diff options
| author | www-data <www-data@mail.pglaf.org> | 2026-07-02 07:58:47 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | www-data <www-data@mail.pglaf.org> | 2026-07-02 07:58:47 -0700 |
| commit | a0fe88a57d4b504b9282d46e310af754d49cb304 (patch) | |
| tree | 902204e26c60140d77374dfb4dfa1ad466d4621e /78996-h | |
Diffstat (limited to '78996-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 78996-h/78996-h.htm | 2474 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 78996-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 0 -> 124807 bytes |
2 files changed, 2474 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/78996-h/78996-h.htm b/78996-h/78996-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..14c8523 --- /dev/null +++ b/78996-h/78996-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,2474 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html> +<html lang="en"> +<head> + <meta charset="UTF-8"> + <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"> + <meta name="format-detection" content="telephone=no,date=no,address=no,email=no,url=no"> + <title> + Psychology for Beginners | Project Gutenberg + </title> + <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover"> + <style> +body { + margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; +} + +h1,h2,h3 { + text-align: center; + clear: both; +} +.fs120 {font-size: 1.2em;} +.fs200 {font-size: 2em;} + +p { + margin-top: .5em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .5em; +} + +.p2 {margin-top: 2em;} +.p4 {margin-top: 4em;} + +hr { + width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: 33.5%; + margin-right: 33.5%; + clear: both; +} + +hr.tb {width: 45%; margin-left: 27.5%; margin-right: 27.5%;} +hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} +@media print { hr.chap {display: none; visibility: hidden;} } + +div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} +h2.nobreak {page-break-before: avoid;} + +.pagenum { + + position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: small; + text-align: right; + font-style: normal; + font-weight: normal; + font-variant: normal; + text-indent: 0; +} + +.center {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;} + +.footnotes {border: 1px dashed;} + +.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} + +.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} + +.fnanchor { + vertical-align: super; + font-size: .8em; + text-decoration: + none; +} + +.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; + color: black; + font-size:small; + padding:0.5em; + margin-bottom:5em; + font-family:sans-serif, serif; +} + </style> +</head> + +<body> +<div style='text-align:center'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78996 ***</div> + + + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">[Pg 1]</span></p> + +<div class="chapter"> + +<p class="center fs120">LITTLE BLUE BOOK NO. 491</p> + +<p class="center">Edited by E. Haldeman-Julius</p> + +<h1 class="p2"> +<span class='fs120'>Psychology for Beginners</span> +</h1> + + +<p class="center fs200">Hereward Carrington, Ph. D.</p> + +<p class="center">Author of “The Problems of Psychical Research,” +“Modern Psychical Phenomena,” “The +Coming Science,” etc.</p> + +<p class="center fs120 p4">HALDEMAN-JULIUS COMPANY</p> + +<p class="center fs120">GIRARD, KANSAS</p> + +</div> + + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">[Pg 2]</span></p> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="chapter"> +<p class="center"> + Copyright, 1924,<br> + Haldeman-Julius Company<br> +</p> +<p class="center p4"> + PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA +</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</span></p> +</div> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> +<div class="chapter"> + <h2 class="nobreak" id="PSYCHOLOGY_FOR_BEGINNERS"> + PSYCHOLOGY FOR BEGINNERS + </h2> +</div> + + +<p>The word “Psychology” originally meant the +study of the <i>soul</i>. The human soul was thought +to be a sort of entity, exhibiting qualities or +“faculties,” which became manifest to us as +various psychological manifestations. The last +century saw the gradual development of a +“psychology without a soul”—a psychology +based upon the study of <i>mind</i>, as manifested +in human beings; it therefore became the study +of consciousness.</p> + +<p>Until relatively recently, the word psychology +meant only this. Within the past few years, +however, the scope of this science has been +enormously increased. When we speak of +Psychology, we no longer mean, merely, the +adult, human, normal consciousness. We must +define now our terms more accurately and in +greater detail. We have psycholog<i>ies</i>—just as +we no longer have “insanity,” but insanit<i>ies</i>. +The science has been enlarged. We know <i>animal +psychology</i>—which deals with the mind +of lower animals—extending all the way down +the scale to the simplest organisms. We have +<i>Educational psychology</i>, which deals with the +psychology of childhood, and the best methods +of training the young mind and developing it. +We have <i>individual psychology</i>, dealing with +the relationship of the individual to his environment, +and going into the details of his +own mental make-up. We have <i>social psychology</i>, +which deals with the instincts and desires +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</span>of man, as related to the society in which he +dwells. We have <i>abnormal psychology</i>, dealing +with the varied derangements, abnormalities +and defects of the human mind. We +have <i>dream psychology</i>, especially studied +by psycho-analysis. We also have the <i>psychology +of the crowd</i>, so different from the +individual in the crowd. We have the <i>psychology +of the subconscious mind</i>—that vast +realm which was practically a closed book to +the psychologists of the last century. We have +<i>Oriental psychology</i>, which is entirely different +from our own, in many respects. We have +<i>supernormal psychology</i>, which deals with certain +alleged “psychical” phenomena, and endeavors +to explain them along psychological +lines. We have psychology of religion, history, +politics, etc.</p> + +<p>It will be necessary to devote a brief space to +all these sections, in order that a bird’s-eye view +of the whole subject may be obtained. First of +all, however, a few words as to the general methods +and scope of psychology.</p> + +<p>The older psychology was based almost entirely +upon “Introspection”—that is to say, subjective +analysis of the mind and its activities. A +great deal of valuable material was secured in +this manner. Later on, came “experimental +psychology”—the “new psychology,” as it was +called for some time—based upon accurate +laboratory measurements, by means of suitable +instruments of precision. This dealt very largely +with the various reactions of the subject +experimented upon. Still more recently, the so-called +“Behavioristic” psychology,—which studies +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</span>the behavior of the subject, and contends +that the inner, mental activities can be interpreted +in this manner. A brief summary of the +behavioristic psychology will be given later on.</p> + +<p>Whatever theory we may hold as to the relation +of brain and mind, it is certain that the +two are in some intimate way related to one +another. Whether the activities of the brain +actually <i>cause</i> or <i>produce</i> consciousness; or <i>vice +versa</i>; or whether these two are but opposite +sides of the same shield—but differing aspects +of reality, (just as a decayed tooth and the pain +caused by it are differing aspects of the same +thing) cannot be decided; it is a metaphysical +problem, which need not be discussed now, since +it falls more properly under the province of +philosophy than of psychology. For all practical +purposes, we may take it for granted that +brain and mind are in some unknown and +intimate way connected, and that thought and +the operations of consciousness are coincidental +with the activities of the brain.</p> + +<p>The human brain is a delicate and beautiful +structure, of great complexity. The older +“physiological psychology” really amounted to +little more than physiology, since it dealt with +mind largely in terms of brain. Nowadays, +psychology is recognized as a separate science, +and we can discuss its problems in purely +mental terms or language, without referring to +the brain.</p> + +<p>In discussing cases of multiple personality, +for example, we can now do so without using +physiological terms, which was not the case +until a few years ago. In other words, we now +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</span>recognize that the psychic sphere is a legitimate +one of its own; and, although it is in some +manner related to the brain-changes, this fact +is not taken into account; the two worlds are +regarded as distinct and separate, for all practical +purposes,—although perhaps united in +some metaphysical sense ultimately. Details as +to the general anatomy of the brain can be +found in any physiology, wherein the various +motor and sensory centers are located, the +higher association centers, etc. Dr. Bastian’s +work, “The Brain as an Organ of Mind,” is a +good book,—although several years old. But +there is a wealth of material upon this subject,—to +which we have no space to do more than +refer in the present booklet.