did not ([[inorganic compounds]]).<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Wilkinson|first=Ian|date=10 June 2002|title=History of Clinical Chemistry|journal=EJIFCC|volume=13|issue=4|pages=114–118|issn=1650-3414|pmc=6208063}}</ref> Vitalist chemists predicted that organic materials could not be synthesized from inorganic components, but [[Friedrich Wöhler]] synthesised [[urea]] from inorganic components in 1828.<ref>{{Cite journal|url=https://www.karger.com/Article/FullText/13463|title=Vitalism and Synthesis of Urea|first1=E.|last1=Kinne-Saffran|first2=R. K. H.|last2=Kinne|date=August 7, 1999|journal=American Journal of Nephrology|volume=19|issue=2|pages=290–294|via=www.karger.com|doi=10.1159/000013463|pmid=10213830|s2cid=71727190}}</ref> However, contemporary accounts do not support the common belief that vitalism died when Wöhler made urea. This ''Wöhler Myth'', as historian Peter Ramberg called it, originated from a popular history of chemistry published in 1931, which, "ignoring all pretense of historical accuracy, turned Wöhler into a crusader who made attempt after attempt to synthesize a natural product that would refute vitalism and lift the veil of ignorance, until 'one afternoon the miracle happened{{'"}}.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.1179/amb.2000.47.3.170|pmid=11640223|title=The Death of Vitalism and the Birth of Organic Chemistry: Wohler's Urea Synthesis and the Disciplinary Identity of Organic Chemistry.|journal=Ambix|volume=47|issue=3|pages=170–195|year=2000|last1=Ramberg|first1=Peter J.|s2cid=44613876}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Schummer |first1=Joachim |title=The notion of nature in chemistry |journal=Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A |date=December 2003 |volume=34 |issue=4 |pages=705–736 |doi=10.1016/S0039-3681(03)00050-5|bibcode=2003SHPSA..34..705S |url=http://www.joachimschummer.net/papers/2003_NatureChemistry_SHPS.pdf}}</ref>{{efn|In 1845, [[Adolph Kolbe]] succeeded in making acetic acid from inorganic compounds, and in the 1850s, [[Marcellin Berthelot]] repeated this feat for numerous organic compounds. In retrospect, Wöhler's work was the beginning of the end of Berzelius's vitalist hypothesis, but only in retrospect, as Ramberg had shown.}}

Between 1833 and 1844, [[Johannes Peter Müller]] wrote a book on [[physiology]] called ''Handbuch der Physiologie'', which became the leading textbook in the field for much of the nineteenth century. The book showed Müller's commitments to vitalism; he questioned why organic matter differs from inorganic, then proceeded to chemical analyses of the blood and lymph. He describes in detail the circulatory, lymphatic, respiratory, digestive, endocrine, nervous, and sensory systems in a wide variety of animals but explains that the presence of a [[soul]] makes each organism an indivisible whole. He claimed that the behaviour of light and sound waves showed that living organisms possessed a life-energy for which physical laws could never fully account.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Otis |first1=Laura |title=Johannes Peter Müller (1801-1858) |url=https://vlp.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/pdfgen/essays/enc22.pdf |website=Virtual Laboratory: Essays and Resources on the Experimentalization of Life (Max Planck Institute) |date=October 2004}}</ref>

[[Louis Pasteur]] (1822–1895) after his famous rebuttal of [[spontaneous generation]], performed several experiments that he felt supported vitalism. According to Bechtel, Pasteur "fitted fermentation into a more general programme describing special reactions that only occur in living organisms. These are irreducibly vital phenomena." Rejecting the claims of Berzelius, [[Liebig]], [[Moritz Traube|Traube]] and others that fermentation resulted from chemical agents or catalysts within cells, Pasteur concluded that fermentation was a "vital action".<ref name=Bechtel/>

