60 Chapter IV. 



must be careful to avoid anthropomorphic exaggera- 

 tions." 



In order to do justice to this mountain of objections, 

 let us examine them carefully one by one. 



First of all, the cultural development of man and 

 the taming of higher animals are said to be different 

 in degree and not in kind. Now, we have nowhere 

 stated, as Forel implies, that cultural development is a 

 condition of intelligence ; on the contrary, we have 

 always maintained that intelligence was a necessary 

 condition for cultural development, and that the latter 

 was a necessary result, and consequently a good cri- 

 terion of intelligence. We willingly admit that the 

 rate of cultural development is different with different 

 nations and races ; but we do not admit that the docility 

 of animals represents even a lower degree or a "germ" 

 of the cultural development of man. The one is essen- 

 tially different from the other, and docility can never 

 become cultural development. This is evident from 

 the following considerations. It is easier to tame and 

 train higher than lower animals because their powers 

 of outer and inner sense perception, their sense organs 

 and their brains are relatively more similar to the 

 human. Owing to this similarity, human intelligence 

 trains the animal by combinations of certain signs to 

 perform a specified feat. The trainer imprints, so to 

 say, mechanically his own processes of thought into the 

 sensile memory of the animal. But the latter never 

 learns to think, it never learns of itself and apart from 

 outer help to compare given representations one with 

 the other, or to draw new conclusions from their 

 reciprocal relations. Whoever has devoted his time to 



