290 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE 



But in discussing evolution I feel that we are on a 

 different plane. Here the appeal to facts is of a much 

 less decisive character.* 



I have been trying, since reading Prof. Baldwin's 

 letter in Science of 1st May, in reply to my own, to 

 ascertain his real views in regard to evolution, and 

 have some hesitation in deciding whether I really grasp 

 his meaning or not. However, a few concrete cases 

 may make matters plainer. A and B are, let us 

 suppose, two individuals that survive because they can 

 and do adapt to the environment ; X and Y die 

 because they cannot ; or, in Prof. Baldwin's terminology, 

 A and B adapt to their " social heredity " constituting 

 " organic selection," which is ontogenetic, or affects the 

 individual. But the survival of individuals specially 

 adapted affects the race or phyllum. But surely an 

 individual adapts to an environment (" social heredity ") 

 because of what he is congenitally. In the language 

 of evolutionists, this is survival of the fittest, or natural 

 selection, though Prof. Baldwin seems to think he has 

 introduced a new factor in his " social heredity." The 

 name is new, and to my mind objectionable, as there is 

 no real heredity ; the idea is not. 



Ordinary people express themselves by saying that 

 we become what we are because of " education," " cir- 

 cumstances," etc. We say : " The man is the product 

 of his age." 



People tend to believe too much in the power 



* Although the bearing on evolution of the observations under 

 dicusssion was not the principal theme of these communications, it 

 may be stated that, under "Determinate Evolution," Prof. Baldwin 

 has elaborated his views in their most mature form in the July 

 (1897) number of the Psych. Rev., in which article also, reference 

 is made to the opinions of others holding views similar to his own. 

 Prof. Morgan has discussed the subject fully in his "Habit and 

 Instinct." W. M. 



