•^•^::»^> : ti!>^>^>^>^ "THOU THAT TEACHEST ANOTHER \ T 'm 1/ TEACHEST THOU NOT V WW*J*, THYSELF ? " ; ! ;-.': : ;v' :'••;■ •';.;:i: 1 : : :y ww whwM wm*A > Wi. &^>%>>^»^^>^>^^^ LIBRARY OF CONGRESS. dlfap. ®api2rig|t 3fo.- r — Shelf ;U 5 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. \ v v\ THE CONNECTION" BETWEEN THOUGHT AND MEMORY A CONTRIBUTION TO PEDAGOGICAL PSYCHOLOGY ON THE BASIS OF F. WIDORPFELD'S MONO- GRAPH " DENKEN UND GEDACHTNIS " WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY G. STANLEY HALL, LL.D. President of Clark University BY HERMAN T. LUKENS, Ph.D. DOCENT IN CLARK UNIVERSITY BOSTON, U.S.A. D. C. HEATH & CO., PUBLISHERS 1895 K LV Copyright, 1895, By Herman T. Lukens. TYPOGBAPHY BY C. J. PETEK8 & SON, BOSTON. Pbesswobk by S. J. Pabkiiill & Co. PREFACE. A short time ago a teacher complained to the author that she could not get any real help in her school-work from reading psychologies and books on education. It is hoped that the following book will give help to such teach- ers, not only by the central idea that stands out so promi- nently, but by its copious illustrations and descriptions of mental phenomena, as well as by the practical applications in the last chapters. The teacher needs descriptive psychol- ogy far more than metaphysical psychology. Even a few simple exercises, such as those recommended on page 5 for grammar school pupils, would greatly help teachers toward appreciating the character of the mental processes with which they have to deal. Observation work thus begun will be found so interesting and attractive that it will easily lead to further introspection and study of the laws of association (cf. pp. 41, 42). But still more help will be gained if teachers will watch how their own pupils think and reason. Make notes of the observations, and compare them with such records as those reported in the Pedagogical Seminary, vol. ii. pp. 358-396. There is nothing in all of this that any bright teacher cannot readily understand. But the mistake is too fre- quently made of supposing that whatever the teacher learns she must forthwith tell her pupils. Nothing could IV PREFACE. be more fatal to good teaching than to attempt to make the child think logically, or learn lessons by the Herbartian formal steps. But every teacher should know how chil- dren do think, and what the necessary steps in acquiring knowledge really are, so as to be able to get out of the way and not hinder the pupil's progress, as well as to be able when necessary to give just the help that is needed. The monograph treatment is eminently adapted to a work of this kind. Two of the most helpful and sugges- tive books for teachers are already published in this form : Radestock's Habit and Its Importance in Education, and Lange's Apperception. It is earnestly hoped that others will follow. Until the chief points in school-work are thus treated, we cannot expect any firm basis for a general work, nor would the teachers get much assistance from such general reading. For self-instruction, the teacher needs clearness, fulness, and practical applications. These are the qualities aimed at in a monograph. The German monograph on which the following work is based grew out of round-table conferences in a teachers' reading circle formed for the purpose of study in educa- tional psychology. In writing a book for American teach- ers I have tried to keep true to the best ideals in the German, while at the same time being perfectly free to add to, omit, or modify, any statement or ideas whatever. When I visited Rector Dorpfeld in 1890, to talk over these and other matters with him, he not only gave me full per- mission to translate his work, but urged me to make any changes and additions I saw fit. Thus it has come to pass PREFACE. V that this work, while quoting very largely from Dorpfeld' s, and being based on it so far as its essential central idea is concerned, is yet in no strict sense a translation. When- ever better ideas have been found elsewhere, they have been unhesitatingly substituted. The explanation of the common origin of the two laws of memory, for instance, is radically opposed to the view expressed by Dorpfeld and all other Herbartians. But I do not believe in the Herbar- tian view on this point, and hence have re-written that part entirely. The same is true of many other less important parts. All of the bibliographical references, and likewise many of the illustrations, are additions. On the other hand, everything that was essentially Ger- man and local in its allusion has been omitted. For the many controversial points with other German educators, and long explanations applicable to religious instruction in Germany only, the reader is referred to the German work. It is now in its fifth edition, in the present issue of the Collected Works of F. W. Dorpfeld, 11 vols. Gutersloh ; C. Bertelsmann, 1894-1895. Dorpfeld died in October, 1893. In conclusion, I wish to thank President G. Stanley Hall and Dr. Wm. H. Burnham for their encouragement and help in the work of revision and of publication. I am also greatly indebted to the following friends : President Charles De Garmo, Dr. C. C. Van Liew, Dr. Charles A. McMurry, and Dr. Frank M. McMurry, for valuable suggestions while the book was passing through the press. H. T. L. Clark University, June, 1895. TABLE OF CONTENTS. PAGE Preface iii-v Introduction, by President G. Stanley Hall ix CHAPTER I. Preliminary 1-7 Statement of the Problem, 1. — Orientation and Explanation of Terms, 3. — The Study of Psychology in the Elementary School, 5. — Clearness of Ideas, 7. CHAPTER II. The Processes of Thought and Memory 8-38 A. Of Thought, 8-24. Comparison, 8. — Conception, 9. — Spontaneous Concepts, 11. — Judgment, 12. — Reasoning, 14. — Graphic Syllogism, 17. — For- mation of Sense Percepts, 19. — Elements of Thought, 21.— Simple Ideas, 23. — Bibliographical Note, 24. B. Of Memory, 24-38. Definitions, 25. — Examples, 26. — Memory in Conception, 28. — In Judgment, 30. — Spontaneous Judgments, 31. — Memory in Reasoning, 33. — In Perception, 34.— Apperception, 35. — Sum- mary, 36. — Bibliographical Note, 38. CHAPTER III. The Laws of Thought and Memory 39-88 A. Of Memory, 39-53. Derivation of Laws of Association, 39. — Aristotle, 39. — Des- cartes, 43. — Herbart and the Recent Writers, 45. — Relative Im- portance of the Two Laws, 49. — Bibliographical Note, 52. vii Vlll TABLE OF CONTENTS. PAGE B. Of Thought, 53-88. Difference between the Laws of Psychology and those of Logic, 53. — Genetic Order of Comparison, Judgment, and Conception, 54. — The Single Thought-Process, 57. — Superordinate and Sub- ordinate Concepts, 58. — Examples, 59. — Children's Use of Lan- guage, G5. — Language not a True Mirror of the Mental Processes, 68. — The Law of Conception, 72. — Causes of Spontaneous Judg- ments, 73. — Examples, 74. — Disappointed Expectation, 77. — Three Forms of Judgments, 80. — Comparison of Laws of Thought and Memory, 82. — Imagination, 84. CHAPTER IV. Application to Pedagogy 89-127 Limitations, 89. — Steps in Acquiring Knowledge, 90. — Memory in Apperception, 93. — Ways and Means of Committing to Mem- ory, 95. — Forms of Memorizing, 97. — Relative Value of Rational and Mechanical Association in Intensity, Extent, and Direction, 98. — Spontaneous Memorizing, 102. — Immanent Memorizing, 107. — Two Forms of Repetition, 109. — Treatment of Reviews, 112. — Advantages and Disadvantages of Mechanical Repetition, 114. — Its Service sometimes Indispensable, 119. — Recapitula- tion, 121. — Mnemonics, 123. — Ebbinghaus's Experiments on the Memory, 125. — Bibliography of the Herbartian School, 127. CHAPTER V. Illustrations taken from the Subjects of the Curriculum 128-158 First Example — History, 128-141. Second Example — Natural Science, 141-145. Third Example — Selections to be learned by heart, 145-148. Fourth Example — Arithmetic, 148-158. CHAPTER VI. Summary and Conclusion 159-165 Reference List of Books 166-169 INTRODUCTION. Dr. Herman T. Lukens, to whom we owe the presenta- tion in so attractive English form of this most noted work of one of the best German teachers of pedagogy, and who as I write has just been advanced in Clark University from the position of Honorary Fellow to Docent, is one of the most accomplished and promising men in that choice group of young Americans who have studied Education in a post- graduate and professional way in Europe and at home, and have deliberately chosen the work of teaching pedagogy as their calling. Unlike too many members of this group, Dr. Lukens, although thoroughly trained in Herbartian pedagogy and in sympathy with it, does not regard it as the consummate formulation of educational theory, nor attempt to apply its rubrics blindly and without change to the very different material and environment of American pedagogy, but has felt it necessary to supplement Herbart, both by modern child-study, and by some practical acquaint- ance with experimental psychology. It is this that makes Dr. Lukens competent to present us with a condensed digest, instead of a literal translation, and to enrich these pages with copious and valuable notes that render this volume more valuable than the original. This, and many other signs of the times pointing in the same direction, sug- gests how speedily our country is outgrowing its excessive ix X INTRODUCTION. reverence for the German speculators of half a century ago. That there are still some to whom it seems the acme of philosophic or pedagogic attainment to interpret the tomes of these great and useful, but now obsolescent, writers is a note of provincialism from which, if all indications do not fail, we are soon to be emancipated. Save health alone, there is no more important and prac- tical topic for teachers to study than that to which this little book is devoted. Its subject-matter is presented in a clear and elemental manner sure to have speedy fruit in the schoolroom, and it is worthy the attention of all prac- tical teachers, to whom I have no hesitation in recommend- ing it. I cannot forebear laying still more stress than does Eector Dorpf eld on the distinction, not only between imma- nent and intentional memorizing, but between immanent and intentional thinking. The latter is, of course, chiefly dealt with in books, but the former is incalculably more important ; and to know something of the mysterious nature of memory and of thought is one of the chief objects of the new study of children. G. STANLEY HALL. Clark University, Worcester, Mass., Sept. 17, 1895. THE connection between thought and memoey. CHAPTER I. PRELIMINARY. There are undoubtedly many more books written about the memory than about any other faculty of the human mind. Great power of retention is fascinating to most people and easily appreciated. The " memory doctors " are accordingly numerous, and reap a rich harvest, not- withstanding repeated exposures. Thinking is, however, somewhat more difficult than remembering, and therefore less attractive for most of us. But every educator, at least, is interested in both divisions of our subject, and must come to some conclusion in his own mind as to the relation that these two activities should bear to each other. For centuries past many questions relating to thought and memory have been discussed with great warmth and ear- nestness. Which of these two faculties is the more im- portant for culture ? Should the memory be cultivated more at one period of life, and the development of the thinking powers be left for another period ? Is the great importance given to memory a hindrance to productive thinking ? Or, vice versa, does the too early cultivation of the thinking powers weaken the memory ? There is no 1 2 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. topic of instruction, and no problem of moral education into which these considerations do not enter at all periods of the child's development. Although our theme embraces, to be sure, two subjects, yet the point of view for their consideration is merely the relation in which they stand to each other. Accord- ingly, there is no need of presenting either all that is known about thought, nor all that is known about memory, but of each subject only so much as is requisite in order to explain the relation between these two mental activities — first of all psychologically, and then applied to practice in the school. In the second place, it must not be lost sight of that it is mainly the practical field of application that gives the sub- ject its broad extent. Let us take an analogous example in physics. The laws of gravitation govern the material world of the whole universe. Nevertheless, the conception of the force of gravitation, together with the most important gen- eral laws relating thereto, can without difficulty be made intelligible by the help of well-chosen illustrative examples, together with something of the practical application of these general laws. It would be quite another thing, however, to trace out their application in all directions and ramifi- cations, — in the field of astronomy, geology, meteorology, etc. ; further, of architecture, mechanics, navigation, and the many other applied arts. What is possible in physics will probably also be possible in psychology. Let us note once more our problem distinctly. In the psychological portion of our work we have to consider the thinking process as well as the memory, in so far as is necessary to explain their mutual relation ; the practical application needs to be followed only as far as is requisite on the one hand to make the above results still somewhat STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM. 3 clearer, and on the other hand to help the reader to think for himself. The mental processes or activities are, as is well known, divided into three main classes, — activities of cognition (intelligence), emotion (feelings), and volition (desires and will). The consideration of our theme will have to do, for the most part, with the activities of cognition ; first, because thought and memory of themselves belong to this class, although they stand in very close relation to both of the others ; secondly, because the feelings and desires, being more vague and indefinite in their very nature, present much greater difficulties to closer observation and intro- spection. Knowledge begins with perceptions through the five senses, — sight, hearing, smell, taste, and feeling (touch, muscular sense, etc.). 