SOME POPULAR ERRORS 



tent and the limitations of what I call " instinc- 

 tive " cleverness. 



The little dog, it seems to me, had enough brains 

 to use guile in order to decoy the big one away 

 from its dinner; but not enough to sit in judg- 

 ment on its own conduct and realize, not only that 

 it was a sneak and a thief, but that it gained noth- 

 ing in the end by sneaking and thieving. It was 

 its instinct to be as clever as it could in getting 

 food. 



A human being would have recognized his duty 

 to his brother, as well as the fact that, where there 

 was plenty for both, it would have been much 

 more sensible to eat his own dinner quietly and in 

 comfort. 



Having now for some time made no secret of 

 my belief as to the feelings of animals, I have 

 naturally become the recipient of letters which 

 illustrate various kinds of popular error on the 

 subject. One correspondent writes, for instance, 

 describing an accident which happened to a bul- 

 lock causing " tears of anguish " to come from its 

 eyes. But for incidents like this, my correspondent 

 says, he would be able to accept the theory that 

 animals do not know that they " suffer " ; and can 

 I explain why, if the bullock was not conscious of 

 suffering, it shed " tears of anguish " ? 



Now, the repetition of that phrase, " tears of 

 [85] 



