2CA Wheeler, The Study of Animal Behavior. \ \^\ 



assuredly a matter of importance to determine whether rudiments 

 of reason exist among animals, and to study this wonderful power 

 in its incipient stages, it is equally true that the comparative psy- 

 chologist may lay too much stress on the intellectualistic aspects of 

 the animal mind. Of far greater importance is the study of those 

 processes which lie at the very foundation of our own, as they do 

 of the animal's mental constitution, namely, the feelings and the 

 will, and their manifestations in instinct. Nor should it be forgot- 

 ten that to reason is itself, in a sense, instinctive. It is probable, 

 therefore, that the science of animal behavior will, in the future, 

 lay less stress on the rationalistic side and more on the more pro- 

 found and no less wonderful phenomena. To this great value of 

 the study of instinct the philosopher Schelling bears witness when 

 he says: "The phenomena of animal instinct are of the greatest 

 importance to every thinking man — they are the true touch-stone 

 of a genuine philosophy." 



In view of the preceding statements, it is not surprising that the 

 study of animal behavior has passed out of the anecdotal stage. 

 This fact seems not to be realized by many of the authors of 

 ''nature-books" in this country. At the present time the animal 

 anecdote is admissible only in works of art, like the fable, the ani- 

 mal epic or the animal idyll, or for the purposes of destructive crit- 

 icism. In other words, its chief scientific use is negatively didactic, 

 or for the purpose of illustrating how not to study and describe 

 animal behavior.' 



The constructive work of the student of animal behavior is not 

 completed with the accumulation of knowledge in conformity with 

 true criteria. He may be expected to present the truths thus 

 acquired in clear and attractive form for the purpose of encourag- 

 ing others to continue the great work in this limitless field of 

 observation and experiment. Few authors have been able to do 



' Those who cannot repress a feeling of disappointment on learning that 

 there is no evidence to show that animals can reason like themselves, may 

 find consolation in the fact that the very naivet^ of animals- — -their limitations 

 and stupidity, humanly speaking — is a fact of great interest and beauty. 

 Who will deny that the very absence of the reasoning and reflective powers 

 enters very largely into our aesthetic appreciation of the actions of our domes- 

 tic animals and of our own children ? 