</p> + +<p>The human mind is just as complex as the +human brain. It reasons, wills, feels, associates, +remembers, perceives time and space, forms concepts, +forms habits, imagines, gives its attention, +concentrates, discriminates, compares, induces, +deduces, thinks abstractly, is subject to +illusions, hallucinations, insanities, as well as +flights of genius, directs the flow of thought, +experiences emotions, feels sensations, experiences +the constant feeling of “self” as a background, +etc., etc. And every mind in the whole +world is different, both in its structure and +its mode of action! No two people think and +feel <i>exactly</i> alike. Each person is a world unto +himself. He himself represents an invisible entity, +somehow tucked away in that little dark +chamber which we call the skull, and within +<i>that</i> his whole individual universe is contained.</p> + +<p>Let us now endeavor to dissect this complex +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</span>mental organism, and see how it “works.” We +shall try to discover the nature and structure +of the human mind, and ascertain how it +operates. We shall devote a brief chapter to +each of its varied activities, and then endeavor +to weld together our findings, so as to enable +us to understand the real nature of the Self.</p> + +<p>First, however, a few words as to the various +“Psychologies.”</p> + + +<h3 id="ABNORMAL_PSYCHOLOGY"> + ABNORMAL PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>This is occupying a prominent place in modern +psychological literature. There is a “Journal +of Abnormal Psychology,” devoted especially to +its problems. A variety of fascinating questions +fall under this heading, a few of which I have +briefly touched upon in the section dealing with +“The Structure of the Mind.” Space prevents +further treatment here. The reader may consult +such a book as Dr. Isador H. Coriat’s “Abnormal +Psychology” for further particulars.</p> + + +<h3 id="ANIMAL_PSYCHOLOGY"> + ANIMAL PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>A vast literature exists upon this subject also. +Darwin’s “Expression of the Emotions” is, of +course, classical. Lindsay’s “Mind in the Lower +Animals” (2 vols.), and Mills’s “Animal Intelligence” +are useful books. Some original and +ingenious speculations are contained in Ouspensky’s +“Tertium Organum.” A most interesting +work, from a practical point of view (that of a +trapper and hunter) is “How Animals Talk,” +by William J. Long. A study of the so-called +“talking animals” is “Lola: a Contribution to +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</span>the Thought and Speech of Animals.” Chapters +on the marvellous horses of Elberfeld are contained +in Maeterlinck’s “Our Unknown Guest,” +and in my own “Modern Psychical Phenomena.”</p> + +<p>The question of <i>Instinct</i> in animals has also +received extensive treatment. C. Lloyd Morgan’s +works are classical in this respect: “Habit and +Instinct,” “Instinct and Experience,” etc. See +also Chadbourne’s “Instinct in Animals and +Men,” and McDougall’s treatment of the subject +in his “Social Psychology,” in his “Psychology,” +and a number of articles on this subject in the +“Journal of Abnormal Psychology,” and similar +periodicals.</p> + + +<h3 id="PSYCHOLOGY_OF_POLITICS_HISTORY_ETC"> + PSYCHOLOGY OF POLITICS, HISTORY, ETC. +</h3> + +<p>This branch of our subject deals with such +questions as the mental life of nations, religion +and the state, national psychology, etc. A useful +book in this connection is J. A. Dewe’s +“Psychology of Politics and History.”</p> + + +<h3 id="RELIGIOUS_PSYCHOLOGY"> + RELIGIOUS PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>A voluminous literature also exists upon this +subject. Attacks upon religion are to be found +in such books as Leuba’s “Belief in God and +Immortality,” and Theodore Schroeder’s writings, +which endeavor to trace all religion to sex. +On the other hand, are to be found such books +as Barrow’s “The Validity of the Religious +Experience,” and William James’ “Varieties of +Religious Experience.” An extensive study of +Mysticism is Poulain’s “The Graces of Interior +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</span>Prayer.” The literature on this subject is so +vast, however, that it would be impossible even +to indicate the sources of reference.</p> + + +<h3 id="EDUCATIONAL_PSYCHOLOGY"> + EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>The mind of the pupil, the aims of the teacher, +methods of instruction, school work, etc., form +the subject-matter of this branch of knowledge. +A useful book in this connection is Hugo Munsterberg’s +“Psychology and the Teacher.”</p> + + +<h3 id="BUSINESS_PSYCHOLOGY"> + BUSINESS PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>Of late years, much has been written concerning +this topic. Many works upon it have been +issued, among which one might mention Link’s +“Employment Psychology,” and Atkinson’s +“Psychology of Salesmanship.”</p> + + +<h3 id="SOCIAL_PSYCHOLOGY"> + SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>The most noteworthy book dealing with this +question is undoubtedly William McDougall’s +“Social Psychology.” Since the publication of +this book, a number of others have been issued, +but the student would do well to begin with +this one. Much useful material is also to be +found in H. G. Wells’ “Outline of History.”</p> + + +<h3 id="INDIVIDUAL_PSYCHOLOGY"> + INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>This is covered by any popular book, such as +the present one.</p> + + +<h3 id="CROWD_PSYCHOLOGY"> + CROWD PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>An individual in a crowd is usually lost, more +or less—mentally no less than physically. If +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</span>the crowd is carried away by some emotion or +intense excitement, so is the individual in it. +Crowd psychology is generally primitive; emotions +overrule intellect. An interesting work +upon this subject is G. LeBon’s “Psychology of +the Crowd.” See also McDougall’s “The Group +Mind,” and Trotter’s “Instincts of the Herd in +Peace and War.”</p> + + +<h3 id="DREAM_PSYCHOLOGY"> + DREAM PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>This is covered by such books as Freud’s +“Dream Psychology,” Walsh’s “Psychology of +Dreams,” Coriat’s “The Meaning of Dreams,” +etc. See also the little book upon “Dreams” in +the present series, and the references therein +given.</p> + + +<h3 id="ORIENTAL_PSYCHOLOGY"> + ORIENTAL PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>This is extensive, in one sense, sparse in another. +Orientals have written much about themselves, +but largely concerning their mystical +states. Rhys Davids’s “Buddhist Psychology” +is perhaps a good summary of the Hindu +Teachings (a section of them). The various +Sacred Books of the East give, perhaps, as +good a clue to their inner life as any.</p> + + +<h3 id="SUPERNORMAL_PSYCHOLOGY"> + SUPERNORMAL PSYCHOLOGY. +</h3> + +<p>This, naturally, falls within the province of +Psychical Research (See the volumes upon this +topic in the present series). F. W. H. Myers’ +“Human Personality” is a classic; an excellent +and sane book is Prof. Th. Flournoy’s “Spiritism +and Psychology,” translated by the present +writer.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</span></p> + + +<h3 id="PSYCHOLOGY_OF_THE_SUBCONSCIOUS"> + PSYCHOLOGY OF THE SUBCONSCIOUS. +</h3> + +<p>Here, again, a voluminous literature exists, +dealing with the various problems presented. +Morton Prince’s “The Unconscious,” and Joseph +Jastrow’s “The Subconscious,” are valuable +books. A. T. Schofield’s book, “The Unconscious +Mind,” may also be consulted. How +new this idea of the subconscious mind is may +be seen from the fact that it was hardly mentioned +in James’ “Psychology.” The difference +between unconscious and subconscious +consists in this: that whereas the former is +thought to represent a sort of “unconscious +cerebration” (Carpenter), without definite +thought, the subconscious mind is believed to +carry-on a lively mentation of its own; there +is an unconscious consciousness, so to say. +This idea has been disputed by some authorities, +but there is a mass of evidence in its +favor. Indeed, investigations of the subconscious +mind have taken precedence over those +into the conscious mental processes, of late +years. The mass of published material dealing +with the psychology of the subconscious is now +enormous.</p> + + +<h3 id="BEHAVIORISM"> + BEHAVIORISM. +</h3> + +<p>This is a relatively new school in psychology, +and has been the subject for much controversy. +Its main contention is that behavior is the +key to a man’s real, inner being, and that, +from this, his total self can be gauged. His +instinctive and emotional equipment, his habits, +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</span>his activities, his social adaptability, his recreation +and sports, his sexual life, his reactions +to conventional standards, his personal bias and +peculiarities, etc.—these are all factors in the +determination of his inner mental life. In other +words; as a man behaves—so is he! Behavioristic +psychology, however, totally fails to disclose +to us the essence of self and personality—what +it <i>is</i>. Those who may be interested in +pursuing this line of reading further may consult +Dr. John B. Watson’s “Psychology: from +the Standpoint of a Behaviorist.”