Richard Saumarez

Saumarez dedicates his book on physiology to Dr. John Hunter amongst others.

To the late MR. J. HUNTER, to DR. GOODWIN, SPALLANZANI, and a few others, we are eminently indebted for many valuable facts obtained through the medium of experiments ... thereby manifesting the natural condition of things without altering it.[3]

Saumarez also praises Bacon for having set down a true method of approach to nature, through direct observation based on clear ideas, not just the collection of facts.

The carpenter who chips the timber, and the mason who polishes the marble, are not to be considered as the men of science; but he alone, who, from a precise knowledge of principles and of causes, is able to direct those materials to be arranged with order, form, and symmetry. It was with that end in view, that his lordship analysed before he generalised; that he has separated the individual from the species; the species from the genus; and, from a multitude of effects, endeavoured to arrive at cause.[3]

True science for Saumarez is designed to analyse facts to arrive at the necessary historical understanding and basic or first principles which takes sense impression to understanding.

Without the full possession of these permanent and universal facts, a general, not a particular knowledge of any subject can ever be obtained: without history, we can never have definition; and without axiom, there can be no science.

Knowledge, properly so called, does not simply consist in the impressions made on the senses by the operations of external phenomena; true knowledge can only be admitted to exist, when we are in full possession of the cause whence the effects are derived; and he alone can be denominated the man of science, who is able to connect the cause with the effect.[3]

Saumarez argued that the level of knowledge in his day was poor and corrupted by false principles. In particular, the study of chemistry was not only still ignorant of the principles of "elective attraction," but sought to extend the principles that only held for dead and common matter to the realm of living matter.

It is greatly to be lamented that the pursuits of the chemists, instead of being confined to their proper objects—to the examination of the qualities of matter, dead and common—have been equally, but improperly, directed and extended to the investigation of living matter also; hoping to explore the causes of animation, and of vital action, from chemical phenomena, which are the inevitable attributes of decomposition and decay.[3]

Instead of the usual classification into animal, vegetable and mineral, Saumarez proposes a classification based on 'matter.'

I shall class the whole system of nature, as it has been called, and the matter of which it is composed, under the three distinct heads,— of common,—of living,—and of dead matter.

FIRST, By living matter, I comprehend the various orders of living beings with which the universe is replenished and adorned.

SECONDLY, By dead matter, I confine myself to the exuviæ of animals, and of vegetables; as well as to the whole substance of which these beings are composed, after the actions of life are at an end, and the state which is known by the appellation of death.

THIRDLY, By common matter, I mean the primitive, or original materials, or elements, of which the world is composed; matter which either, has never received the participation of life, or having received, has lost it, and been resolved back into a common state.[3]

Saumarez distinguishes between the property of living matter that is general and diffused through the whole system, and active - materia vitae diffusa - and that which is particular and dormant. The former maintains the preservative (sustentive) and participative (generative) capacity of a living organism. The principle of life is the principium vitae diffusum. We could also say that the former is the inherent capacity of the system to respond, and the latter is the result of the interaction of the former with the exciting powers, the stimuli of Dr. Brown and the Brunonian system of medicine. Saumarez claims that Hunter preceded Brown with his principle of a living principle, which Brown then expressed in the idea of excitation as the stimuli for bringing potential life or excitability to actual life or excitement.

Saumarez then also distinguishes between physiology and physics.

To physiology, belongs the province of investigation [of] the properties of living matter. To physics such as is dead, or common...[3]

Each system of matter "not only in the progress of its evolution, but in the actions it performs, is governed and impelled by laws, distinct and peculiar".

The laws and principles governing dead or common matter (chemistry) cannot be employed to any useful end in understanding living matter (physiology). As an example, the "assimilating and convertible power" or "converting power of the assimilating organ" found in digestion, as "proved by Mr. Hunter and Spallanzani" cannot be explained by chemical laws and actions, but must be performed by a "living power resident in the organ and its secretions, in this case, that of the gastric juice of animals and man." From all of his observations of the facts from previous experiments, Saumarez is led to the logical conclusion that "the process of digestion...is not a chemical, but a living, act." He is further led to conclude that this living power, which is able to first dissolve, diffuse and then re-arrange external matter into a new unified form, "pervades throughout the whole range of animated existence" whether animal or vegetable. And the essence of this living power is that it is able to overcome the chemical laws, so that they resist being reduced to the elements (entropy).[3]

Saumarez also addresses the living power of the mind which is necessary to relate to living sense experience.

Although the organs of sense are the avenues through which impressions from external objects are first made, it is from the native vigor and power of the mind, that ideas are made to flow; while the spark comes from without, the flame resides within; although it is set in motion by external means, it is from the power of mind alone, by which those ideas and motions ought to be directed.

The mind on the contrary, which subsists not like the organs in parts, but as a whole total and universal, receives the impressions wholly and totally, and contemplates altogether, and at once, the various attributes of the body, a perception of which the organs of sense had separately obtained. While the organs of sense, therefore, distinguish the particular attributes of a body, the mind, on the contrary, receives and conceives these perceptions, universally; things partible it views impartibly; things divisible, indivisibly; things temporal, eternally.[3]

This correlates with his contemporary Coleridge's view of the imagination as a creative power (governed by laws that are 'the very powers of growth and production"), that is "vital, even as all objects (as objects) are essentially fixed and dead"). As with Coleridge, Saumarez sees mind and consciousness to be a creative function that is higher and greater than sense-experience, indeed, as Coleridge puts it, "in the mind's self-experience there are evidently two powers at work, which relatively to each other are active and passive; and this is not possible without an intermediate faculty, which is at once both active and passive."

