INSTINCT AND INTELLIGENCE. 



own times. Descartes maintaiaed that the inferior animals were 

 mere automata, but that being constructed by Nature, they are 

 incomparably more perfect than any which could be constructed 

 by man. Buffon allowed them sensations, arid a consciousness of 

 present existence, but denied them all exercise of thought, reflec- 

 tion, the consciousness of past existence or memory, and the 

 power of comparing their sensations or having ideas. Yet not- 

 withstanding this, in other parts of his works, he admits that a 

 power of memory, active, extensive, and retentive, cannot be 

 denied to certain species. Thus, in his history of the dog, he says 

 that an ardent, choleric, and even ferocious disposition, which 

 renders that animal in the wild state formidable to all around it, 

 gives place in the domestic dog to the most gentle sentiments, the 

 most lively attachments, and the strongest desire to please. The 

 dog, creeping to the feet of its master, places at his disposition its 

 courage, its force, and its talents. It waits his orders merely to 

 execute them ; it consults him, interrogates him, supplicates him, 

 understands the slightest signs of his wishes : has all the warmth 

 of sentiment which characterises man, without the light of his 

 reason ; has more fidelity, more constancy ; no ambition, no selfish 

 interest, no desire of vengeance, no fear save that of its master's 

 displeasure. It is all zeal, aU ardour, all obedience. More 

 sensible to the memory of kindness than of injury, it is not dis- 

 heartened by bad treatment. It submits and forgets, or remembers 

 only the more to attach itself. Far from being irritated by, or 

 fiying from him who punishes it, it willingly exposes itself to new 

 trials. It licks the hand which strikes it, ofiers no remonstrance 

 save the expression of its pain, and disarms the hand which 

 punishes it by patience and submission.* 



Thus while Buffon refuses thought to the dog, he admits that 

 he is capable of consulting, interrogating, and supplicating his 

 master, and understanding the signs of his wUl. But, how, it 

 may be asked, can a dog understand, without understanding ? 

 Without the faculty of memory, how can he remember kindness 

 and forget ill-treatment ? Buffon, as M. Flourens justly observes, 

 admits as an historian, but he denies as a philosopher, and in 

 spite of his acute understanding, allows his judgment to be influ- 

 enced by the purpose to which the work on which he is engaged at 

 the moment is directed. As an historian, he has to state facts ; 

 and he does so with truth and eloquence. As a philosopher, he 

 has to defend a, system ; and he closes his eyes on aU facts save 

 those which support his hypothesis. 



9. During more than a century which elapsed between the 



* " Histoire du Chien," vol. 5, p. 1^6 

 113 



