112 HOMO V. DARWIN. 



different thing from their having such a sense of beauty as 

 man possesses. A bird can admire only itself, or others of 

 its own species. Its sense of beauty has a very narrow 

 range, though, within that range, it serves an evident and 

 necessary purpose. But is any bird conscious of the beauty 

 of flowers ? Can a peacock, or a peahen, admire, or be 

 taught to admire, a lily or a rose ? Mr. Darwin himself 

 says, " Obviously no animal would be capable of admiring 

 such scenes as the heavens at night, a beautiful landscape, 

 or refined music." " Such high tastes," he adds, " are not 

 enjoyed by barbarians or uneducated persons." But bar- 

 barians and uneducated persons may easily be so cultured 

 as to have these high tastes developed in them. This 

 is more than can be said of any animal. In animals, the 

 sense of beauty is but a confined and narrow instinct, which 

 remains the same age after age ; in man it is a high and 

 complex faculty, which may be cultured and improved, and 

 transmitted onwards, purified and refined, from generation 

 to generation. 



Lord C. I think, Mr. Darwin, you must admit that the 

 sense of beauty which certain animals possess is a mere 

 unimproveable instinct, operating within a very narrow 

 range, and incapable of extension beyond that range ; while, 

 in man, this sense may be so trained as to become one of 

 the loftiest faculties of his nature. Man can speak not 

 only of a beautiful bird, or a beautiful flower, or a beautiful 

 landscape, but of a beautiful poem, a beautiful chain of 

 reasoning, the beautiful machinery of nature, and so on. 

 I think you must wait till you find some animal going 

 beyond itself and its own species, in its admiration of 

 beauty, before you compare its sense of beauty with that 

 possessed by man. What is the next point ? 



Darwin. "Belief in Ood" my Lord ; "Religion. There 