1 This is, however, not to be un- derstood as if the sense impressions forthwith produced actual perceptions. They result first of all only in sensa- tions. A perception does not form until a sensation has been frequently repeated, and only after certain other psychic processes have taken place. The reader should notice from this that the formation of 1 Whoever wants to, can, even here at the outset, plunge headlong into philosophical and theological speculations, with all their old and all their new controversies. Sensualism here, idealism there, and so forth. Let the reader remember, therefore, once for all, that we are going to concern ourselves with facts of experience in psychology — not in how far meta- physical doctrines can be spun from them, but simply in so far as they are able to give clearness and support in our pedagogical practice. In this sense we may accept the old dictum: Nihil est in intellectu, quod antea non fuerit in sensu, understanding it to mean, There is nothing in the intellect that does not presuppose sense-perceptions. 4 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. clear perceptions is far from being so simple as it at first view seems and is generally considered. If a teacher is not thoroughly familiar with the subject of the origin of perceptions, he may assume as certain that in instruction he will make many mistakes, even in the very first stages of the lesson, in particular by expecting more of the pupil's power of perception than he is capable of. A step farther. If such a knowledge of psychology is required in order to give even an object-lesson properly, where things can be presented immediately to the senses, how much more neces- sary is it when the object must be represented in language, in which case the imagination must assist. Besides the senses, the mind has still another source of knowledge. The senses make report only of the phe- nomena of the outer world ; i.e., of the things, properties, processes (and their relations) in the world of matter. They say nothing, on the other hand, of the phenomena in the mind. These latter processes, belonging to the world of spirit, make themselves known immediately through consciousness. Thus the mind gains ideas not only of the things and processes outside, but also of the phenomena of its own inner life, especially of ideation itself, of feeling, exercise of will, and the relations existing between these. How else would the science of psychology be possible? And all the other sciences of mind — logic, ethics, law, theology, pedagogy, psychiatry, aesthetics, philology, etc. — draw essentially from this second source. There is a special reason why pedagogy should turn its attention to this second source of knowledge. Those sub- jects of the curriculum that have most directly to do with character-forming, as literature on its humanistic side and history, belong in so far to the field of psychology. THE STUDY OF PSYCHOLOGY. 5 This is shown by the vast array of names and expressions there met with, that refer to mental qualities, states, and processes. The usual method of presentation aims to bring these concretely before the pupils' minds by the his- toric events, and by associating these latter with events in the experience of the pupils. But the teacher must be concerned to see to it that meanwhile this second source of knowledge in the pupil's mind is actually at work ; i.e., that the words call up corresponding processes and states in the mind. The teacher can do considerable to help in this in two ways, the first of which is applicable through- out the whole course, from the lower grades up ; the second is only possible in the upper grades. The former work will be accomplished if the teacher directs the pupils' attention to psychic processes and states as they occur in the lesson, and does his best to make them definite and distinct. Three objects will be gained by this : first, this kind of instruction will be in the highest degree in the interest of character-building ; secondly, the pupil learns to be observant of his inner life ; and thirdly, he is collecting in this way a desirable store of psycho- logical material and expressions for use later. The second part of the work consists of a number of separate lessons in psychology, using the material collected as above. In these lessons nothing more is needed than an arrangement and review of this material by topics; e.g., expressions of knowing (to deliberate, to consider, to find out ; silly, wise, ingenious ; judg- ment, question, statement, etc.) ; expressions of feeling (to mourn ; sad, desperate ; joy, sorrow, etc.), and expressions of willing (to resolve : stub- born ; purpose, etc.). Rightly managed, this may 6 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. with profit be begun with children of ten or eleven years. The perceptions of sense from without, together with those of consciousness from within the mind, form the fun- damental stock in trade of the intellect. Out of this raw material the soul creates new forms of knowledge, — con- cepts and imaginary ideas, judgments and conclusions. We may compare the intellectual activities of the soul to the commercial and industrial activities of the people. We distinguish here, (1) original production, which by agricul- ture, mining, etc., furnishes raw material ; and on the other hand, (2) manufactures, which make the raw goods into something better ; and lastly, (3) commerce and transpor- tation, which effect the exchange of goods of both kinds between different regions. In this comparison we would call the sense perceptions (together with the inner per- ceptions) the intellectual raw production, and the other activities beyond these, mental manufacture and commerce. Now we are going to include all of these higher activities of knowledge, with the exception of imagination, 1 under the name of "thinking." Ordinary usage gives to the word a wider sense ; e.g., in the expressions, Who would have thought it (expected or imagined it) ? Think of yourself in my place! What do you think of my new hat? The word "concept" is also used in several different senses. In the following pages it is always to be under- stood as equivalent to "general notion." Conception is employed as the name of the process by which concepts are formed. 1 In a wider sense, imagination is included in thinking, since it, too, creates new ideas ; but these are never abstract, if the imagination alone is concerned. USE OF TERMS. 7 "In all thought the greatest beauty is the greatest clearness." These are very nearly the words with which Rector Dorpfeld began a conversation with ine in the summer of 181)0, when I visited him to consult about the subject of this work. Every one will do well to bear this advice ever in mind, and never be satisfied with a thought until it is followed out to its logical conclusions, and is as clear as it is possible to make it. Confusion of ideas is fatal to all sound work. In an article by Fullerton, Oyi Sameness and Identity, in the Publications of the University of Pennsylvania, No. 1, there are enumerated and illustrated no less than seven different meanings of the word "same," which, one would think, should certainly keep the "same" meaning better than any other word in the language. Yet, as the author points out, this very term has led to a host of misunderstandings and false reasonings in systems of philosophy. Most of the prolonged and fruitiess discussions in which we engage are based on a difference of use in our words, and the consequent misunderstandings they occasion. This is especially true of the mental sciences. The use of the word "concept" adopted in this book agrees with that of the great majority of writers on psychology, both in this country and in England. Indeed, I know of but two conspicu- ous exceptions. These are De Garmo, in his translation of Lind- ner's Psychology ; and secondly, perhaps following this use of concept as equivalent to idea in its generic sense, M. K. Smith in her translation of Herbart's Psychology. I call attention to this difference in use, to prevent confusion. CHAPTER II. THE PROCESSES OF THOUGHT AND MEMORY. A. Of Thought. As already explained, we understand by "thinking" (in the narrower sense) all of those intellectual activities which, out of the raw material of the senses and inner perceptions, produce new material ; viz., higher (abstract) ideas. These activities are usually divided into : compar- ing, distinguishing, forming concepts, judging, reasoning, etc. This division is not wrong ; but if we examine these I)rocesses closely, we shall find that they all agree in hav- ing essentially to do with ideas, and differ only in the man- ner of presentation. Let us examine these processes singly. For simplifica- tion we will take the comparison of two objects, say two plants, that are not present to the senses. In order to compare them, they must be so well known that their mental images can be distinctly recalled to consciousness. Thereupon those properties are sought out in which they both agree. When these are found and noted, — i.e., pre- sented to the mind singly, — the process of comparison has in so far reached its end. It is, so far as we are now con- cerned, the same as if the objects themselves were pres- ent to the senses. In the latter case the qualities of the objects would be presented in the mind more vividly; but otherwise the x^rocess is the same. "We will take next the forming of conceptions ; and first FORMATION OF CONCEPTS. 9 the so-called class-concepts (species, kind, family, order, class, etc.). The word "mountain," for instance, is asso- ciated in the child's mind at first with the perception of a single elevation, which he has seen and which he was told was a mountain. Later he becomes acquainted with sev- eral more such elevations, — small and large, wooded and bare, steep and gently sloping, rocky and sandy, etc. ; all are called mountain. Now, since those qualities wherein these elevations differed came into consciousness only in a few cases, perhaps only once, while those common to all occurred in every perception, and therefore by this fre- quent repetition became clearer and more firmly impressed, therefore as a result we find very naturally that those qualities occurring seldom have withdrawn, as too weak, from consciousness, while those common to all have come forw r ard in consciousness, and become distinct. Finally, these latter alone remain, and are the content of the con- cept. But a concept may be formed on the basis of even a single observation, whenever any one or more qualities in a new object stand out with such prominence as to fasten the attention on them, and thus separate them from the other qualities. The first time a child sees a giraffe, he undoubtedly forms a concept that serves him even if he never sees another. But such concepts are almost sure to be faulty. The mental process is purely spontaneous and involuntary. Language, although not the cause of the process, has favored it very much. In the instance cited above, the fact that two or more different things bore the same name (mountain) aroused the attention, and so led to a clearer apprehension. Secondly, the result of invol- untary comparison was step by step fixed in language, and so gotten ready for use. Of course the child has not been 10 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. conscious of any of these psychic processes, not even no- ticing that the meaning of the word " mountain " has been gradually changing, losing one after another the specific qualities, and strengthening into clear consciousness those common to all. Nor has he noticed that the word has narrowed its meaning (content), while it has broadened its application (extent). Above is shown the involuntary, spontaneous rise of general notions or concepts. To be sure, this mode of pro- cedure alone will never bring the concept to full com- pleteness. For even if really so many examples presented themselves for observation that all the differing qualities could be eliminated, and only the similar ones retained, — which would be expecting a good deal, — still these latter are seldom all distinctly noticed. It is very seldom indeed that we can enumerate them separately. But besides this a second deficiency is possible. Among those qualities rightly recognized as common to all, may be found some insignificant ones ; i.e., such as do not change the nature of the concept, whether they are included or excluded. A logically complete concept must, however, omit such insignificant characteristics, and retain only such as are essential. In order, therefore, to bring to a conclusion this process of conception, and give rise to entirely clear and correct concepts, something additional is necessary. This is a conscious and voluntary investigation, so as to get rid, on the one hand, of all the accidental character- istics ; and, on the other hand, to bring into clear con- sciousness all those that remain and are essential to the concept. Thus in concepts of classes, or in particular concepts of individual characters; for example, if it is asked what belongs to the essential characteristics of SPONTANEOUS CONCEPTS. 