</p> + + +<h3 id="THE_SENSES"> + THE SENSES. +</h3> + +<p>The five generally recognized senses are: +sight, hearing, taste, touch and smell. These +depend upon certain sense-organs, (the eye, +ear, etc.), and also upon specific sense-centers +in the brain. The structure and physiology of +these organs can be found in any good text +book on the subject. Suffice it to say that, in +the case of the eye, for example, certain incoming +ether vibrations are converted, by the rods +and cones in the retina of the eye (by a wholly +mysterious process) into nerve-currents, which +are transmitted to the sight-centers in the +brain, wherein the sensation of sight occurs. +The ear converts sound waves into nerve-currents, +which we then perceive as sound, etc. +Touch depends upon nerve-currents from the +periphery of the body. Smell and taste are +closely related; in fact, there are only four +primary tastes which are directly conveyed by +the nerves of the tongue. These are sweet, +salt, sour and bitter. All our other “tastes” +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</span>are dependent upon the sense of smell. That +is why, when we have a “cold,” and cannot +smell anything, food seems to have no taste. +The primary tastes are obtained through the +“taste buds” in the tongue. Smell is a sense +about which relatively little is known.</p> + +<p>In addition of these sensations, arising from +the sense organs, there are also other senses, +such as the muscular sense, the temperature +sense, etc. To what extent these may be +properly classed as separate senses has been +disputed. The so-called “sixth sense” is theoretically +a sort of “second sight,” of supernormal +origin, which orthodox psychology does not at +present recognize.</p> + +<p>The sensation of motion should perhaps be +mentioned in this place. Such sensations are +of two kinds: (1) sensations of objects +moving over our sensory surfaces; and (2) +sensations of our whole person’s translation +through space.</p> + +<p>The former of these has been much studied, +though little definite can be said regarding it +here. Curiously, while the sensation of a +moving object can be accurately determined, +it is most difficult to locate a number of +stationary objects on the skin (if the eyes are +closed). Thus, if one places the finger-tips +against the chest, one cannot tell how many +fingers are touching (after the first three). +Certain areas of the skin are also quite insensitive; +anaesthetic zones of patches sometimes +existing,—especially in hysterical subjects, and +these can be pricked without involving any reaction. +These figure largely in the “witchcraft +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</span>trials,” of the middle ages, for it was held that +the witch was insensible to pain wherever the +Devil had touched her. Such spots were, therefore, +searched for with long needles!</p> + +<p>As to the sensation of movement through +space, we often experience this at night, in our +so-called “flying dreams.” (See my little book +in this series on “Dreams.”) The Hindus contend, +however, that this is an actual possibility; +that the physical body can really be +lifted or “levitated,” by means of proper breathing +exercises, etc. I have discussed this question, +briefly, in my volume in this series devoted +to “Yoga Philosophy.”</p> + + +<h3 id="SENSATION"> + SENSATION. +</h3> + +<p>Sensation depends upon certain nerve-currents, +which affect the brain, but are usually +localized or “felt” in a particular spot or area +of the body. If a finger is burnt, for example, +the pain is apparently felt <i>in</i> the <i>finger</i>; nevertheless +the actual sensation takes place <i>in</i> the +<i>brain</i>, and if the sensory (or afferent) nerves +were cut, no pain would be experienced. +Normally, we react to a stimulus of this kind +by immediately withdrawing the hand; this is +due to the motor (or efferent) nerve-currents, +which are sent out, commanding the muscles to +move the hand and arm in question. A definite +“reaction” has then taken place. Reactions of +this sort are constantly going on, but most of +them never rise into consciousness. Only when +the sensation is powerful enough to rise above +the so-called “threshold” does it rise into consciousness, +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</span>and the reaction to the given +stimulus is then consciously directed.</p> + +<p>The outer world acts upon the periphery +(surface) of the body, giving rise to all sorts +of sensations. Again, various internal organs, +if they are not functioning normally, will give +rise to internal sensations. All such sensations +are conveyed by sensory nerves; and, +when these flow from any specific sense-organ, +only the characteristic sense impression is +thereby conveyed. Thus, the duty of the optic +nerve is to convey sensations of sight; if the +eye be struck violently, the optic nerve, in such +case, does not transmit pain—only sight—and +we “see stars” instead. This phenomenon is +due to the sudden and violent transmission of +a nerve current flowing along these nerve-tracts. +Similarly with all the other senses.</p> + +<p>This fact has given rise to the theory of +“specific nervous energies,”—to the theory, +that is, that each sensory nerve conveys the +particular sort of current appropriate to it, and +no other. Certain internal organs, however, +appear to have no sensation. For example, the +brain can be cut up, without any sensation on +the part of the subject. (Of course, before +reaching the brain, pain would be experienced +on the surface of the head, in the skull, etc.)</p> + +<p>Sensations are our most primitive mental +constituents. They are distinguished from +Perceptions by the fact that the latter are +more complex; they are sensations, <i>plus</i> ideas +about the sensation; hence “pure sensations” +are impossible to us after the first few days of +life.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</span></p> + +<p>Sensations differ greatly in the degree of +their intensity; a feeble sensation, however, +if continued, will ultimately rise into consciousness. +On the other hand, sensations +which intruded into consciousness at first +may sink below its threshold after a time, and +are no longer noticed. Thus, a workman may +sleep in a boiler-factory; soldiers have learned +to sleep amidst the constant booming of cannon, +etc. Certain sensations also give rise to +a sort of reverse of themselves. Thus, if one +gazes at a red spot for a time, and then looks at +the white ceiling, a <i>green</i> spot will be seen to +form there. This is a so-called “after image,” +and is due to fatigue. This can readily be +demonstrated in the case of vision.</p> + + +<h3 id="INSTINCT"> + INSTINCT. +</h3> + +<p>William James defines Instinct as “the faculty +of acting in such a way as to produce certain +ends, without foresight of the ends, and +without previous education in the performance.” +Of late years, much controversy has arisen as +to instinct—some authorities contending that +it does not exist, (in the old-fashioned sense of +the term) while others have postulated a number +of different instincts—all more or less +primitive and innate. (McDougall).</p> + +<p>Instincts are certainly impulses—to perform +some action. They vary greatly in complexity, +and are by no means always blind or invariable. +They often resemble thought—and yet +it is certain that no actual thought is concerned +in them. Instincts may be inhibited +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</span>by habits; they are also transitory. They are +well adapted to certain ends, and an animal +or an insect will perform quite complicated +actions, under entirely novel circumstances. +Most of the work done upon instincts, until +lately, was done upon animals of the lower +order; but, more recently, much attention has +been paid to human instincts, and some authorities +have contended that human beings +have more instincts than the lower animals.</p> + +<p>Instinct will usually cause the creature in +question to perform actions compatible with +its own safety and self-preservation. Instinct +thus grades naturally into Emotion, which will +next be considered.</p> + + +<h3 id="EMOTION"> + EMOTION. +</h3> + +<p>We know that practically all emotions give +rise to bodily expression. Darwin wrote an extensive +monograph upon “The Expression of +the Emotions in Men and Animals.” Fear, +anger, hatred, etc., find visible expression in +the face, and in the actions of the body. Common-sense +seems to tell us that these bodily +expressions are the <i>results</i> of the emotion; the +James-Lange theory of the emotions says that +the bodily expressions are the primary factors, +the internal emotions following after. Thus, we +feel sorry because we cry, etc. This theory was +for long popular among psychologists, but is today +questioned in many quarters.</p> + +<p>Emotions of all sorts are certainly connected +in a very intimate manner with the body and +its internal mechanism. Healthful emotions +stimulate, while destructive emotions inhibit +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</span>and destroy. It has been claimed that emotions +actually cause the secretion of definite chemical +substances, which can be partially expelled in +the breath; varied emotions cause different +colored precipitates in a given solution, etc. +(Elmer Gates.) However this may be, there +can be no question of the beneficial effects of +healthful emotions, and the detrimental effects +of the reverse. It is not so much the effects of +the <i>thought</i> upon the body, as the <i>emotion</i> +aroused by and associated with that thought.</p> + +<p>Feeling is the fundamental sensation of all +life. Strong feelings have been called emotions; +these are dependent largely upon the sympathetic +nervous system, although the glands of +internal secretion are also important factors. +These are stimulated by the emotion, and also +give expression to it.