26 The Animal Mind 



ened, he knows not definitely why. It is evident that 

 these three possibilities represent three different grades 

 of complexity of mental process, the first being by far the 

 highest. Lloyd Morgan's canon enjoins upon us in such 

 a case to prefer the third alternative, provided that it will 

 really account for the dog's behavior. 



Now why should the simplest interpretation be pre- 

 ferred? We must not forget that the more complex ones 

 remain in the field of possibility. Dogmatic assertions 

 have no place in comparative psychology. We cannot 

 say that the simplicity of an hypothesis is sufficient war- 

 rant of its truth, for nature does not always proceed by 

 the paths which seem to us least complicated. The fact 

 is that Lloyd Morgan's principle serves to counterbalance 

 our most important source of error in interpreting animal 

 behavior. It is like tipping a boat in one direction to 

 compensate for the fact that some one is pulling the opposite 

 gunwale. We must interpret the animal mind humanly 

 if we are to interpret it at all. Yet we know that it differs 

 from the human mind, and that the difference is partly 

 a matter of complexity. Let us therefore take the least 

 complex interpretation that the facts of animal behavior 

 will admit, always remembering that we may be wrong 

 in so doing, but resting assured that we are, upon the whole, 

 on the safer side. The social consciousness of man is 

 very strong, and his tendency to think of other creatures, 

 even of inanimate nature, as sharing his own thoughts and 

 feelings, has shown itself in his past to be almost irresistible. 

 Lloyd Morgan's canon offers the best safeguard against this 

 natural inclination, short of abandoning all attempt to 

 study the mental life of the lower animals. 



