The Vital Principle

Organic beings are those which have in themselves a source of activity that produces the phenomena of life. They are born, grow, reproduce their own species, and die. They are provided with organs specially adapted to the accomplishment of the different acts of their life, to the satisfaction of their needs, and to their preservation. They include men, animals, and plants.

Organic beings have a source of activity within them that produces the phenomena of life. They are born, grow, reproduce their own kind, and die. They have organs adapted to perform the different functions of life, meet their needs, and keep them alive. Organic beings include humans, animals, and plants.

Inorganic beings are those which possess neither vitality nor the power of spontaneous movement, and are formed by the mere aggregation of matter; as minerals, water, air, &c.

Inorganic beings have neither life nor the ability to move on their own. They are formed simply by matter coming together. Examples include minerals, water, and air.

60. Is the force which unites the elements of matter in organic and inorganic bodies the same?

60. Is the same force responsible for holding together the elements of matter in organic and inorganic bodies?

"Yes; the law of attraction is the same for all."

"Yes, the law of attraction is the same for everyone."

61. Is there any difference between the matter of organic and inorganic bodies?

61. Is there any difference between the matter in organic and inorganic bodies?

"The matter of both classes of bodies is the same, but in organic bodies it is animalised."

"Both kinds of bodies are made of the same matter, but in organic bodies, that matter is animalized."

62. What is the cause of the animalisation of matter?

62. What causes matter to become animal matter?

"Its union with the vital principle."

"Its connection with the vital principle."

63. Does the vital principle reside in a special agent, or is it only a property of organised matter; in other words, is it an effect or a cause?

63. Does the vital principle reside in a special agent, or is it only a property of organized matter? In other words, is it an effect or a cause?

"It is both. Life is an effect produced by the action of an agent upon matter; this agent, without matter, is not life, just as matter cannot become alive without this agent. It gives life to all beings that absorb and assimilate it."

"It is both. Life results from an agent acting on matter. Without matter, this agent is not life, just as matter cannot become alive without the agent. The agent gives life to all beings that absorb and assimilate it."

64. We have seen that spirit and matter are two constituent elements of the universe. Does the vital principle constitute a third element?

64. We have seen that spirit and matter are two elements of the universe. Is the vital principle a third element?

"It is, undoubtedly, one of the elements necessary to the constitution of the universe; but it has its source in a special modification of the universal matter, modified to that end. For you, it is an elementary body, like oxygen or hydrogen, which, nevertheless, are not primitive elements; for all the bodies known to you, though appearing to you to be simple, are modifications of the primal fluid."

"It is certainly one of the elements necessary to the makeup of the universe. But it comes from universal matter, which has been specially modified for that purpose. For you, it is an elementary substance, like oxygen or hydrogen. Yet neither oxygen nor hydrogen is a primitive element. For all substances known to you, though they appear simple, are modifications of the primal fluid."

—This statement seems to imply that vitality is not due to a distinct primitive agent, but is a special property of the universal matter, resulting from certain modifications of the latter.

This statement seems to suggest that vitality does not come from a distinct, original force. Instead, it is a special property of universal matter, resulting from certain changes in that matter.

"Your conclusion is the natural consequence of what we have stated."

"Your conclusion follows naturally from what we have said."

65. Does the vital principle reside in any one of the bodies known to us?

65. Is the vital principle found in any of the bodies we know?

"It has its source in the universal fluid; it is what you call the magnetic fluid, or the electric fluid, animalised. It is the intermediary, the link, between spirit and matter."

"It comes from the universal fluid. It is what you call magnetic fluid, or electric fluid made animal. It is the link between spirit and matter."

66. Is the vital principle the same for all organic beings?

66. Is the vital principle the same in all living things?

"Yes; but modified according to species. It is that principle which gives them the power of originating movement and activity, and distinguishes them from inert matter; for the movement of matter is not spontaneous. Matter is moved; it does not originate movement."

"Yes, but the principle is modified according to the species. It gives them the power to initiate movement and activity. It also distinguishes them from inert matter, because matter does not move on its own. Matter is moved. It does not initiate movement."

67. Is vitality a permanent attribute of the vital principle, or is vitality only developed by the play of the organs in which it is manifested?

67. Is vitality a permanent attribute of the vital principle? Or does it develop only through the activity of the organs where it appears?

"It is only developed in connection with a body. Have we not said that this agent, without matter, is not life? The union of the two is necessary to the production of life."

"It develops only in connection with a body. Haven't we said that this agent is not life without matter? The two must be united to produce life."

—Would it be correct to say that vitality is latent when the vital agent is not united with a body?

Is it correct to say that vitality is dormant when the vital agent is not joined to a body?

"Yes; that is the case."

"Yes, that's true."

The totality of the organs of a body constitutes a sort of mechanism which receives its impulsion from the active or vital principle that resides in them. The vital principle is the motive power of organised bodies. And while the vital principle gives impulsion to the organs in which it resides, the play of those organs develops and keeps up the activity of the vital principle, somewhat as friction develops heat.

