reaching theories.

It is the more unfortunate that Butler's lack of appreciation on
these points should have led to the enormous proportion of bitter
personal controversy that we find in the remainder of his biological
writings. Possibly, as suggested by George Bernard Shaw, his
acquaintance and admirer, he was also swayed by philosophical
resentment at that banishment of mind from the organic universe,
which was generally thought to have been achieved by Charles Darwin's
theory. Still, we must remember that this mindless view is not
implicit in Charles Darwin's presentment of his own theory, nor was
it accepted by him as it has been by so many of his professed
disciples.


"UNCONSCIOUS MEMORY" (1880).--We have already alluded to an
anticipation of Butler's main theses. In 1870 Dr. Ewald Hering, one
of the most eminent physiologists of the day, Professor at Vienna,
gave an Inaugural Address to the Imperial Royal Academy of Sciences:
"Das Gedachtniss als allgemeine Funktion der organisirter Substanz"
("Memory as a Universal Function of Organised Matter"). When "Life
and Habit" was well advanced, Francis Darwin, at the time a frequent
visitor, called Butler's attention to this essay, which he himself
only knew from an article in "Nature." Herein Professor E. Ray
Lankester had referred to it with admiring sympathy in connection
with its further development by Haeckel in a pamphlet entitled "Die
Perigenese der Plastidule." We may note, however, that in his
collected Essays, "The Advancement of Science" (1890), Sir Ray
Lankester, while including this Essay, inserts on the blank page
{0b}--we had almost written "the white sheet"--at the back of it an