232 A. A. SCHAEFFER 



The concept of choice is thus seen to occupy a difficult posi- 

 tion in science. If a process in organisms can be described as 

 a sequence of events, we may adopt the view that we do not need 

 the word choice in the description of these events; if, on the 

 other hand, a process of choice cannot be described as a sequence, 

 we cannot from the point of view of objective science use a meta- 

 physical concept — consciousness — as a directive force to explain 

 the phenomenon, but must conclude that some of the events in 

 the chain of sequences are still unknown. 



Perhaps the chief objection to the use of the concept of choice 

 is that it insistently calls to mind a relation existing between, for 

 example, an ameba and some particles which it senses. The 

 relation between the ameba and the particles is made to occupy 

 a more important position in the mind than either the ameba or 

 the particles by themselves. The concept is strongly metaphysi- 

 cal, for the instant one seeks for a relation between phenomena 

 one steps into the borderland of metaphysics. A thousand and 

 one other concepts without w r hich we could not possibly get 

 along in science are just as truly metaphysical, but for various 

 reasons we have fallen into the habit of not noticing this 

 characteristic. 



Again, the concept of choice originates almost wholly from 

 subjective material, and in ordinary usage it has first of all a 

 subjective meaning. It is supersaturated with anthropomorph- 

 ism. Let us say that a man chooses an apple from among 

 some oranges. How would these phenomena be related objec- 

 tively without connoting a subjective process? A kinemato- 

 graphic record even, without any words at all, would be certain 

 to suggest a subjective process. But although we ordinarily 

 thus think of the subjective process, nevertheless if the same 

 events should be made known to us in a paper on animal or 

 human behavior, we would disregard the subjective meaning 

 and center attention only on the objective phenomena. It is, 

 in short, the meaning we are after and the point of view, not 

 the words merely. 



To some investigators of behavior such words as selection, 

 choice, etc., are anathema. They would avoid them as they 

 would the plague. But they themselves do not wholly suc- 

 ceed in avoiding - them. How would the idea: The ameba 

 selects its food — be rendered on this view? This idea could 

 conceivably be presented, as in the case of the man selecting 



