126 - Animal Intelligence 
constructs, moreover, through association with reconstructs, 
or representations, link themselves in trains so that a sensa- 
tion, or group of sensations, may suggest a series of recon- 
structs, or a series of remembered phenomena.” (C. L. 
Morgan, Animal Life and Intelligence, p. 341.) 
“Lastly, before taking leave of the subject of the chapter, 
Tam most anxious that it should not be thought that, in con- 
tending that intelligence is not reason, I wish in any way to 
disparage intelligence. Nine tenths at least of the actions of 
average men are intelligent and not rational. Do we not all 
of us know hundreds of practical men who are in the high- 
est degree intelligent, but in whom the rational, analytic 
faculty is but little developed? Is it any injustice to the 
brutes to contend that their inferences are of the same order 
as those of these excellent practical folk? In any case, no 
such injustice is intended ; and if I deny them self-conscious- 
ness and reason, I grant to the higher animals perceptions 
of marvelous acuteness and intelligent inferences of won- 
derful accuracy and precision — intelligent inferences in 
some cases, no doubt, more perfect even than those of man, 
who is often disturbed by many thoughts ” (zbid., pp. 376- 
377): 
“Language and the analytic faculty it renders possible 
differentiate man from the brute” (ibid., p. 376). 
Here, as elsewhere, it should be remembered that Lloyd 
Morgan is not quoted because he is the worst offender or be- 
cause he represents the opposite in general of what the pres- 
ent writer takes to be the truth. On the contrary, Morgan 
is quoted because he is the least offender, because he 
has taken the most advanced stand along the line of the 
present investigation, because my differences from him are 
in the line of his differences from other writers. With the 
theory of the passages just quoted, however, which attribute 
