Potássio em White (1949)

But when the scholar attempts to define the mental difference between man and other animals he sometimes encounters difficulties which he cannot surmount and, therefore, ends up by saying that the difference is merely one of degree: man has a bigger mind, “larger power of association,” wider range of activities, etc. We have a good example of this in the distinguished physiologist, Anton J. Carlson. After taking note of “man’s present achievements in science, in the arts (including oratory), in political and social institutions,” and noting “at the same time the apparent paucity of such behavior in other animals,” he, as a common man “is tempted to conclude that in these capacities, at least, man has a qualitative superiority over other mammals.” But, since, as a scientist. Professor Carlson cannot define this qualitative difference between man and other animals, since as a physiologist he cannot explain it, he refuses to admit it— “. . . the physiologist does not accept the great development of articulate speech in man as something qualitatively new; . . .” —and suggests helplessly that some day we may find some new “building stone,” an “additional lipoid, phosphatid, or potassium ion,” in the human brain which will explain it, and concludes by saying that the difference be- tween the mind of man and that of non-man is “probably only one of degree.” [Nota de rodapé 3: Carlson, pp. 477-79.](White 1949:24)

WHITE, Leslie. 1949. The science of culture: a study of man and civilization. New York: Grove Press.