Niedergang der Vergleichenden Morphologie ‐ Verlust für die Botanik

Abstract Comparative or idealistic morphology can be taken for one of many different kinds of approaches in general biology. Its Golden Age was the era of Central European Romanticism, one late descendant of this tradition was Wilhelm Troll (1897‐1978). In the end of the 19th century morphology stood back. Its place in the front scene was taken by other general approaches. At present, however, aphilosophic or even antiphilosophic specialists with their materialistic ideologies (of which they are mainly unconscious) are setting the fashion in biology. General concepts are suspicious of natural philosophy and not wanted. If forwarded they have little influence on actual research. Desultory activity is characteristic of present‐day biology resulting in masses of incoherent data. However, history shows how much general concepts are needed for alignment of scientific research. One reason for the vanishing interest in general concepts can be found in professionalized science. Professionalism included the trend to confine to internal affairs. This ends up with a confrontation of two parties: scientists who dispose of knowledge and the public without such insight. Scientists, however, beware of surpassing their “proper spheres of responsibility” thus leaving the public in full obligation to decide on plans, enterprises, and operations. Positive science therefore turns out to be science in complete disengagement since it is pure expert knowledge. Biology must escape from positivism. It needs vital general concepts, otherwise it remains esoteric, exclusive and isolated. Science without interference with actual culture is as sterile and only for luxury as is art in its l'art‐pour‐l'art attitude.