222 EVOLUTION AND MAN S PLACE IN NATURE 



animal life, this also is seen in direction of activity, 

 though of a new and wider range, admitting of a degree 

 of co-operation in work with us, provided we direct the 

 animals in their efforts. But animals do not of them 

 selves seek knowledge, as a dog seeks what will please 

 its appetite. It seems as if intelligence were not 

 dominant power, though existing in the life, and 

 capable of being used and developed by us. Accord 

 ingly, we have no success in efforts to educate these 

 animals, education being distinguished from training. 

 So long as we seek to have the monkey to imitate our 

 action, we succeed ; but we do not get much beyond 

 this. To refer here to the want of articulate language, 

 is only to illustrate the difference. This want is not 

 accounted for by absence of vocalising power. What 

 we are remarking is really the absence of that measure 

 of intelligence to which information gives interest, as 

 in contrast with curiosity, or sense of strangeness. 

 Accumulation of knowledge by exploration and re 

 flection is hardly, if at all, within the compass of these 

 animals, even with all the advantages of companionship 

 with man, continued for long ages. The dog is our 

 best test here; in its history we have the largest 

 results of heredity. 



The contrast between training and education, here 

 brought into prominence, has not received adequate 

 recognition. Intelligence, as seen in an animal, com 

 monly shows progress in the scope of its activity, not 

 tentative effort to gain enlarged knowledge. This 

 throws a serious obstacle in the way of an argument 

 for continuity, favouring a belief in evolution of the 

 higher intelligence from the lower. Evidence from 

 contrivances to reach food; incidents of the chase; 



