DISCUSSION 157 



bably alluding chiefly to my work on Instinct 

 and Intelligence in the Animal World (3rd ed., 

 Freiburg i. B., 1905) as otherwise it would 

 not be possible for him to give so superficial 

 and so erroneous a description of my methods 

 of proof. Without a previous clear definition of 

 the ideas involved, it is quite obvious that it 

 would be futile to debate whether animals 

 possess reason or not. Only by means of 

 philosophical consideration of each point, can 

 we arrive in this subject at any intelligible 

 result. Critics who have thought more deeply, 

 such as Professor Emery, have expressly recog 

 nised the fact, that my chief merit in the treat 

 ment of this question lies precisely in my clear 

 definitions of the ideas involved. 



At the conclusion of his speech von Hansemann 

 referred again to the almost absolute agreement 

 existing between the pathology of man and that 

 of beasts. He said that only differences of degree 

 existed, not of principle. 



I failed to understand what inference was to 

 be drawn from this remark that could militate 

 against the essential difference between man 

 and beast, with regard to their mental equip 

 ment especially as the speaker did not touch 

 upon diseases of the brain. 



