228 THE ZOOLOGIST. 



realms, they can or should be separated ? Is it a fact, as Prof. 

 Brooks believes, that there is a partial failure of training in bio- 

 logical laboratories to make naturalists of the students ; and is 

 the explanation of that failure " the belief that our biology (the 

 biology of the present day, and not that of the unknown future) 

 ends with the study of the structure and functions of the physical 

 basis — the belief that biology is ' nothing but ' the discovery of 

 its physical and chemical properties"? It is at least probable 

 that we have also naturalists who are not philosophers, and 

 philosophers who are not naturalists. 



Zoology to-day is a science of so wide and exhaustive a 

 nature, that its student may indeed form philosophical conclusions, 

 while having no time for the wide reading and reflection necessary 

 to the acquisition of a mental competency. Aristotle's knowledge 

 of zoology was small indeed compared with what may readily be 

 acquired at the present day, but the position is reversed when his 

 philosophical method is compared with modern speculative gym- 

 nastics. 



This book may be well commended to the perusal of those who 

 love debatable matters, and who seek to tread the labyrinth of 

 biological speculation. It is a good, but not altogether an easy book 

 to read. It is not assertive, but rather argumentative ; it often 

 quotes only to question, and frequently details a proposition to 

 show its weakness. Sometimes we ponder over such a conclusion 

 as the following : — " Biology is not a closed science, and Darwin's 

 view of the matter is not proved — possibly is not provable ; but 

 its great value is in the proof that there is no shadow of evidence 

 for any other view." Does not this constitute Herbert Spencer's 

 canon of truth — or proof— by the inconceivableness of the con- 

 trary ? The great importance of these works is that they do not 

 entreat assent, but demand consideration ; their mission is not so 

 much to convince as to promote thought : — " Scientific men who 

 are not zoologists are fond of telling us science has nothing to 

 do with the Why ? and is concerned only with the How ? but, in 

 zoology, it is often easy to discover why an action is performed, 

 while we are very ignorant of the structural conditions under 

 which it takes place." 



