THE CHICAGO EXPERIMENTS WITH RACCOONS 167 



Reply. Hardly probable, since the floor between him and 

 the piece was carefully rubbed with another piece of the same 

 apple, and his forepaws were still moist with the pieces of apple 

 he had already eaten. But note Hunter's argument (p. 27) 

 that smell was eliminated in his experiments because the rat 

 was given only a bite, "so almost no food fell on the floor." 

 Food was used with the raccoons in the same way. 



Criticism 3 . Varying means to the same end. My data 

 under this head are just as inconclusive as that presented above. 

 (P. 17.) 



Reply. Curious then that Professor James thought this "the 

 mark and criterion of the presence of mentality in a phenomenon." 

 "We all use this test," says James, "to discriminate between an 

 intelligent and a mechanical performance." 



Criticism 4 "The criticisms on Cole's entire work reduce 

 to these: (1) The facts are either inconclusive or irrelevant. 

 And (2) there is no evidence of adequate controls." (P. 20.) 



Reply (a) Why then are the same facts, namely, responses 

 to an absent stimulus, so satisfyingly conclusive of imageless 

 thought ? This recalls the remark of Hodgson, "What you 

 know least about, assert to be the explanation of everything 

 else." (I quote from memory.) (b) "No controls." This is 

 the repeated cry in these papers. It seems probable from the 

 statements of the papers that their authors did not read my 

 account and that they misunderstood the few pages they did 

 read. I shall show this in detail in showing that Gregg and 

 McPheeters (and their experiment was planned by Hunter) have 

 entirely misunderstood what I did. 



In concluding the discussion of Hunter's report alone the 

 points of similarity between his experiments and mine may be 

 enumerated. He extinguished lamps which were used as stimuli, 

 while I put a series of objects in view of the animal, then out of 

 view again, and he must discriminate, under these conditions, 

 between absent stimuli. Hunter secured delay by caging the 

 animal, while I secured it by not feeding the animal until every 

 member of the series had been put in view and (except the last 

 member) out of view again. Sometimes six objects were used 

 by me (i. e., each of three cards was shown twice). Hunter 

 found it inapplicable to use the third light in many cases. 



