100 General Notes. [January,: 
our own. Forthwith we must assign it a desire for food, which 
desire is the chemical affinity of atoms; then the Amceba hun- 
gers.” The origin of movements under the stimulus of pain and 
pleasure is next followed out. The reproductive instinct is 
referred to as a modified form of hunger. There is also a theory 
of the origin of the brain; and another as to the origin of the 
differentiation between the motor and sensory nerves and their 
functions. The work is a brilliant one, and is studded with epi- 
grammatic sentences, some of which have points which will be 
felt, but whether pleasurably or painfully will depend on the 
opinions of the reader. For instance ; “ Sociologically the money- 
grubber devours the services of men of brains, and the issue of 
the business is the development of faculties and facilities for 
mercantile improvement both in the sordid and mental aspects.” 
Again: “ A Chicago writer dislikes to credit any one in Arkan- 
sas with a good thought. A New York or Boston man cannot 
conceive of Chicago originating anything, and across the sea 
the general run of scientists avoid any mention of America or its 
workers if possible. Darwin was a notable exception to this rule, 
for he was above pettiness.” The author has ransacked the liter- 
ature of his subject, and has made a most interesting,book. 
he writer undervalues metaphysics, which he calls “lunar 
_ politics.” Hence his identification of consciousness with chemi- 
cal affinity (see above on hunger). This is a fundamental point 
in the science of mind in the large sense, though it may not 
greatly affect theories of the evolution of the human mind out of 
consciousness with the aid of memory and molar motion. We 
have already explained in this journal (1884, p. 973, on Catagen- 
esis) and elsewhere the opposite doctrine, that consciousness is 
not a form of energy, but that although inseparably bound to 
matter and energy, it is coéqual with them. Some reasons for 
this view may be restated as follows: 
When a form of energy is developed (as heat, light, etc.), which 
was not present before, we know, in accordance with the law of 
the conservation of energy, that the energy was already present 
in some other form. We thus get something out of something. 
We cannot hold the same view when consciousness ‘appears 
where it had not been before. It is like the attempt to add beans 
and potatoes to get apples, etc.; in a word it is an attempt to get 
something out of nothing. To look upon it asa product of the 
metamorphosis of energy is like regarding a man as the product 
of the door which is opened in order to admit him to sight. 
None but a savage could entertain such an opinion. In view of 
the nature of the case, as well as of the truths of Kinetogenesis, 
so well presented by Dr, Clevenger, it is much more logical to 
believe that the consciousness is derived from an outside source, 
and is communicated to matter which is in a proper energetic 
state. The difficulties in the way of this view are largely if not 
