May 1, 1896.] 



SCIENCE. 



669 



New York Academy of Sciences Prof. Osborn, 

 in arguing that the environment is one of the 

 causes of adaptations, stated that lime is the 

 cause of teeth, because teeth depend on the ex- 

 istence of lime and vary with its abundance. 

 It is true that there could be no teeth if there 

 were no lime, but teeth do not result from the 

 mere presence of lime in the environment. Lime 

 is one of the material causes and occasions of 

 teeth, but it has not been shown that it is their 

 efficient cause. It would seem that the environ- 

 ment is more often the cause of the destruction 

 of life than the cause of its development. 



J. McKeen Cattell. 

 CoLusiBiA University. 



INSTINCT. 



In Prof. Mills' communications on ' Instinct ' 

 he seems to have missed the point in the case 

 of each of those criticised — the ' writer of the 

 note, ' Prof. Morgan and myself. In the case of 

 the fowl's drinking, it is not the mere fact that 

 drinking and eating may differ in the degree to 

 which the performance is congenital ; the re- 

 ports seem to show that this varies in different 

 fowl; but that instincts (in this case drinking) 

 may be only half congenital, and may have to 

 be supplemented by imitation, accident, intelli- 

 gence, instruction, etc., in order to act, even 

 when the actions are so necessary to life that 

 the creature would certainly die if the function 

 were not performed. That is the interesting 

 point. 



Then, in criticising me, Prof. Mills accuses me 

 of ignoring the ' effects of environment and of 

 use.' On the contrary, these are just the facts 

 which I appeal to. By adaptations to the en- 

 vironment and by use the creature manages to 

 keep alive ; other creatures die off; so certain 

 determinate directions of congenital variation 

 are singled out and inherited. Thus phylo- 

 genetic variations become determinate, just 

 through these ontogenetic adaptations. This 

 takes the place of the Lamarckian factor. 

 Lamarckism is an ' obvious ' resort in all 

 cases, of course, but it seems to me so easy that 

 in many cases it is shallow in the extreme. 



But my view is very far from being Weis- 

 mannism. I reach determinate variations by 

 means of new functions or adaptations which 



keep certain animals alive to propagate. It is 

 really a new theory, as Prof. Osborn, who has 

 reached about the same point of view, declares. 

 This is also just the value which Prof. Morgan 

 attaches to his observations. 



J. Mark Baldwin. 

 Peinceion, April 17, 1896. 



STUDIES IN THE MORAL DEVELOPMENT OF 



CHILDREN. 



The Relation of the Child to Authority. 



It is desired to obtain data for a study of the 

 attitude of young children toward parental 

 authority, with a view to determining what sort 

 of discipline, instruction and appeal is best 

 calculated to develop in children a proper 

 recognition of the parent's authority and a 

 readiness to submit to it. 



Parents who are willing to aid in the investi- 

 gation are requested to carry out the following- 

 experiments, and to report the results. 



1. Try different punishments for the same 

 offence, as follows : 



(a) For Naughtiness at Table: (1) Corporal 

 IDunishment, though not necessarily severe. 



(2) Sending the child away from the table, with 

 permission to return as soon as he is ready to be 

 good. (3) Having the child eat by himself in the 

 kitchen. 



(6) For Sauciness to Parents : (1) Corporal pun- 

 ishment. (2) Sending the child into the bed- 

 room to stay till he is ready to take back what 

 he said. (3) Refusing to caress the child or to 

 be caressed by him until he is ready to make up 

 and say he is sorry. Of course, it may some- 

 times be hours after the offence before occasion 

 is given for applying this last penality, the par- 

 ent meanwhile seeming to have ignored the of- 

 fence. If the child has not made up before bed- 

 time, then put him to bed without his usual 

 kiss, explaining why you do so. 



(c) For Taking a Toy Belonging to a Playmate 

 (whether by force or stealth), with a resulting 

 outcry on the part of the playmate : (1) Com- 

 pelling the child by corporal punishment, or 

 the threat of it, to return the toy to the play- 

 mate. (2) Taking the toy away by force and 

 returning it to the playmate, and sending the 

 child into the bedroom for iive minutes. 



(3) Giving one of the child's favorite toys (not 