11 some historical personage (Socrates-, Napoleon, etc.), or of English nationality, this conscious and voluntary part of the work assumes a greater prominence. From the above, it seems clear that only in the field of science can we expect to find proper, logically complete concepts. The chief intellectual intercourse, even among people of culture, has to rely on the spontaneously formed general notions, which are never perfectly definite, and fre- quently contain something wrong. This accounts for many misunderstandings and vain disputations. It is further plain that all words, except proper names, denote not prop- erly perceptions, — unless it be when the child hears the word for the first time, — but general notions (concepts). Next to the formation of concepts, comes the apprehen- sion of the relations between things or processes, of which the causal and mathematical relations are the most impor- tant. Here, too, we make use of the word " conceive " ; and we shall find thinking, in this case also is only a par- ticular way of presenting ideas in consciousness. "We will take an example of the causal relation. What is the origin of our conception that cold is the cause of water changing into ice ? In the beginning it is quite sponta- neous. It is noticed that with a greater degree of cold, ice appears ; and again, that when the cold disappears the ice vanishes. This is, however, still by no means sufficient to give rise to the conception of a causal connection. For there are no innate ideas waiting, as it were, for outer stimulus in order to make their way into consciousness. The sequence of those two phenomena (cold and ice) is observed not only once, but again and again. This regular and invariable sequence of these phenomena produces the new idea finally that the one thing must follow the other, 12 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. that the one phenomenon calls forth the other, causes it. Hereupon the relation between the two facts, which before seemed only temporal, becomes apprehended as causal in its origin ; out of post (after) has become propter (on ac- count of, by means of). The further details of this causal relation can, of course, be learned only by an investigation into the physical nature of cold and of water. That the conception of mathematical relations, as they occur in arithmetic, for instance, in the fundamental operations, in proportion, etc., rests likewise on simple elementary per- ceptions, is shown sufficiently in the schoolroom. We come now to the formation of judgments. In the simple proposition, " Snow is white," two ideas are in con- sciousness, — subject and predicate. We have here a so-called analytical judgment, since the subject-concept " snow " properly includes in it the characteristic " white " ; the latter, in order to direct attention to it, is separated in thought from that complex. It is the same with the proposition, " Mint is a labiate." The latter concept con- tains characteristics which are already in the subject- concept so far as this is completely apprehended ; but for the time being it is singled out for emphasis, that it may be once for all distinctly noticed. Let us take now an incompleted judgment, such as occurs in the question form; e.g., How much is 3X4? Here the predicate idea that belongs with the subject is still to be sought. The ability of the pupil to answer depends on whether the percepts of the numbers, of which the predicate is composed, are so clear and so mobile in his mind, that the idea sought, which he has already learned from adding, can now arise in consciousness. If this takes place, subject and predicate stand side by side in con- JUDGMENTS. 13 sciousness : the judgment is complete. That which would cause the pupil trouble is moreover something that comes properly before the act of judging ; for the latter is noth- ing else than au act of mental representation, wherein two concepts (in the sense of subject and predicate) stand together complete in consciousness. Of course the judg- ment may be more complex than in the above examples, — if either the subject or the predicate, or both, have a more complicated form. For example : — " In the Acadian land, on the shores of the Basin of Minas, Distant, secluded, still, the little village of Grand-Pre' Lay in the fruitful valley." Here are associated with the subject (the village of Grand-Pre) certain characteristics (distant, secluded, still, little) ; and likewise the predicate (lay) is further, in local and other respects, more exactly described (in the Acadian land, on the shores of the Basin, in the fruitful valley). In this way arises one complex of ideas there grouped about the subject, and another one here forming the predi- cate. This does not, however, in any way change the fact that in both cases we have to do merely with the presenta- tion of ideas in consciousness. Although the two groups of ideas are at first held asunder as subject and predicate, in order that they may be more sharply examined and plainly apprehended, yet they combine again in con- sciousness to a compact mass of ideas which must be apprehended as a whole. The peculiarity of judgments, therefore, lies in this : that the two ideas or complexes of ideas separating at first as subject and predicate thus become more sharp and distinct, and therefore combine afterwards all the more readily. Judgments are, accord- ingly, a chief means of making ideas plainer, and of im- 14 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. pressing them more firmly on the mind. The reader will now see at once the importance of the art of questioning, as well as its special purpose. It should be remarked further, that when we speak of a " thought" we generally mean a judgment; but the ex- pression may, in the wider sense, also stand for a single idea. We have yet to analyze the process of reasoning. Take the simplest possible example : — Major premise : New England belongs to the United States. Minor premise : Massachusetts belongs to New England. Conclusion : Therefore Massachusetts belongs likewise to the* United States. As is readily seen, to reason is to judge. What is the difference, then, between the syllogism and other judg- ments ? Logic says : reasoning means deriving a new judgment from two or more given ones. Let us look at the matter more exactly from the psychological side, and ask what takes place in our minds when we reason. Whereas in the simple judgment only two concepts, sub- ject and predicate, are held in consciousness, and repre- sented in their relation to each other, in reasoning three concepts are present, and therefore also three relations. In the above example the three concepts are : New England, Massachusetts, and the United States. It is this complexity that makes reasoning more difficult than the other processes of thinking; or, in other words, the effort to hold in consciousness at the same time so many ideas, together with their relations, in perfect clearness. In the above example the question is, What political KEASONING. 15 relation exists between Massachusetts and the United States ? This is supposed to be unknown, or at least not yet fully determined. As a help to the mind, we insert between the two concepts, " Massachusetts " and " United States," which are for consciousness too wide apart, an intermediary concept, "New England, 1 ' whose relation to Massachusetts on the one side, and to the United States on the other, is already known. The reader will have no trouble in recognizing that this help to thinking — the insertion of a middle concept be- tween concepts lying too far apart — is entirely similar to the help that one makes use of when one is crossing a creek or ditch that is too wide to jump over. If one succeeds in throwing a stone into the middle of the creek to step on, thus requiring instead of a big jump only two little ones, the trouble is avoided, the impossible is made possible. Here ive have the secret of reasoning, as will be shown more exactly later. The above comparison may further serve to call attention to another fact. It is cus- tomary to begin a syllogism with the so-called major premise ; but, as in crossing a creek as above, the second step cannot be taken before the first, so one ought in reasoning to begin, not with a major premise, but with a minor premise ; for the movement of thought proceeds most easily from the minor premise to the major premise, as is shown by the very name and purpose of the middle term. Let us call to mind now the mental state after the insertion of the middle term, — what is known and what is still sought. Known are two relations: that of the first term (Massachusetts) to the middle term (New Eng- land), and that of the middle term to the third (United 16 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. States) ; the relation of the first to the third is sought. This latter relation must be contained impliedly in the two known ones ; for else it could not be inferred from them. But since it had not previously been recognized, the light necessary to see it must have been wanting ; and if it is to be really noticed now, this illumination must come to it from some source. But whence can this light come, since the process is a purely internal one, and there- fore cannot receive help from the senses ? Evidently from the already known ideas, the premises. The successful result depends first of all on their clearness, and secondly on whether they are retained in consciousness until their light has spread over the third relation. If this does not take place at the first attempt, it must be owing to the fact that the full illumination is wanting ; i.e., that the preliminary conditions — clearness and repose of the ideas in the premises — are not yet fulfilled. In such case those two ideas must be repeated and kept in consciousness until, on the one hand, all indistinctness has disappeared from them, and, on the other hand, no more disturbance is caused by other ideas. We see from the above that even reasoning, which at first appears so mysterious, is nothing more than a kind of mental presentation of ideas, which is distinguished from other mental presentations only in that it depends on the clearness of two other groups of ideas, and on these remaining clear in consciousness. That this is so, and indeed that reasoning differs from" the sense perception of such relations only in that the former is a purely internal process, while in the latter case the objects are present to the senses — of this one can immediately convince one's self by representing symbolically to the senses the three GRAPHIC SYLLOGISM. 17 terms of a syllogism, together with their relations. This symbolical representation is usually made by three circles whose size and position represent the three terms with their relations. In this way, as the text-books of logic show, all the figures of the syllogism may be represented graphically. The circle may stand as the symbol both of the content as well as of the extent of the concepts. The meaning of the figures will be most easily understood, how- ever, if the circles stand only for the extent of the concepts. The example given above belongs to the first and simplest figure of the syllogism, and is represented graphically, as in the margin. The three terms are here rep- resented in their extent by the visual image of the circles. The three relations of size, together with that of inclusion or exclusion, can be apprehended completely, as if they were so many sense perceptions. There is, accordingly, here no possibility of any difficulty in apprehending the third relation. This is, furthermore, the reason why the first example was chosen from geog- raphy, since the relation of size in the three terms is here of itself concrete. If the teacher wants to make trial of the above drawing with his pupils, he may try it first with different words, so as to direct the attention to the size only. For example, the first circle (Mass.) is smaller than the second (X. E.) ; the second is smaller than the third (U. S.) ; therefore, etc. If he wishes to make the process still plainer and more concrete, he may place three pupils of different height in a row before the class. A is shorter 18 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. than B, and B is shorter than C. If now lie asks whether A is also shorter than C, every one will be ready with the answer, " Yes ; certainly." From the above the reader will be convinced that reasoning when it takes place internally, and without outward help, is still precisely the same process as when the three objects are present to the senses. Further: that the success of the unaided internal reasoning depends entirely on whether the two premises can be clearly pre- sented and retained for a time undisturbed in conscious- ness. The same is true of all the other forms of the syllogism. Why these latter are usually more difficult does not concern us here. We have now examined in their main features the most important processes (comparison, conception, judgment, and reasoning) of the human understanding, and have found that each consists of a mental presentation of ideas in consciousness, or of a combination of new ideas. Before we take up the memory, I want to make a remark about sense perceptions. Although this may not seem to belong to our theme, still it will later be seen that the above discussion, particularly one point in regard to the formation of concepts, is thereby desirably supplemented. The mental picture of a complex object — e.g., of a mountain, plant, etc. — is usually thought of as a mental product that has come all at once into existence in this complexity, just as a photograph is made by one flash of the camera. Of course it looks as if we adults could certainly obtain a mental picture of such an object by a momentary glance of the eye. This, however, is an illusion, but more es- pecially in the case of a child who is just beginning to use his senses. For perception even the simplest object is in FORMATION OF SENSE PERCEPTS. 