xxxii Unconscious Memory 



In the preface to his first edition (reprinted in the second) 

 Semon writes, after discussing the work of Hering and 

 Haeckel : — 



" The problem received a more detailed treatment in 

 Samuel Butler's book, ' Life and Habit,' published in 1878. 

 Though he only made acquaintance with Hering's essaj' after 

 this publication, Butler gave what was in many respects a 

 more detailed view of the coincidences of these different phe- 

 nomena of organic reproduction than did Hering. With much 

 that is untenable, Butler's writings present many a brilliant 

 idea ; yet, on the whole, they are rather a retrogression than 

 an advance upon Hering. Evidently they failed to exercise 

 any marked influence upon the literature of the day." 



This judgment needs a httle examination. Butler 

 claimed, justty, that his " Life and Habit " was an 

 advance on Hering in its dealing with questions of 

 h5'bridit3^ and of longevity pubert}' and sterility. Since 

 Semon 's extended treatment of the phenomena of crosses 

 might almost be regarded as the rcAvriting of the corre- 

 sponding section of " Life and Habit " in the " Mneme " 

 terminology, we may infer that this view of the question 

 was one of Butler's " brilliant ideas." That Butler shrank 

 from accepting such a formal explanation of memory 

 as Hering did with his hj^pothesis should certainly be 

 counted as a distinct " advance upon Hering," for 

 Semon also avoids any attempt at an explanation 

 of " Mneme." I think, however, we may gather the 

 real meaning of Semon 's strictures from the following 

 passages : — 



" I refrain here from a discussion of the development of 

 this theory of Lamarck's by those Neo-Lamarckians who 

 would ascribe to the individual elementary organism an equip- 

 ment of complex psychical powers — so to say, anthropo- 

 morphic perception and volitions. This treatment is no 

 longer directed by the scientific principle of referring complex 

 phenomena to simpler laws, of deducing even human intellect 

 and will from simpler elements. On the contrary, they follow 

 that most abhorrent niethod of taking the most complex and 