</p> + +<p>Emotions have, of late years, been the subject +of much study. It is now believed that the +various complex emotions are built-up, or compounded +of simpler ones. An analysis of these +complex emotions has resulted in their being +resolved into their component factors. On the +other hand, organized systems of emotional +tendencies (centered about some object) exist +in all of us, and these have been called “sentiments.” +This idea has played a large part in +contemporary psychological literature.</p> + +<p>Dr. William McDougall, in his “Social +Psychology,” has made a very ingenious analysis +of the various emotions. He shows at +considerable length how the complex emotions +are built-up from the simpler ones. Thus:—<i>gratitude</i> +is a compound of tender emotion and +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</span>negative self-feeling; <i>scorn</i> is a compound of +disgust and anger; <i>fascination</i>, of horror and +wonder; <i>envy</i>, of negative self-feeling and +anger; <i>reproach</i>, of anger and tender emotion; +<i>anxiety</i>, of anticipatory pain, tender emotion +and anger—against the source of the threatened +harm; <i>pity</i>, of tender emotion and sympathetically-induced +pain, etc. Goddard (“Psychology +of the Normal and Subnormal”) says that low +orders of intelligence (morons, etc.) experience +only relatively simple emotions; many of the +higher forms are lacking in them, and that +“only higher intelligences have the highest +emotions.” The primary emotions thus seem +to belong to animals and undeveloped humans; +our emotions have evolved in their intensity +and complexity like everything else. That is +why refined and “sensitive” people experience +the deepest and keenest emotions.</p> + + +<h3 id="CONCEPTION"> + CONCEPTION. +</h3> + +<p>“The function by which we mark-off, discriminate, +draw a line round, and identify as a +numerically distinct subject of discourse is +called <i>conception</i>.” We may therefore have conceptions +of objects, people, qualities, abstract +ideas, etc. Each conception is unique, separate, +and distinct for the subject thinking it. No two +conceptions can ever be quite alike; for no two +individuals conceive things in a similar manner, +and the same individual, conceiving the +same thing twice, conceives it in a different +way. The original conception <i>plus</i>, is always +conceived the second time. For, from the purely +physiological point of view, the brain has been +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</span>already modified somewhat by the first impression, +and the second one reacts upon a +modified, and not an unmodified, substratum. +“History never repeats itself;” and no two +thoughts, and no two conceptions, can thus ever +be <i>precisely</i> alike.</p> + + +<h3 id="PERCEPTION"> + PERCEPTION. +</h3> + +<p>These two terms are often confused in the +public mind. Psychologically, however, they +are quite distinct. The consciousness of material +objects through the senses is called “perception.” +We <i>perceive</i> them. On the other +hand, we <i>conceive</i> an idea. Perceptions depend +upon our senses and brain-processes; conceptions +may be independent of the former. It is +true, however, that perceptions depend upon the +inner workings of the mind, as well as upon +sense-impressions.</p> + +<p>When we perceive a thing, we recognize or +“know” that thing. But we do not yet think +<i>about</i> it, associate it with other things, etc. +This higher process of the mind has been +termed “apperception.” It is applied to the +process by which the mind goes out to meet +the incoming perception, and elaborates it by +higher processes of association, etc. Thus, +through the sensation of sight, you perceive an +orange. But you do not yet say to yourself: +“This is a nice, juicy orange; I like oranges; +it will taste sweet; it will quench my thirst,” +etc. These associative processes of the mind +may be classed, roughly, under the process of +“apperception.” They represent syntheses and +associations.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</span></p> + +<p>We are all subject to fallacies of perception. +Our senses may deceive us; or we may draw +wrong deductions from genuine sense impressions. +There are thus illusions and hallucinations, +which resemble one another, but which +may be distinguished thus: <i>Illusions</i> are caused +by wrong inferences from actual, objective sense +impressions—as, for instance when a hat and +coat hanging on the wall are mistaken for a +man standing at the foot of the bed, etc. In +the case of a <i>hallucination</i>, however, there is +no physical substratum of reality in the outer +world; the whole thing is created from within, +whence it is projected outward,—into space. +Some hallucinations of this type seem as “real” +as a solid object would be.</p> + +<p>Hallucinations often result from diseased or +irritated sense-organs, the sense-centers in the +brain, etc. The condition of the blood may +have much to do with this. Delirium tremens +is a good example of hallucination of this type. +But not all hallucinations are abnormal; we +all have them at night when we fall asleep and +dream. We then experience hallucinatory pictures +of all sorts of things which are not really +“there.” There seem to be, also, odd cases of +“telepathically induced hallucinations,” as I +have described in my booklet on “Psychical Research,” +in this series. In such cases, the subject +appears to be perfectly normal at the time. +There can be no doubt, however, that most +hallucinations denote some form of mental or +physical disease—as the hallucinations of the +insane, of drug fiends, etc., amply testify.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</span></p> + + +<h3 id="THE_PERCEPTION_OF_SPACE"> + THE PERCEPTION OF SPACE. +</h3> + +<p>When a baby first begins to notice objects +about it, everything is doubtless more or less +vague and confused. Gradually, order appears +out of chaos. Normal adults have a fairly clear +idea of the sizes, shapes and distances of objects—within +certain limits. How are we enabled to +do this?</p> + +<p>An enormous literature exists upon this subject. +Only a few essentials can be given here. +First of all, it is probably true that the general +feeling of size exists as a definite quality in +sensation—of intensity of voluminousness. +Varied sensations are inwardly compared with +one another, and, so to say, checked-off. +Smaller objects are discriminated within the +object looked at; the object is usually seen in +relation to other objects, etc. James holds that +“extensity, discernible in each and every sensation ... is +the original sensation of space, +out of which all the exact knowledge about +space that we afterwards come to have is woven +by processes of discrimination, association and +selection.” These later powers are developed +as the mind itself develops; on the other hand, +sensations with a certain degree of innate extensity +in them are postulated—and are denied +by others!</p> + +<p>Ouspensky (“Tertium Organum”) asserts that +man is the only three-dimensional animal; the +lower animals are naturally two-dimensional, +and that what we perceive as the third dimension +they perceive as movement. They see only +flat surfaces. This is, however, a much-disputed +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</span>point, into which we have not time to +enter now; it also takes us into the realm of +animal psychology.</p> + + +<h3 id="PERCEPTION_OF_TIME"> + PERCEPTION OF TIME. +</h3> + +<p>Our perception (or sense) of time differs considerably +at different ages, and under different +circumstances. When we are bored, tired, etc., +time seems to move slowly; when we are interested +or excited, it flits by rapidly, etc. A +certain span of time always seems shorter to +old people than to young ones. A year is an +enormous period to a child; whereas an old +man will often exclaim: “How the years have +flown!” Time which is busily occupied seems +short, but it seems a long period, when looked +back upon. A waiting period, on the other hand, +in which nothing is accomplished, seems interminable +during its passage; but it seems extremely +brief, when viewed in retrospect. This +is probably due to the fact that many actions +<i>seem</i> to occupy a long period of time, whereas +a span in which nothing of importance happens +<i>seems</i> to have taken-up no time at all.</p> + +<p>The shortest period of time which we can +appreciate is about 1/500 of a second. Exner +recognized two electric sparks to be successive +when the second followed the first at that interval. +On the other hand, the longest period +of time which we can accurately distinguish +from longer or shorter bits of time, according +to Wundt, is 12 seconds. We probably have no +sense of “empty” time; but of the flow of +events <i>in</i> time. It has been suggested that +the pulse may be a sort of natural clock, enabling +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</span>us to appreciate time as it flows (for +instance in sleep), but this hardly serves to explain +many such cases. The same may be said +of the idea that some unknown, but constant, +feature in the brain activities is the source of +our perceiving time at all.</p> + +<p>When we become unconscious, time is obliterated +altogether; the sense of time is also +seriously impaired under the influence of certain +drugs (<i>e. g.