===20th century===

[[Hans Driesch]] (1867–1941) interpreted his experiments as showing that life is not run by physicochemical laws.<ref name="DevBio">{{Cite web|url=http://7e.devbio.com/article.php?ch=10&id=110|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20061031180529/http://7e.devbio.com/article.php?ch=10&id=110|url-status=dead|title=Developmental Biology 8e Online: A Selective History of Induction|archivedate=October 31, 2006}}</ref> His main argument was that when one cuts up an embryo after its first division or two, each part grows into a complete adult. Driesch's reputation as an experimental biologist deteriorated as a result of his vitalistic theories, which scientists have seen since his time as pseudoscience.<ref name="DevBio" /><ref name=ps>{{cite book |last=Dyde |first=Sean |editor1-last=Normandin |editor1-first=Sebastian |editor2-last=Wolfe |editor2-first= T. Charles |title=Vitalism and the Scientific Image in Post-Enlightenment Life Science, 1800–2010 |chapter-url= https://books.google.com/books?id=EQVAAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA104 |year=2013 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-94-007-2445-7 |page=104 |chapter=Chapter 5: Life and the Mind in Nineteenth-Century Britain |quote=In medicine and biology, vitalism has been seen as a philosophically-charged term, a pseudoscientific gloss that corrupted scientific practice …}}</ref> Vitalism is a superseded scientific hypothesis, and the term is sometimes used as a [[pejorative]] [[epithet]].<ref>{{Cite journal|url=http://www.pep-web.org/document.php?id=aop.004.0041a|title=Psychic Energy: A Historical Perspective|first=R. M.|last=Galatzer-Levy|date=August 7, 1976|journal=Ann. Psychoanal.|volume=4|pages=41–61|via=PEP Web}}</ref> [[Ernst Mayr]] (1904–2005) wrote:
{{quote|It would be ahistorical to ridicule vitalists. When one reads the writings of one of the leading vitalists like Driesch one is forced to agree with him that many of the basic problems of biology simply cannot be solved by a philosophy as that of Descartes, in which the organism is simply considered a machine... The logic of the critique of the vitalists was impeccable.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Mayr|first1=Ernst|date=2002|url= http://www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/e01_2/autonomy.htm |title=BOTANY ONLINE: Ernst MAYR: Walter Arndt Lecture: The Autonomy of Biology |access-date=2006-09-24 |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20060926210457/http://www.biologie.uni-hamburg.de/b-online/e01_2/autonomy.htm |archive-date=2006-09-26 }}</ref>}}
{{quote|Vitalism has become so disreputable a belief in the last fifty years that no biologist alive today would want to be classified as a vitalist. Still, the remnants of vitalist thinking can be found in the work of [[Alistair Hardy]], [[Sewall Wright]], and [[Charles Birch]], who seem to believe in some sort of nonmaterial principle in organisms.<ref>Ernst Mayr ''Toward a new philosophy of biology: observations of an evolutionist'' 1988, p. 13. {{ISBN|978-0674896666}}.</ref>}}

Other vitalists included [[Johannes Reinke]] and [[Oscar Hertwig]]. Reinke used the word ''neovitalism'' to describe his work, claiming that it would eventually be verified through experimentation, and that it was an improvement over the other vitalistic theories. The work of Reinke influenced [[Carl Jung]].<ref>{{Cite journal|url=https://www.academia.edu/6789277|title=Jung's concept of die Dominanten (the Dominants) (1997)|first=Richard|last=Noll|via=www.academia.edu}}</ref>

