222 MIND IN EVOLUTION CHAP. 



The theory may, however, be reconstructed in a more 

 plausible form. It may be said that the animal never 

 perceived the relation between one act and another, but 

 that when his attention was called to the act, he acquired 

 a slight impulse to do it, which was speedily confirmed by 

 the satisfactory results. There are not wanting facts in 

 favour of this theory. Jack, for example, undoubtedly 

 acquired a taste for hanging strings, and would pull at 

 them frequently with no result. Similarly, the elephant, 

 who would pull in a basket containing bread by means of 

 a cord, would also pull dummy cords arranged for the 

 purpose. I have seen the cat sitting up before the cabinet 

 of drawers systematically pulling out one after another 

 when there was nothing in them at all, and what is more, 

 I have seen him pull out the same drawer three or four 

 times in succession. Such cases suggest at least that the 

 action tends to become habitual or sensori-motor. That is 

 to say, it tends to become attached to the perception itself. 

 And so far as it is attached to the perception, the rela- 

 tion between the act and its apparent end ceases to be 

 operative. 



How far, then, does this tendency go, and how far can 

 we still trace the direct influence of the end upon the act ? 

 The simplest method of determining this question is by a 



piece out, but sideways, not lengthwise as I had done. Nothing hap- 

 pened. I showed him again several times, and as nothing happened, his 

 interest speedily drooped, and he departed, probably in some dudgeon. 



Meanwhile, Jack was watching the proceedings. He now came up, 

 and pawed all about, getting out the loose piece first sideways, and after 

 a time, during which he was not shown again, lengthwise. I then showed 

 him once or twice, and at length he pulled it out more or less deliberately. 

 When he found that nothing happened, and I replaced the piece, he took 

 no notice of it at all. I showed him again, and he knocked the piece out 

 sideways, and bit it. After this he refused to take any notice till I had 

 shown him three times, when he pawed at the side, and knocked the 

 whole thing over. After this he absolutely refused to take any notice until 

 he was ordered to pull it out, when he again got up and knocked the 

 whole rack over. 



Both animals began with every appearance of expectation that 

 this was to be another of the now familiar tricks, which, according to 

 experience, resulted in a tit-bit for them. Both showed interest in the 

 proceedings, and an attempt to follow what I was doing at first ; and 

 both, when they found there was no result, abandoned their efforts. It 

 would, of course, be possible to get the dog to persist through the motive 

 of obedience, but this would be quite a different thing from mechanical 

 imitation. Of this there seemed to be no trace. 