19 reality compound. It consists of form, size, color, material, weight, hardness, etc. ; and the form is, in addition, com- posed of elements even in the case of the simplest body, namely, a sphere. In a simple tone we may distinguish four elements, — pitch, color, intensity, and duration. Now, the only way in which any one can secure a distinct per- ception of any complex object is by quickly or slowly, or even at different times, examining and noticing every char- acteristic separately. Furthermore, be it remembered, every characteristic must be repeatedly observed before the first (obscure) impression can grow into a (clear) per- ception. Such a perception is, accordingly, to be thought of not as a picture made with a flash light, as it were, but as a mental product consisting of a number of simple or single ideas ; viz., as many as there were characteristics noted. In short, it is a complex of ideas. In this sense the saying, " Our knowledge is piece-work," may be applied here. This complex appears to consciousness, of course, as a whole or unit, because the object is a unit. As a rule, concepts also, as we have seen above, are com- plexes of ideas, but of an entirely different kind. In sense perception the characteristics combine in the idea because they are united in the object ; on the other hand, in concep- tion we have only definitely selected characteristics ; namely, such as have been chosen by comparison of several ideas, thus separating, first of all, common characteristics, and afterward from these, by a more exact examination, the essential ones. This knowledge that both sense percepts as well as concepts are complexes of ideas, should direct our attention to several other important questions. 1. Why is a concrete percept fresher, more vivid, and more effective than the corresponding concept, although 20 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. the latter is less compound than the former ? It seems now very generally admitted that thought is always accom- panied by motor manifestations. These are, of course, more pronounced in the case of sense perceptions, and de- crease in intensity more and more as the ideas become more abstract. In abstract ideas of the scientific sort, this motor element is reduced, it would seem, to the mere word, so far as it appears in the innervation of the muscles of speech. This being the case, it would seem clear that the freshness and power of concrete ideas depends, for the most part, on this re-enforcement received from the motor element. Some go so far as to say that all volition, even the calling up of the visual or auditory images in the mind, is effected by the innervation of muscles, and that the only possible expression of will power is through muscles. So far as this is true it throws important light on the subject of physical culture, and gives a new reason for muscle training. 1 2. Since the single ideas which go to make a concept are also contained in the different complexes of ideas out of which they were chosen, as well as in the other complexes of ideas that belong under this concept, and since, further, each of these single ideas united with others occurs in still very many other complexes which do not belong to this concept, how is one to think of the existence in the mind i Ribot, along with many others, accepts as " a fundamental law that the reflex is the sole type of all neural action, of all relation," and hence that "every state of consciousness always has a tendency to express it- self, to manifest itself, by a movement, an act." See Ribot's Diseases of the Will, Pqtcholoyy of Attention, and Diseases of the Memory, three little books of 120-200 pages each, full of very suggestive ideas for every teacher. Miinsterberg has based his theory of association of ideas on the motor element in all thought. THE ELEMENTS OF THOUGHT. 21 of the single ideas, of the complexes of ideas, and of the concepts ? In other words, and more exactly, does such a single idea (e.g., round, four-cornered, long, short, broad, narrow, bitter, sweet, learned, smart, foolish, just, etc.) exist many hundred times in the mind, — once perhaps as a single idea, then so and so many hundred times in different lower and higher concepts ; then, again, so and so many thou- sand times in sense perceptions, — or must one think of it in an entirely different way ? And how do the concepts and sense perceptions themselves exist in the mind ? This is not the place to attempt a final solution of these questions by argument ; but a comparison with another field of phe- nomena that lies open to every one's observation can per- haps put us on the track of a correct understanding. This field of phenomena is human society. There are here, first of all, individuals ; further, families, groups of friends and relations, civil and religious communities, cities, towns, states, nations, federal unions, guilds, railroad companies, singing-societies, missionary societies, and all the other many small and large associations for different purposes. All of these exist ; but hoiv do they exist ? Is the exis- tence of an individual of the same sort as that of a society ? Does each human being exist first as an individual, and then once more as a member of a family, and once more, again, as a member of society, and further, as many times as there are different associations to which he belongs ? To be sure, we say the family, the community, the state, etc., exist, and of course they do exist ; but what is it in each of these cases that exists bodily? Evidently that which exists as an actual being is only the individual. The names, family, circle of friends, singing-societies, etc., ace, but in the contiguity in time, — in a word, in the simultaneousness of perception. This new discovery, being approved by further trial, showed the first hypothesis to be insufficient. The latter had helped the investigation upon the track, but had not reached the goal ; it was not entirely false, but the de- cisive point was lacking ; it contained only half the truth, not the whole. Of course it does not make any difference whether the Greek psychologist went to work in just this way or not ; his investigation resulted in a classification into four kinds of relations. And, as a matter of fact, all cases of recol- lection, however varied they may at first view appear, may be divided into these four categories, as any one can try for himself if he will take the trouble. These four forms of recollection are as follows : — 1. Simultaneously formed ideas reproduce one another. (Examples above.) 2. Ideas in continuous series reproduce one another, — most easily in the order in which they were formed. Ex- amples : The words and sentences in a selection committed to memory ; the stations and stages in a journey ; the events in a story that has been heard or read ; the occurrences in one's own life, etc. 42 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. 3. Similar ideas reproduce one another. Examples : Like-sounding expressions, as in rhyme and alliteration; similar historical facts (thus David and Jonathan's friend- ship recalls that of Damon and Pythias ; the giving of the law by Moses, the legislation of Lycurgus and Solon, etc.). Here belong also the cases in which a thought calls up a comparison ; further, that reproduction which helps to form clear perceptions out of sensations, and that also which leads to the spontaneous formation of concepts and judg- ments, etc. 4. Contrasted ideas reproduce one another. Examples: The sight of great luxury and waste reminds one of poverty and misery ; a deed of distinguished courage recalls an ex- ample of cowardice; great goodness of heart, an instance of hard-heartedness ; the downfall of Prussia in 1806, its uprising in 1813 ; Germany's political unity since 1870-1871, its previous distracted condition ; the cradle, the grave, etc. 1 This was an important beginning in the illumination of such an obscure field as that of the movement of ideas, and redounds to the honor of the great Stagirite. This perform- ance is all the more remarkable because in all sciences it is the first steps that are the most difficult; but still more because of the fact that psychological investigation during the succeeding two thousand years did not make any essen- tial progress in this regard. Those four laws of recollection are, as without doubt their i Whoever wishes to get any real good out of these four laws for the association of ideas must not omit to observe his own thoughts as they occur to him off and on, and see under which rule each separate case belongs. In the study of psychology, that which is learned should be ap- plied on and on to the phenomena of one's own mind, since nothing can take the place of self-observation. For exceedingly interesting sugges- tions see Gal ton, Human Faculty, p. 182-207. DESCARTES SIMPLIFIED THE LAWS. 43 discoverer also knew, only symptomatic, not causal. They say that the ideas reproduce each other in these four ways, but they cannot say why they must do it; wherefore, also, it remains unexplained why there are just four ways, no more and no less. But aside from this chief omission, of which we shall speak later on, the Aristotelian theory of memory is also symptomatically incomplete, although not absolutely wrong. Since Descartes (died 1650), this incom- pleteness has been remedied. And this has been the only scientific addition to the doctrine of memory until the present century. Herbart (died 1841) gave a new impetus to psychology in every department, and has justly been called the father of modern psychology. It is this recent work, more particularly in the physiological field, that has contributed most toward a solution of the cause of the asso- ciation of ideas. The addition made by Descartes was this. He recognized that, on the one hand, the first and second, and on the other hand, the third and fourth, laws (as stated above) have so much in common, that probably each pair forms a single law. In the first pair the deciding characteristic is the time ; more exactly, the circumstance that the two ideas in ques- tion have been in consciousness together, either at the same time or immediately succeeding each other. There is no reference to the content of the ideas. They may be derived from different senses, or from the same; and in the latter case they may be like or unlike, and it makes no difference. If, now, both laws require a previous co-existence of the ideas in consciousness, while they differ only as to whether the ideas are completely simultaneous, or whether one idea has already become partly obscured when the other enters consciousness, — or, in other words, whether the two ideas 44 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. have been together in consciousness a longer or a shorter time, — it is clear that in both cases the reason of repro- duction must be sought in the common characteristic of having been together in consciousness. Accordingly, these two laws are to be understood only as one, which may be called the law of simultaneity. That which had previously misled into thinking that there were two laws proves to be merely a difference in the effect of one and the same cause, — namely, the being in consciousness at the same time, — and in the main only a difference of degree, since the com- pletely simultaneous ideas are more strongly united than the half simultaneous. The other pair (3. and 4. laws p. 42) differ from the first pair in two ways. First of all, the matter of time does not come into consideration here at all, since the ideas need never have been together in consciousness. And in the second case, that which before was not considered — namely, the content of the ideas — is here the distinguish- ing characteristic ; for the expressions " similar " and " con- trasted " refer to the content of the ideas. Keeping this in mind, one cannot help wondering why in the one case the similarity, in the other case the dissimilarity, of mean- ing should cause reproduction. It was plain that there must be some mistake It was soon recognized that in the latter case the earlier psychologists had allowed them- selves to be deceived by outward appearance. A contrast between two objects presupposes their similarity in other respects. For between two entirely dissimilar or disparate ideas there can be no contrast, because, as we say, they can- not be compared. Thus, for example, such ideas as have their origin in different senses, as square and sweet, red and shrill, etc. ; likewise, round and yellow (form and LATER VIEWS OF MEMORY. 