RELATION TO PSYCHIC BEHAVIOR 337 



of consciousness in the given case. We do not usually attribute con- 

 sciousness to a stone, because this would not assist us in understanding 

 or controlling the behavior of the stone. Practically indeed it would 

 lead us much astray in dealing with such an object. On the other 

 hand, we usually do attribute consciousness to the dog, because this is use- 

 ful ; it enables us practically to appreciate, foresee, and control its actions 

 much more readily than we could otherwise do so. If Amoeba were 

 so large as to come within our everyday ken, I believe it beyond ques- 

 tion that we should find similar attribution to it of certain states of con- 

 sciousness a practical assistance in foreseeing and controlling its behavior. 

 Amoeba is a beast of prey, and gives the impression of being controlled 

 by the same elemental impulses as higher beasts of prey. If it were as 

 large as a whale, it is quite conceivable that occasions might arise when 

 the attribution to it of the elemental states of consciousness might save 

 the unsophisticated human being from the destruction that would result 

 from the lack of such attribution. In such a case, then, the attribution 

 of consciousness would be satisfactory and useful. In a small way this 

 is still true for the investigator who wishes to appreciate and predict 

 the behavior of Amoeba under his microscope. 



But such impressions and suggestions of course do not demonstrate 

 the existence of consciousness in lower organisms. Anv belief on this 

 matter can be held without conflict with the objective facts. All that 

 experiment and observation can do is to show us whether the behavior 

 of lower organisms is objectively similar to the behavior that in man is 

 accompanied by consciousness. If this question is answered in the 

 affirmative, as the facts seem to require, and if we further hold, as is 

 commonly held, that man and the lower organisms are subdivisions of 

 the same substance, then it may perhaps be said that objective investi- 

 gation is as favorable to the view of the general distribution of conscious- 

 ness throughout animals as it could well be. But the problem as to the 

 actual existence of consciousness outside of the self is an indeterminate 

 one; no increase of objective knowledge can ever solve it. Opinions 

 on this subject must then be largely dominated by general philosophical 

 considerations, drawm from other fields. 



LITERATURE XX 



Consciousness in Lower Animals 



Claparede, 1901, 1905 ; Titchener, 1902 ; Minot, 1902 ; Munsterberg, 

 1900; Verworn. 1889; Bethe, 1898; Yerkes, 1905, 1905 a\ Jordan, 1905; 

 v. Uexkull, 1900 b, 1902 ; Wasmann, 1901, 1905 ; Lukas, 1905. 



