202 INTELLIGENCE IN INSECTS 
judgments on animal psychology are usually conservative, 
attributes to insects an “ability to instinctively draw in- 
ferences from analogy.’’ Some of the facts adduced are the 
following: After bees had been trained to come to artificial 
flowers of a certain color for honey they deserted the Dahlias 
upon which they had been working and began to work 
upon other artefacts of different colors and in various 
positions. The bee may be supposed, according to Forel, 
if we interpret him correctly, to go through with a mental 
process corresponding to ‘This appearance means honey; 
“therefore this other similar appearance likewise means honey; 
.. I will investigate it.””. The behavior of the bee may indicate 
a step toward rational procedure, but we are hardly 
justified in assuming that any act of comparison between 
similar flowers takes place in the insect’s mind. A certain 
appearance has been associated with the act of sucking 
honey. This association leads the bee to visit the same 
artificial flower again; or we may say that this object tends 
to set in action the honey-getting activities. If the same 
object causes the return of the bee we do not appeal to any 
inference from analogy. If now a similar object provokes 
the visit of the bee, it may mean simply that the stimulus 
is sufficiently like the first to set the honey-getting activities 
in motion. The bee gets a different perception from the 
second object, but it does not necessarily recognize that it is 
different from and at the same time similar to the first. 
What appears in many cases to be reasoning from analogy, 
involving judgments of likeness, is really based on nothing 
more than lack of discrimination. While granting that a 
simple act of inference may be performed by the bee, the 
facts do not, I think, require us to conclude that it actually 
is performed. 
Another case involving a decided approach to reason, 