45 color), although they come from the same sense. Since, then, in the third law it is plainly only the likeness that causes the reproduction, it might easily be guessed that also in the case of contrasted ideas it was their like char- acteristics that made one reproduce the other, and that only after this had so far taken place the contrasted char- acteristics attracted attention. This was proved to be true by the fact that ideas completely unlike never recall one another, unless they have been in consciousness simultane- ously, in which case the law of simultaneity alone holds. From which it follows that the 3. and 4. laws are likewise to be regarded as one, which may be called the law of simi- larity. That which had previously misled into supposing that there were two laws, — namely, the consciousness of contrast, — proves to be merely a difference in the effect of one and the same cause, and really only an after-effect of the reproduction that has already taken place by reason of similarity. Thus a deeper examination has shown that the funda- mental laws for the manifold forms of reproduction are considerably simpler than was formerly believed. There are not four laws of memory, but only two ; that of simultaneity, and that of similarity. In the first a sub- jective factor decides, — namely, the previous presence of the ideas together in consciousness ; in the second, an objective factor, — namely, their similar content. These two laws, then, simple as they seem, are only symp- tomatic, and do not yet express the cause of reproduction. Modern psychology, physiological and experimental, has been fruitful in suggestions of solutions for this question. When we recall to mind an act we have done or a sensa- tion we have experienced, the similarity between this and 46 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. the original doing or feeling is so great as to leave but little doubt that the same parts of the nervous system are con- cerned in the mental reproduction as in the previous physi- cal production. We know that every action leaves the parts of the body with a disposition to the same action again, thus making the second performance more easy. This fact lies at the foundation of habit, and it would seem the same fact is the basis of memory. Thus, then, we may conclude that the senses are not only necessary to receive impressions from the outside world, but are also necessary for their vivid reproduction in memory ; the muscles of the body are not only concerned in the movement of parts of our organism, but they also play a part in the remembrance of these actions afterward. The memory, therefore, has no seat in any particular part of the nervous system, but is everywhere. There are as many species of memory as there are species of represen- tation. Mental work is also nerve and muscle work. This being so, we can easily appreciate the fact that the nervous discharge, when once started on a previously travelled tract, continues till it has roused all those cells to action which took part in the first process. Or, to put it more plainly, if one portion of a previous mental state returns to consciousness, the entire state, with all its ac- companiments, will naturally be recalled, provided only the nervous energy is sufficient. As Professor Lazarus of Berlin expresses it, " Every state of consciousness tends to reproduce itself completely." That this law has its basis in the anatomical structure of the brain and nervous system, we can hardly doubt. This is evidently also only another statement of the foregoing law of simultaneity. For whatever ideas, feel- ASSOCIATION BY SIMILARITY. 47 ings, or volitions may be in the mind at any one time fuse together into one state ; there is strictly only one complex idea in the mind at any one time. The very fact that two or more ideas, etc., are in the same moment in the same consciousness, unites all of these into one state. They are not separate ideas, feelings, etc., until they have been thought of at separate times ; i.e., in separate conscious- nesses. We have, therefore, in this one statement the cause both of our mental associations and of our mental abstrac- tions. We have next to explain the cause of associations by similarity. For the sake of clearness, I shall make use of a very simple concrete illustration. In the margin is a very meagre outline, say of a vase. Ask a shoemaker what it represents, and he will prob- ably, if pressed to say something, declare it is a shoe- sole. If you ask the same question of a biologist, he will probably say it represents a cell of a yeast plant, with a daughter cell budding off from it. Ask now a little girl, and she will say it is the head and body of a doll. A boatman will say it is the outline of some island he knows. An Indian recognizes it as a representation of a canoe paddle ; a chemist sees in it a laboratory flask ; a geo- meter sees two ellipses ; a German is reminded of nine- pins ; while a gymnast sees a suggestion of an Indian club. This might be continued indefinitely, but enough has been shown to illustrate the working of the law of similarity. That which remained constant in all of these associa- tions is the rough outline on the paper ; but in each case it called up in mind a different complement of accessory ideas, thus completing for each of these observers a differ- ent previous mental state. It is evident that in thus 48 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. redintegrating previous states of consciousness the same process was taking place as Avas before described as asso- ciation by simultaneity. Let us take one step farther. The same person looking at the above figure would no doubt be reminded of differ- ent objects (successively, just as we have supposed different persons to be). In other words, one of these objects would suggest the other through the medium of the outline, which is common to both. Now, this illustrates very clearly, I take it, what occurs in the case of every instance of asso- ciation by similarity. Consciousness concentrates on cer- tain elements, — namely, on those through which the asso- ciation is made, and which are therefore common to both ideas ; thereupon by the law of simultaneity the other parts of that second previous mental state are recalled. It is in this way that the mind passes from one complex idea to another by simply retaining those demerits common to both, and then (1) dropping out of conscious7iess the other elements of the first idea, and (2) redintegrating the second. The process may be represented diagrammatically as in the figure. The flow of consciousness is represented from x X y w V left to right. The complex idea, containing elements rep- resented by x, a, and y, is now in mind. The attention is then concentrated on the one or more elements represented by a, which therefore simply persist in consciousness after x and y have dropped out. The elements a have, however, already formed an integral part of a previous state of con- RELATION OF THE TWO LAWS. 49 sciousness in which they were associated with w and z. They therefore now reproduce w and z by the law of sim- ultaneity and the second complete idea results in conscious- ness. Thus we see the process of recollection by similarity re- duces to redintegration by simultaneity, and the latter is therefore stamped as the original law of association. The only way in which two ideas can be immediately associated is by their forming parts of the same mental state at some time. On the other hand, since two similar ideas are associated through their common elements, we might call such association mediate, in contrast to the immediate association of two ideas by simultaneity. This use of terms, as well as the entire preceding explanation of asso- ciation, is of course very far from being Herbartian. Here, then, we have the two laws of memory in their very inmost nature and causal connection before us. Not- withstanding, however, their identity in origin, the two ways are, psychologically, essentially different in their influence on the development of the mental life. They are distinct ways of reproduction, and without the recognition of this fact the higher activities of thought are inexplicable. One individual never goes beyond outer connection ; his memory for facts appears marvellous ; we wonder " how one small head can carry all he knows " ; his stories are filled with minutest unimportant details, apparently having no connec- tion but that they once happened in that order. Another person does not seem to know half so much, but brings every fact into its logical connection. When he tells a story, only such details as have relation to the main issue are brought in ; his memory makes no great show of power, but always seems to be readier in an emergency than the 50 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. other man's. But the greatest difference of all is, the latter understands things better than the former. " To the peasant the falling apple redintegrates only spatial associations of its pleasant taste ; to Sir Isaac Newton its resemblance to all falling bodies suggested the law of gravitation." The difference in mental economy is shown by the rela- tive availability of a fact remembered by association with another fact in time or space ; and, on the other hand, of a fact remembered by its relation of similarity with others. For future use the former is frequently as good as worth- less. It is bound up with other ideas with which it may never again need to be in connection. Except in those cases where the same processes or events are repeated over and over again, such memory has practically no use. It serves us, to be sure, in remembering that the sun rose in the east and set in the west, yesterday, day before, and so on. It must even be admitted that it forms the basis of all memory, as we have shown above 5 and it has truly immense importance for automatic action and all the mechanism of the mind. But it cannot be too emphatically reiterated that this sort of memory alone never can amount to anything. All mental power of thought, invention, im- agination, and character itself depends on the workings of the other law (of similarity). The connection of similarity is internal, and involved in the very nature of the ideas. With the formation of every new link of similarity the capacity of the mind is increased instead of becoming taxed. But its greatest point of superiority is in the avail- ability for all future use of ideas so associated. Wherever needed, there is just where they put in an appearance. They spontaneously group themselves in order, and prepare DISSOCIATION. » 51 the way for all the higher activities of thinking. As we have before seen, this process of spontaneous grouping leads to conception, judgment, and reasoning. The birth of all new ideas, plans, inventions, discoveries of nature's laws, etc., are alone made possible by the association of ideas by similarity. All science, both of investigation and of formulation, consists of applications of it. It should be noticed that in the process of recollection, as just described, the first step consists in dissociation; i.e., in separating certain elements from the rest of the first complex idea, which then drops out of consciousness. The power to do this requires practice, and is of the same nature as abstraction. This breaking up of the ideas into their elements, however, must take place in order to make the ideas mobile, and to dissolve their connection in time and place, and introduce them into new combinations with other ideas like themselves. Readiness of thought depends on this ability ; and both steps, disso- ciation and redintegration, need practice. In early child- hood the facts of the external world pour in through the senses, leaving no time to sort out and classify. The asso- ciation fibres that are probably necessary for the latter process do not get their medullary sheath and begin to function for a considerable time after birth. The founda- tion of all future greatness is, however, being laid in this great store of concrete material received through the senses and retained by sheer force of natural memory. Happy the child whose mind has been furnished thus abundantly. This is the raw material of school instruction that must be supplemented where deficient, and worked over into the higher products of thought. The method of school-work should therefore form the transition from the one form to 52 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. the other ; from memory by simultaneity to memory by similarity, from childish wonder to maturer thought and understanding. The question of resolving the two laws of memory into one prin- ciple has occupied nearly all the psychologists of note. Dorpfeld, differing from the above views, follows Herbart in his metaphysics of the statics and dynamics of ideas, and hence sees in the law of similarity the ground for the removal of the check from all the similar ideas which therefore rise in consciousness of themselves (1). Eepetition is the assistance, by which ideas which are not thus freed from check can be dragged into consciousness (2). This explana- tion of the two laws is concurred in by nearly all the Herbartian writers. The recent translation of lifer' s Introduction to the Peda- gogy of Herbart contains the shortest unvarnished statement of these views in English (particularly pp. 12-14). See Herbart' s Psy- chology, pp. 11-16; Lindner's Psychology, p. 81 ff . ; and two articles by G. F. Stout in " Mind" on " The Herbartian Psychology' 1 '' (Nos. 51 and 52). For a good short account with criticism, see the chap- ters on Herbartian Psychology in Ribot's German Psychology of To-day, pp. 24-67. Spencer seeks on another basis to reduce simultaneity to simi- larity. To him the essential fact in association is fusion of similars in recognition. Coexistent ideas are similar in their time relation and hence associate. Principles of Psychology, i. p. 267 ff. On the other hand, Lazarus in Germany, and Sir William Hamil- ton and others in England, and Dewey, James, Ladd, and Baldwin in this country, agree in the explanation given in the text, reducing all association to the principle of coexistence in consciousness. See Dewey, Psychology, pp. 00-117. James, Psychology, i. p. 578 ff., is very clear and readable. He adds that our general retentiveness is unchangeable by any amount of training (i. p. 663 ff. ). On i. p. 504 he gives an interesting " history of opinion concerning asso- ciation." For a similar brief summary of opinions, see Bain, Mental Science, Appendix, pp. 01, 02; and Sully, Human Mind, ii., Appen- dix, pp. 330-342. Ladd {Psychology, descriptive and explanatory, p. 275) says, "the influence of contiguity in consciousness is the sole discoverable psychological principle of association." Baldwin BIBLIOGRAPHY. 