Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and the Place of Irritability in the History of Life and Death

Giglioni, Guido

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2445-7_2

Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and the Place of Irritability in the History of Life and Death

Guido Giglioni³

Chapter
First Online: 01 January 2013

1410 Accesses
6 Citations

Part of the book series: History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences ((HPTL,volume 2))

Abstract

In the history of philosophy and science, vitalism has a bad reputation, for the very definition of life remains remorselessly murky. And yet life also resists all attempts at reduction carried out by the logic of mechanical reason. While on a superficial level, life smacks of irrational exuberance, on a deeper level, it is in the very uncomfortable company of death. In this chapter, I argue that this ambivalence is particularly evident in Jean-Baptiste Lamarck’s natural philosophy. In his chemical, geological, botanical and zoological views, Lamarck advocated a theory of decaying rather than living matter. He characterized orgasm, irritability and sensibility – the forms which life takes on in the physical universe– as momentary interruptions of nature’s ordinary course toward death and destruction. This chapter examines Lamarck’s notion of irritability, paying special attention to his concept of “intussusception.” By intussusception, Lamarck meant a universal mechanism of organic mutability through which organisms were able to calibrate their reactions to the environment. He argued that through increasingly more complex reactions, living beings could resist the universal tendency to disintegration and breakup by internalizing pressures coming from the environment.

M. de Lamarck séparait la vie d’avec la nature. La nature, à ses yeux, c’était la pierre et la cendre, le granit de la tombe, la mort! La vie n’y intervenait que comme un accident étrange et singulièrement industrieux, une lutte prolongée, avec plus ou moins de succès et d’équilibre çà et là, mais toujours finalement vaincue; l’immobilité froide était régnante après comme devant.

Charles-Augustin Sainte-Beuve, Volupté, 1834

Et metuunt magni naturam credere mundi

exitiale aliquod tempus clademque manere,

cum videant tantam terrarum incumbere molem!

Lucretius, De rerum natura, VI, 565–567

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter: USD 29.95; Price excludes VAT (USA)

eBook: USD 149.00; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Softcover Book: USD 199.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Hardcover Book: USD 199.99; Price excludes VAT (USA)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

