Of atoms, bricks and cells: A historical critique of historical criticisms of classical cell theory

The essay argues against historical accounts that portray classical cell theory as having established an atomistic and/or building block vision of life and hence as being diametrically opposed to the organismic standpoint. The cell-atom analogy came up in the mid-nineteenth century as a rhetorical creation against cell theory. Yet, the historical fact that opponents, such as Thomas Huxley, Adam Sedgwick, and Charles Otis Whitman interpreted and rejected cell theory as an atomistic theory does not mean that it actually was an atomistic theory. Nevertheless, their criticisms passed from one critic to the next over a considerable period and continue to influence present-day ideas about a supposedly reductionist cell theory. A look into the original texts of some protagonists of early cell theory, such as Matthias Schleiden, Theodor Schwann, Franz Unger, Albert von Koelliker, and Rudolf Virchow, shows that no one defended such a view. On the contrary, they explicitly spoke against any form of cell-atom or cell-building block analogy. Nor did they consider cells as completely independent and interchangeable units, or organisms as mere cell aggregates. I demonstrate that their views of cells and their role in vital organization were more complex, more uncertain and more hypothetical than their critics have admitted.