XIX. 
HE question, “Do birds think?” is so uni- 
versally affirmed or negatived in accord 
with individual thought or interest, the answer 
is lost in a labyrinth of theorizing. The answer 
given by naturalists and others interested in bird 
lore is frequently if not always individualized, 
and the response of the general public to the 
question is hesitant and unassured. Apparently 
there is no open way to a comprehensive answer 
to the question. 
Birds have no language intelligible to man’s 
understanding, and the speech of man is unin- 
telligible to birds; hence that avenue through 
which a convincing answer might be sought, is 
closed. But why, if facts as defined by man are 
truths, and the perception of truths, knowledge, 
why should not man have a more comprehensive 
knowledge of the facts—the truths in nature? 
Why does man hesitate to concede the faculty of 
thought and reasoning to birds and others of 
the lower animals? What proof have we that 
they do not think? We can only judge by the 
circumstances under which actions are per- 
formed, whether they are due to instinct or rea- 
son; but it is a significant fact that the more the 
habits of birds are studied by a naturalist, the 
more he attributes to reason and the less to 
instinct. Birds’ ways are extremely suggestive 
of the intelligence that directs intelligent man, 
and a careful examination of the nests and their 
87 