</i>, hasheesh), so that a second +may appear to consume hours, and <i>vice versa</i>. +It has been proved by experiment that subjects +under hypnosis, and some natural somnambules, +have a remarkable sense of time, and can reckon +it with uncanny accuracy. Our conscious mind +is notoriously bad at this sort of thing. The +subconscious mind is the “ready reckoner,” +therefore, which must be added to its other accomplishments!</p> + + +<h3 id="ATTENTION"> + ATTENTION. +</h3> + +<p>When we “pay attention” to a thing, the consciousness +is narrowed down to a point, as it +were, and concentrated like the beam of a +searchlight. The greater the degree of attention, +the more this narrowing process takes +place, until the subject may be lost to all save +the immediate object of his inward study. Attention +may be either voluntary or involuntary; +we may read a book with deep interest, or +stand fascinated by some horrible spectacle, +from which we are unable to avert our eyes. +We may pay attention to objects of sense, or to +ideal or represented objects (intellectual attention). +Attention may also be connected with +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</span>some sense (sight, hearing, etc.); or may be +purely psychical, as in cases of meditation, etc. +Attention may be stimulated by associating the +subject-matter with something of interest, or by +drawing analogies. A person will always pay +attention to something that interests him. The +practical importance of this law should be utilized +by all teachers, for the child’s education +would proceed by leaps and bounds were due +advantage taken of these facts.</p> + + +<h3 id="DISCRIMINATION"> + DISCRIMINATION. +</h3> + +<p>The word “discrimination” is popularly used +in two senses (1) we speak of a man having +“good discrimination,” meaning by that a sort +of good judgment. (2) Discrimination, in the +psychological sense, however, means the noticing +of any part of an object, as distinct from +the whole.</p> + +<p>All sensations tend to fuse and become a single +compound; discrimination singles these out, +and separates them. Such differences may be +felt, if they are <i>really</i> different, and different +<i>enough</i>; further, they must fall more or less in +succession upon the same organ, and not simultaneously. +If they do, they are apt to blend +hopelessly. Especially is this the case if the +elements of the impression have never been experienced +singly before. If we are familiar with +a thing, we can begin to discriminate the elements +going to compose it. It is, however, true +that only such elements as we are acquainted +with, and can imagine separately, can be discriminated, +within a total sense impression. If +a thing be associated at one time with one thing +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</span>and at another time with another, this may +become a separate “thing” for the mind, which +singles it out, by an act of discrimination, and +places it in a position by itself. Such acts of +discrimination may be greatly improved by +practice.</p> + + +<h3 id="ASSOCIATION"> + ASSOCIATION. +</h3> + +<p>This is the peculiar quality of the mind, by +means of which two or more ideas or memories +are coupled together. Association is thought to +take place largely in the higher centers in the +brain—the frontal lobes. Nearly all our higher +education consists in association, and our +mental lives are largely dependent upon it. +Genius is said to consist, largely, in making +associations, and seeing resemblances, which +other people do not. Upon association memory +largely depends.</p> + +<p>Association is a very complicated process, +which depends largely upon the brain. Various +anatomical schemes have been devised to explain +and illustrate association,—which may be +found in text books upon the subject. Association +may be partial or complete. Similarity is +one of its distinguishing characteristics (and +causes). Usually, objects which appeal to the +same sense are associated one with another; +but sometimes quite different sense-impressions +are associated, in a very odd manner. The subject +may, e. g., associate a sense of smell with a +visual impression; or a sense of taste with a +definite sound, etc. These are the so-called +“synæsthesias.” Thus: “<i>salt</i>, for instance, is +described by one observer as dull red, <i>bitter</i> as +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</span>brownish, <i>sweet</i> as clear bright red, and <i>sour</i> as +green or greenish-blue. To another observer the +taste of meat seems red or brown, the taste of +graham bread is rich red in color, while all ice-creams, +(except chocolate and coffee) taste +blue. To still another reporter, the sound of +the word ‘intelligence’ tastes like fresh sliced +tomatoes, while the sound of the word ‘interest’ +tastes like stewed tomatoes....”</p> + +<p>These are unusual associations, however, +which depend either upon some odd nervous +connections between the various sense-centers +in the brain, or upon some purely psychical +associations. Most of our normal associations +deal either with objects or with memories.</p> + + +<h3 id="IMAGINATION"> + IMAGINATION. +</h3> + +<p>Nearly all our imaginations are visual in +character; great composers may imagine the +orchestration of the masterpiece they are composing—so +vividly, at times, that this amounts +to an auditory hallucination. But most of us +are more or less limited to <i>visual</i> imaginings; +we “build air-castles in Spain,” or imagine ourselves +in various scenes or situations, which +are seen by the “mind’s eye.” The explanation +usually put forward to explain this is that +“sensations, once experienced, modify the nervous +organism, so that copies of them arise again +in the mind after the original outward stimulus +is gone.” No such mental copy, of course, +can arise in the mind, of any sensation which +has never been directly excited from without, +on this theory.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</span></p> + +<p>This power of “visualization” differs greatly +in different individuals; some men are good, +others bad visualizers. Images of sounds, muscular +sensations, touch, etc., may also be reconstructed. +These again may be so vivid as to +amount to actual hallucinations.</p> + +<p>Imagination consists in the power of the mind +to build-up mental pictures, and project them +into the <i>future</i>, just as memory-images are projected +into the <i>past</i>—into our life-experience. +Imagination is that power of the mind which +seems, in one sense, to pierce the veil. While +such imaginings are, as a rule, merely day-dreams, +never coming true, it is also a fact +that all great works must be thought of or +imagined, in some sense, before they are executed, +or come into being on the material plane. +Someone must have “imagined” the Pyramids +before they were built. Rightly used, then, imagination +is a very valuable asset, which should +be cherished and utilized—just as it can become +destructive, if abused. It had indeed been said +that a sense of humor and imagination are the +two things which distinguish us more than +anything else from the brutes.</p> + +<p>Use your imagination, therefore, only keep it +well in leash—like the thoroughbred horse +which it is!</p> + + +<h3 id="WILL"> + WILL. +</h3> + +<p>The Will is that which seems more intimately +a part of our inner Self than almost any other +portion of our mental being. We feel when we +actually <i>will</i> a thing that we thereby set some +hidden energy in motion, which flows outwards, +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</span>and sets our muscles into action. Or we may +will to accomplish a certain thing, or to feel +or think in a certain way. The will seems to +be centered in the forehead, just above the +eyes and nose, and to form a part of the central +Self or Ego.</p> + +<p>Hence the doctrine of the “freedom of the +will.” We <i>feel</i> that we are free to will, to perform +any given action, or to refrain from performing +it. “The human will is free.” The +contrary doctrine, on the other hand, “Determinism,” +contends that this is an illusion; we are +<i>not</i> free; our every action is determined by our +previous trains of thought,—our education, +environment, heredity, etc.,—and that we must +<i>necessarily</i> choose and will as we do. This is +the much-debated philosophical question of +“Free Will Vs. Determinism,”—which is really +a metaphysical question, and not a psychological +one, and hence cannot be discussed at greater +length in this place.</p> + +<p>We may really will to perform a certain +action; or we may merely <i>wish</i> to do so. This +is little more than desire. A wish may exist +without giving rise to the will to carry it out; +the <i>fiat</i> of the will has not gone forth. Action +only follows this fiat of the will. Wish and +desire remain in the world of inaction. Hence +the truth of the old adage,—“If wishes were +horses, beggars would ride.” The reason they +do not ride is that the wish is never translated +into action.</p> + +<p>Ideas of action may be expressed in action, or +they may be inhibited—prevented from being +actively expressed. There is always a tendency +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</span>on the part of the body thus to carry out any +given volitional impulse. This is often checked, +for our judgment tells us that we should not +perform the action in question. On the other +hand, we may force ourselves to perform a +given action, from which we instinctively +shrink.