338 ON THE CLASSES OF THE 



But this is far from being the worst: for it seems more- 

 over to be utterly impossible to draw up any" table of na- 

 tural affinities on the assumption of the truth of this hypo- 

 thesis ; so that, in addition to the difficulty of imagining 

 the existence of this cone, it is useless to the naturalist 

 when imagined. We are thus authorized to go back 

 another step in the review of our syllogism. No one 

 will deny that two species differ from each other in struc- 

 ture; because, were they constructed precisely on the same 

 model, they would form only one species : neither will 

 any one, I think, deny that man is a species of animal. 

 But is it equally certain that the material organization of 

 man, which, for the wisest of purposes, has been made to 

 appear so beautiful and dignified in our eyes, is that per- 

 fection of animal mechanism, of which all others are 

 merely modifications ? Helvetius, and other materialists, 

 must of course, for the sake of consistency, maintain the 

 excellence of man, considered as a machine, to be infinitely 

 before that of any other animal ; because, making as they 

 do the intellectual faculties of man to be the result of his 

 material mechanism, they must either obstinately insist 

 on his superiority in the latter respect, or consent to re- 

 duce him to a level of intelligence with the brute. Never- 

 theless the mechanical superiority of the human frame, 

 although probable, is by no means a self-evident truth ; for it 

 has been disputed by those comparative anatomists who 

 are celebrated for their profound knowledge of the Vtfte- 

 brata, — that is, precisely the very division of which all the 

 animals may justly be compared to the human form. Thus 

 says one of them, speaking of the Fertebrala, "Lorsque 

 Vanatomie compareefait de Vhomme son point de depart, 

 et lorsque s'appvyant sur ceprincipe que les organes de cette 