1.
On Bacon’s notions of matter and death, cf. Giglioni (2005, 2011, 74–75). On Bacon’s Historia vitae et mortis and its later fortuna, cf. Gemelli (2010, 191–205). Francis Glisson, referring to Jan Baptiste van Helmont’s treatise Ignota actio regiminis, called this tendency to be irritated as ‘disquietude’ (inquietudo). Cf. British Library, MS Sloane 574B, f. 67^r.
2.
Cf. Glisson (1677, 365–368). In defending the primacy of perception over appetite, Glisson sides with Helmont rather than Bacon: “Non me latet, Illustrissimum. D. Dominum Franc. Baconium, VicecomitemVerulamii, Tractatu de Principiis pag. 211, 212, etc. negare antiquissimum Cupidinem habere causam se priorem. Respondeo, eum proculdubio, sub persona Cupidinis, naturalem quoque perceptionem, absque qua ille subsistere nequit, includi supposuisse. Ipse expressis verbis agnoscit, dari perceptionem generaliorem ea quae est sensuum, quae nihil aliud esse potest nisi perceptio naturalis.” Cf. Bacon ([1653] 1996), Bacon (1857–1874, I, 610; II, 602).
3.
Cudworth ([1845] 1995, III, 405). Cf. Giglioni (2002).
4.
On the complex issue of the relationship between vitalism and materialism in the early modern period, see the excellent account in Wolfe and Terada (2008). In contemporary discourse, panpsychism is often mistaken for hylozoism. From this point of view, the early modern discussion on life, matter and mind was more accurate than the contemporary one.
5.
Crocker (1968, 115) and Omodeo (1997).
6.
Jordanova (1979, 122). Cf. Picavet (1891), Rosen (1946), Temkin (1968), Canguilhem ([1965] 2008, 59–120), Ackerknecht (1967), Desaive (1972), Moravia (1972, 1974), Figlio (1976), Burkhardt (1995, 103), Corsi (1988, 75), and Jordanova (1984, 58–70).
7.
Cf. Corsi (1988, 25, 35–35, 76–84). On Buffon cf. Hoquet (2005).
8.
In elaborating his notion of fluides incontenables, Lamarck drew on Newton’s model of experimental physics. Cf. Pichot (1994, 23–24) and Conry (1981).
9.
Cf. Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 185, 246, 343–346). In the Histoire des animaux, Buffon compared the process of reproduction to the function of nutrition. In both cases, living beings demonstrate the ability to identify and distinguish ‘organic’ and ‘brute’ molecules: “dans la nourriture que ces êtres organisés tirent, il y a des molécules organiques de différent espèces; que, par une force semblable à celle qui produit la pesanteur, ces molécules organiques pénètrent toutes les parties du corps organisé, ce qui produit le développement et fait la nutrition.” This “intussusception des molécules” is a process that underlies both nutrition and reproduction (Buffon 1835–1835, III, 394). On the discussion of “intussusception” versus “juxtaposition” in Louis Bourguet (1678–1742), Charles Bonnet (1720–1793) and Carl Linnaeus (1707–1778), cf. Wolfe (2011, 200).
10.
On Bichat and the medical context at the time, cf. Haigh (1984).
11.
Cuvier (1800–1805, I, 3).
12.
As pointed out by André Pichot, Lamarck’s “biologie est une réponse mécaniste à la physiologie vitaliste de Bichat, qui était alors la théorie dominante” (Pichot 1994, 20).
13.
Burckhardt (1995, 157) hints at this evolutionary mechanism in passing: “[Lamarck’s] explanation of the production of the simpler invertebrates demonstrates that in his view the power of life was not opposed to environmental influences but, on the contrary, grew directly out of them. Only after the complexity of animal organization became sufficiently great was ‘the productive force of movement’ internalized.”
14.
As is aptly remarked by Pichot, irritability represents an important phase in the development of the intussusception mechanism (Pichot uses the expression processus auto-catalytique): “Chez les animaux, la principale conséquence de l’irritabilité des tissus est une intériorisation de la cause excitatrice des mouvements de fluides” (Pichot 1994, 25, 37–39).
15.
Cf. Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 104–105, 115, 175).
16.
Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 124–125): “Les animaux sont des corps vivans doués de parties irritables, contractiles instantanément et itérativement sur elles-mêmes, ce qui leur donne à tous la faculté d’agir, et à la plupart celle de se déplacer.”
17.
Lamarck ([1802] 1986, 66): “l’irritabilité devient plus grande et plus durable, à mesure que l’organisation animale approche plus sa simplification.”
18.
Cf. Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 358): “there is no true will in animals which have a nervous system without any organ for intelligence, and if this is the reason why such animals only act by emotions produced by their sensations, this truth applies still more to animals that have no nerves. It appears therefore that these latter only move by an excited irritability, and as an immediate result of external excitations.” Cf. Lamarck (1801, 19, 41–42, 357–359), Lamarck ([1802] 1986, 31–32, 65, 76, 80–84, 124), Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 114–153–154).
19.
Cf. Lamarck (1972, 180): “à mesure que la composition de l’organisation diminue, les facultés animales sont graduellement moins nombreuses mais qu’elles acquièrent proportionellement plus d’étendue.”
