1 68 NATURE STUDIES. 



letter discussing this particular case, and Dr. Darwin's 

 comments thereon, only, as it seems to us, he carries 

 the objection rather further than it will fairly go, 

 extending it to cases to which we think it can hardly 

 be applied. " It has always seemed to me/' he says, 

 " that brute reasoning is always practical, but never 

 abstract" (but he tries to show that there is very 

 little reasoning at all in the matter). " They do 

 wonderful things, suggested by the objective fact 

 before them; but, I think, never go beyond it. Thus, 

 a dog left in a room alone, rang the bell to fetch the 

 servant. Had not the dog been taught to ring the 

 bell (which, on inquiry, proved to have been the case), 

 it would have been abstract reasoning; but it was only 

 practical. The Arctic fox too wary to be shot, like 

 the first, who took a bait tied to a string, which was 

 attached to the trigger of a gun would dive under 

 the snow and so pull the bait down below the line of 

 fire. This is purely practical reasoning ; but had the 

 fox pulled the string first out of the line of fire, in 

 order to discharge the gun, and then to get the bait, 

 that would have been abstract reasoning, which ho 

 could not attain to." This, however, is assuming 

 more than can be proved; the fox, in the case re- 

 ferred to, did not act in the way which would have 

 implied abstract reasoning ; we do not know that no 

 fox has ever done so, still less that, failing a simpler 

 way of attaining his object, no fox could so reason. 

 Albeit, we believe there are very few cases in which a 

 line of reason involving so many steps as that sug- 