</p> + +<p>We may have an impulse to perform a specific +action, but we “let it go.” Again, we may +hold steadily before the mind the idea of performing +that action, until we actually do so. +Now, according to many psychologists, this act +of voluntary attention is all that the will <i>is</i>; it +is nothing else. “The essential achievement of +the will ... when it is most voluntary, is to +attend to the direct object and hold it fast before +the mind. The doing so <i>is</i> the fiat; and +it is a mere physiological incident that when +the object is thus attended to, immediate motor +consequences should ensue. Effort of attention +is thus the essential phenomenon of will....”</p> + +<p>There are many of us, however, who cannot +accept or believe this. We see in the human +will something more than this. There is something +more in will than mere effort of attention. +Recent experiments, conducted by means of +delicate recording instruments, seem to show +us that the human will is indeed an energy, +capable of registering itself, or being registered, +by suitable apparatus; while the experiments +of Dr. Charles Russ also appear to prove that +the human eye, under the dynamic action of +the will, can be made to emit a living force, +capable of affecting delicate instruments. We +feel that, when we love, some vital energy radiates +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</span>from the eyes; that the glance of hate is +more than a mere metaphor. The will and the +outward vision (if I may use the term) seem +to be subtly connected, and experiments such as +these seem to prove it. And if so, they cast a +new and vitally important light upon the doctrine +of free-will. For our immediate practical +purposes, however, it may be said that the will +seems to send forth a fiat, of a nature wholly +unknown, following upon which definite actions +are performed in accordance with that volitional +effort.</p> + + +<h3 id="MEMORY"> + MEMORY. +</h3> + +<p>A sensation, an emotion, an idea, etc., may +leave a more or less permanent memory which +can, perhaps, be recalled years later. Where +was this memory in the meanwhile? The usual +explanation is that a sort of groove or trace is +cut into certain brain cells,—just as the recording +needle cuts a groove in the phonograph +record, recording at the same time the <i>music</i>; +and that the act of recalling a memory is +analogous to reproducing the music, by means +of a suitable device upon the phonograph. The +brain is, on this view, “the physical basis of +memory.”</p> + +<p>One difficulty which at once arises, however, +is that, inasmuch as all parts of the body are +constantly being made-over, and replaced by +new parts, these brain-cells must also be replaced +(within a few weeks, months or years) +and the record would vanish with them. The +usual reply to this is that the newly laid-down +brain-cell in some way “inherits” the memory +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</span>from the old one, and hence somehow continues +to store its psycho-physical memories, which are +again passed-on when this cell is replaced, and +so on forever.</p> + +<p>Needless to say, such an interpretation of the +facts strains our credulity. None other, however, +has ever been forthcoming. But the inherent +difficulty of the case has led some philosophers—notably +Bergson—to defend the idea +that the brain is merely a mechanism for <i>reproducing</i> +memories, and that memory itself resides +within some spiritual storehouse, where +it remains until recalled. The legitimacy of +such a view, of course, rests upon the possible +proof of such a super-physical world as that +postulated.</p> + +<p>Memory depends upon a variety of factors. +A healthy brain is essential to a good memory; +good blood, bathing healthy nerve-cells being +here essential. Memory also depends upon (1) +interest, and (2) association. We remember a +thing which interests us; it makes an “impression” +upon us. Also, if we associate a thing +with other things, it helps us to remember it. +An isolated fact is hard to remember; but if it +is associated with a number of other things +which we know, or which also interest us, it is +more liable to be recalled. Any one of these +things may then recall the other event, by association, +and hence the given memory is more +readily accessible.</p> + +<p>Memory is first of all recorded, then stored, +then recalled, and finally recognized or “placed,” +after it is recalled. Some authors say that +memory consists in three stages, others in as +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</span>many as five (Hyslop). This is merely a question +of the sub-division of the process involved.</p> + +<p>It has been contended that there is no such +thing as a “good” or a “bad” memory; it all +depends upon the factors above mentioned. +Various artificial schemes have been devised +to improve and perfect the memory; and there +is no doubt that it is a faculty which can be +greatly improved by constant practice. In a +sense, everything is remembered, but it is not +vivid enough to be recalled. Such hidden memories +can often be revived by means of hypnotism, +etc. In certain abnormal conditions, the +memory seems to be keenly stimulated, and +events, long forgotten, are recalled, which had +long before been forgotten by the conscious +mind. Many apparently “super-normal” phenomena +have been explained in this manner.</p> + + +<h3 id="REASONING"> + REASONING. +</h3> + +<p>One thing which is held to elevate us above +the brutes, more than all else, is our <i>reason</i>. +“Man is a rational animal.” Yet how few of us +reason,—at any rate systematically! When in a +crowd, we are carried away by the psychology +of the crowd; and we are swayed more by our +feelings and emotions than we are by our +reason, as a rule. Yet there can be no doubt +that pure reason is the highest type of thinking +possible for the normal man.</p> + +<p>Reasoning consists in carrying on a logical +and connected train of thought, each step of +which follows logically from the one preceding +it. It is dependent upon learning, sagacity and +common-sense. The essence of reasoning is, of +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</span>course, <i>logic</i>, which is supposed to portray the +highest type of reason. We think about a thing +intellectually, when we reason. We arrive at a +conclusion by a logical train of thought. Each +thought is like the link in a chain. We may +arrive at the conclusion in some other way, by +some process of “intuition,” or what not, but +reasoning constitutes the basis of our thinking, +and represents the solid rock, upon which most +men are content to build their intellectual +houses. And in order to reason well, systematically +clear thinking is required.</p> + + +<h3 id="SPEECH"> + SPEECH. +</h3> + +<p>Normally, we communicate with one another +in three ways; by means of marks upon paper +(writing), by movements (sign language), and +by means of air vibrations issuing from the +vocal chords (speech). The question of the +origin of speech is a much disputed one, some +authorities contending that we gradually attached +meanings to certain primitive sounds; +others that we learned to express ourselves in +speech in order to express our thoughts.</p> + +<p>There are certain definite areas in the brain +which send out the necessary motor currents, +rendering speech possible. We have two such +centers, one in each hemisphere, but we ordinarily +use but one of them. Right-handed people +use the one in the left hemisphere, while left-handed +persons utilize the one in the right +hemisphere. Should this active area be injured, +the subject becomes <i>dumb</i>—though the corresponding +area in the other hemisphere may be +quite intact. Hence the importance of teaching +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</span>children to become “ambidextrous”; <i>both</i> centers +are thereby cultivated, and, if one is injured, +the patient can still talk. An extended +discussion of this entire subject may be found +in Dr. N. C. MacNamara’s “Human Speech; its +Physical Basis.”</p> + + +<h3 id="HABIT"> + HABIT. +</h3> + +<p>We all know what is meant by forming habits—either +“good” or “bad.” It is always easier to +do a thing a second time than at first. If any +specific action is performed a great number of +times, it becomes practically automatic, so that +we do not have to think about it at all. Every +step in walking is conscious at first; every +action in buttoning a button or tying a tie; in +time these actions become more or less unconscious. +A habit, once formed, is hard to +break, but it is relatively easy to break in the +early stages of its formation.</p> + +<p>Man has been defined as “a bundle of habits.” +We hardly realize, perhaps, the extent to which +habit governs us—not only in our physical +actions, but also in our trends and attitudes of +thought. “Habit second Nature?” exclaimed the +Duke of Wellington; “habit is ten times +nature!”</p> + +<p>There is much truth in this assertion. When +we form a new habit, we cut a new groove in +the brain, so to speak, and nervous currents +find it much easier to travel over this beaten +path, rather than to cut a new one. Every time +that path is used, it becomes relatively easier +and easier for the nervous current to pass over +it; and the result is that, whenever a nervous +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</span>current passes in its immediate vicinity, it tends +to shoot along that path, before it can be prevented +from doing so. The action in question +is then performed. Of course, this is only a +rough simile, but something of the sort takes +place, and it enables us to visualize how habits +are formed, from the psycho-physiological +point-of-view.