"It may be noted that regulation in the manner we have set forth is
what, in the behaviour of higher organisms, at least, is called
intelligence [the examples have been taken from Protista, Corals, and
the Lowest Worms]. If the same method of regulation is found in
other fields, there is no reason for refusing to compare the action
to intelligence. Comparison of the regulatory processes that are
shown in internal physiological changes and in regeneration to
intelligence seems to be looked upon sometimes as heretical and
unscientific. Yet intelligence is a name applied to processes that
actually exist in the regulation of movements, and there is, a
priori, no reason why similar processes should not occur in
regulation in other fields. When we analyse regulation objectively
there seems indeed reason to think that the processes are of the same
character in behaviour as elsewhere. If the term intelligence be
reserved for the subjective accompaniments of such regulation, then
of course we have no direct knowledge of its existence in any of the
fields of regulation outside of the self, and in the self perhaps
only in behaviour. But in a purely objective consideration there
seems no reason to suppose that regulation in behaviour
(intelligence) is of a fundamentally different character from
regulation elsewhere." ("Method of Regulation," p. 492.)


Jennings makes no mention of questions of the theory of heredity. He
has made some experiments on the transmission of an acquired
character in Protozoa; but it was a mutilation-character, which is,
as has been often shown, {0j} not to the point.