INTRODUCTORY. 19 



undergone the process in question, and that no indi- 

 vidual mind does undergo it now. 



In order to overturn so great a presumption as is 

 thus created on d, priori grounds, the biologist may fairly 

 be called upon to supply some very powerful considera- 

 tions of an i posteriori kind, tending to show that the 

 general consent of civilized mankind * is wrong in 

 denying to brute beasts those truly intellectual, voli- 

 tional, and moral faculties which it is commonly 

 supposed that they do not in fact possess. 



In proceeding with his argument, Mr. Romanes re- 

 marks on the emotional resemblance between animals 

 and man. This we have always not only admitted, but 

 affirmed, as being a necessary consequence of the 

 corporeal nature common to man and beast. Never- 

 theless, though the sensations and lower emotions of 

 both are probably similar, it is not so with the higher 

 emotions,! which depend upon distinct intellectual and 

 moral perceptions. Thus we are convinced that Mr. 

 Romanes errs in attributing to animals % the emotion 

 of the "ludicrous," since that emotion essentially de- 

 pends on an intellectual perception ; though emotional 

 excitement and facial contortions more or less like 

 those of man, may be induced in some animals, espe- 

 cially in apes, by tickling. Such " laughter," however, 

 is radically § different from a feeling of the ludicrous 



* Some of the lower races of mankind think little of the 

 distinction between themselves and the brute creation (see "On 

 Truth," p. 497). The appreciation of man's exceptional dignity 

 has grown with civilization. 



t See " On Truth," p. 221. | p. 7. 



§ See the Forum for July, 1887, p. 492. 



