Page:The Zoologist, 4th series, vol 4 (1900).djvu/144

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
116
THE ZOOLOGIST.

BIOLOGICAL SUGGESTIONS.
MIMICRY.

By W.L. Distant.

(Concluded from vol. iii. p. 553.)

Active mimicry naturally predicates intelligence, and is not equivalent to what is generally described as instinct,[1] so universally applied to any other animal than man. Prof. Lloyd Morgan remarks on the many who believe that instinct is neither more nor less than inherited habit, but concludes that, "while still believing that there is some connection between habit and instinct, admit that the connection is indirect and permissive rather than direct and transmissive."[2] Every attempt is made to minimise this faculty. In birds, Mr. Orr has warned us not to overrate the intelligence implied by nest-building "of an animal which has not sufficient intelligence to loosen a slip-knot tied around its leg."[3] But man himself has very slowly and laboriously acquired—and has not yet altogether the desire to possess—the intelligence to loosen the artificial slip-knots that bind him to many errors and much superstition. If, however, some would minimise animal intelligence, there are others who maintain the purposive acts of plants. Thus Mr. Grant Allen, in describing the wonderful life-history of the common gorse, and allowing that "the intelligence is here no doubt unconscious and inherited," still remarks: "Gorse, in short, may fairly be called a clever and successful plant, just as the Bee may be called a clever and successful insect, because it works out its own way through life with such conspicuous wisdom."[4] The

  1. The true teleological definition of the term was defined by Paley: "An instinct is a propensity, prior to experience, and independent of instruction" ('Natural Theology').
  2. 'Habit and Instinct,' p. 322.
  3. 'A Theory of Development and Heredity,' p, 19.
  4. 'Flashlights on Nature,' pp. 282–3.