All the organs of a body together form a kind of mechanism. The active or vital principle within them drives this mechanism. The vital principle is the driving force of living bodies. While it drives the organs in which it resides, the organs’ activity develops and sustains it, much as friction produces heat.

68. What is the cause of the death of organic beings?

68. What causes living beings to die?

"The exhaustion of their bodily organs."

"The exhaustion of their body organs."

—Would it be correct to compare death to the cessation of movement in a machine that had got out of gear?

Would it be correct to compare death to a machine stopping because it has broken down?

"Yes; when the machine gets out of order, its action ceases. When the body falls ill, life withdraws from it."

"Yes. When a machine breaks down, it stops working. When the body falls ill, life leaves it."

69. Why is death caused more certainly by a lesion of the heart than by that of any other organ?

69. Why is damage to the heart more likely to cause death than damage to any other organ?

"The heart is a life-making machine. But the heart is not the only organ of which the lesion causes death, it is only one of the wheels essential to the working of the machine."

"The heart is a machine that makes life possible. But it is not the only organ whose damage can cause death. It is just one of the wheels essential to the machine's operation."

70. What becomes of the matter and the vital principle of organic beings after their death?

70. What happens to the matter and vital principle of living beings after they die?

"The inert matter is decomposed, and serves to form other bodies; the vital principle returns to the general mass of the universal fluid."

"The lifeless matter breaks down and helps form other bodies. The vital principle returns to the general mass of the universal fluid."

On the death of an organic being, the elements of which its body was composed undergo new combinations that form new beings. These, in their turn, draw the principle of life and activity from the universal source; they absorb and assimilate it, and restore it again to that source when they cease to exist.

When an organism dies, the elements of its body combine in new ways to form new beings. These beings, in turn, draw the principle of life and activity from the universal source. They absorb and take in this principle, then return it to the source when they cease to exist.

The organs of organic beings are, so to say, impregnated with the vital fluid. This fluid gives to every part of an organised being the activity which brings its parts into union after certain lesions, and reestablishes functions that have been temporarily suspended. But when the elements essential to the play of the organism have been destroyed, or too deeply injured, the vital fluid is powerless to transmit to them the movement which constitutes life, and the being dies.

The organs of living beings are, so to speak, filled with vital fluid. This fluid gives every part of a living being the activity that brings damaged parts back together after certain injuries. It also restores functions that have temporarily stopped. But the parts essential to the body's functioning may be destroyed or too badly damaged. When this happens, the vital fluid cannot pass on to them the movement that constitutes life, and the being dies.

The organs of a body necessarily react, more or less powerfully, upon one another; their reciprocity of action results from their harmony among themselves. When from any cause this harmony is destroyed, their functions cease; just as a piece of machinery comes to a stand-still when the essential portions of its mechanism get out of order, or as a clock stops when its works are worn out by use, or accidentally broken, so that the spring is no longer able to keep it going.

The organs of the body necessarily affect one another, to a greater or lesser degree. They act on one another because they work together in harmony. When this harmony is disrupted for any reason, the organs stop functioning. In the same way, a machine stops when essential parts of its mechanism break down. A clock stops when its parts wear out or accidentally break, so that the spring can no longer keep it running.

We have an image of life and death still more exact in the electric battery. The battery, like all natural bodies, contains electricity in a latent state; but the electrical phenomena are only manifested when the fluid is set in motion by a special cause. When this movement is superinduced, the battery may be said to become alive; but when the cause of the electrical activity ceases, the phenomena cease to occur, and the battery relapses into a state of inertia. Organic bodies may thus be said to be a sort of electric battery, in which the movement of the fluid produces the phenomena of life, and in which the cessation of that movement produces death.

An electric battery gives us an even more exact picture of life and death. Like all natural bodies, a battery contains electricity in a latent state. But electrical phenomena appear only when a particular cause sets the fluid in motion. When this happens, the battery may be said to come alive. But when the cause of the electrical activity stops, the phenomena stop, and the battery becomes inactive again. Organic bodies may therefore be described as a kind of electric battery. In them, the movement of the fluid produces the phenomena of life. When that movement stops, death follows.

The quantity of vital fluid present in organic beings is not the same in all; it varies in the various species of living beings, and is not constantly the same, either in the same individual or in the individuals of the same species. There are some which may be said to be saturated with it, and others in which it exists in very small proportions. Hence certain species are endowed with a more active and more tenacious life, resulting from the superabundance of the vital fluid present in their organism.

The amount of vital fluid in living beings is not the same in all of them. It varies among species and also changes within an individual and among individuals of the same species. Some may be said to be saturated with vital fluid, while others have very little. As a result, certain species have a more active and enduring life because of the abundance of vital fluid in their bodies.

The amount of vital fluid contained in a given organism may be exhausted, and may thus become insufficient for the maintenance of life, unless it be renewed by the absorption and assimilation of the substances in which that fluid resides.

The vital fluid in an organism may be depleted. It may then become insufficient to sustain life unless it is replenished by absorbing and assimilating substances that contain it.

The vital fluid may be transmitted by one individual to another individual. An organisation in which it exists more abundantly may impart it to another in which it is deficient; and may thus, in certain cases, rekindle the vital flame when on the point of being extinguished.

