These few lines, which are the outcome not of a heedless pen but of
mature reflection, will set people talking of hateful paradoxes. We
will let them talk and we will submit the following proposition to our
adversaries: take an entomologist of the highest merit, a Latreille
(Pierre Andre Latreille (1762-1833), one of the founders of modern
entomological science.--Translator's Note.), for instance, versed in all
the details of the structure of insects but utterly unacquainted with
their habits. He knows the dead insect better than anybody, but he has
never occupied himself with the living insect. As a classifier, he is
beyond compare; and that is all. We ask him to examine a Bee, the first
that comes to hand, and to name her trade from her tools.
Come, be honest: could he? Who would dare put him to such a test? Has
personal experience not fully convinced us that the mere examination
of the insect can tell us nothing about its particular industry? The
baskets on its legs and the brush on its abdomen will certainly inform
us that it collects honey and pollen; but its special art will remain an
utter secret, notwithstanding all the scrutiny of the microscope. In our
own industries, the plane denotes the joiner, the trowel the mason, the
scissors the tailor, the needle the seamstress. Are things the same
in animal industry? Just show us, if you please, the trowel that is
a certain sign of the mason-insect, the chisel that is a positive
characteristic of the carpenter-insect, the iron that is an authentic
mark of the pinking-insect; and as you show them, say:
'This one cuts leaves; that one bores wood; that other mixes cement.'
And so on, specifying the trade from the tool.
You cannot do it, no one can; the worker's speciality remains an
impenetrable secret until direct observation intervenes. Does not
this incapacity, even of the most expert, proclaim loudly that animal
industry, in its infinite variety, is due to other causes besides the
possession of tools? Certainly, each of those specialists requires
implements; but they are rough and ready implements, good for all sorts
of purposes, like the tool of Franklin's workman. The same notched
mandible that reaps cotton, cuts leaves and moulds pitch also kneads
mud, scrapes decayed wood and mixes mortar; the same tarsus that
manufactures cotton and disks cut out of leaves is no less clever at the
art of making earthen partitions, clay turrets and gravel mosaics.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account