From the Unconscious to the Conscious 



That selection (Darwinian hypothesis) or re- 

 peated exercise (Lamarckian hypothesis), may have 

 reinforced and perfected these instincts is possible 

 or even probable. But according to Fabre, neither 

 the one nor the other can explain the origin of the 

 instinct itself. 



Neither chance nor need can explain how the 

 sting of the primitive insect found at once, without 

 trials, the nerve-ganglion, and was able to paralyse 

 without killing. Actually ' there was no reason 

 for a choice : the stabs had to be given on the upper 

 surface, on the lower surface, on the side, from the 

 front, from behind, at random, according to the 

 chances of a struggle . . . and how many points 

 are there on the skin and interior of a gray cater- 

 pillar ? Rigorous mathematics would reply : An 

 infinity.' Nevertheless the sting must strike once 

 and infallibly: 'the art of provisioning the larva 

 requires a master, and cannot admit apprenticeship. 

 The wasp must excel from the first or make no 

 attempt ... no middle term, no half-success will 

 suffice.' Either the caterpillar is operated upon 

 exactly, or the death of the aggressor and therefore 

 of her descendants ensues. But this is not all: 

 ' Let the desired end be attained ; only half the 

 work is done. A second egg is required to complete 

 the future pair and give progeny. Therefore, at a 

 few days' or hours' interval, a second stab must be 

 given as luckily placed as the first. This is to repeat 

 the impossibility and raise it to the second power! ' 



It is true that these conclusions by Fabre have 

 recently been impugned as too absolute. Researches 

 by Marchal, by Peckham, by Perez, and by most con- 

 temporary naturalists, seem to demonstrate that the 

 primary instincts, in some of their details at least, are 

 variable and perfectible. 



21 D 



