discovered was that the part of the nervous system which was meant to direct sight was formed first, much before the nerve of sight and much before the eye. This was absolutely contrary to the scientific theory of the time. The conclusion he came to was this: that in animals the psychic part is formed before the being itself is formed i.e., the instincts of the animals are there before the animal has finished building itself physically. This means that generation concerns not only the body, and the different inner organs but also the psyche, also the instincts of each animal, and that the habits of these animals are fixed before the organ is formed.
Behaviorism
This is the new idea. The habits that the animal is going to have are fixed in the nerve centers much before the organ is built. Now if this psychic part is preexisting, what does it mean? It means that the organ finishes its own construction, molding itself to the requirements of the psyche, of the instincts. This method of reasoning brings us to the conclusion that animals have their habits pre-established before birth and the organs are built in such a fashion as best to fulfil these habits and these instincts. So according to this new theory, what is important in nature is the habits, the customs of animals. It is interesting to see that the organs, of whatever the animal, are the best suited to carry out the command of its instincts. The new theory has arisen from years and years of study and from observation of facts, not from pre-established ideas. This brings us to the conclusion that the habits of animals are now-a-days more important than the form of the body which was the center of interest in previous times. The term used in this generalization of facts is what is designated as ‘behavior,’ It includes in its meaning the habits and customs of the animals described. The new theory is known in modern books, especially in America, as ‘Behaviorism.’ It is a new light that has come into the field of science. The old ideas which held that animals assume their habits because they had to adapt themselves to their environment have gone. The old theory held that it was the will of the adult which provoked the transformations necessary so that the body became adapted to the environment, that the efforts which animals made to keep alive, this ‘instinct of self-preservation,’ caused a transformation in the successive generations and gradually the species became adapted. The species which could not do this perished. This was called the ‘survival of the fittest,’ This theory averred that by means of continuous efforts carried out during generations, a sort of perfection came about and this was then transmitted to the next generation.
The new theory does not do away with all this, but places the behavior of the animal at the center of all its habits. The facts observed are that the animal which strives for adaptation is successful only if its efforts are expended within its behavior-pattern. So the animal which successfully carries out its experiences of life upon the environment does so along the lines of its behavior. Let us illustrate this by an example. Let us take the cows. They are powerful animals, strong and well armed. In the geological history of the earth, the course of their evolution can be traced. They make their appearance when the earth is already well covered with vegetation. One might ask oneself why this animal has limited itself to feed only on grass which is the most indigestible food that can be found, so much so that in order to digest it the poor animal has had to develop four stomachs. If, as the old theory said, it was a question of self-preservation of survival, how much easier it would have been to eat something else of which there was an abundance in the surroundings. It would have been very simple and very easy. But today after millions and millions of years, we still see cows, when in natural surroundings, eating only grass. They stand with lowered heads, chewing and chewing. It is very seldom that you can make them raise their heads so that one can look into their beautiful eyes. Immediately after they have given you a look, down goes their head. If you observe the animal, you will see that it crops the grass near the roots, but it never uproots the plant. It seems to know that in order to keep the grass alive, it must be cut near the roots because if the latter are cut, the plant dies, whereas if they are cut like this, they develop under ground. The roots expand and occupy more ground and so the grass travels and spreads instead of dying. Now if one studies the history of evolution, one finds that only very late in the history of the earth grass appears and one also finds the tremendous importance that grass has for other vegetation; because grass ties together the loose grains of sand which otherwise would be carried away by the wind. Not only does it render the ground firm, but it fertilizes it also. No other vegetation could have grown if the grass had not prepared the way first. That is the importance of grass. Two things are necessary for its upkeep, besides cutting: one is manure, the other is rolling i.e., putting a heavy weight upon it. Now, tell me what artificial agricultural machine can be more marvelously fit for these three tasks than the cow herself. So efficient is this machine that besides helping the growth of grass it also produces milk. What a wonderful agriculturist of nature is the cow. Her behavior gives us one more reason to be grateful to her. We thought that she gave us milk and manure and nothing else. At the most we may have thought that the cow is an example of patience. But much more does humanity owe to the cow. It is something which has been ignored by humanity at large, but which has been felt by the subconscious mind in India, where the cow is worshiped. It is the upkeep of the earth, the life of other plants that we owe to the cow. The patience she has is more than the superficial patience that we admire. It is the patience of generations and generations.
A Task in Life
Now if the cow were conscious, she would be conscious merely of the fact that she is hungry, that she likes grass, just as in India the people like chapatis, rice and curry and other people like something else. But certainly the cow will never realize, will never think, will never be conscious of the fact that she is an agriculturist. Yet the behavior of the cow is just such as to help nature in its work of agriculture.
Now, let us take the example of crows and vultures who eat the refuse of nature. Why, with the abundance of food there is in the world, should the vultures eat rotten carcases and the crows excrements and whatever dirt they find in the environment? They have wings. They can and do fly long distances in search of their food. So it would not be difficult for them to find something more appetizing, such as other animals less endowed with strength and the possibility of movement do find. But can you imagine the amount of mortality there would be if this refuse were not removed from the earth? What an amount of illness, of plague and other diseases of all kinds would there be, if there were not some instrument whose only task in life is to keep the environment clean? They have by nature been allotted the task of cleaning the environment. Tell me what is the difference between the mass of workers that in Ahmedabad go back after their work, streaming from the mills towards their homes, and the hundreds of crows we see flying back at dusk towards their roost, after having done their work of cleaning and sweeping? This is their behavior.
These two examples have been given taking them from the choice of food. We might take hundreds and we should find that each species has chosen a particular kind of food. We might conclude that animals have no free choice of food. They do not eat merely to satisfy themselves. They eat to fulfil a mission upon the earth, the mission which is prescribed for them by their behavior. Certain it is that all these animals are benefactors of nature and the benefactors of all other living beings. They work to preserve the harmony of creation. They work out creation, because creation is achieved by the collaboration of all the living and non-living beings. And these two do their part in it by their behavior. Other animals there are which eat in such tremendous quantity that it cannot be explained merely on the ground of the upkeep of life. They do not eat in order to keep themselves alive. They keep alive in order to eat, for instance, the earth-worms. They eat only earth, although there is so much choice of foods. These earthworms eat daily a quantity of food which is 200 times the volume of their body. This is measured by their droppings. This is a species of being that does not eat in order to keep alive, especially when one considers the amount of other better food there is at its disposal. The worm is a worker of the earth. It was Darwin himself who first said that without the worms the earth would be less productive. The worms render the earth fertile. So there are forms of body or details of the body which go beyond the direct advantage of the individual.
Take the bees. They come out in hot weather. They are covered with
