974 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XV. No. 390. 



sichten ' and ' Naehsichten ' of university 

 life. Here one is inclined, with Schop- 

 enhauer, to put a higher estimate on their 

 investigations than on many of the publi- 

 cations of academic ' professionals,' es- 

 pecially as the work of the latter is com- 

 ing to be more and more the expression of 

 ephemeral laboratory fads, inflated with 

 the intellectual infection so inseparable 

 from ' schools ' and ' tendencies ' of all 

 kinds. 



The failure of zoologists to .cultivate the 

 province of their science corresponding to 

 the 'oecology' of the botanists is more ap- 

 parent than real for a second reason ; viz., 

 the great complexity of the zoological as 

 compared with the botanical phenomena to 

 be organized and methodized. And this 

 leads us to a further reason for abandoning 

 the term ' cecology ' in zoology, and for sug- 

 gesting the adoption of one essentially dif- 

 ferent. While botanists and zoologists alike 

 are deeply interested in the same funda- 

 mental problem of adaptivity, they differ 

 considerably in their attitude, owing to 

 a difference in the scope of their respect- 

 ive subjects. The botanist is interested 

 in the effects of the living and inorganic 

 environment on organisms which are rel- 

 atively simple in their responses. The 

 zoologist, however, is more interested in 

 the expressions of a centralized principle 

 represented by the activity of the nervous 

 system or some more general and obscure 

 'archffius' which regulates growth, regen- 

 eration and adaptation, carrying the type 

 onward to a harmonious development of its 

 parts and functions, often in apparent op- 

 position to or violation of the environ- 

 mental conditions. This finds its vaguest 

 and most general expression in what we call 

 ' character ' or in what systematists feel, 

 but are often unable to describe, the ' habi- 

 tus.' Its deeper manifestations, however, 

 are of the nature of instinct and intelli- 



gence. This language may be tinged with 

 metaphysics, not to say mysticism, but 

 those who have finally learned to find 

 animals most interesting when not ' fixed ' 

 in some fluid recommended in a German 

 laboratory, or converted into skins, skele- 

 tons, shells, cadavers or fossils, will com- 

 prehend at least the intention of the 

 writer.* 



The only term hitherto suggested which 

 will adequately express the study of ani- 

 mals, with a view to elucidating their true 

 character as expressed in their physical 

 and psychical behavior towards their liv- 

 ing and inorganic environment, is ethology. 

 This term has been employed to some ex- 

 tent by French zoologists and, as the writer 

 infers from Dr. Bather's article, attempts 

 have already been made to establish its 

 English usage. Dahlf has advocated its 

 introduction into Germany in the place of 

 'Biologic' (in the German sense) a term 

 which in that country has been very gener- 

 ally preferred to Haeckel's ' cekologie.' 

 On the other hand, the retention of 'Biol- 

 ogic' has been ably defended by Wasmann 

 {loc. cit.), and it is probable that it wiU 

 remain in general favor, notwithstanding 

 the ambiguity of the word. This danger 

 is perhaps not so great in Germany, where 

 every zoologist or botanist does not style 

 himself a 'biologist' or at least give a 

 course of lectures in ' general biology. ' Be 

 this as it may, however, the question is one 

 to be settled by the Germans themselves, 

 and we are at perfect liberty to use 'eth- 



* The difference between the interests of the 

 botanists and zoologists is most clearly seen in 

 the difference of the problems suggested by 'plant 

 societies' and by social animals. 



t 1. ' Vergleichende Untersuchungen iiber die 

 Lebensweise der Aasfresser,' Sitz. Ber. Alcad. 

 Wiss. Berlin, II., III., 16. Jan., 1896; 2. Experi- 

 mentelle statistische Ethologie,' Verhand. Deutsch. 

 Zool. Gesel., 1898, pp. 121-131; 3. 'Was ist ein 

 Experiment, was Statistik in der Ethologie?' 

 Biol. CentralU., 21. Bd., 1901, p. 675. 