[[John Scott Haldane]] adopted an anti-mechanist approach to biology and an [[idealist]] philosophy early on in his career. Haldane saw his work as a vindication of his belief that [[teleology]] was an essential concept in biology. His views became widely known with his first book ''Mechanism, life and personality'' in 1913.<ref name="Peter J. Bowler 2001, pp. 168">Bowler, Peter J. Reconciling science and religion: the debate in early-twentieth-century Britain, 2001, pp. 168–169. {{ISBN|978-0226068589}}.</ref> Haldane borrowed arguments from the vitalists to use against mechanism; however, he was not a vitalist. Haldane treated the organism as fundamental to biology: "we perceive the organism as a self-regulating entity", "every effort to analyze it into components that can be reduced to a mechanical explanation violates this central experience".<ref name="Peter J. Bowler 2001, pp. 168" /> The work of Haldane was an influence on [[organicism]]. Haldane stated that a purely mechanist interpretation could not account for the characteristics of life. Haldane wrote a number of books in which he attempted to show the invalidity of both vitalism and mechanist approaches to science. Haldane explained:

{{quote|We must find a different theoretical basis of biology, based on the observation that all the phenomena concerned tend towards being so coordinated that they express what is normal for an adult organism.|<ref name="Mark A. Bedau 2010, p. 95" />}}

By 1931, biologists had "almost unanimously abandoned vitalism as an acknowledged belief."<ref name="Mark A. Bedau 2010, p. 95">{{cite book |title=The Nature of Life: Classical and Contemporary Perspectives from Philosophy and Science|editor1-first=Mark A. |editor1-last=Bedau|editor1-link=Mark Bedau |editor2-first=Carol E.|editor2-last=Cleland |editor2-link= Carol Cleland |chapter=The Decline of Vitalism |first=Ernst |last=Mayr |author-link=Ernst Mayr |pages=93–95|quote=Yet considering how dominant vitalism was in biology and for how long a period it prevailed, it is surprising how rapidly and completely it collapsed. The last support of vitalism as a viable concept in biology disappeared about 1930." (p.&nbsp;94) From p.&nbsp;95: "Vitalism survived even longer in the writings of philosophers than it did in the writings of physicists. But so far as I know, there are no vitalists among the philosophers of biology who started publishing after 1965. Nor do I know of a single reputable living biologist who still supports straightforward vitalism. The few late twentieth-century biologists with vitalist leanings (A. Hardy, S. Wright, A. Portmann) are no longer alive. |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=L3ycvNfa320C&pg=PA93 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |year=2010 |isbn=9781139488655}}</ref>

==Emergentism ==
{{main|Emergentism}}

Contemporary science and engineering sometimes describe [[emergence|emergent processes]], in which the properties of a system cannot be fully described in terms of the properties of the constituents.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Schultz |first=S.G. |title=A century of (epithelial) transport physiology: from vitalism to molecular cloning |journal=The American Journal of Physiology |volume=274 |issue=1 Pt 1 |pages=C13–23 |year=1998 |pmid=9458708 |doi=10.1152/ajpcell.1998.274.1.C13 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Gilbert |first1=S.F. |last2=Sarkar |first2=S. |title=Embracing complexity: organicism for the 21st century |journal=Developmental Dynamics |volume=219 |issue=1 |pages=1–9 |year=2000 |pmid=10974666 |doi=10.1002/1097-0177(2000)9999:9999<::AID-DVDY1036>3.0.CO;2-A |doi-access=free }}</ref> This may be because the properties of the constituents are not fully understood, or because the interactions between the individual constituents are important for the behavior of the system.

Whether emergence should be grouped with traditional vitalist concepts is a matter of semantic controversy.{{efn|See;<ref>{{cite web |last1=O’Connor |first1=Timothy |title=Emergent Properties |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/properties-emergent/ |website=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University |date=2021}}</ref> briefly, some philosophers see emergentism as midway between traditional spiritual vitalism and mechanistic reductionism; others argue that, structurally, emergentism is equivalent to vitalism. See also.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Emmeche|first=C|title=Does a robot have an Umwelt? Reflections on the qualitative biosemiotics of Jakob von Uexküll |journal=Semiotica |date=16 July 2001 |volume=2001 |issue=134 |pages=653–693 |doi=10.1515/semi.2001.048|url=http://www.nbi.dk/~emmeche/cePubl/2001d.robumwelt.pdf}}</ref>}} According to Emmeche ''et al.'' (1997):

