INSTINCT. 



and that Hate of mind in which we are not onlv not con- 

 fcious of any fuch volitions, but fully aware tliat the habitual 

 adions occur, even when we are confcious of having exerted 

 the ftrongcit efforts of volition to prevent them. But to 

 conclude this preliminary, but necetfary, difcuflion, we 

 may, by way of recapitulation, otforve, if theexpofition we 

 have been giving be correal, that the difference between the 

 four fpecies of actions under one confideration confilh nearly 

 in tlie following circnmftances. That rational actions are 

 done with inlill'igsnce, tuill, and dfjign on the part of the agent ; 

 InfliiiSive ^A\ons fpantancoujly, but with no proper intelligence 

 or deligii in the doer ; mechanical actions without will, fpon- 

 tan.-ity, delign or intelligence ; and /'.i/v.'rW actions, like me- 

 chanical ones, (we mean the habits that may be properly 

 called principles of attion,) without fpontaneity, defign, or 

 i;itelligence ; but differing in this, that they are accidental in 

 their origin, and in many in^ances capable of being checked 

 and even removed by contrary habits ; whereas miclunictil 

 aftions, properly fo c.iilcd, are in a manner necefTary in 

 their origin (for inftance circulation, fecretion and refpira- 

 tion in anim:ils), and can never be removed or fupprell'ed al- 

 together, witliout the dellrudlion of the animal, by any vo- 

 luntary effort of ours. 



As we are of opinion, that the origin at leaft of fomc of 

 the adions of man cannot be explained, unlefs we admit the 

 exiftence of fuch a principle as inltinft, it becomes neccf- 

 fary to confider fome of thofe aftioiis of the lower animals, 

 which are generally allowed to be inltinftive. This ftep 

 feems tiie more neceffary, as the exigence of inftinit, even 

 in the lower animals, feems of late to have been wholly de- 

 nied, iince it has been afl'erted, in a " Nev.' Syllem of the 

 Natural Hiftory of Animals," publilhed in Edinburgh, in 

 J vols. Svo. by Peter Hill, in i 79 1 ; " that the laws of ana- 

 logical reafoning do not juftify the opinion, that the brutes 

 aft, on any occaiion, abfolitely without defign." Whiiil, 

 on the other hand, it has been maintained by Mr. Smellie, 

 in his " Philofophy of Natural Hiilory," " that between 

 reafon and inftinft there is no difference, and that the rea- 

 Coning faculty is itfelf the necefTary refiilt of inllinCt." 

 Nothing can be more direC;tly oppofite than both thefe opi- 

 nions ; and like moll extremes, nothing can be more eafily 

 fhewn to be falfe. To prove that fome of the natural ope- 

 rations of the lower animals are not performed with delign, 

 or with a view to confequences, in oppofition to the former, 

 many examples will not be necefhiry ; and tirll, let us attend 

 to the operations of the winged tribe. The youngefl pair 

 of birds, it is known, without inllruftion or experience, 

 build their firlt nefl of the materials commonly ufed by their 

 fpecies ; in fituations, whofe privacy, S:c. render them fit 

 to afford them fecurity, and ccnivenient for incubation and 

 the rearing of their young. It is alfo certain, that they 

 Ihew equal fl<ill with the o'deft and moft pradifcd of their 

 tribe, in the neatnefs, accuracy, and fymmetrvof their work. 

 It is furtl'.cr known, whenever the chmatc or fituation, or 

 any change of circumllances renders a change in the ftrnc- 

 ture of nells necefTary, that this change is made by all the 

 individuals (young and old) of the fame fpecies equally, and 

 that only when fuch a change is necefTary. Thus, " in 

 countries infeHed with monkies, many birds, which, in other 

 Climates, build in bufhes and clefts of trees, fufpend their 

 nefts upon P.ender twigs, and, by this ingenious device, elude 

 the rapacity of their enemies." It is moreover certain, that 

 no improvement has been made, within the memory of man, 

 in the art of nefl-building, by any tribe, or by any of its 

 individuals. Now the nature of all tin; arts with which we 

 are acquainted is .fuch, and their hiilory fhcws us, that they 

 were firll invented by fome porfon, and then improved in 



Vol.. XIX.' 



the courfe of time, either by the inventor or by others, and 

 finally brought to fome degree of gerfeflion. Hiltory and 

 experience alfo Ihew, that human arts are befl known and 

 practifed with motl .fkill and dexterity in general, by thofe 

 only to whom they have been taught ; and that in different 

 ages and countries they all undergo confiderabk' variations. 