Thus, the act of thinking presents two sides for contemplation, – that of external causality, in which the train of thought may be considered as the result of outward sensations, of accidental combinations, of fancy, or the associations of memory, –and on the other hand, that of internal causality, or of the energy of the will on the mind itself. In philosophical language, we must denominate this intermediate faculty in all its degrees and determinations, the IMAGINATION, the compleating power which unites clearness with depth, the plenitude of the sense with the comprehensibility of the [intellect], impregnated with which the [intellect] itself becomes [understanding]– an intuitive and living power. (Biographia Literaria)

Saumarez also sees that the nature of this living power is both sustentive and generative, and has been spoken of throughout history in different ways, including most recently by Dr. John Brown.

It is by the energy of this same living power, resident in the seed of plants, and in the fecundated ova of animals, that the acorn becomes evolved into an oak,—the infant foliage expanded into leaves,—and the whole process of nutrition and of growth carried on. It is this power which constitutes the architect and the fabricator, by which the whole machine is erected; it is the base on which the whole stands, it forms the bond of its elementary parts,—the cement that unites them into one whole; it is the cause primary and efficient, whence the individuality of every living system arises, in which the form and the sex it assumes, essentially reside; by which, the human species differs from the brute, the brute from the vegetable, the vegetable itself from matter inanimate and common; this power it is, which I call life. The matter, which this power has assimilated and organised, it is, which I call living matter. It is this principle, which has been named by ARISTOTLE, eidoz,—by HARRIS, form—by STAHL, vis medicatrix naturæ—by HALLER, vis vitæ—by BLUMENBACH, nisus formativus—by J. BROWN, excitability ... and by HUNTER, principle of life. This last term appears to me so appropriate and distinct, that I shall consequently retain it. The principle of life may be defined to be "that power, by whose energy different species of matter are assimilated to one kind, a living system organised and formed; and the various parts of which it is composed, are protected and preserved from decomposition and decay.[4]

Thus, what we see in living organisms is simply an organisation of powers, forces and energies according to real prototypes or ideas in the non-material, super-sensible domain. It is by way of this living power that health and disease derive.

Admitting these undeniable truths, the conclusion presses itself upon the mind with force irresistible, that these attributes must, of necessity, belong to a principle immaterial, and incorporeal, by whose activity, matter formless becomes organised;—by whose vivacity it becomes endowed with the power of action, and of motion; exerting the same influence, and governing by the same laws, every particle of this matter which it has assimilated; and constituting the power whence the organisation originates—the fountain, whence health and disease are made to flow.[4]

This living power exists prior to any "organic action" and this pre-existing state Saumarez terms 'pre-disposition'. Like Brown, he also sees that the potential or dormant living power must be brought into action and motion.

It is the same thing with respect to the living principle, and the different organs which it has produced; it not only demands a certain state and temperature of the medium in which it is placed, but particular kinds of food, as well as particular conditions of it, before that dormant power can become power active, and the phenomena be produced of organic action.[4]

Saumarez sees in the regular, organised functions and processes of living beings a unifying cause within the system itself, the living principle that keeps everything operating in a harmonious whole, both through the power of expansion, growth and that of containment or formation.

When we behold the regularity with which the actions of vegetables are performed, as well as the simplicity in the construction of their frame,—we are naturally led to conclude, that those actions, constant and definite as they seem to be, must flow from the operation of causes which exist uniformly and invariably the same, without any opposing or controlling power; residing within the system itself, by the energy of which those actions can either be suppressed, or prevented...[4]

This living power is not to be equated or reduced to the nervous or sensitive power of plants and animals. The first is extensive throughout and the second is more limited in extent, as not all plants and animals have it, or it does not operate throughout the organism, absolutely or equally (in health). The sensitive power, however, is generally prevalent in animals and gives them knowledge of the external world. The cause of sensation lies not so much in the object, but in the sensory organ receiving the impression. This sensitive power is the basis for the pleasure principle, and in its lower form, the instincts and their actions. In humans, however, there is something else besides the instincts.

In terms of the capacity for instinct and the use of the sensory organs, man is inferior compared to a given animal. Vegetables, equally, have a superior power of propagation to that of animals and man. As one rises higher, the power of propagation is exchanged for that of sensation, and sensation exchanged for something else in man - mind or consciousness.[4]

In man, the animal instincts must be mastered and converted by a higher power, that of self-consciousness through the power of rational thought. Instinctual action is not freedom, but the path of degeneration for man. Saumarez also speaks of the power of the mind to integrate sensations. These connect with Locke's ideas on self-consciousness (see Romantic medicine) and Coleridge's ideas, noted above regarding the power of imagination, both primary and later, in a more conscious way, secondary imagination.

Although the organs of sense are the avenues through which impressions from external objects are first made, it is from the native vigor and power of the mind, that ideas are made to flow; while the spark comes from without, the flame resides within; although it is set in motion by external means, it is from the power of mind alone, by which those ideas and motions ought to be directed.[3]