{{quote|On the one hand, many scientists and philosophers regard emergence as having only a pseudo-scientific status. On the other hand, new developments in physics, biology, psychology, and cross-disciplinary fields such as cognitive science, artificial life, and the study of non-linear dynamical systems have focused strongly on the high level 'collective behaviour' of complex systems, which is often said to be truly emergent, and the term is increasingly used to characterize such systems.|<ref name="Emmeche 1997">Emmeche, C. (1997) Explaining Emergence: towards an ontology of levels. ''Journal for General Philosophy of Science'' [http://alf.nbi.dk/~emmeche/coPubl/97e.EKS/emerg.html available online] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061006171903/http://alf.nbi.dk/~emmeche/coPubl/97e.EKS/emerg.html |date=2006-10-06 }}</ref>}}

== Mesmerism ==
{{main|Animal magnetism}}
[[File:Franz Anton Mesmer.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Franz Mesmer]] proposed the vitalist force of ''[[animal magnetism|magnétisme animal]]'' in animals with breath.]]

A popular vitalist theory of the 18th century was "[[animal magnetism]]", in the theories of [[Franz Mesmer]] (1734–1815). However, the use of the (conventional) English term ''animal magnetism'' to translate Mesmer's '''magnétisme animal''' can be misleading for three reasons:
* Mesmer chose his term to clearly distinguish his variant of ''magnetic'' force from those referred to, at that time, as ''mineral magnetism'', ''cosmic magnetism'' and ''planetary magnetism''.
* Mesmer felt that this particular force/power only resided in the bodies of humans and animals.
* Mesmer chose the word "''animal''," for its root meaning (from Latin ''animus''="breath") specifically to identify his force as a quality that belonged to all creatures with breath; viz., the animate beings: humans and animals.

Mesmer's ideas became so influential that King [[Louis XVI]] of France appointed two commissions to investigate [[mesmerism]]; one was led by [[Joseph-Ignace Guillotin]], the other, led by [[Benjamin Franklin]], included [[Jean Sylvain Bailly|Bailly]] and [[Lavoisier]]. The commissioners learned about Mesmeric theory, and saw its patients fall into fits and [[trance]]s. In Franklin's garden, a patient was led to each of five trees, one of which had been "mesmerized"; he hugged each in turn to receive the "vital fluid," but fainted at the foot of a 'wrong' one. At Lavoisier's house, four normal cups of water were held before a "sensitive" woman; the fourth produced convulsions, but she calmly swallowed the mesmerized contents of a fifth, believing it to be plain water. The commissioners concluded that "the fluid without imagination is powerless, whereas imagination without the fluid can produce the effects of the fluid."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Best |first1=M. |last2=Neuhauser |first2=D. |last3=Slavin |first3=L. |title=Evaluating Mesmerism, Paris, 1784: the controversy over the blinded placebo controlled trials has not stopped |url= http://qhc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/12/3/232 |journal=Quality & Safety in Health Care |volume=12 |issue=3 |pages=232–3 |year=2003 |pmid=12792017 |pmc=1743715 |doi=10.1136/qhc.12.3.232}}</ref>

== Medical philosophies ==

Vitalism has a long history in [[medical]] philosophies: many [[traditional medicine|traditional healing]] practices posited that disease results from some imbalance in vital forces. One example of a similar notion in Africa is the [[Yoruba people|Yoruba]] concept of [[Ase (Yoruba)|ase]]. In the European tradition founded by [[Hippocrates]], these vital forces were associated with the [[four temperaments]] and [[The four humours|humours]]. Multiple Asian traditions posited an imbalance or blocking of [[qi]] or [[prana]]. Amongst unterritorialized traditions such as religions and arts, forms of vitalism continue to exist as philosophical positions or as memorial tenets.{{citation needed|date=April 2017}}

