THE RELIGION OF NATURE 



dog which has done wrong is not exactly the same 

 as that of a boy in like case. It is only the same in 

 so far as each has done that which gives offense to 

 a more powerful animal (its master in the case of 

 a dog, its schoolmaster or parent in the case of 

 the boy) and each dreads the consequences. 



But here comes in the difference between the 

 human being and the mere animal. If the boy 

 knows that what he did was morally right, al- 

 though it was a breach of the rules, he holds his 

 -Js head high. Even if he is punished he is proud of 

 it. The dog cannot think about its own thoughts. 

 ./y/'The offense against the rules is plain, and that is 

 all that it can see, and it takes its punishment, like 

 a dog, as a matter of cause and effect. 

 >ff S That a dog's mind can make such connections of 

 ideas and trace the relation of cause to effect, no 

 one should attempt to deny: but it can do this 

 without being at all self-conscious of the fact that 

 it is exercising reasoning power. 



I will quote a couple of instances which have 



f/ v / ^een related to me in this connection, to show how 



^W<^ easy it is to mistake mere animal instincts for hu- 



'*pt"flnan intelligence: in one case, of an old and slow 



dog which, when its younger and swifter com- 



,, ^J/ panion started after a cat, did not fatigue itself 



kriffi in hopeless pursuit, but went straight to a gap 



through which the cat must return; and, in the 



/r QO T 

 ^ ty, 4^ ***'. " '&<</ ~ir#S L ^ J 



'fjlft*-' 



/ 



t ^ fc**ii~ ! 

 /* 



fcj ^J^ 



&M* 