20.
In his On the Relations between the Physical and Moral Aspects of Man, Cabanis had pointed out the extent to which any increase in organic complexity resulted in a living system’s precariousness. Higher sensibility – a result of higher organization – exposed living beings to a greater amount of stimuli, but also to a more complicated network of reactions and dangers (Cabanis [1805] 1981, II, 543–544).
21.
Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 90): “On sait que Haller avait déjà distingué ces deux sortes de phénomènes; mais, comme la plupart des zoologistes de notre temps les confondent encore, il est utile que je m’efforce de rétablir cette distinction dont le fondement est de toute évidence.” Cf. Ibid., 230, 233.
22.
Cf. Burkhardt (1995, 170, 175), Jordanova (1981), and Gissis (2010).
23.
On Cabanis and the physiological and anthropological doctrines of the Idéologues, cf. Moravia (1968, 1970, 1974, 1978), Staum (1980), Williams (1994), and Barsanti (1983).
24.
As Xavier Bichat noted with regard to the distinction between sensibility and irritability, Haller “made them almost insulated properties” (Bichat [1801] 1822, I, 12).
25.
Richerand accused Bichat of having plagiarized his own theory of sensibility. Cf. Haigh (1984, 10).
26.
Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 218, 228). Cf. Ibid., 322: “the conditions required for the production of feeling are of altogether another nature from those necessary for the presence of irritability. The former demand a special organ which is always distinct, complex, and extended throughout the animal’s body, whereas the latter demand no special organ and give rise only to an isolated and local phenomenon.”
27.
Cf. Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 11).
28.
Cf. Russo (1981).
29.
Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 59–60, 260), Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 183, 187, 321–322), Lamarck ([1802] 1986, 56–57): “La vie est un ordre et un état de choses dans les parties de tout corps qui la possède, qui permettent ou rendent possible en lui l’exécution du mouvement organique, et qui, tant qu’il subsistent, s’opposent efficacement à la mort.” Cf. Burkhardt (1995, 58–71).
30.
Cf. Lamarck ([1802] 1986, 77, 108) and Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 192, 205).
31.
Barthez (1778, 109): “chaque humeur est formée par une fermentation spécifique vitale; c’est à dire par un mouvement intestin. … qui anime les mixtes qu’il a produits, et les pénètre toujours plus intimement de l’action du Principe de la vie.”
32.
Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 211–218), Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 42, 169–171). On Lamarck’s notion of invisible fluids cf. Burkhardt (1995, 65), Jordanova (1984, 49), and Corsi (1988, 152).
33.
Cf. Lamarck ([1802] 1986, 85).
34.
Cf. Ibid., 245: “Cela étant ainsi, il me sera facile de faire voir dans un instant que la chaleur, cette mère des générations, cette âme matérielle des corps vivans, parmi lesquels l’homme seul peut être hors de rang et privilégié, que la chaleur, dis-je, a pu être le principal des moyens qu’emploie directement la nature pour opérer sur des matières appropriées, un acte de disposition des parties, d’ébauche d’organisation, et par suite, de vitalisation analogue à celui de la fécondation sexuelle.”
35.
Marsh (1864, 68).
36.
Cf. Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 64).
37.
Cf. Burkhardt (1995, 105–114) and Barsanti (1979, 54–64).
38.
On Lamarck’s notion of spontaneous generation cf. Daudin ([1926] 1983, II, 176–178, 214), Burkhardt (1995, 151–157), Barsanti (1979, 98–91), Jordanova (1984), 46; Corsi (1988, 67–68, 88), Pichot (1994, 30), and Tirard (2006). On the concept of organization cf. Russo (1981), and Pichot (1994, 21–23).
39.
On Needham and the debate on spontaneous generation cf. Stefani (2002) and Ratcliff (2009).
40.
Cf. Barsanti (1979, 82) and Barsanti (1983, 42–43).
41.
Cf. Lamarck ([1802] 1986, 77): “Dans un pareille masse de matières, les fluides subtils et expansifs répandus et toujours en mouvement dans les milieux qui l’environnent, pénétrant sans cesse et s’en dissipant de même, régularisent en traversant cette masse, la disposition intérieure des ses parties, et la rendent propre alors à absorber et à exhaler continuellement les autres fluides environnans qui peuvent pénétrer dans son intérieur et qui sont susceptibles d’être contenus.”
42.
This ambiguity is noted by Corsi: “The concept of irritability, a property exclusive to animal fiber, prevented him [Lamarck] from explaining in a totally mechanical manner the characteristics of organic movement in animals” (Corsi 1988, 70).
43.
On Lamarck’s notion of nature cf. Daudin ([1926] 1983, II, 119), Burkhardt (1995, 131), Barthélemy-Madaule ([1979] 1982, 22–44), Jordanova (1984, 83–88), and Corsi (1988, 175–176), Corsi (2006, 2011).
44.
Cf. Lamarck (1972, 57, 77).
45.
On Lamarck’s view on God cf. Grasse (1981).
46.
Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 208): “sensibility and irritability are not only quite distinct faculties, but. . . they have not even a common origin and are due to very different causes.”
47.
Lamarck (1801, 21–22): “Il semble, pour ainsi dire, que la matière alors s’animalise de toutes parts, tant les résultats de cette étonnante fécondité sont rapides.”
48.
Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 33): “N’a-t-on pas osé dire que le globe terrestre est un corps vivant; qu’il en est de même des différent corps célestes…n’a-t-on pas osé assimiler la nature même aux êtres doués de la vie!”
49.
On Lamarck’s chemistry cf. Conry (1981), Gohau (2006, 10).
50.
Cf. Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 129–130): “On a même supposé que je voulais parler d’une chaîne existante entre tous les corps de la nature, et l’on a dit que cette chaîne graduée n’était qu’une idée reproduite, émise par Bonnet, et depuis, par beaucoup d’autres. On aurait pu ajouter que cette idée est de plus anciennes, puisqu’on la retrouve dans les écrits des philosophes grecs. Mais, cette même idée, qui prit probablement sa source dans le sentiment obscur de ce qui a lieu réellement à l’égard des animaux, et qui n’a rien de commun avec le fait que je vais établir, est formellement démentie, par l’observation, à l’égard de plusieurs sortes de corps maintenant bien connus.” On the notion of chain of being cf. Lovejoy (1936) and (1968).
51.
Cf. Cuvier (1816–1830, II, 158–159).
52.
On Lamarck’s adoption of the linear arrangement cf. Daudin ([1926] 1983), Burkhardt (1995, 58, 124).
53.
As Burkhardt notes, Lamarck’s “supposition that all the different minerals were produced gradually as the elements disengaged themselves from the remains of living things appears to be virtually the inverse of his later idea that all the different organic species were produced gradually as the ‘power of life’ and modifying circumstances caused simple, spontaneously generated forms to become increasingly complex and diversified” (Burkhardt 1995, 102).
54.
On this point cf. Barthélemy-Madaule ([1979] 1982, 34–35, 40–41).
55.
Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 220): “Although we are not definitely aware how each vital function is performed, we should not gratuitously attribute to the parts a knowledge and power of choice among the objects which they have to separate out, and retain or evacuate.”
56.
In Charles-Augustin Sainte-Beuve’s novel Volupté (published in 1834), the protagonist remembers with passion Lamarck’s lectures he attended in the Jardin des Plantes: “At that time he was one of the last representatives of that great school of natural philosophers and general observers who had reigned from Thales and Democritus to Buffon” (Sainte-Beuve [1834] 1995, 105).
57.
On the term “biology,” cf. McLaughlin (2002) and Corsi (2006).
58.
See the two “basic principles” in Histoire naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres: “1.^er Principe: Tout fait ou phénomène que l’observation peut faire connaître, est essentiellement physique, et ne doit son existence ou sa production qu’à des corps, ou qu’à des relations entre corps. 2.^e Principe: Tout mouvement ou changement, toute force agissante, et tout effet quelconque, observés dans un corps, tiennent nécessairement à des causes mécaniques, régies par des lois” (Lamarck 1815–1822, I, 11–12).
59.
Cf. Stahl’s objection: “incommodissimum illud schema de irritatione, quod certe de rebus mechanicis praedicari absolute ineptum est” (Stahl [1708] 1831–1833, I, 288).
60.
Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 51, 250, 255–258). On Lamarck’s geological theories cf. Carozzi (1964).
61.
Lamarck ([1809] 1984, 258).
62.
Lamarck (1801, 24–26, 367).
63.
Cf. Daudin [1926] 1983, II, 211: “précisément parce que la différance physique de l’inerte et du vivant est ainsi posée comme inhérente aux modalités d’un fonctionnement, d’une action, elle laisse une place à la notion d’une ‘influence’ positive des conditions de milieu sur les phénomènes vitaux – et cette notion . . . est sans doute l’idée la plus féconde de toute la ‘philosophique zoologique’ de Lamarck.” Cf. Ibid., 217–218.
64.
Cf. Jordanova (1984, 55, 102) and Corsi (1988, 177).
65.
Cf., for instance, Lamarck (1815–1822, I, 133): “Le plan des opérations de la nature à l’égard de la production des animaux est clairement indiqué par cette cause première et prédominante qui donne à la vie animale le pouvoir de composer progressivement l’organisation, et de compliquer et perfectionner graduellement, non-seulement l’organisation dans son ensemble, mais encore chaque système d’organes particulier, à mesure qu’elle est parvenue à les établir. Or, ce plan, c’est-à-dire, cette composition progressive de l’organisation, a été réellement exécuté, par cette cause première, dans les différens animaux qui existent. Mais une cause étrangère à celle-ci, cause accidentelle et par conséquent variable, a traversé çà et là l’exécution de ce plan, sans néanmoins le détruire, comme je vais le prouver.” Cf. Ibid., 160–161.
66.
Sainte-Beuve ([1834] 1995, 106).