[[Complementary and alternative medicine]] therapies include [[energy therapy|energy therapies]],<ref name="titleComplementary and Alternative Medicine – U.S. National Library of Medicine Collection Development Manual">{{cite web |url= https://www.nlm.nih.gov/tsd/acquisitions/cdm/subjects24.html |title=Complementary and Alternative Medicine – U.S. National Library of Medicine Collection Development Manual |access-date=2008-03-31}}</ref> associated with vitalism, especially biofield therapies such as [[therapeutic touch]], [[Reiki]], external [[qi]], [[chakra]] healing and SHEN therapy.<ref name="Rubik">{{cite web|last=Rubik|first=Beverly|title=Bioenergetic Medicines|work=American Medical Student Association Foundation|access-date=8 November 2006|url= http://www.amsa.org/ICAM/C6.doc  |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20060214125248/https://www.amsa.org/ICAM/C6.doc |archive-date=2006-02-14 }}</ref> In these therapies, the "[[subtle energy]]" field of a patient is manipulated by a practitioner. The subtle energy is held to exist beyond the electromagnetic energy produced by the heart and brain. Beverly Rubik describes the biofield as a "complex, dynamic, extremely weak EM field within and around the human body...."<ref name="Rubik" />

The founder of [[homeopathy]], [[Samuel Hahnemann]], promoted an immaterial, vitalistic view of disease: "...they are solely spirit-like (dynamic) derangements of the spirit-like power (the vital principle) that animates the human body." The view of disease as a dynamic disturbance of the immaterial and dynamic vital force is taught in many homeopathic colleges and constitutes a fundamental principle for many contemporary practising homeopaths.{{citation needed|date=April 2017}}

== Criticism ==
[[File:Pierre Mignard - Portrait de Jean-Baptiste Poquelin dit Molière (1622-1673) - Google Art Project (cropped).jpg|thumb|upright|left|The 17th century French playwright [[Molière]] mocked vitalism in his 1673 play ''[[Le Malade imaginaire]]''.]]

Vitalism has sometimes been criticized as [[begging the question]] by inventing a name. [[Molière]] had famously parodied this fallacy in ''[[Le Malade imaginaire]]'', where a quack "answers" the question of "Why does [[opium]] cause sleep?" with "Because of its '''dormitive virtue''' (i.e., [[soporific]] power)."<ref name="fr.wikisource.org">'' Mihi a docto doctore / Demandatur causam et rationem quare / Opium facit dormire. / A quoi respondeo, / Quia est in eo / Vertus dormitiva, / Cujus est natura / Sensus assoupire.'' [http://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Le_Malade_imaginaire_-_3%C3%A8me_interm%C3%A8de Le Malade imaginaire, (French Wikisource)]</ref> [[Thomas Henry Huxley]] compared vitalism to stating that water is the way it is because of its "aquosity".<ref name="The Physical Basis of Life">[http://aleph0.clarku.edu/huxley/comm/PMG/PBofL.html The Physical Basis of Life], ''Pall Mall Gazette'', 1869</ref> His grandson [[Julian Huxley]] in 1926 compared "vital force" or ''élan vital'' to explaining a railroad locomotive's operation by its ''élan locomotif'' ("locomotive force").

Another criticism is that vitalists have failed to rule out mechanistic explanations. This is rather obvious in retrospect for [[organic chemistry]] and [[developmental biology]], but the criticism goes back at least a century. In 1912, [[Jacques Loeb]] published ''The Mechanistic Conception of Life'', in which he described experiments on how a sea urchin could have a pin for its father, as [[Bertrand Russell]] put it (''Religion and Science''). He offered this challenge:<ref name="JLoeb1912">{{Cite book |first=Jacques |last=Loeb |date=1912 |title= The Mechanistic Conception of Life: Biological Essays |publisher=University of Chicago Press |edition=1st |location=United States |url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Mechanistic_Conception_of_Life/euVcAAAAcAAJ}}</ref>{{rp|pages=5–6}}