53 (Handbook of Psychology, Senses and Intellect, p. 201) formulates the primary law as follows: "Every association of mental states is an integration, due to the previous correlation of those states in apperception." But one has to read the context to see what all of this means. Kay (Memory, What it is and how to improve it, p. 278) agrees in recognizing contiguity as the one principle of all association, hut fails completely when he comes to explain it. John Stuart Mill is of the opinion that the reduction of the two ways of association to one principle must be necessarily unsuccess- ful (James Mill's Analysis of the Human Mind, p. Ill, note 35 by J. S. Mill). Hoffding (Outlines of Psychology, p. 158) recognizes this as the fact, but identifies the association between the parts and the whole as the typical form of all association, which he calls the law of totality. Sully (Outlines of Psychology, p. 2(37 ff.) describes the phenomena in very much the same way, although he does not undertake to formulate any general law. For an admirable historical account of the psychology of memory, see Dr. Wm. H. Burnhani's articles in the American Journal of Psychology, vol. ii. A very complete bibliography of memory will be found at the close of these in vol. ii. pp. 614-622. For dissociation of ideas, see Dewey, Psychology, pp. 117-129. For the physiological basis of memory, see Spencer, Psychology, i. p. 270; and author's preface to Kay's Memory and pp. 29-46 and 92 ff. ; James, Psychology, i. p. 643 ff. is clear and readable as usual. Perhaps the most accessible and clearest explanation of recent theory of physical basis for the association of ideas is contained in Ziehen's Introduction to Physiological Psychology, chapter ix. See also Bain, The Senses and the Intellect, p. 338, for his famous doctrine that " the renewed feeling occupies the very same parts, and in the very same manner, as the original feeling." B. Or Thought. The term law is applied to thought in two senses: we speak on the one hand of psychological, and on the other hand of logical, laws of thought. In the first case the term law is used in the same sense as in all the natural sciences, namely, to describe the actual, uniform, and invariable pro- 54 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. cesses of nature. Such laws allow of no exception. On the other hand, the laws of logic, like those of grammar, sesthetics, ethics, music, poetry, etc., are rules laid down by Art to be followed in order to secure a right result. The laws of Science must be followed if there is to be any result at all. The rules of Art may be and often are dis- regarded, and this results only in mistakes. Since our investigation is a psychological one, we have to do only with the psychological laws. In order to simplify our problem, we must try to reduce the fourfold activity of thought under one point of view. In the second chapter above, the four forms of thought were reviewed : comparison, conception, judgment, and reason. It is usual to mention only the last three. The reason for this we shall see presently. I should like to ask such of my readers as have been to normal schools or have already privately studied a com- pendium of psychology, just to try whether they can them- selves reduce those four operations of thought under one head. This problem, belonging as it does to the theory of knowledge, which is the plainest and best-worked field in psychology, would indeed be very well adapted to show how much, or rather how little, good can come from com- pendiums. I shall attempt, however, first to make the problem plainer by a few separate questions. In what relation, genetic or logical, do these processes of thought stand to one another ? Is one preliminary to another ; that is, does one prepare the way for another ? And if some- thing like this is found to be true of some, is it further true of all ? Do these four processes form a single genetic series, one arising out of another ? In a word, when rightly understood, are there really four thought pro- GENETIC SEQUENCE OF THOUGHT-PKOCESSES. 55 cesses, or three, or two, or only one ? Even with these suggestions the reader aviII probably not be able to answer, especially if he has studied his logic diligently. The books on psychology, and especially the handbooks, leave their readers entirely too much in the lurch in this regard. They do not even present this problem, nor so much as call attention to the fact that there is such a problem. But worse still, they usually treat of three thought-processes in the order in which they are treated in logic. Now, logic is right in its treatment ; for, since it has to do merely with the forms of thought, not, however, with their origin, it pro- ceeds very correctly from the simple to the complex, and treats accordingly first of the concept, then of the judg- ment, and then of the syllogism. If the text-books in psychology choose the same order, it should be only as a preliminary treatment of each of these thought-processes by themselves. But if now they contain no further dis- cussion of the genetic connection between the different thought functions, so as to correct the false order previ- ously used, then not only is the chief topic in the theory of knowledge left obscure, but if the reader tries now to work this problem out for himself, he will be misled by the pre- vious confusion of treatment. My own presentation in the second chapter above nevertheless follows the order dictated by logic, but the reason for so doing was simply for the purpose of showing the reader the contrast between that want of order and the genetic sequence which I shall now present. For the sake of brevity I shall avoid the proper induc- tive form of presentation, and state at once the correct order of the thought-processes, leaving the proofs to fol- low in connection with examples. 56 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. In the first place, reasoning or inference drops out of the list of processes, on logical grounds. Because, as we saw before, reasoning is only a peculiar kind of judgment : it is the derivation of a new judgment from two or more other judgments, and the conclusion is therefore sometimes called a derived judgment. Therefore, leaving reasoning out of the list, we have still three specifically different pro- cesses of thought. These three stand in a genetic relation to one another; i.e., they arise one out of another, but not in the confused sequence in which logic treats them. There is really but a single thought-process, which from its purpose may be called the formation of concepts ; but it runs through several acts, just as in a flower the bud, the blossom, and the ripe fruit follow each other. The three acts in the thought-process are comparison, judgment, and conception. Comparison is, for the present, to be counted as a sep- arate act preliminary to judgment, in order to avoid any obscurity, or uncertainty as to its place in the thought- process. But, in point of fact, comparison and judgment really form but one mental act, or, in other words, they are only two different expressions for one and the same pro- cess, which in each case is regarded and named from a dif- ferent standpoint. The word comparison regards the beginning of the process ; the word judgment, on the other hand, has reference to its end, denoting, as it does, the result of the comparison. Or, in other words, comparison represents the process from its objective side, pointing to the two or more objects in consciousness whose like or un- like characteristics are to be sought ; judgment, on the contrary, shows the process from its subjective side, refer- ring to the peculiar form of idea produced. Now, in order THE THOUGHT-PROCESS. 57 to have a single expression for this one mental process, we call it, from its result, by the name of judgment. In this psychological sense, to judge is, therefore, nothing more than to call up clearly in consciousness a distinct mental representation or idea of the object to be judged, together with those characteristics, wherein it is like or unlike another object. If the act of judgment is com- pleted, the formation of the concept follows of itself. But this latter is not to be confused with the verbal expression for the concept. Nor can the reader be too careful in dis- tinguishing the above use of the word " judgment " in the psychological sense from the usual definition of judgment as given in logic. Accordingly, we may say in conclu- sion : — There is only a single thought-process, but it takes place in two successive acts, namely, judgment and conception. In this statement we have the myriad forms of thought reduced to their greatest simplicity. Even popular usage in speech has long since expressed the fact that there is properly only one thought-process, and that it consists of the two acts, judgment and conception ; and further, that with the completion of judgment the conception was ready of itself, and that, conversely, no concept was possible with- out previous judgment. Each of the two expressions is used promiscuously in popular language for the whole pro- cess. For, when one wants to express the fact that another does not understand a certain matter, one may say either "lie has formed no judgment in regard to it," or "he has no conception of the matter," and they both mean the same. However welcome the foregoing general view of the process of thought may have been to the reader, such 58 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. knowledge must still remain subject to all of those faults that are inseparable from instruction by abstract ideas which do not rest on a concrete basis of careful observa- tion. It affords, at best, very incomplete satisfaction to have a broad, open field of view and yet not be able to see clearly and distinctly anything in it. There is, besides, much more that requires explanation, particularly in the relation between the two parts of the thought-process. With the help of the concrete examples let us now attempt this further work. For the correct understanding of the following examples, it is necessary that the two directions of thought be first properly understood. In comparison or judgment we may, of course, look for either similarities or dissimilarities in the object compared. Just according as we look for the one or the other, will the result be a different kind of con- cept. For instance, if the characteristics common to a right-angled, an acute-angled, and an obtuse-angled triangle are combined, the concept " triangle " is formed, which in respect to the three ideas above (so far as these are them- selves concepts), is called a superordinate or generic con- cept. If, however, this concept were already formed, and in a new comparison of those three figures the dissimilar characteristics are seized upon (which process we call dis- tinguishing them), there result finally the three differing ideas : right-angled, acute-angled, and obtuse-angled tri- angle. These, in respect to the concept " triangle," are called subordinate or species concepts. This shows us that thought can move in two different directions ; in one way it proceeds to ever wider, more general, and higher con- cepts ; in the other way, it reaches ever narrower, more special, and lower concepts. In the one case, broad views FIRST EXAMPLE. 59 open up to us ; in the other, we find exercise for our dis- crimination. It is well when one head can combine both abilities — far-sight and acuteness. The following examples are mostly those of involuntary or spontaneous conception, because when concepts are in- tentionally formed the process is of itself somewhat more transparent. The question therefore arises, what is it that determines whether the spontaneous process shall take the one or the other direction. When the process is voluntary, the will determines by choosing the one or the other ; but if it is spontaneous, the determination must come from some other source. This source is in the objects them- selves. For, if the objects to be compared show more similar characteristics and seem so much alike that the difference appears unimportant, and therefore not worth considering, thought will proceed to the superordinate con- cept. If, on the contrary, the dissimilar characteristics exceed, or if one in particular succeeds in attracting special attention, then, although the likeness will be noticed, still the process will lead to the subordinate concepts. Thus we see that nature has, even in the spontaneous process, already provided for both directions of thought. First Example (in the direction of superordinate con- cepts). The reader has only to call to mind what was said above in the second chapter on the origin of the concept "mountain'' in early childhood. If the child has already once seen such an elevation, and then afterwards sees an- other, the concept " mountain " is in its inception forth- with present. Although a general idea has thus worked itself out of the two concrete ideas, the child has not been conscious of this inner process, and yet if, when he saw the first elevation, he was told that it was a mountain, he 60 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. would at the sight of the second undoubtedly exclaim : " That is a mountain, too." We may well be surprised at the fact that here the judgment already contains the word (mountain) expressing the concept. This certainly looks as if the judgment did not take place before conception, but rather as if judgment and concept were born simultaneously. But, if this is so, how could we claim before that judgment was a preliminary process to conception ? And if it is not so, our concrete example seems to have brought us only further into the fog of uncertainty. But the reader will probably conclude, and rightly too, that the example was nevertheless purposely chosen. The purpose was to call attention to an important peculiarity in the spontaneous formation of superordinate concepts, a peculiarity which is usually not even alluded to in the text-books. This example by itself, however, will not give us any full ex- planation. We must therefore first take an example from the other direction of thought, in which judgment and concept appear strictly separate. After we have rightly comprehended the relation in the latter case, we shall be able to clear up the doubtful points in the first example, and find out the important peculiarity which it teaches in regard to the formation of superordinate concepts. Second Example (in the direction of subordinate con- cepts). Suppose a child has repeatedly seen yellow wood- sorrel (oxalis stricta). Of course there are different kinds of wood-sorrel, but we will suppose that he has not yet noticed their differences. Since, however, he has seen various specimens of yellow wood-sorrel, his mind has formed from these concrete ideas (percepts) likewise the abstract idea (concept) " wood-sorrel." If after this he comes across a specimen of violet wood-sorrel, he will notice SECOND EXAMPLE. 