EXPLANATOKY HYPOTHESES 115 



due to memory, then we have no word to express 

 the process and no hypothesis to explain it. The 

 only difference between the two cases is that we can 

 experiment with the brain and get quick results, 

 while with the germ we are restricted to a series 

 of slow observations. But this makes no real dif- 

 ference in the argument ; and the proof for the germ 

 being affected is as good as that for the brain. An 

 illustration will make this clearer. Suppose I 

 wished to know what a friend saw at a certain place. 

 I ask him, and he recalls the circumstance and tells 

 me. This we call memory. Now suppose I wish 

 to know what the flower is like of a plant of which 

 I only possess the seed. I sow the seed, and it pro- 

 duces the flowers. Is not that done by memory also? 



Another objection may be taken, that it is impos- 

 sible to suppose that the small ovum, or still smaller 

 spermatozoid , could contain all the memories neces- 

 sary for building up the adult organism. This is an 

 objection which applies to all hypotheses except 

 epigenesis, and it is one which it is difficult to meet. 

 However, the capacity of the germ-cells for storing 

 up memories is not unlimited. It is only very few 

 indeed of the impressions stored in the brain that 

 are also registered in the germ-cells; and this, I 

 think, is favourable evidence. 



The weak point in Professor Bering's essay is 

 the absence of any attempt to verify his hypothesis 

 by an appeal to observation, especially on two 

 points. (1) the transmission of habits, and (2) the 

 presence of mind in every cell. I will try to do' 

 something towards supplying this omission. 



