LAMARCK’S THEORY OF DESCENT 335 
special Octet ee to which we give the name of 
tnstinct.* 
“This propensity of animals to preserve their habits 
and to renew the actions resulting from them being 
once acquired, is then propagated ‘by means of repro- 
duction or generation, which preserves the organiza- 
tion and the disposition of parts in the state thus 
attained, so that this same propensity already exists 
in the new individuals even before they have exer- 
cised it, 
“Tt is thus that the same habits and the same 
mstinct are perpetuated from generation to genera- 
tion in the different species or races of animals, with- 
out offering any notable variation,+ so long as it does 
not suffer change in the circumstances essential to 
the mode of life.” 
* “* As all animals do not have the power of performing voluntary 
acts, so in like manner zzstincf is not common to all animals; for 
those lacking the nervous system also want the organic sense, and 
can perform no instinctive acts. 
“* These imperfect animals are entirely passive, they do nothing of 
themselves, they have no wants, and nature as regards them treats 
them as she does plants. But as they are irritable in their parts, the 
means which nature employs to maintain their existence enables them 
to execute movements which we call actions.” 
It thus appears that Lamarck practically regards the lowest animals 
as automata, but we must remember that the line he draws between 
animals with and without a nervous system is an artificial one, as some 
of the forms which he supposed to be destitute of a nervous system 
are now known to possess one. 
+ It should be noticed that Lamarck does zot absolutely state that 
there are 7zo variations whatever in instinct. His words are much less 
positive: ‘‘ Sazs offrer de variation notable.” This does not exclude 
the fact, discovered since his time, that instincts are more or less varia- 
ble, thus affording grounds for Darwin’s theory Of the origin of new 
kinds of instincts from the ‘‘ accidental variation of instincts.” Profes- 
sor James’ otherwise excellent version of Lamarck’s view is inexact and 
misleading when he makes Lamarck say that instincts are ‘‘ perpet- 
uated wthout variation from one generation to another, so long as 
the outward conditions of existence remain the same” ( 7he Principles 
of Psychology, vol. ii., p. 678, 1890). He leaves out the word nota- 
ble. The italics are ours. Farther on (p. 337), it will be seen that 
Lamarck acknowledges that in birds and mammals instinct is variable. 