References

Ackerknecht, Erwin Heinz. 1967. Medicine at the Paris Hospital, 1794–1848. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. 1857–1874. Works, ed. James Spedding, Robert L. Ellis, and D.D. Heath. 14 vols. London: Longman. (repr. Stuttgart-Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog, 1962; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.)
Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. [1653] 1996. De Principiis atque originibus secundum fabulas Cupidinis et Coeli. In Philosophical Studies c. 1611- c. 1619, ed. Graham Rees, 195–267. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. [1620] 2004. The Instauratio Magna Part II: Novum Organum and associated texts, ed. Graham Rees with Maria Wakely. Oxford: Clarendon.
Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. [1623] 2007. The Instauratio Magna Part III: Historia Naturalis et Experimentalis: Historia Ventorum and Historia Vitae et Mortis, eds. Graham Reese with Maria Wakely. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Google Scholar
Barsanti, Giulio. 1979. Dalla storia naturale alla storia della natura: Saggio su Lamarck. Milan: Feltrinelli.
Google Scholar
Barsanti, Giulio. 1983. La mappa della vita: Teorie della natura e teorie dell’uomo in Francia, 1750–1850. Naples: Guida.
Google Scholar
Barthélemy-Madaule, Madeleine. [1979] 1982. Lamarck the mythical precursor: A study of the relations between science and ideology. Trans. M.H. Shank. Cambridge, MA/London: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Google Scholar
Barthez, Paul-Joseph. 1778. Nouveaux éléments de la science de l’homme. Montpellier: Jean Martel.
Google Scholar
Bichat, Xavier. [1800] 1813. Treatise on the membranes in general, and of different membranes in Particular. Trans. M. Husson. Boston: Cummings and Hilliard.
Google Scholar
Bichat, Xavier. [1801] 1822. General anatomy, applied to physiology and medicine. Trans. George Hayward. 3 vols. Boston: Richardson and Lord.
Google Scholar
Bichat, Xavier. [1800] 1827. Physiological researches on life and death. Trans. F. Gold. Boston: Richardson and Lord.
Google Scholar
Buffon, Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de. 1835–1836. Œuvres complètes avec les supplémens, augmentées de la classification de G. Cuvier. 9 vols. Paris: Duménil.
Google Scholar
Burckhardt Jr., Richard W. 1995. The spirit of system: Lamarck and evolutionary biology. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar
Cabanis, Pierre-Jean-Georges. [1805] 1981. On the relations between the physical and moral aspects of man, ed. George Mora. Trans. Margaret Duggan Saidi. Baltimore and London: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Google Scholar
Canguilhem, Georges [1965] 2008. Knowledge of life, ed. Paola Marrati and Todd Meyers, Trans. Stefanos Geroulanos and Daniela Ginsburg. New York: Fordham University Press.
Google Scholar
Carozzi, Albert V. 1964. Lamarck’s theory of the earth: Hydrogéologie. Isis 55: 293–307.
Article Google Scholar
Conry, Yvette. 1981. Une lecture newtonienne de Lamarck est-elle possible? In Lamarck et son temps: Lamarck et notre temps, ed. Madeleine Barthélemy-Madaule, 37–64. Paris: Vrin.
Google Scholar
Corsi, Pietro. 1988. The age of Lamarck: Evolutionary theories in France 1790–1830. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of California Press.
Google Scholar
Corsi, Pietro. 2006. Biologie. In Lamarck, philosophe de la nature, ed. Pietro Corsi, Jean Gayon, Gabriel Gohau, and Stéphane Tirard, 37–64. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Google Scholar
Corsi, Pietro. 2011. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck: From myth to history. In Transformations of Lamarckism: From subtle fluids to molecular biology, ed. Snait B. Gissis and Eva Jablonka, 9–17. Cambridge, MA: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Google Scholar