{{bq|text=... we must either succeed in producing living matter artificially, or we must find the reasons why this is impossible.}}

Loeb addressed vitalism more explicitly:<ref name="JLoeb1912"/>{{rp|pages=14–15}}

{{bq|text=It is, therefore, unwarranted to continue the statement that in addition to the acceleration of oxidations the beginning of individual life is determined by the entrance of a metaphysical "life principle" into the egg; and that death is determined, aside from the cessation of oxidations, by the departure of this "principle" from the body. In the case of the evaporation of water we are satisfied with the explanation given by the kinetic theory of gases and do not demand that to repeat a well-known jest of Huxley the disappearance of the "aquosity" be also taken into consideration.}}

Bechtel states that vitalism "is often viewed as [[Falsifiability|unfalsifiable]], and therefore a pernicious metaphysical doctrine."<ref name=Bechtel/> For many scientists, "vitalist" theories were unsatisfactory "holding positions" on the pathway to mechanistic understanding. In 1967, [[Francis Crick]], the co-discoverer of the structure of [[DNA]], stated "And so to those of you who may be vitalists I would make this prophecy: what everyone believed yesterday, and you believe today, only [[Crank (person)|cranks]] will believe tomorrow."<ref name="Crick">Crick, Francis (1967) ''Of Molecules and Men''; Great Minds Series Prometheus Books 2004, reviewed [http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/reviews/crickandkurtz.htm here]. Crick's remark is cited and discussed in: Hein H (2004) [https://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF00413789 Molecular biology vs. organicism: The enduring dispute between mechanism and vitalism.] ''Synthese'' 20:238–253, who describes Crick's remark as "raising spectral red herrings".</ref>

While many vitalistic theories have in fact been falsified, notably Mesmerism, the [[pseudoscience|pseudoscientific]] retention of untested and [[Testability|untestable]] theories continues to this day. [[Alan Sokal]] published an analysis of the wide acceptance among professional nurses of "scientific theories" of spiritual healing.<ref name="Sokal">[http://physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/pseudoscience_rev.pdf Pseudoscience and Postmodernism: Antagonists or Fellow-Travelers? (pdf)]</ref> Use of a technique called [[therapeutic touch]] was especially reviewed by Sokal, who concluded, "nearly all the pseudoscientific systems to be examined in this essay are based philosophically on vitalism" and added that "Mainstream science has rejected vitalism since at least the 1930s, for a plethora of good reasons that have only become stronger with time."<ref name="Sokal" />

Joseph C. Keating, Jr.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.ncmic.com/pages/ce/seminars/speakers/keating.htm|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20060525203939/http://www.ncmic.com/pages/ce/seminars/speakers/keating.htm|url-status=dead|title=Joseph C. Keating, Jr., PhD: Biographical sketch|archivedate=May 25, 2006}}</ref> discusses vitalism's past and present roles in [[chiropractic]] and calls vitalism "a form of [[bio-theology]]." He further explains that:<ref name="keating_innate">{{citation |title=The Meanings of Innate |author=Keating, Joseph C. |volume=46 |issue=1 |pmc=2505097 |journal=The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association |year=2002 |pages=4–10}}</ref>

{{bq|text=Vitalism is that rejected tradition in biology which proposes that life is sustained and explained by an unmeasurable, intelligent force or energy. The supposed effects of vitalism are the manifestations of life itself, which in turn are the basis for inferring the concept in the first place. This [[circular reasoning]] offers pseudo-explanation, and may deceive us into believing we have explained some aspect of biology when in fact we have only labeled our ignorance. 'Explaining an unknown (life) with an unknowable (Innate),' suggests chiropractor Joseph Donahue, 'is absurd'."}}

Keating views vitalism as incompatible with scientific thinking:<ref name="keating_innate" />

