X.] IN ANIMALS AND MAN. 65 



less be unable to hear, because nothing capable of becoming 

 conscious of sound-sensations would be left in the brain. In 

 removing nearly the whole cerebrum the mind would be lost 

 together with all its accessory powers, thought, imagination, 

 will, and self-consciousness. The ' soul ' would be wanting, and 

 hence even the most beautiful of the sound-sensations produced 

 in the auditory centre could not be perceived because there 

 would be nothing capable of perception. 



I have only mentioned this hypothetical case in order to 

 show that the way in which music is perceived depends not 

 onl}^ upon the auditory centre, but quite as fully upon the 

 organ which lies behind, receives the sound-pictures, and 

 allows them to have their full effect upon it. If, as in the case 

 supposed above, there be no mind, then not a single sound- 

 image can be perceived ; but with a highly developed human 

 mind of infinite freedom and flexibility and rich in ideas, the 

 ' parts ' of a polyphonic composition which run through each 

 other, and proceed by contrary movement, can be perceived as 

 the most charming musical architecture ; they make up an artistic 

 structure of rich form, the several parts of which exhibit the 

 most significant relationship, rising from and returning into 

 each other, and ever presenting in each of its separate parts 

 fresh features and new and interesting combinations. But the 

 case is very different with the comparatively lowly organized 

 brain of an animal such as a parrot ; for the power of mind is 

 insufficient to take in such an elaborate sound-picture, and the 

 animal can only perceive a confusion of notes, although 

 perhaps a pleasing one. Even after constant practice the 

 parrot would be unable to follow the movements of the ' parts ' 

 cf the composition, because it lacks the necessary intelligence. 

 We know by its whistling that it can hear music, but even in 

 this it makes but httle progress, and can only repeat short 

 pieces, because it does not understand the connection between 

 the parts. There is of course a very marked difference between 

 the musical perception of a parrot's brain and that of a man. 

 But a comparison between the two is perhaps on this very 

 account best qualified to render evident the conclusion with 

 which we are here concerned, viz. that one and the same 

 auditory organ together with its auditory centre must produce an 

 entirely different effect upon the mind according as this is more 



VOL. II. F 



