EVOLUTION OF THE COLORS OF BIRDS. 95 



and when the insect is on the alert, concealed at other 

 times. 



" The immense difference between the two divisions, 

 the one most pleasing, the other highly repugant to our 

 aesthetic susceptibilities, seems to me to be entirely un- 

 explained if we assume that the colors of both are 

 intended for the purposes of recognition. But these 

 great differences are to be expected if we accept Mr. 

 Darwin's views; for the colors and patterns of the latter 

 division ai:)peal to a vertebrate enemy's sense of what 

 is conspicuous, while those of the former apj)eal to an 

 insect's s.ense of what is beautiful. It is, of course, 

 highly remarkable that our own aesthetic sense should 

 so closely correspond with that of an insect. I believe, 

 however, that it is possible to account for this wonder- 

 ful unanimity in taste." 



Mr. Poulton accounts for it by supposing that " our 

 standards of beauty are largely derived from the con- 

 templation of the numerous examples around us, which, 

 strange as it may seem, have been created by the assthe- 

 tic preferences of the insect world." But this does not 

 explain why insects should have the same standards of 

 beauty as man. Morgan indeed takes a stand decidedly 

 opposed to Poulton. Thus he says:"^ "To sum up, 

 then, concerning this difficult subject, the following are 

 the propositions on which I would lay stress: (1) AVhat 

 w^e term an aesthetic sense of beauty involves a number 

 of complex perceptual, conceptual, and emotional ele- 

 ments. (2) The fact that a natural object excites in 

 us this pleasurable emotion does not carry with it the 

 implication that the object was evolved for the sake of 

 its beauty. (3) Even if we grant, as we fairly may, 

 that brightly colored flowers, in association with nectar, 

 have been objects of appetence to insects; and that 



* Auimal Life aud Intelligence, p. 413. 



