BOUNDARIES DETERMINED BY HABIT 7 



ing territory is founded. Yet inasmuch as the 

 survival value of the dispositions themselves 

 must have depended upon the success of the 

 process as a whole, it is manifest that peculiar 

 significance must not be attached to just the 

 area occupied, w^hich happens to be so suscep- 

 tible of observation ; other contributory factors 

 must also receive attention, for the process is 

 but an order of relationships in which the 

 various units have each had their share in 

 determining the nature and course of subsequent 

 process, so that, as Dr Stout says, when they 

 were modified, it was modified. 



Now the male inherits a disposition which 

 leads it to remain in a restricted area, but the 

 disposition cannot determine the extent of that 

 area. How then are the boundaries fixed ? 

 That they are sometimes adhered to with 

 remarkable precision, that they can only be 

 encroached upon at the risk of a conflict — all of 

 this can be observed with little difficulty. But 

 if we regard them as so many lines definitely 

 delimiting an area of which the bird is cognisant, 

 we place the whole behaviour on a different 

 level of mental development, and incidentally 

 alter the complexion of the whole process. It 

 would be a mistake, I think, to do this. Though 

 conscious intention as a factor may enter the 

 situation, there is no necessity for it to do so ; 

 there is no necessity, that is to say, for the bird 

 to form a mental image of the area to be 

 occupied and shape its course accordingly. The 

 same result can be obtained without our having 



B2 



