Did Wöhler's urea synthesis end vitalism? disputed

Positions

1. Yes: the founding blow

   The version in most chemistry textbooks. A survey by Peter Ramberg published in 2000 found that about nine in ten repeat some form of it. Hermann Kopp and later writers recast Wöhler as a campaigner against the vital force.

   Sources

   1. P. Ramberg, 2000 survey of chemistry textbooks on the 'Wöhler myth', as reported in Wikipedia: Wöhler synthesis Secondary
   2. Wikipedia: Wöhler synthesis Secondary

2. No: vitalism lingered

   Belief in a vital force persisted for decades after 1828. Kolbe's work of 1845 is often cited as more decisive, and Homer Smith's renal work of the 1930s was later described as removing the last trace of vitalism from physiology.

   Sources

   1. Wikipedia: Wöhler synthesis Secondary
   2. Wikipedia: Homer W. Smith (listed in research/02 §11) Secondary

Evidence

The chemistry is not in question. Wöhler reported in 1828 that urea forms from cyanic acid and ammonia, or from silver or lead cyanate with ammonium salts, as ammonium cyanate rearranges. What is disputed is the weight later writers gave it in the history of ideas; the claim that it overturned vitalism was built up after the event.

Current standing

Historians treat the textbook story as a myth. The film says so outright: the belief lingered for decades, but a door had opened.

All sources