most works too there may be found a relation of the represented thing to the rest of nature, which in a Hegelian mind may awaken the notion of a general idea behind the individual phenomenon. But, as we have already observed, it is a mark of excessive intellectualism to assume that the desire to discover predominant qualities or hidden ideas is the impelling force in art-creation. And we shall now endeavour to show that it is equally one-sided to consider the enjoyment of art as conditioned by increased intellectual knowledge of individual or universal phenomena and ideas. The defects of intellectualistic art-theories are perhaps most manifest in the system of Taine. Taine himself seems to believe that the “faculté mère” really exists, and that it can be not only represented by an artistical treatment of nature, but also discovered by scientific study; he is consequently unable to make any proper distinction between the departments of science and art.[156] And, on the other hand, his own critical studies show us how incompatible is the principle of dominant faculties with a purely scientific conception of reality. Too often, in the attempt to deduce every manifestation and every personality from a determinate, all-explaining and all-conditioning quality, he loses sight of the rich variety of life, and gains instead merely a brilliant formula. Thus, however suggestive his criticisms may be, they are seldom scientifically exact. There is none, however, of all his admirers who would wish to have anything changed in his writings on art; for we know that by this very one-sidedness, which is the source of his scientific shortcomings, he has at the same time attained his greatest, though perhaps unintentional, triumphs as an artist. In illustration of this we need only refer to one instance: his celebrated description of the lion.[157] Objections may be raised from the zoological point of view to his selecting the lion as a representative of animal strength, and from the anatomical point of view to his deducing its whole configuration from the structure of its jaws. But it is impossible to deny that precisely by such a one-sided and exaggerated portrait Taine has succeeded in giving an expression to his admiration for elementary force better than would have been possible by a scientifically faithful description. Accordingly Taine’s lion, in spite of its faults from the point of view of science, remains a classical illustration of the æsthetic importance of dominant qualities.