childhood, indicate an evolution in time of the psychic be- 

 ing of man. Whatever may be the outcome of further 

 study, Romanes, Lloyd Morgan, Forel and Thorndike, 

 among those of modern times, have demonstrated that the 

 genetic methods of zoology are useful instruments for the 

 psychologist, who, I believe, is becoming more and more 

 a student of zoological materials as he realizes the ad- 

 vantage of studying the simpler psychic phenomena of 

 animals lower than man. 



In venturing to speak of the relation of zoology to 

 sociology and ethics, I am well aware that I shall be 

 charged with straying beyond the confines of my subject. 

 But if the student of lower forms should find well-defined 

 principles of biological association and principles of ani- 

 mal conduct, it is not only his privilege, it is in a sense his 

 duty as well to bring these to the consideration of the 

 students of human social and ethical relations. Unless in 

 these matters there has been a break in the continuity of 

 evolution, the simpler relations to be observed in lower 

 animals must surely possess a profound interest and per- 

 haps more. 



In a true sense, any of the many-celled animals is a 

 community, whose constituent members are the differ- 

 entiated tissue-cells, which have undertaken the various 

 tasks of digestion, contraction, sensation, and the rest. 

 By far the majority of animals are cell-communities of 

 this nature. Considering these as individuals, though of 

 a secondary order, we find some communities made up of 

 several animals which have banded together for mutual 

 support and defense, giving us as in the wolf -pack a coun- 

 terpart of the lowest associations of savage men. But 

 among insects especially we find colonies of numerous 

 multicellular individuals which may be so rigidly special- 

 ized for the performance of certain tasks that we cannot 

 avoid the use of terms applied to civilized human groups 



32 