61 of course that it is similar to the wood-sorrel he has pre- viously seen, but at the same time his attention will be attracted by the strongly different characteristic of color. The comparison and distinction is forthwith completed, and at the same time the mental process of judgment is ready to give expression to itself in the words, " this wood- sorrel is violet." — What do we find here as the result of the comparison ? At all events a judgment. But is there not also a new concept — the species concept " violet wood- sorrel " ? That there is no such concept in the judgment is shown by the fact that the new idea appearing in the predicate is nothing more than a characteristic (violet). But, it may be asked, does not the species concept " violet wood-sorrel " come into existence along with this new characteristic ? For the present it does not ; for the single specimen of this species that the child has seen can only give rise to the concrete idea or perception " violet wood- sorrel." In order for an abstract idea to be produced (in this case, the spontaneous species concept " violet wood- sorrel "), it would be necessary that several specimens of this species should first be seen. 1 The relation between the act of judgment and the for- mation of the concept will now probably be somewhat clearer to the reader. The judgment indicates as the re- sult of comparison nothing new more than a new charac- teristic, but not yet the species concept, to which this characteristic belongs. It prepares the way, to be sure, for this concept, since it furnishes the new material (the 1 Of course it is not necessary that several different specimens should be presented to the senses, but only that several different percepts or mental presentations, whether obtained from one or from more than one object, should have taken part in the formation of the concept 62 THOUGHT AND MEMOKY. characteristic) for it ; but the judgment as such knows nothing of the concept itself. It is clear, therefore, that here, in the formation of subordinate concepts, the judg- ment certainly comes previously to the concept — not simultaneously, as seemed to be the case in superordinate concepts. It is, furthermore, important to notice that, as was just pointed out, the judgment prepares the way for the species concept ; for, just as soon as the newly noticed difference "violet " has been distinctly apprehended, or, in other words, as soon as this new characteristic appears in consciousness in the form peculiar to the judgment, the concept wood- sorrel which was already present becomes unsettled. Why? It previously contained the characteristic " yellow," since this characteristic had occurred in all the specimens pre- viously seen, and was therefore counted in with the common characteristics. But now, after a violet wood-sorrel has come to view, it is seen that this characteristic " yellow " does not belong to the common characteristics of this genus. What result has this on the old concept ? First of all, that the concept " wood-sorrel " loses the characteristic (yellow) that did not belong to it, and becomes in so far purified and more complete. And secondly, that beside this earlier concept (wood-sorrel) on the one hand, the ready formed subordinate concept " yellow wood-sorrel " arises ; and, on the other hand, the way is prepared for a second subordinate concept " violet wood-sorrel," co-ordinate with the other. 1 1 The way is prepared for the second concept but it is not yet formed. This must he distinctly noticed ; for the judgment as such never helps in the formation of concepts at all in any other way, since it does nothing else than furnish characteristics. This is just as true of the formation of KELATION OF JUDGMENT TO CONCEPTION. 63 The second example has therefore shown us, first that 'the judgment always comes before the concept, and cannot come otherwise ; secondly, that the act of judgment, when it relates to a dissimilar characteristic, has the effect of clarifying the old concept and splitting it into two sub- concepts, thus making it a genus concept. We can now return to our first example and clear up the doubts that surrounded it. Why was it that in this first example judgment and conception appeared simultaneous ? If in comparison, as we know, the mind is concerned only with like or unlike characteristics, and if the mental act of higher as of lower concepts. In the present case, in the judgment, " this wood-sorrel is violet," there is another circumstance that will serve to show very plainly how strictly separate the act of judgment is from the act of conception. For here the characteristic "violet" appears as a point of dissimilarity in contrast to " yellow; " hut a con- cept, on the other hand, is always concerned with common or like char- acteristics only. From this it follows that the judgment alone could never give rise to the concept "violet wood-sorrel," hut that, as before said, several specimens of violet wood-sorrel must first be seen. Only after these have been compared can the characteristic " violet " be recog- nized as common. The new judgment, "all these wood-sorrels are vio- let," will now lead to the sub-concept " violet wood-sorrel." The earlier judgment in which " violet " was an unlike characteristic, has, there- fore, strictly speaking, not directly prepared the way for this sub-concept, but only indirectly, and therefore not so much prepared the way for it as merely served as an incentive to its formation. The other sub-concept (yellow wood-sorrel) did not need any new judgment, since it was already contained in the old concept " wood-sorrel." This old concept experi- enced a change in its content, in losing one of its characteristics; its pre- vious content, on the contrary, then became the species concept. This illustrates very nicely that mutual influence between new and old ideas, which is so characteristic of all apperception. One thing more should be noticed here. Since a concept, whether higher or lower, is in comparison with the ideas which it embraces in its content, in the relation of superiority to these, it follows, therefore, that in the act of conception as such the movement of thought is always ?/p- xoard. The two movements of thought spoken of in the text are there- fore found in judgment (comparison) only. 64 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. judgment is nothing more than a mental representation of the result of comparison, then it follows that the predicate of a mental judgment must relate to characteristics only, whether like or unlike. If, on the contrary, conception consists of seizing together in the grasp of a single idea the similar characteristics, then it must be plain that judg- ment and conception are two entirely distinct acts. If, then, in our first example this distinction did not clearly appear, it was owing to one or both of the following causes — either to a peculiarity in the spontaneous formation of genus concepts, or to the interference of language. In order to have a concrete instance in mind, let us re- turn to the example (mountain) given above. Here the characteristics which the objects compared with one an- other had in common, are several in number, as is also the case in most instances of such concepts. A child Avill never be able at the first sight to notice distinctly all of these characteristics separately ; even an adult would not succeed in a single rapid glance. Now, just as the child has formed only a general perception of each of the two objects, so also of the characteristics in which they are alike. He perhaps has the general impression that the two objects are similar, i.e., have much in common, but he cannot give an account of the characteristics which compose this simi- larity. Suppose, however, for the sake of argument, that a child really had apprehended distinctly all the common characteristics, or at least some of them ; still, he would scarcely have at command the necessary expressions to denote each of these characteristics precisely. But even supposing he had, the child would have no incentive to express these common characteristics in a series of separate judgments. What concerns him is simply to make known children's use of words. 65 the general impression that the two objects are similar. For this purpose the easiest means that offers is the name of the elevation first seen — the word " mountain," which when first heard had for the child the meaning of a proper name. This shows us clearly whence it comes that the expressed judgment, "that (thing) is a mountain," already contains the concept word. The expression, mountain, which the child uses in the predicate is, for him, not a concept word, but a mere name, the name of the elevation first seen. He means to denote by it the characteristics he has noticed (in this case those that were common to both). Since, however, only the total impression was noticed, or in case any one of the characteristics was distinctly noticed, the particular expression for it was wanting, he therefore chooses the name of the object previously seen, as much as to say : the characteristics which he has now in mind here, are just the same as he had before seen there : or, in other words, since the two objects have so much in com- mon (judgment), they deserve the same name (concept). If the meaning of the child's expression is so understood, we see plainly the relation between the act of judgment and the formation of the concept, although in the actually spoken judgment both acts were mingled. The child's manner of expression accords with his incomplete appre- hension and his poverty of language. For, because the mental act of judgment is not correctly completed, and because, moreover, the correct expression is wanting, while the idea is, nevertheless, struggling for utterance ; the gen- uine judgment form which ought to give the separate characteristics is, as it were, skipped, and that form is chosen which the judgment has when it comes after the 66 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. concept has been formed, and when it therefore is intended to name, not the separate characteristics, but the concept itself. This is probably the correct view 'with reference to nearly all those charming instances of childish " exten- sion of meaning " in common words, which are frequently given as proof of the child's power of abstraction and con- ception. One little girl, born in the South, saw snow for the first time on a visit North, and said it was " raining soapsuds." Another called the crackling of the kitchen fire, " barking." A little boy, not yet old enough to pro- nounce distinctly, called dipping bread into gravy giving it a bath ("ba"'). Baby J used the word "bo" to mean anything that pleased him. Darwin's little boy, at twelve months, invented the word " mum," which he used for food of all kinds. There is no proper abstraction in any of these cases. A child of one or two years old uses words by analogy, as was explained above, but does not have general concepts with any definite content. Adults, moreover, do not do a particle better than the child in the spontaneous formation of genus concepts. When they pass a judgment merely on the basis of a hasty comparison, without, therefore, distinctly apprehending the separate common characteristics, they understand very well how to cover up this deficiency. They pass by the genuine form of judgment and employ, instead, the expres- sion which contains the ready formed concept, and perhaps, besides, use a very general expression for this concept. And this phrase must pass current for a genuine judgment, and the general expression must serve as an adequate con- cept. Sometimes such a word serves the purpose for which it was uttered — just as light money passes for full value until its deficiency is recognized. TO THINK IS TO FORM CONCEPTS. 