DISCUSSION 227 



any chance imagines logic to be a strong point in 

 monism, as he understands it, I regard that as 

 extremely doubtful, and am inclined to think that 

 those have more logic on their side who assume the 

 existence of a Creator, or, as Professor Plate says, 

 of a lawgiver, who originally laid down the laws of 

 nature. This seems to me far more logical. 



The alleged gradually increasing differences 

 between man and beast, and the intellectual evolu 

 tion of man from the animal kingdom, these are 

 subjects which could only be treated adequately in 

 a special lecture on Comparative Psychology. I 

 have published several works on them, to which I 

 must refer my audience. 1 



My opinions therefore coincide with those of Dr. 

 Bolsche only when he praises logic, and I wish very 

 much that scientists in particular were well endowed 

 with it. (Laughter.) 



Professor Dahl, whose remarks appealed to me 

 very much, believes that in the eternity of matter 

 there is no opposition to the laws of thought, but 

 only to the imagination. It is undoubtedly true 



1 A long reply to Bolsche would be superfluous, as all that he said about 

 the psychology of animals, and the excellence of the animal soul in com 

 parison with the human soul, was from the point of view of Popular 

 Psychology. I may refer my readers to my own works, Instinkt und 

 Intelligent im Tierreich (Instinct and Intelligence in the Animal Kingdoms) 

 3rd ed., Freiburg im Breisgau, 1905, and also Vergleichende Studien uber 

 das Seelenleben der Ameisen und der hoheren Tiere (Comparative Studie, 

 of the Mental Activity of Ants and of the Higher Animals), 2nd ed., 

 Freiburg im Breisgau, 1900. Cf. also my remarks on Bolsche s speech, 

 p. 119. 