</p> + +<p>Prof. William James, in his “Psychology,” +has laid down certain maxims, which are very +helpful, and may be applied in daily life to +our own advantage. These maxims, in brief, +are:</p> + +<p>(1) <i>Make your nervous system your ally +instead of your enemy.</i> This is to fund and +capitalize our acquisitions, and live at ease +upon the interest of the fund. For this we +must make automatic and habitual, as early +as possible, as many useful actions as we can, +and guard against the growing into ways that +are likely to be disadvantageous to us, as we +should guard against the plague. We should, +then, take care to launch ourselves with as +strong and decided an initiative as possible +upon any new venture. This will tend to cut +a deep initial groove, so to say.</p> + +<p>(2) <i>Never suffer an exception to occur till +the new habit is securely rooted in your life.</i> +Each lapse is like the letting fall of a ball +of string which one is carefully winding-up; +a single slip will undo more than a great +many turns will wind up again. <i>Continuity</i> of +training is the great means of making the +nervous system act infallibly right.</p> + +<p>(3) <i>Seize the very first possible opportunity +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</span>to act on every resolution you make</i>, and on +every emotional prompting you may experience +in the direction of the habits you aspire to +gain. It is not in the moment of their forming, +but in the moment of their producing +<i>motor effects</i>, that resolves and aspirations +communicate the new “set” to the brain.</p> + +<p>Much dispute has arisen as to the best way +to break a bad habit—whether to abolish it +at once, or to taper it off by degrees—thus +avoiding “shock.” The consensus of opinion +seems to be that it is far better to break off +at once, <i>providing one can stand it</i>. Similarly, +the abrupt acquisition of a new habit is best, <i>if</i> +there is a real possibility of carrying it out. +If you set yourself an impossible task, and +fail to carry it out, this will leave you +weaker than before. But this is not necessary; +slight tasks will serve just as useful purposes +as more difficult ones in the formation +of new habits. And the ability to perform unpleasant +tasks is the test of character! “The +faculty must be kept alive by a little gratuitous +exercise every day.”</p> + +<p>According to the habits we form—lazy or industrious, +bad or good—our life, success, happiness, +destiny depend. An object-lesson of +some sort—a book, a play, a living example—will +perhaps modify and color our whole lives. +I cannot do better than to conclude this chapter +by a quotation from William James, which +I personally read when about nineteen years +of age, and which served to influence the whole +course of my life. It may, perhaps, have the +same effect upon others, and it is with the hope +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</span>that it will, that I call attention to it here. +James says:</p> + +<p>“Let no youth have any anxiety about the +upshot of his education, whatever the line of +it may be. If he keep faithfully busy each +hour of the working day, he may safely leave +the final result to itself. He can with perfect +certainty count on waking up, some fine morning, +to find himself one of the competent +ones of his generation, in whatever pursuit +he may have singled out. Silently, between +all the details of his business, the <i>power of +judging</i> in that class of matter will have built +itself up within him as a possession that will +never pass away. Young people should know +this truth in advance. The ignorance of it +has probably engendered more discouragement +and faint-heartedness in youths embarking on +arduous careers than all other causes put together.”</p> + + +<h3 id="THE_STRUCTURE_OF_THE_MIND"> + THE STRUCTURE OF THE MIND. +</h3> + +<p>Great changes in our views as to the nature +or structure of the mind have taken place +within the past few years. The older psychology +held that the mind was a <i>unit</i>; that it was a +separate thing or entity, a sort of “sphere”—which, +if it could ever be caught, would reveal +all the secrets of True Being! Accordingly, +they tried to catch this sphere-of-being, by inward +reflection or “introspection.” But it was +never caught! There are many reasons why +this should be so, the chief reason being that +a subject cannot be an object also; it is as +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</span>impossible for a thought to catch itself as it +would be to turn a hollow rubber ball inside +out, without tearing the cover.⁠<a id="FNanchor_1_1" href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> But the +newer psychology studies the mind objectively, +from the outside—by means of recording instruments, +and does not depend upon introspection +for its results. Further, the very conception +of the nature of the “self,” is different; +it is not now considered an entity, as of old; +but rather a compound thing, a complex, composed +of a variety of elements. Instead of being +considered a single gossamer thread, it is now +thought to be rather a rope, composed of innumerable, +interwoven elements—and these, in +turn, of still finer threads, until the sub-division +seems endless. The mind, in other words, is +thought to be compounded of innumerable separate +elements; but held together, or compounded +into one, by the normal action of the +will, of attention, and the grip upon the personality +of the true Self. When this will is +weakened, when the attention is constantly +slackened, when the mind wanders, this strand +of rope separates and unravels. The “threads” +branch out in various directions, no longer in +control of the central governing will; the Self +has become <i>dissociated</i> or split-up into various +minor Selves—all but parts of the real total +Self; yet separate and distinct, nevertheless. +And if <i>enough</i> of these threads become joined +together, or interwoven, one with another, it +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</span>can easily be imagined that this second strand +of rope might become a formidable opponent +to the original strand; it might become so large +and strong, in fact, by the constant addition +of new threads, and the dissociation of these +from the first, true strand, that it would assume +a <i>more</i> important role, and become +stronger, and finally even control the whole. +What was originally but a single, fine, divergent +thread has become, in course of time, a +successful rival to the original strand of rope.</p> + +<p>Now let us apply this analogy—which is, of +course, <i>only</i> a rough analogy—which seeks to +portray briefly, in visual terms, something that +seems to happen invisibly and internally in the +mental life. The mind as a whole represents +the rope; its elements or component parts are +the threads; and, under certain abnormal conditions, +these can be torn away from the original +Self—like little rivulets, branching off from +the main stream of consciousness, forming independent +selves. This is an abnormal condition; +a splitting of the mind, a dissociation of +consciousness. We here enter, therefore, the +domain of <i>Abnormal Psychology</i>. In such cases, +we have instances of so-called “double consciousness,” +of “alternating personality;” or, +if there are three or more splits or cleavages, +of “multiple personality.”⁠<a id="FNanchor_2_2" href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a>⁠</p> + +<p>So long as this split-off portion remains a +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</span>mass of sporadic thoughts, not much damage +has been done; but when they become abnormally +linked or associated together, forming +groups, then the abnormal conditions have begun +in earnest. These masses of subconscious +experiences are called “complexes,” and give +rise to all sorts of trouble. It must not be +thought that this complex formation is always +harmful; on the contrary, this very process, +when normally conducted, is the basis of our +educational processes. But when they are thus +conglomerated and consolidated outside the +conscious mind, and function automatically, by +themselves, then they have become dangerous +to the mental stability. Their pressure and +influence may be felt in the conscious life—in +fantastic imaginations, in fears, phobias and +obsessions, in morbid dreams, in morbid emotional +and moral reactions throughout the entire +psycho-physical life. It is these automatic, +self-acting complexes which originate many of +the disorders of the mind.</p> + +<p>This theory of the dissociation of consciousness +has enabled us to explain many puzzling +facts, hitherto inexplicable. Thus <i>hysteria</i>, +with its multiform symptoms, and its internal +contradictions, has long been the stumbling-block +of medicine. Now it is no longer thought +to be a morbid physical state (dependent usually +upon sexual disturbances), but it is regarded +rather as an indication of the splitting of the +mind, a dissociation which embraces all the +motor, physical and psychical activities. On +this theory, hysteria is readily explained, and +all its multiplex symptoms understood. In +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</span>treating it, the self is unified, abnormal suggestibility +is removed, and the patient is cured!</p> + +<p><i>Psychaesthenia</i>, again, with its obsessions +and fears, may be explained in the same manner, +and its cure rests upon the same principles. +The “attacks” cease so soon as the +psychical synthesis is effected and the morbid +self-consciousness removed.