Crocker, Lester G. 1968. Diderot and eighteenth-century French transformism. In Forerunners of Darwin: 1745–1859, ed. Bentley H. Glass, Owsei Temkin, and William L. Straus Jr., 114–143. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Google Scholar
Cudworth, Ralph. [1845] 1995. The true intellectual system of the universe. 3 vols. London: Tegg. (Repr.: Bristol: Thoemmes.)
Google Scholar
Cuvier, Georges. 1800–1805. Leçons d’anatomie comparée. 5 vols. Paris: Baudouin.
Google Scholar
Cuvier, Georges. 1816–1830. Animal. In Dictionnaire des sciences naturelles. 60 vols, II, 158–174. Strasbourg and Paris: Levrault and Le Normant.
Google Scholar
Daudin, Henri. [1926] 1983. Cuvier et Lamarck: Les classes zoologiques et l’idée de série animale, 1790–1830. 2 vols. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Google Scholar
de Bordeu, Théophile. 1818. Œuvres complètes. Paris: Caille et Ravier.
Google Scholar
Desaive, Jean-Paul. 1972. Médecins, climat, et épidémies à la fin du XVIII ^e siècle. Paris/The Hague: Mouton.
Google Scholar
Figlio, Karl M. 1976. The metaphor of organisation: An historiographical perspective on the bio-medical sciences of the early nineteenth century. History of Science 14: 17–53.
Google Scholar
Gemelli, Benedino. 2010. Introduction. In Francis Bacon, Scritti scientifici, ed. Benedino Gemelli, 189–390. Turin: UTET.
Google Scholar
Giglioni, Guido. 1994. Panpsychism versus hylozoism: An interpretation of some seventeenth-century doctrines of universal animation. Acta Comeniana 11: 25–45.
Google Scholar
Giglioni, Guido. 2002. Francis Glisson’s notion of Confoederatio Naturae in the context of hylozoistic corpuscularianism. Revue d’Histoire des Sciences 55: 239–262.
Article Google Scholar
Giglioni, Guido. 2005. The hidden life of matter: Techniques of prolonging life in the writings of Francis Bacon. In Francis Bacon and the refiguring of early modern thought: Essays to commemorate the advancement of learning (1605–2005), ed. Julie Robin Solomon and Catherine Gimelli Martin, 129–144. Aldershot: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Giglioni, Guido. 2008. What ever happened to Francis Glisson? Albrecht Haller and the fate of eighteenth-century irritability. Science in Context 21: 465–493.
Article Google Scholar
Giglioni, Guido. 2010. As forças da vida segundo Albrecht von Haller. In Corpo, poesia e afecto em Albrecht von Haller, ed. Adelino Cardoso and Palmira Fontes da Costa, 11–26. Lisbon: Edições Colibri.
Google Scholar
Giglioni, Guido. 2011. Francesco Bacone. Rome: Carocci.
Google Scholar
Gissis, Snait B. 2010. Lamarck on feelings: From worms to humans. In The body as object and instrument of knowledge: Embodied empiricism in early modern science, ed. Charles T. Wolfe and Ofer Gal, 211–239. Dordrecht: Springer.
Chapter Google Scholar
Glisson, Francis. 1672. Tractatus de natura substantiae energetica, seu de vita naturae, ejusque tribus primis facultatibus. London: Flesher.
Google Scholar
Glisson, Francis. 1677. Tractatus de ventriculo et intestinis. Amsterdam: Jacob Junior.
Google Scholar
Gohau, Gabriel. 2006. Lamarck “Philosophe”? In Lamarck, philosophe de la nature, ed. Pietro Corsi, Jean Gayon, Gabriel Gohau, and Stéphane Tirard, 9–35. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Google Scholar
Grasse, Pierre-Paul. 1981. Dieu et la nature dans la pensée de Lamarck. In Lamarck et son temps: Lamarck et notre temps, ed. Madeleine Barthélemy-Madaule, 203–211. Paris: Vrin.
Google Scholar
Haigh, Elizabeth. 1984. Xavier Bichat and the medical theory of the eighteenth century. London: Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine.
Google Scholar
Haller, Albrecht. 1757–1766. Elementa physiologiae corporis humani. 8 vols. Bern and Lausanne: Bousquet, D’Arnay and Grasset.
