THE INTELLIGENCE OF MAMMALS 241 
is present as an element of the association; he cannot supply 
it from a general stock. The groundwork of animal asso- 
ciations is not the association of ideas, but the association 
of idea or sense-impression with impulse.” 
Notwithstanding his general attitude of opposition to the 
doctrine of association of ideas in animals, Thorndike re- 
cords a few experiments which led him to the conclusion 
that in certain cases such associations may occur. In one 
case a hungry cat was placed in a box and the experimenter 
sat about eight feet away from it. At intervals of about 
two minutes he would say, “I must feed those cats.’ Ten 
seconds afterward he would take a piece of fish, go to the 
box and hold it so that the cat was compelled to climb up 
the front of the box to obtain it. Would the cat after a 
number of trials come to associate (A) the sound of the 
words with (B) the sense impression of the experimenter’s 
movements in taking the fish and walking to the box, and 
climb up (C) before it had experienced the second term (B) 
of the association? If so Thorndike concludes that the 
action of the cat “is to be explained by the presence through 
association, of the idea (B).”’ The possibility is left open 
“that (A) was associated directly with the impulse to (C), 
although that impulse was removed from it by ten seconds 
of time.” But Thorndike thinks this is “ highly improbable, 
unless the neurosis of (A), and with it the psychosis, con- 
tinues until the impulse to (C) appears. But if it does so 
continue during the ten seconds, and thus get directly linked 
to (C), we have exactly a representation, an image, a memory 
in the mind for eight or ten seconds.” Leaving out of ques- 
tion the existence of an idea of (A), during the interval, 
why should we say that it is “highly improbable” that 
(A) should become directly linked with (C)? The implica- 
tion of the argument is that the time separating the two 
16 