{{bq|text=Chiropractors are not unique in recognizing a tendency and capacity for self-repair and auto-regulation of human physiology. But we surely stick out like a sore thumb among professions which claim to be scientifically based by our unrelenting commitment to vitalism. So long as we propound the 'One cause, one cure' rhetoric of Innate, we should expect to be met by ridicule from the wider health science community. Chiropractors can't have it both ways. Our theories cannot be both dogmatically held vitalistic constructs and be scientific at the same time. The purposiveness, consciousness and rigidity of the Palmers' Innate should be rejected.}}

Keating also mentions Skinner's viewpoint:<ref name="keating_innate" />

{{bq|text=Vitalism has many faces and has sprung up in many areas of scientific inquiry. Psychologist [[B.F. Skinner]], for example, pointed out the irrationality of attributing behavior to mental states and traits. Such 'mental way stations,' he argued, amount to excess theoretical baggage which fails to advance cause-and-effect explanations by substituting an unfathomable psychology of 'mind'.}}

According to Williams, "[t]oday, vitalism is one of the ideas that form the basis for many pseudoscientific health systems that claim that illnesses are caused by a disturbance or imbalance of the body's vital force."<ref name="Williams" /> "Vitalists claim to be scientific, but in fact they reject the scientific method with its basic postulates of cause and effect and of provability. They often regard subjective experience to be more valid than objective material reality."<ref name="Williams">{{cite encyclopedia|encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience: From Alien Abductions to Zone Therapy|editor-first=William F.|editor-last=Williams|year=2013|edition=revised|title=Vitalism|page=367|isbn=9781135955229|url= https://books.google.com/books?id=vH1EAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA395 |quote='''VITALISM''' &ndash; The concept that bodily functions are due to a 'vital principle' or 'life force' that is distinct from the physical forces explainable by the laws of chemistry and physics. Many alternative approaches to modern medicine are rooted in vitalism. ... The exact nature of the vital force was debated by early philosophers, but vitalism in one form or another remained the preferred thinking behind most science and medicine until 1828. That year, German scientist [[Friedrich Wöhler]] (1800&ndash;82) synthesized an organic compound from an inorganic substance, a process that vitalists considered to be impossible. ... Vitalists claim to be scientific, but in fact they reject the scientific method with its basic postulates of cause and effect and of provability. They often regard subjective experience to be more valid than objective material reality. Today, vitalism is one of the ideas that form the basis for many pseudoscientific health systems that claim that illnesses are caused by a disturbance or imbalance of the body's vital force.}}</ref>

[[Victor J. Stenger|Victor Stenger]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Medicine/Biofield.html|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303202347/http://www.colorado.edu/philosophy/vstenger/Medicine/Biofield.html|url-status=dead|title=Victor J. Stenger's site|archivedate=March 3, 2016}}</ref> states that the term "bioenergetics" "is applied in biochemistry to refer to the readily measurable [[Biological thermodynamics|exchanges of energy]] within organisms, and between organisms and the environment, which occur by normal physical and chemical processes. This is not, however, what the new vitalists have in mind. They imagine the [[Energy (esotericism)|bioenergetic]] field as a holistic living force that goes beyond reductionist physics and chemistry."<ref name=Stenger>{{cite journal |last=Stenger |first=Victor J. |title=The Physics of 'Alternative Medicine': Bioenergetic Fields |journal=The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine |date=Spring–Summer 1999 |volume=3 |issue=1 |url= http://www.sram.org/0301/bioenergetic-fields.html |author-link=Victor J Stenger |access-date=2006-12-03 |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20061218144228/http://www.sram.org/0301/bioenergetic-fields.html |archive-date=2006-12-18 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

