316 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. LI. No. 1317 



De Bonnet's philosophical theories were 

 largely influenced by the time in which he 

 lived ; he wrote a work on the " Proofs of 

 Christianity" to defend Eevelation, and 

 valiantly opposed the teachings of Voltaire 

 and Eousseau, and the epigenesis theory of 

 Buffon. On the other hand, he advanced the 

 purely materialistic idea that all thought is 

 due to vibrations of the nerves. Bodily 

 activity, he said, is a necessary condition of 

 thought. 



Following Cuvier and Leibnitz in the doc- 

 trine of original creation by a Deity, de 

 Bonnet then premised a "germ" of perfect- 

 ing evolution in every living thing. In his 

 "Contemplation of Nature," he taught that 

 all beings in natui-e form a graduated and 

 unbroken scale from lowest to highest, with 

 no gaps from the lowest atom of matter 

 to " Archangels " ; though the flaw in his per- 

 fectability theory appears when he denies 

 that the highest of his heirarchy can ever 

 exactly equal Deity itself. In "Philosophic 

 Palingenesis," he elaborated this doctrine to 

 show the survival not merely of man, but of 

 all animals, and the perfecting of their fac- 

 ulties in the future state. Man, he said, is 

 composed of a material body arid an .immate- 

 rial mind, resident in his brain ; but he carries 

 within himself the germ of a more attenuated 

 body which will clothe his mind in the next 

 stage after life on earth — a curious approxi- 

 mation to some of the teachings of modern 

 Spiritualism. What he does not make clear 

 is whether he expects each individual to carry 

 within himself the germ of his own perfect- 

 ability, or whether it is only races of men and 

 kinds of animals that are perfected en masse. 



De Bonnet's philosophy is chiefly interesting 

 as a commentary on his scientiflc attain- 

 ments. If he had died at twenty-five, he 

 would have left his most valuable achieve- 

 ments already accomplished; but if, two hun- 

 dred years ago, he had never been born, the 

 world of science even to-day would have been 

 a gTeat deal the loser. 



Maynard Shipley 



SCIENTIFIC EVENTS 

 THE PRESERVATION OF NATURAL CONDITIONS 



Foe three years the Ecological Society of 

 America has had a committee composed of 

 about twenty-five interested persons, investi- 

 gating the question of preserving natural con- 

 ditions for scientific Study. The work to date 

 has been concerned with (a) listing and de- 

 scribing preserved areas and areas desirable 

 for reservation, (&) determining the policies 

 governing existing reservations and the desir- 

 ability of reserving natural areas within them, 

 (c) collecting arguments in favor of pre- 

 serves, (d) determining lines of research and 

 education, scientific, artistic and historical 

 which require or can make use of reservations, 

 and (e) methods which have been successfully 

 employed in securing reservations. The mat- 

 ter in hand includes a list of more than six 

 hundred areas in United States and Canada 

 which are preserved or are desirable for pre- 

 servation. It is evident that some types of 

 natural conditions are not represented and for 

 some localities no areas have been brought to 

 our attention. Persons having information 

 regarding areas desirable for preservation or 

 already preserved or knowledge concerning 

 any of ' the subjects noted above, especially 

 ■methods employed in securing reservations, 

 are requested to send information, which will 

 be fully credited, to the chairman or any mem- 

 ber of the committee. The present committee 

 is composed of C. W. Alvord (history), Univ. 

 of III; H. C. Cowles (plant communities), 

 Univ. of Chicago; E. T. Fisher (forest prac- 

 tice), Harvard Univ.; S. A. Forbes (ento- 

 mology), Univ. of 111., A. S. Pearse (aquatic 

 preserves), Univ. Wis., C. F. Korstian (graz- 

 ing), Ogden, Utah; E. B. Miller (forest laws), 

 Univ. of 111.; T. C. Stephens (bird preserves), 

 Sioux City, la.; E. H. Wolcott (fires), Univ. 

 of Nebr. ; F. B. Sumner, La JoUa, California ; 

 M. J. Elrod, Univ. of Mont.; F. ,T. Lewis, Univ. 

 of Alberta; John Davidson, Univ. of Br. Co- 

 lumbia; G. B. Eigg, Univ. of Washington; 

 F. Eamaley, Univ. of Colo.; G. A. Pearson, 

 Flagstaff, Ariz.; G. W. Goldsmith, Univ. of 

 Nebr.; J. E. Watson, Univ. of Fla.; J. W. 

 Harshberger, Univ. of Pa. ; W. L. Bray, Syra- 



