1899] DR. WILLE V’S RESULTS 225 
cannot be dealt with here, especially as they are more fully stated elsewhere. 
He restates his former well-known conclusion of the homology of the vertebrate 
thymus with the branchial tongue-bars of Enteropneusta, and further finds the 
homologue of the endostyle in the parabranchial ridges, paired ciliated tracts 
which pass forwards to unite with the epibranchial band. This suggestion 
may be further compared with Garstang’s comparison of the echinoderm ad-oral 
band with the endostyle. : 
Enough has here been said to show the value of Dr. Willey’s contribution. 
The third memoir is by Mr. Shipley, who takes the occasion to give a 
systematic revision of the groups of Echiurids. Sonellia viridis and four species 
of Thalassema are comprised in Dr. Willey’s collection. The author gives a 
useful summary of the most valuable specific characters, of which the number of 
nephridia and the enumeration of muscle bundles appear the most important. 
The five genera, Bonellia, Echiurus, Hamingia, Saccosoma, and Thalassema, are 
dealt with. 
From these brief remarks it will be noted that Part III. of the “ Zoological 
Results” is full of interest alike to the morphologist and the systematist, and 
the author is to be congratulated upon his own labours and upon the able 
assistance which he has obtained. yd pa 
REASONING MADE SIMPLE. 
The Psychology of Reasoning, based on Experimental Researches in 
Hypnotism. By Dr. ALFRED BINET. Translated by A. G. WHYTE, 
B.Se. 8vo, pp. 191. Chicago: The Open Court Publishing Company, 
1899. Price ds: 6d. 
Dr. Alfred Binet’s name is well known in association with that of Dr. 
Charles Féré (placed on the dedication page of this little book), to all who are 
interested in the phenomena of hypnotism. He here makes these phenomena 
throw such light as they can on the psychology of reasoning. His treatment 
has the advantage of perfect lucidity and of a simplicity which is, we venture 
to think, delusively alluring. 
Reasoning is not regarded by Dr. Binet as a specialisation of conscious 
activity, and a differentiation only reached at a late stage of mental evolution, 
but rather as the general form of all psychical life. ‘To sum up,” we are told, 
“all forms of mental activity are reducible to a single one—reasoning.” ‘‘ Three 
images which succeed each other, the first evoking the second by resemblance, 
and the second suggesting the third by contiguity—that is reasoning. Submit 
any reasoning to analysis, and you will find nothing else at the bottom of the 
crucible. But it would be an error to believe that this process belongs specially 
to reasoning. Far from it. We meet with it in all intellectual operations ; it 
is the single theme upon which nature has embroidered the infinite variations 
of our thought.” When a three-day-old chick avoids a cinnabar caterpillar as 
the result of previous experience of like objects, we have the three successive 
images ; this caterpillar evoking images of certain others by resemblance, and 
these others suggesting the nastiness which was unpleasantly contiguous. 
Changing for convenience the order of formulation, and leaving out one little 
word, Dr. Binet gives for comparison— 
This is a crystal ; 
All erystals have planes of cleavage ; 
This has a plane of cleavage. 
Here, he says in effect, this crystal is on all fours with this caterpillar ; other 
crystals suggested by resemblance take the place of other caterpillars similarly 
suggested ; while experience suggests cleavage in the one case just as it sug- 
gested nastiness in the other. But where does the therefore come in? In the 
15—wnar. sc.—vou. xv. No. 91. 
