426 The American Naturalist. [May, 



tion of the intelligent selection will be preserved in just the same sense. 

 I think it is a great feature of Prof. Cope's theory that he emphasizes 

 the intelligent direction of evolution, and especially that he does it by 

 appealing to the intelligent adaptations of the creatures themselves ; 

 but just by so doing he destroys the need of the Lamarkian factor. 

 Natural selection kills off all the creatures which have not the intelli- 

 gence nor the variations which the intelligence can use ; those are kept 

 alive which have both the intelligence and the variations. They use 

 their intelligence just as their fathers did, and besides get new intelligent 

 adaptations, thus aiding progress again by intelligent selection. What 

 more is needed for progressive evolution ? 4 



Third. We come now to the third point — the method of intelligent 

 selection — and on this point Prof. Cope does not understand my position, 

 I think. I differ from him both in the psychology of voluntary adapta- 

 tions of movement, and in the view that consciousness is a sort of force 

 directing brain energies in one way or another (for nothing short of a 

 force could release or direct brain energy). The principle of Dynamo- 

 genesis was cited in my article in this form : i. e., " the thought of a 

 movement tends to discharge motor energy into the channels as near 

 as may be to those necessary for that movement." This principle 

 covers two facts. First, that no movement can be thought of effectively 

 which has not itself been performed before and left traces of some sort 

 in memory. These traces must come up in mind when its performance 

 is again intended. And second (and in consequence of this) that no 

 act, whatever, can be performed by consciousness by willing movements 

 which have never been performed before. It follows that we can not 

 say that consciousness by selecting new adaptations beforehand can 

 make the muscles perform them. The most that psychologists (to my 

 knowledge) are inclined to claim is that by the attention one or other 

 of alternative movements which have been performed before (or com- 

 binations of them) may be performed again ; in other words, the selec- 

 tion is of old alternative movements. But this is not what Prof. Cope 

 seems to mean ; nor what his theory requires. His theory requires the 

 acquisition of new movements, new adaptations to environment, by a 

 conscious selection of certain movements which are then carried out the 

 first time by the muscles. 5 



< intellegent " adaptations here ; but the same principle applies to 

 " Organic & 



article to appear in this journal to designate 



using the phrase " Organic 

 'gnate this "factor" in evoiuuon ^s 



ition to the other organic processes." 

 made clear just how in his opinion t 



