no Animal Intelligence 



The view seems preposterous because, if an animal has 

 sense-impressions when his brain is excited by currents start- 

 ing in the end-organs, it seems incredible that he should not 

 be conscious in imagination and memory by having similar 

 excitations caused from within. We are accustomed to 

 think of memory as the companion of sensation. But, 

 after all, it is a question of fact whether the connections in 

 the cat brain include connections between present sensation- 

 neuroses and past sensation-neuroses. The only connec- 

 tions may be those between the former and impulse-neu- 

 roses, and there is no authoritative reason why we should 

 suppose any others unless they are demonstrated by the 

 cat's behavior. This is just the point at issue. Such evi- 

 dence as the phenomena of animals' dreams does not at all 

 prove the presence of memory or imagination. A dog may 

 very well growl in his sleep without any idea of a hostile 

 dog. The impulse to growl may be caused by chance ex- 

 citement of its own neurosis without any sensation-neu- 

 rosis being concerned. Acts of recognition may have no 

 feelings of recognition going with or causing them. A 

 sense-impression of me gets associated in my dog's mind 

 with the impulses to jump on me, lick my hand, wag 

 his tail, etc. If, after a year, the connection between the 

 two has lasted, he will surely jump on me, lick my hand 

 and wag his tail, though he has not and never had any 

 representation of me. 



The only logical way to go at this question and settle it 

 is, I think, to find some associations the formation of which 

 requires the presence of images, of ideas. You have to give 

 an animal a chance to associate sense-impression A with 

 sense-impression B and then to associate B with some act 

 C so that the presence of B in the mind will lead to the 

 performance of C. Presumably the representation of B, 