 But in the arts of animals we ohferve no fjch variations ; 

 nor can any individual be pointed out as, the inventor, the 

 improver, or the pcrfcAor of any of them ; for inllance, 

 of nefl-building. Each of them is perfectly fliilled in the 

 wqrkmanfliip of its tribe ; we do not fay that they know 

 the nature and the rules of the different arts which they prac- 

 tife ; but that they are acquainted with the mode of work- 

 ing in them to perfeftioa. How many very fimple arts do 

 we daily fee pradifed by our fpecies, without being able to 

 praftife them, or learn them ourfelves. What a long ap, 

 prcnticefliip is generally necefTary before we can praclif^ 

 even fome of the most common and necefTary. A peafant 

 fpends months and years under his fimple roof, and yet is not 

 able often to build fuch a hut as that he inhabits. Birdi 

 require no fuch teaching or experience : they fervcd no 

 apprenticefliips ; and yet a pair of yoimg birds kept folitary 

 and fequeftered from their infancy, build exaftly fuch another 

 nefl as that in which they themfelves had been brought into 

 life. But what is the inference to be drawn from thefe faiSs ? 

 If the natural actions of the lower animals, for inllariC(» 

 this of nefl-building, be all under the influence of motives, 

 in other words, rctioml, we muft conc'ude, iince they are 

 fo invariable, either that their workmanfliip is perfeft be- 

 yond the reach of improvement, or fo imperfeft as not to be 

 capable of degenerating. The former of thefe conclulions 

 cannot be fupported, unlefs it be contended at the fame tine, 

 that the lower animals have made more early and greater dif- 

 coveries and advances in the arts and fcienccs than vi-e have. 

 Nor will the latter be m.aintained by any man, who confider« 

 the ftrufture of a honey-comb, or who rcflefts, that all the 

 flciU of man has never yet excelled the workmanfliip even of 

 a wren in the ftrufture of fuch a neft as he builds. How. 

 ever, if the fuppofition be admitted, the former feems the 

 better inference. But, if this doftrine be true, we mull fay, 

 that birds are good judges ef climnte and circumllaiices ; 

 that they know th^ dangers and advantages relulting from 

 them, and the beft methods for obviating the former and 

 fecuring the latter. We muft fay, thnt reafoning fhews 

 them the ncceflity of equahty in the ftructure of their nells ; 

 or when, after having been abfent for fome time, they turn 

 their eggs fo as to heat them prop'»rly, and at all times 

 equally, we mull think, that they know heat, and even an 

 equal diftribiition of it, to be necefTary for incubation. 

 Bit as none of thefe can, we think, be afSmied with tiie 

 fmallell appearance of truth, and iince thofe aftions of 

 birds are, without teaching, habit, or cxperitnce as per- 

 feftly performed by the young as by the old, and always lo 

 invariable, we mull conclude, that in thefe inilances we 

 (iifcover not the reafoning of animals, pointing to confe- 

 quences and deviling means, but the unerring reafon and 

 wifdom of Him who made them, and implanted fuch prin- 

 ciples in their conllitutions as guide them unceafingly in the 

 performance of tiicir various natural o;:crations, the complete 

 purpofes and utility of which He only knows. Our reafoning 

 is confirmed by that of Addifon — " What," fays he, " caa 

 we oall the principle wliich direfts every different kind of 

 bird to obferve a particular plan in the ilrufture of its neit, 

 and direfts all of the fame fpecies to work after the lame 

 model .' It cannot l)e imitation; for though you hatch a ^ 

 crow under a hen. and never let it fee. any of the v/orks of 

 its own kind, the nell it makes Ihall be the /ame, to the- . 

 Cc lavuij 