Such a field is sometimes explained as electromagnetic, though some advocates also make confused appeals to quantum physics.<ref name="Rubik" /> Joanne Stefanatos states that "The principles of energy medicine originate in quantum physics."<ref name="Stefanatos">Stefanatos, J. 1997, ''Introduction to Bioenergetic Medicine'', Shoen, A.M. and S.G. Wynn, ''Complementary and Alternative Veterinary Medicine: Principles and Practices'', Mosby-Yearbook, Chicago.</ref> Stenger<ref name="Stenger" /> offers several explanations as to why this line of reasoning may be misplaced. He explains that energy exists in discrete packets called quanta. Energy fields are composed of their component parts and so only exist when quanta are present. Therefore, energy fields are not holistic, but are rather a system of discrete parts that must obey the laws of physics. This also means that energy fields are not instantaneous. These facts of quantum physics place limitations on the infinite, continuous field that is used by some theorists to describe so-called "human energy fields".<ref name="Biley">Biley, Francis C. 2005, ''Unitary Health Care: Martha Rogers' Science of Unitary Human Beings'', University of Wales College of Medicine, viewed 30 November 2006, {{cite web |url= http://medweb.uwcm.ac.uk/martha/ |title=RogersHomepage |access-date=2006-12-02 |url-status=dead |archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20061205024515/http://medweb.uwcm.ac.uk/martha/ |archive-date=2006-12-05 }}</ref> Stenger continues, explaining that the effects of EM forces have been measured by physicists as accurately as one part in a billion and there is yet to be any evidence that living organisms emit a unique field.<ref name="Stenger" />

Vitalistic thinking has been identified in the naive biological theories of children: "Recent experimental results show that a majority of preschoolers tend to choose vitalistic explanations as most plausible. Vitalism, together with other forms of intermediate causality, constitute unique causal devices for naive biology as a core domain of thought."<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.tics.2004.06.004 |last1=Inagaki |first1=K. |last2=Hatano |first2=G. |year=2004 |title='Vitalistic causality in young children's naive biology.' |journal=Trends Cogn Sci |volume=8 |issue=8|pages=356–62 |pmid=15335462 |s2cid=29256474 }}</ref>

== See also ==
{{div col|colwidth=22em}}
*[[Argument from ignorance]]
* [[Egregore]]
* [[Energy (esotericism)]]
* [[Etheric body]]
* [[Georges Canguilhem]]
* [[Henri Bergson]]
* [[Holism in science]]
* [[Homeopathy]]
* [[Hylozoism]]
* [[Irreducible complexity]]
* ''[[Lebensphilosophie]]''
* [[Mind–body dualism]]
* [[Montpellier vitalism]]
* [[Morphic resonance]]
* [[Odic force]]
* [[Orenda]]
* [[Orgone]]
* [[Orthogenesis]]
* [[Qi]]
* [[Ratiovitalism]]
* [[Royal Commission on Animal Magnetism]]
* [[Spirit (animating force)]]
* [[Vis medicatrix naturae]]
* [[Vital materialism]]
* [[Vitality]]
{{div col end}}

==Notes==
{{notelist}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Sources==
* {{cite book|last1=Birch|first1=Charles|last2=Cobb|first2=John B|title=The Liberation of Life: From the Cell to the Community|year=1985|publisher=CUP Archive |isbn=9780521315142|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=h3c6AAAAIAAJ}}
* {{cite book|ref={{harvid|''History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences''}}|title=History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences|volume=29|year=2007|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=tUkoAQAAIAAJ}}

==External links==
{{Wikiversity}}
* {{In Our Time|Vitalism|b00dwhwt|Vitalism}}
* [http://skepdic.com/vitalism.html Vitalism] at the [[Skeptic's Dictionary]]

* For vital force and vitalism in the Spanish context, see Nicolás Fernández-Medina's ''[https://www.academia.edu/37425761/Life_Embodied_The_Promise_of_Vital_Force_in_Spanish_Modernity Life Embodied: The Promise of Vital Force in Spanish Modernity]'' (McGill-Queen's UP, 2018).

{{Evolution}}
{{Philosophy of biology}}
{{philosophy of science}}

[[Category:Vitalism| ]]
[[Category:History of biology]]
[[Category:Obsolete scientific theories]]
[[Category:Pseudoscience]]