758 



THE AMERICAN NATURALIST [Vol. XLII 



the facts in order to maintain his thesis: lie recognizes fully the 

 complication of the behavior of both higher and lower animals ; 

 and he does not claim that we now know the precise physico- 

 chemical factors involved in all behavior. But he is able to 

 make a good case for his view that all is fundamentally intelli- 

 gible physico-ehemically ; in other words, that we could ulti- 

 mately make a complete and systematic explanation of what ani- 

 mals do, even if we assumed that they have no ''psychic factors," 

 no consciousness, at all. The nature of the objective explanations 

 which to the author seem satisfactory he can of course merely 

 sketch; there is no attempt to give details or claim finality. 

 Most significant appears to him, as to others who have studied 

 the matter, the making by animals of varied movements, which 

 bring them into varied relations with the environment, until 

 certain of these relations prove advantageous and therefore per- 

 sist. To this way of acting, which has received various names, 

 including (from the present reviewer) the unfortunately mis- 

 understandable one of "method of trial and error," Zur Strassen 

 gives the expressive name of the "shot-gun method." Some 

 such evidently figurative term is doubtless its best appellation, 

 as reducing the temptation to read higher things into it. 



But now we come to the case of man; do our principles of 

 interpretation exclude psychic factors here also? Most un- 

 doubtedly they do, if the reasoning up to this point has been 

 well based. Greater complication there is, but no difference 

 in principle ; Zur Strassen sets forth that there is no reasonable 

 ground for making a distinction between the behavior of man 

 and that of animals in this matter. And so, are we led to the 

 absurd conclusion that there are no psychic processes, no con- 

 sciousness, in man ? 



Here we perceive that two questions must be distinguished- 

 two questions which we shall try to formulate even more sharply 

 than the author has done, because the usual failure to distinguish 

 them has tremendously confused this whole matter. The ques- 

 tions are: (1) Does mind exist in men and animals? (2) Does 

 mind play such a part in the behavior of men and animals that a 

 complete objective explanation of the behavior can not be given 

 without taking it into consideration? 



To this second question Zur Strassen answers. No: a satis- 

 factory explanation of the behavior of man and animals can be 

 given without taking into consideration any factors but objective, 



