i] IDEA OF INDIVIDUALITY 15 



of actions, each one of these only has meaning when 

 considered in relation to the whole. Thus the problem 

 so far has been the relation of the parts to the whole. 

 There remains to be considered the relation of this 

 whole to itself. 



Since it is obviously the working, the function, 

 which is important in an individual, the structures 

 being only instruments for the function's better per- 

 formance, this question really resolves itself into the 

 relation between the working of the whole individual 

 at one time and its working at another, later time. 

 This has already been implicitly answered. When 

 we said that the hand and its functioning had signi- 

 ficance in relation to a whole, we did not mean merely 

 to a whole which happened to be there at that one 

 instant, but to a whole which had a continued exist- 

 ence in time. When the hand takes up a piece of 

 bread and puts it into the mouth, that action has 

 no significance for the whole man if only that instant 

 of time is considered. Its significance is only seen 

 later, when the bread has been digested, absorbed, 

 and carried to nourish all the hungry parts of the 

 whole individual. 



What has been said so far presupposes some 

 degree of continuance in the individual ; a survey of 

 the various kinds of organic individuals shows this 

 continuance to be common to them all, and that too 

 in no limited measure, but as one of the fundamentals 