Vital fluid may be passed from one person to another. A person with more vital fluid may give it to someone who lacks it. In certain cases, this may rekindle the vital flame when it is about to go out.

71. Is intelligence an attribute of the vital principle?

71. Is intelligence a quality of the vital principle?

"No; for the plants live and do not think; they have only organic life. Intelligence and matter are independent of one another; for a body may live without intelligence; but intelligence can only manifest itself by means of material organs. Animalised matter can only be rendered intelligent by its union with spirit."

"No, because plants live but do not think. They have only organic life. Intelligence and matter are independent of each other, because a body can live without intelligence. But intelligence can only express itself through physical organs. Animal matter can only become intelligent through its union with spirit."

Intelligence is a faculty which is proper to certain classes of organic beings, and which gives to these the power to think, the will to act, the consciousness of their existence and individuality, and the means of establishing relations with the external world and providing for the needs of their special mode of existence.

Intelligence is a faculty found in certain classes of living beings. It gives them the power to think, the will to act, and awareness of their existence and individuality. It also enables them to interact with the outside world and provide for the needs of their particular way of life.

We may therefore distinguish: 1st, Inanimate beings, formed of matter alone, without life or intelligence—the bodies of the mineral world; 2d, Animated non-thinking beings, formed of matter and endowed with vitality, but without intelligence; 3d, Animated and thinking beings, formed of matter, endowed with vitality, and possessed of an intelligent principle which gives them the faculty of thought.

We can therefore distinguish three kinds of beings: 1st, Inanimate beings, made of matter alone, without life or intelligence. These are the bodies of the mineral world. 2nd, Living beings that do not think, made of matter and endowed with life, but without intelligence. 3rd, Living beings that think, made of matter and endowed with life. They also possess an intelligent principle that gives them the ability to think.

72. What is the source of intelligence?

72. What is the source of intelligence?

"We have already told you: the universal intelligence."

"We've already told you: the universal intelligence."

—Would it be correct to say that every intelligent being draws a portion of intelligence from the universal source, and assimilates it as it draws and assimilates the principle of material life?

Would it be correct to say that every intelligent being draws and absorbs some intelligence from the universal source? And that it does so just as it draws and absorbs the principle of material life?

"Such a comparison would be far from exact, for intelligence is a faculty that is proper to each being, and constitutes its moral individuality. Besides, we have told you that there are things which man is unable to fathom; and this, for the present, is one of them."

"That comparison would be far from exact. Intelligence is a faculty unique to each being, and it makes up that being's moral individuality. Besides, we have told you that there are things humans cannot understand. For now, this is one of them."

73. Is instinct independent of intelligence?

73. Is instinct separate from intelligence?

"No, not precisely so, for it is a species of intelligence. Instinct is an unreasoning intelligence, by means of which the lower orders of beings provide for their wants."

"No, not exactly, because it is a kind of intelligence. Instinct is intelligence without reasoning. It enables lower forms of life to meet their needs."

74. Is it possible to establish a line of demarcation between instinct and intelligence; that is to say, to define precisely where the one ends and the other begins?

74. Is it possible to draw a line between instinct and intelligence? Can we define exactly where one ends and the other begins?

"No, for they often blend into one another. But the actions which belong to instinct and those which belong to intelligence are easily distinguished."

"No, because they often blend into one another. But it is easy to tell instinctive actions from intelligent ones."

75. Is it correct to say that the instinctive faculties diminish in proportion with the growth of the intellectual faculties?

75. Is it correct to say that instinctive abilities weaken in proportion as intellectual abilities grow?

"No; instinct always continues to exist, but man neglects it. Instinct, as well as reason, may lead us in the right direction. Its guidance almost always makes itself felt, and sometimes more surely than that of reason. It never goes astray."

“No. Instinct always remains, but people neglect it. Instinct, like reason, can lead us in the right direction. We can almost always feel its guidance, and sometimes it guides us more surely than reason does. It never leads us astray.”

—Why is it that reason is not always an infallible guide?

Why isn't reason always a reliable guide?

"It would be infallible if it were not perverted by a false education, by pride, and by selfishness. Instinct does not reason. Reason leaves freedom to choice, and gives man free-will."

"It would be infallible if false education, pride, and selfishness did not corrupt it. Instinct does not reason. Reason allows people to choose and gives them free will."

Instinct is a rudimentary intelligence, differing from intelligence properly so called in this particular, viz., that its manifestations are almost always spontaneous, whereas those of intelligence are the result of combination and of deliberation.

Instinct is a basic form of intelligence. It differs from intelligence in the usual sense in one respect. Instinctive actions are almost always spontaneous, whereas intelligent actions result from combining ideas and deliberating.

The manifestations of instinct vary according to the differences of species and of their needs. In beings that possess self-consciousness and the perception of things external to themselves, it is allied to intelligence, that is to say, to freedom of will and of action.

Instinct shows itself differently depending on the species and its needs. In beings aware of themselves and the world around them, instinct is linked to intelligence. Intelligence means freedom of will and action.