67 Thus we have shown that likewise, in the case of super- orclinate concepts, there results from the comparison first of all a judgment, no matter whether expressed or not. But the judgment never concerns itself with anything hut the separate characteristics ; for the mental act of judg- ment is nothing but the focusing of consciousness on a single like or unlike characteristic. To sum up : not until the judgments are made, that is, until the necessary like or unlike characteristics are seized upon, thus bringing to- gether the material for the concept in question, — not until this is done, can the concept, whether superordinate or sub- ordinate, be formed. For conception is nothing but the taking together (con, together, capio, I take) of the com- mon or essential characteristics in the grasp of one idea. In just so far as the preceding judgments have been incom- plete, will also the succeeding concept be incomplete. A concept deserves to be called scientifically precise, only when it is the result of correct and exhaustive judgments. The manifold forms of thinking have thus been so far simplified that we see they consist entirely of judging and forming concepts, — or of the two successive acts : appre- hension of the separate characteristics of several objects, and comprehension of their like or essential characteristics in the grasp of a general idea. There is, moreover, noth- ing to prevent carrying this simplification farther and denoting only the final act, and saying, accordingly, to think is to form concepts. But one must then keep in mind that this concluding act is preceded by the prepara- tory act of judgment. A further hindrance to the clear understanding of the genetic relation between judgment and conception lies in the use of language. Since the text-books make no men- 68 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. tion of this difficulty and no attempt to remove it, we shall try to supply the omission. Language is in this respect by no means a true mirror of the mental processes. Thus the concept, being a single idea, would require, as a corresponding expression for itself, a single word or a word with one or more qualifiers (e.g., right-angled triangle, bitter tasting, beautiful and correct writing, "the little village of Grand-Pre, distant, secluded, still," as subject, " lay in the fruitful valley, in the Acadian land, on the shores of the Basin of Minas," as predicate, etc.). But in order to express any mental act, language never uses a single word or an isolated phrase — unless it be an abbreviation, in which the omission is supplied men- tally — but always employs a sentence, which is the form of expression for a judgment. And since concepts always occur as parts of a sentence, any one who does not thor- oughly understand the origin of judgments and concepts would be led to believe that concepts were developed before judgments. The reason why language obscures the correct sequence of these acts is not difficult to see. One has only to remember that the speaker puts his thoughts in words not for his own sake, but in order to communicate them to others. Thus, if one is thinking to one's self and wishes to denote in words a newly conceived idea, a single ivord will suffice, or an isolated phrase ; but, if one wants another clearly to understand a newly conceived idea, such an isolated expression will not be sufficient, but the preceding act of judgment must be indicated. Now, this is done by formulating a complete sentence, in which the objects judged appear as subject and the resulting concept as predicate. For example, suppose the new concept is " par- allelogram." If it has been gained from the study of the JUDGMENTS AS EXPRESSED IN LANGUAGE. 69 square and rectangle, it has been preceded by the two judg- ments : " in the square the opposite sides are parallel," and " in the rectangle the opposite sides are likewise parallel." Hereupon the superordinate concept results which we briefly call '•'parallelogram." Now if this act of conception is to be made known to others, it takes place through the sentence, " Squares and rectangles are parallel- ograms." The same is true if the concept is not entirely new, but, although formed before, is not yet clarified and completed. Thus, in the case before us, if, in regular school work, the new concept " parallelogram " is to be tested and at the same time made complete — by application first to the rhombus, we will say — there will result first of all again a genuine judgment : " in the rhombus the opposite sides are likewise parallel." Hereupon the clarified con- cept appears in the sentence : " the rhombus is likewise a parallelogram." If, after the test has been further made with the rhomboid, the completed concept is now to be expressed in its full extent, the sentence would be : " the square, the rectangle, the rhombus, and the rhomboid are parallelograms." In this way language clothes all thoughts in the sentence or judgment form ; but, if one looks closer to see what sort of a mental act is thereby represented, one will find that there are two sorts of judgments as expressed in language. One kind expresses an actual mental act of judgment pre- paratory to the particular concept ; the other kind pnyperly makes known only a newly gained or newty completed con- cept, and such are therefore possible only after the concept has been formed. In the first case the language is adapted like a well-fitting garment expressly made to order ; in the latter case, on the contrary, it is only a borrowed suit for 70 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. an emergency. Thus, although the fact that language uses sentences exclusively, may easily mislead the beginner in psychology into believing that the judgment forms the conclusion of the thought process, a closer examination has shown us that the contrary view is confirmed, viz., that conception is the end and goal of thinking. For further elucidation let the attention be called to a couple of ex- amples which show that the act of conception towards which the judgment is aiming is very frequently not ex- pressed at all, but instead only the preceding judgment. This is more particularly the case when the concept is in the main already formed and the new judgment only adds a further explanation. Thus, for example, the geometrical proposition, " the angles of a triangle are together equal to two right angles," is a genuine judgment. The act of con- ception, to which it tends, consists in the completion of the concept triangle by a new and accessory characteristic. The Pythagorean proposition is likewise a judgment in which the concept " right triangle " receives a new and accessory characteristic. In both cases it is the act of judgment to which we give expression, not the act of con- ception. The preceding discussion, which has, it is hoped, tended very much to simplify our conception of thinking, has likewise simplified our search for the psychological laws of thought. We have only to concern ourselves with judgment as the preliminary act, and with conception as the final and' chief act. The psychological law is here to be understood as meaning the cause or incentive which leads the mind spontaneously (involuntarily) on the road to judgment and further on to conception. We must there- fore watch and observe unintentional or spontaneous think- ing, since intentional or scientific thought is] influenced by THE LAW OF CONCEPTION. 71 the will. We will begin with conception, since we can from this higher point of view look back better over the preliminary act. We must, then, briefly recur to the process of conception as before described in the second chapter. When a con- cept is to be formed, two or more ideas, having something in common, must be present side by side in consciousness. There are three possible cases : in the first, two objects may be immediately present to the senses, e.g., if the teacher draws two geometrical figures on the board, or distributes two different kinds of plants to the class. Secondly, one idea may be a sense perception and the other a reproduced idea, e.g., if the mountain one is look- ing at recalls the image of one previously seen. Thirdly, both may be reproduced ideas, as is mostly the case, for instance, in silent meditation. The concepts in these cases are so-called class concepts, because they include in their extent a number of objects. The individual concept differs from these in referring only to a single individual (person, thing, etc.). But in its origin it does not differ, since the individual must have been seen several times and in differ- ent forms, e.g., a person in different clothes, or at different ages, in different mood, activity, etc. Here, only the second and third cases above mentioned can occur — the last, when, for instance, an historian meditates on the essential charac- teristics of an historical character, whose biography he has read. The process of conception always consists simply in those characteristics which the two objects have in common becoming clearer in consciousness, and the dissimilar char- acteristics consequently being crowded back, i.e., becoming indistinct. The former make up the content of the con- 72 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. cept. It is possible that the like characteristics at first have not been all distinctly marked, but only in the form of a general impression or feeling, as people usually, but very improperly, say. Nevertheless, even in such case, the concept is already embryonic. The cause of the act of con- ception is, accordingly, the fact that the common character- istics become clearer in consciousness, since each pair of characteristics corresponding to the two ideas compared unite into one and are thus strengthened. This is then the psychological law of conception which we have been seeking. 1 The next question is whether this is the only law, or whether there is another in conjunction with it. There is, indeed, as we shall see, a second law in all those cases where one or both ideas are reproduced in memory. For in these cases the meeting of two ideas in consciousness is made possible only when an idea, momentarily in con- sciousness, recalls to mind an earlier similar idea. Thus we see that here the memory is actively engaged in the service of conception, and we may therefore say, that in all those cases where the ideas compared are not sense percep- tions, the law of reproduction by similarity assists as a pre- paratory factor of thought. The first case above, in which this assistance is not rendered, since the objects are pre- sented to the senses, occurs comparatively seldom, — and for the most part only in regular school instruction, in which case the process is intentional, whereas we are here speaking of spontaneous conception. The other cases em- 1 Concepts, therefore, bear a striking analogy to composite portraits. The term "abstract idea" is frequently not so appropriate as "cumula- tive idea." Compare Galton, Inquiries into Human Faculty, p. 83. Ribot prefers the term " generic idea." CAUSE OF SPONTANEOUS JUDGMENTS. 73 brace not only by far the greater part of the processes of thought, but are further of special importance, inasmuch as through them the store of ideas already collected is con- tinually being applied to the production of new thoughts ; without them the older supply of ideas would remain as dead capital for the mind. In order now to discover the natural cause that leads the mind to form judgments, we shall have to exclude from our consideration all cases of voluntary thought, since here the will too much overshadows the other natural cause for us to observe. And so far as involuntary or spontaneous thinking is concerned, it will again occur to the reader that here the act of judgment is skipped, as it were, i.e., does not show plainly, thus resulting in concepts which are likewise incomplete. Hence it would appear that the very process which we wish to observe is so obscured that our investigation seems to be brought again to a standstill. But we should recollect that those judgments which lead immediately to conception, relate exclusively to the like characteristics. Even if this half of the field is cut off from our view, there still remains for observation all the other half, consisting of those judgments which relate to unlike characteristics. These were already referred to above as giving the downward direction to thought, towards subordinate concepts. One point is already clear to start with. Keeping in mind that a judgment is nothing but a peculiar kind of mental presentation, and, further, that the usual mental presentation can take place without leading to outward expression in language, we notice that there are two parts to be distinguished in the act of judgment. In the first place the apprehension of the characteristics in question, 74 THOUGHT AND MEMORY. whereby the ordinary form of mental presentation results ; and, secondly, a certain additional factor that changes the ordinary mental presentation into the judgmental form. It is this second factor, then, that is properly the cause of the act of judgment, and is therefore the element that we are seeking. The following examples will show us wherein it consists. First example : A child sees a white sheep, and at the same time, alongside of it, a piece of black coal. Second example: The child sees a white sheep, and at the same time, alongside of it, a black one (supposing he has not seen sheep before at all). The examples are evidently so chosen that the very same two unlike characteristics (white and black) occur in both cases. The question is now : What sort of a mental state will these unlike characteristics call forth in each case ? Will they give rise to a judgment or not ? In the first example, what arise first in the mind of a child are the total perceptions of the two objects. There is certainly no doubt that the color characteristic will not be wanting in either one of the perceptions, since color, as is well known, belongs to the characteristics that seldom escape attention. We will, therefore, assume that the color characteristic has been apprehended along with the rest in each object, resulting in at least an ordinary idea. Will now this ordinary idea produce a judgment ? At first view one might think that since these characteristics are in contrast, and their difference is so great that it could not be greater, they would strike the child as something notice- able, and so lead to the formation of a judgment. Never- theless, I claim that the act of judgment will not follow, — which is as much as to say, that, in spite of the contrast, a child's spontaneous judgments. 75 the attention is not sufficiently aroused, and the apprehen- sion has not been sufficiently lively, to make the mind feel the need of (j l u in