Google Scholar
Hoquet, Thierry. 2005. Buffon: Histoire naturelle et philosophie. Paris: Honoré Champion.
Google Scholar
Jordanova, Ludmilla J. 1979. Earth science and environmental medicine: The synthesis of the late enlightenment. In Images of the earth: Essays in the history of the environmental sciences, ed. Ludmilla J. Jordanova and Roy S. Porter, 119–146. Aberdeen: The British Society for the History of Science.
Google Scholar
Jordanova, Ludmilla J. 1981. La psychologie naturaliste et le “problème des niveaux”: La notion de sentiment intérieur chez Lamarck. In Lamarck et son temps: Lamarck et notre temps, ed. Madeleine Barthélemy-Madaule, 69–80. Paris: Vrin.
Google Scholar
Jordanova, Ludmilla J. 1984. Lamarck. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
La Mettrie, Julien Offray de. [1748] 1960. L’homme machine: A study in the origins of an idea, ed. Aram Vartanian. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar
Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste. 1796. Réfutation de la théorie pneumatique ou de la nouvelle doctrine des chimistes modernes. Paris: Lamarck and Agasse.
Google Scholar
Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste. 1801. Système des animaux sans vertèbres. Paris: Deterville.
Google Scholar
Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste. 1815–1822. Histoire naturelle des animaux sans vertèbres. 7 vols. Paris: Verdière.
Google Scholar
Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste. [1802] 1964. Hydrogeology. Trans. Albert V. Carozzi. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
Google Scholar
Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste. 1972. In Inédits d’après les manuscrits conservés à la bibliothèque centrale du Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle de Paris, ed. Max Vachon, Georges Rousseau, and Yves Laissus. Paris: Masson.
Google Scholar
Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste. [1809] 1984. Zoological philosophy. Trans. Hugh Samuel Roger Elliot. Chicago/London: The University of Chicago Press.
Google Scholar
Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste. [1802] 1986. Recherches sur l’organisation des corps vivants, précédé du Discours d’ouverture du cours de zoologie, donné dans le Muséum d’Histoire Naturelle. Tours: Fayard.
Google Scholar
Lovejoy, Arthur O. 1936. The great chain of being: A study of the history of an idea. Cambridge, MA/London: Harvard University Press.
Google Scholar
Lovejoy, Arthur O. 1968. The argument for organic evolution before the origin of species, 1830–1858. In Forerunners of Darwin, ed. Bentley H. Glass, Owsei Temkin, and William L. Straus Jr., 356–414. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Google Scholar
Marsh, George P. 1864. Man and nature, or physical geography as modified by human action. New York: Scribner.
Google Scholar
McLaughlin, Peter. 2002. Naming biology. Journal of the History of Biology 35: 1–4.
Article Google Scholar
Moravia, Sergio. 1968. Il tramonto dell’illuminismo: Filosofia e politica nella società francese (1770–1810). Bari: Laterza.
Google Scholar
Moravia, Sergio. 1970. La scienza dell’uomo nel Settecento. Bari: Laterza.
Google Scholar
Moravia, Sergio. 1972. Philosophie et médecine en France à la fin du XVIII^e siècle. Studies on Voltaire and the Eighteenth Century 89: 1089–1151.
Google Scholar
Moravia, Sergio. 1974. Il pensiero degli Idéologues. Florence: La Nuova Italia.
Google Scholar
Moravia, Sergio. 1978. From homme machine to homme sensible: Changing eighteenth-century models of man’s image. Journal of the History of Ideas 39: 45–60.
Article Google Scholar
Omodeo, Pietro. 1997. Le transformisme au XVIII^e siècle. In Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744–1829), ed. Goulven Laurent, 471–482. Paris: Éditions du CTHS.
