This faculty is perfect of its kind from the outset; otherwise the
insect would have no posterity. Time adds nothing to it and takes
nothing from it. Such as it was for a definite species, such it is
to-day and such it will remain, perhaps the most settled zoological
characteristic of them all. It is not free nor conscious in its
practice, any more than is the faculty of the stomach for digestion or
that of the heart for pulsation. The phases of its operations are
predetermined, necessarily entailed one by another; they suggest a
system of clockwork wherein one wheel set in motion brings about the
movement of the next. This is the mechanical side of the insect, the
fatum, the only thing that is able to explain the monstrous
illogicality of a Pelopæus misled by my artifices. Is the Lamb when it
first grips the teat a free and conscious agent, capable of improvement
in its difficult art of taking nourishment? The insect is no more
capable of improvement in its art, more difficult still, of giving
nourishment.
But, with its hide-bound science ignorant of itself, pure instinct, if
it stood alone, would leave the insect unarmed in the perpetual
conflict of circumstances. No two moments in time are identical; though
the background remain the same, the details change; the unexpected
rises on every side. In this bewildering confusion, a guide is needed
to seek, accept, refuse and select; to show preference for this and
indifference to that; to turn to account, in short, anything useful
that occasion may offer. This guide the insect undoubtedly possesses,
to a very manifest degree. It is the second province of its mentality.
Here it is conscious and capable of improvement by experience. I dare
not speak of this rudimentary faculty as intelligence, which is too
exalted a title: I will call it discernment. The insect, in exercising
its highest gifts, discerns, differentiates between one thing and
another, within the sphere of its craft, of course; and that is about
all.
So long as we confound acts of pure instinct and acts of discernment
under the same head, we shall fall back into those endless discussions
which embitter controversy without bringing us one step nearer to the
solution of the problem. Is the insect conscious of what it does? Yes
and no. No, if its action falls within the domain of instinct; yes, if
the action falls within that of discernment. Are the habits of an
insect capable of modification? No, decidedly not, if the habit in
question belongs to the province of instinct; yes, if it belongs to
that of discernment. Let us state this fundamental distinction more
precisely with the aid of a few examples.
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