The Making of Species 
As Geddes and Thomson say (page 29 of 
The Evolution of Sex), ‘When we consider the 
complexity of the markings of the male bird or 
insect, and the slow gradations from one step of 
perfection to another, it seems difficult to credit 
birds or butterflies with a degree of esthetic 
development exhibited by no human being with- 
out special zsthetic acuteness and special train- 
ing. Moreover, the butterfly, which is supposed 
to possess this extraordinary development of 
psychological subtlety, will fly naively to a piece 
of white paper on the ground, and is attracted 
by the primary zsthetic stimulus of an old- 
fashioned wall-paper, not to speak of the gaudy 
and monotonous brightness of some of our garden 
flowers. Thus we have the further difficulty, 
that we must suppose the female butterfly to 
have a double standard of taste, one for the 
flowers which she and her mate both visit, the 
other for the far more complex colourings and 
markings of the males. And even among birds, 
if we take those unmistakable hints of real 
awakening of the zsthetic sense which are 
exhibited by the Australian bower-bird or by 
the common jackdaw in its fondness for bright 
objects, how very rude is his taste compared 
with the critical examination of infinitesimal 
variations of plumage on which Darwin relies. 
Is not, therefore, his essential supposition too 
glaringly anthropomorphic ? 
306 