Google Scholar
Picavet, François. 1891. Les Idéologues: Essai sur l’histoire des idées et théories scientifiques, philosophiques, religieuses, etc. en France depuis 1798. Paris: Alcan.
Google Scholar
Pichot, André. 1994. Présentation. In Lamarck, Philosophie zoologique, ed. André Pichot, 7–49. Paris: Flammarion.
Google Scholar
Ratcliff, Marc J. 2009. The quest for the invisible: Microscopy in the enlightenment. Farnham/Burlington: Ashgate.
Google Scholar
Richerand, Anthelme. [1801] 1823. Elements of physiology. Trans. G.J.M. De Lys. Philadelphia: James E. Moore.
Google Scholar
Rosen, George. 1946. The philosophy of ideology and the emergence of modern medicine in France. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 20: 328–339.
Google Scholar
Russo, François. 1981. La notion d’organisation chez Lamarck. In Lamarck et son temps: Lamarck et notre temps, ed. Madeleine Barthélemy-Madaule, 119–141. Paris: Vrin.
Google Scholar
Sainte-Beuve, Charles-Augustin. [1834] 1995. Volupté: The sensual man. Trans. Marilyn Gaddis Rose. New York: The State University of New York Press.
Google Scholar
Stahl, Georg Ernst. [1708] 1831–1833. Theoria medica vera, ed. Ludwig Choulant. 3 vols. Leipzig: Voss.
Google Scholar
Staum, Martin S. 1980. Cabanis: Enlightenment and medical philosophy in the French revolution. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Google Scholar
Stefani, Marta. 2002. Corruzione e generazione: John T. Needham e l’origine del vivente. Florence: Olschki.
Google Scholar
Temkin, Owsei. 1968. The idea of descent in post-romantic German biology: 1848–1858. In Forerunners of Darwin, ed. Bentley H. Glass, Owsei Temkin, and William L. Straus Jr., 323–355. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Google Scholar
Tirard, Stéphane. 2006. Générations spontanées. In Lamarck, philosophe de la nature, ed. Pietro Corsi, Jean Gayon, Gabriel Gohau, and Stéphane Tirard, 65–104. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Google Scholar
Williams, Elizabeth A. 1994. The physical and the moral: Anthropology, physiology, and philosophical medicine in France, 1750–1850. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Wolfe, Charles T. 2011. Why was there no controversy over life in the scientific revolution? In Controversies within the scientific revolution, ed. Marcelo Dascal and Victor D. Boantza, 187–219. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
Wolfe, Charles T., and Motoichi Terada. 2008. The animal economy as object and program in Montpellier vitalism. Science in Context 21(4): 537–579.
Article Google Scholar

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Warburg Institute, Woburn Square, WC1H 0AB, London, UK
Guido Giglioni

Authors

Guido Giglioni
View author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guido Giglioni .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Lyman Briggs College, Michigan State University, Auditorium Road 426, East Lansing, 48824, Michigan, USA
Sebastian Normandin
Centre for History of Science, Dept. of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, Ghent, 9000, Oost-Vlaanderen, Belgium
Charles T. Wolfe

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Giglioni, G. (2013). Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and the Place of Irritability in the History of Life and Death. In: Normandin, S., Wolfe, C. (eds) Vitalism and the Scientific Image in Post-Enlightenment Life Science, 1800-2010. History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2445-7_2

Download citation

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2445-7_2
Published: 22 April 2013
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-2444-0
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-2445-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics