The Relation of Organic to Nattcral Selection 1 1 5 



most laborious accumulation of slight functional selections 

 from overproduced movements. 



6. The only resort left to the theory that consciousness 

 is some sort of an actus puriis is to hold that it directs brain 

 discharges; but besides the objection that it is as hard to 

 direct movement as it is to originate it (for nothing short of 

 a physical force could release or direct brain energies), we 

 find nothing of the kind necessary. The attention is what 

 determines the particular movement in developed organ- 

 isms, and the attention is no longer considered an acUis 

 pttnis with no brain process accompanying it. The atten- 

 tion is a function of memories, movements, previous organic 

 experiences. We do not attend to a thing because we or 

 the attention select it; but we select it because we — con- 

 sciousness and organism — find oitrselves attending to it. 



§ 7. The Relatio7i of Organic to Natural Selection ^ 



A word on the relation of the principle of organic 

 selection to that of natural selection. Natural selection 

 is too often treated as a positive force. It is not a positive 

 force ; it is a negative formula. It is simply a statement 

 of what occurs when some organisms do not have the 

 qualifications necessary to enable them to survive in given 

 conditions of life; while others by reason of their qualifi- 

 cations do survive. It does not in any way positively 

 define these qualifications. 



1 The reader may well look up the interesting figure of Darwin at the 

 conclusion of Variation of Plants and Animals (see the summary of his 

 discussion with Asa Gray given by Poulton, Charles Dariuin, p. ii6) — the 

 figure which describes natural selection as a builder using uncut stones 

 (variations). Even though we side with Darwin, still the builder is better 

 off if the stones are shaped and prepared for him by the screening and 

 supplementing processes of individual accommodation. 



