532 THE EVOLUTION OF MIND 



which may be called purely physiological ? The clearest 

 answer that we know to this question has been given by 

 Prof. C. Lloyd Morgan (1915, p. 10). " The c-i actor is 

 not mere awareness. It is always pre-awareness. It is 

 always awareness which, by however little, forestalls the 

 coming event ; always in a measure anticipatory ; always rep- 

 resentative of that the like of which may follow in sensory 

 presentation. It is always this at its very lowest level; and 

 at its highest level it is this developed into definite and 

 distinct prevision of ends, thus rising to the fully teleological 

 status. Furthermore its presence or absence, as criterion of 

 mind, is not only a speculative problem but one of inference 

 based on evidence afforded by observation. When an or- 

 ganism profits by experience, as we say, when for example 

 a chick avoids nauseous caterpillars after (and only after) 

 seizing their like in its bill, we may infer pre-awareness 

 of what is, or may be, just coming in further presentation. 

 This is our c-factor in an early phase of development; and 

 even at this early stage the study of behaviour may afford 

 evidence from which its presence or absence may be inferred." 

 " What, then, does such pre-awareness imply ? It implies 



(1) the prior occurrence of direct awareness of like nature; 



(2) the retention of some change of structure associated with 

 such direct awareness; (3) the revival of awareness in rep- 

 resentative fashion; and (4) the time-precedence of this 

 revival to the occurrence of like awareness in sensory pres- 

 entation. If, for example, a chick has pre-awareness of the 

 taste-meaning of the lady-bird it sees, there must have been 

 prior awareness of live insects as nauseous ; the effects of that 

 prior awareness must be structurally retained; the meaning 

 must be functionally revived ; and this must ' prevent ' 

 both in the older and in the more modern sense of this word 