</p> + +<p><i>Neurasthenia</i>, long regarded as a pathological +state, due to auto-intoxication and similar +causes, is now thought to be due chiefly to dissociation, +caused by excessive fatigue—one of +the known contributory causes of this condition. +<i>Psycho-epilepsy</i>—a sort of fictitious imitation +of the real disease—is due to precisely +similar causes, and may be cured in a similar +manner. Hypnotism, Psycho-analysis and general +psychotherapy may be employed in such +cases.</p> + + +<h3 id="ABSTRACT_THOUGHT"> + ABSTRACT THOUGHT. +</h3> + +<p>Two schools of philosophers—the “nominalists” +and the “conceptualists”—for long waged +a wordy war as to whether or not the mind +could frame abstract or universal ideas. As a +matter of fact, it was ideas of universal or abstract +objects that was meant. These ideas +dealt largely with the sense of <i>meaning</i>, the +inner significance of the thing contemplated. +It is one of the unsolved mysteries of mind—how +such a thing as abstract meaning can exist +at all, and how brain-changes can in any way +account for it. McDougall, as we know, is inclined +to question that they do so at all. Meaning +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</span>is a thing most difficult to account for on +a purely materialistic basis. Abstract thinking +is supposed to be one of the highest types +of thinking possible for us; it is the most impersonal +form of thought, and hence, in a +sense, the highest. Much has been written +upon this topic in Oriental literature. This +question comes up for discussion, naturally, in +the Section devoted to the stream of thought, +and the consciousness of self; and further discussion +of it will be found in that place.</p> + + +<h3 id="THE_CONSCIOUSNESS_OF_SELF"> + THE CONSCIOUSNESS OF SELF. +</h3> + +<p>We now approach the heart of our Problem; +the central core of Being! The consciousness +of self is ingrained in every one of us; we feel +our own inner being, our true self, our personal +identity, our individuality, as something +unique and exclusive. What is this Self? What +are thoughts, and who is the Thinker that +thinks them? Are the two identical, or are the +thoughts expressions of the flow of consciousness? +What is the true Self—of what is it +composed—and what relation has it to the +other functions and processes of the mind +which go on, and which are in some mysterious +way related to it? Only a brief answer to +these questions can be attempted in this Chapter; +for many lengthy volumes have been written +upon this question alone.</p> + +<p>Our stream of consciousness is <i>continuous</i> +(except during sleep); states of mind tend +to succeed each other. Let us grant this to +begin with. The mind seems to be <i>selective</i> +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</span>in its action, it is changing within itself, as +time passes; no two states of consciousness are +ever precisely alike. Further, “all consciousness +tends to personal form”—a very important +fact indeed. A flow of more or less continuous +thought goes on; these thoughts follow +one another logically in sequence. (In insane +patients, of course, they are not logical. +I speak here merely of the normal mind. Also, +it must be emphasized that nothing in this +Chapter touches upon the subconscious mind, +unless special mention is made of that fact.) +Each thought seems to be personal to the thinker; +it is not merely thought in itself. It is +<i>my</i> thought. This flow of thought is in constant +change; it flows as life itself flows; on +the other hand, thought is sensibly continuous! +The mental life might here be compared to a +river, which eddies and swirls, as it flows, +but is the same water, nevertheless.</p> + +<p>One of the objects of thinking is to reach +certain conclusions. We might compare thought +to a bird in flight; its object is to perch upon +yon branch; its flight is a necessary transitive +stage <i>to</i> the branch. The chain of intermediate +thought corresponds, on our analogy, to +the bird’s flight. This flight is very different, +in the case of different people; with some, it +is straight and rapid; with others, it is tortuous +and lengthy. That is why different people +think differently. About each thought is a +sort of halo of relations, dimming off, as it +recedes, into other things. This is the so-called +“fringe of consciousness.” All thought +is related to other thought, more or less directly. +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</span>Knowledge <i>about</i> a thing is knowledge +of its <i>relations</i>.</p> + +<p>When I am thinking, I am aware of my <i>personal +existence</i>; at the same time <i>I</i> am aware. +There thus seems to be a double self within +the Self—the Self as known, and the Self as +knower. James calls the former the “ME” and +the latter the “I.” Let us consider each of +these in turn.</p> + +<p><i>The Me.</i>—This comprises all that a man can +call <i>his</i>; the most important of these spiritual +possessions are (1) the material me; (2) the +social me; and (3) the spiritual me.</p> + +<p>The <i>Material Me</i> consists in (a) his body, +and (b) his possessions. <i>The Social Me</i> is the +side he shows to his friends and acquaintances; +this varies greatly in differing environments, +so that it has been said that “a man has as many +social selves as there are individuals who +recognize him.” His name, fame, reputation, +success, etc., are classed as parts of this Me. +<i>The Spiritual Me</i> includes passing states of +consciousness; it is that part of us which +“goes out” to meet other thoughts. Feelings +and emotions affect this Me; self-appreciation, +self-satisfaction (or the reverse), self-complacency, +etc., vitally affect this Me. Self-seeking +and self-preservation are a part of it. +These various Selves clash and conflict, to a +certain extent, among themselves; they do not +all want the same thing. “Happiness” probably +consists largely in having all these Selves +working together in harmony, to the same end.</p> + +<p><i>The I.</i>—This was called the “pure ego” by +the older psychologists. It seems to be the +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</span>background of the personality—the string upon +which the pearls of thought are strung. Is +there a real “string,” or are the pearls merely +separate, succeeding one another, as if they +were thus strung?</p> + +<p>That is a difficult question. Passing thought +appears to be a unity; yet it consists of a number +of different elements; there is no “fusing” +of thought. Ideas, thoughts, in this unlike +material threads, cannot be woven together +upon nothing; there must be some background +other than themselves. The human <i>Soul</i> has +been postulated as this “permanent background,” +uniting the whole, and withstanding +the shock of death. If true, this would serve +to explain the facts, and at the same time give +us hope for survival. But whether or not such +a soul exists at all is a matter of controversy! +In the absence of its proof, we must, says +Science—reject it. Consequently, we have today +a “psychology without a soul.” Attempts have +been made to explain the facts without resorting +to it.</p> + +<p>The usual argument is somewhat as follows: +There seem to be single, successive pulses in +the stream of thought, constituting the Ego. +These vary and change; they succeed one another. +May not consciousness, then, consist +merely <i>in</i> such successive states of consciousness; +may it not in truth be composed of them—just +as a succession of pearls may exist without +a unifying string? Each thought, on this +hypothesis, in some way gives birth to the +next, which also inherits its content; in other +words, <i>the thoughts themselves are the thinkers</i>. +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</span>Were this true, we should have no “abiding +entity,” but merely a successive series of +thoughts, constituting the stream of consciousness; +this stream in turn composing the true +Self. Which of these views is the correct one +can only be proved by showing that survival in +some form exists; and this can only be accomplished +by Psychical Research! (See my little +book upon that subject, in the present series.)</p> + +<hr class="tb"> + +<p>(Mutations, multiplications, etc., of the Self, +have been touched upon in the Section devoted +to Abnormal Psychology; Insanity in its own +section; mediumships, possessions, etc., in the +book just mentioned.)</p> + + +<h3 id="THE_DUCTLESS_GLANDS_AND_PERSONALITY"> + THE DUCTLESS GLANDS, AND PERSONALITY. +</h3> + +<p>Within the past few years, a new school has +arisen, which contends that the ductless glands +in the body (or rather their secretions) affect +personality to a very great extent, and that, in +fact, personality is largely dependent upon +them for its peculiarities and general make-up. +A good example of such teaching is to be found +in Dr. Louis Berman’s book, “The Glands Regulating +Personality.” Here, <i>e. g.</i>, we read:</p> + +<p>“Acuteness of perception, memory, logical +thought, imagination, conception, emotional +expression or inhibition, and the entire content +of consciousness are influenced by the internal +secretions.... All the different +<i>nuances</i> of personality are expressions of a +peculiar relationship, transitory or permanent, +between the endocrines and the viscera and +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</span>muscles. Conversely, behavior shows what a +person actually <i>is</i> chemically; that is, what +endocrine and vegetative factors predominate +in his make-up. The constructive imagination, +one of the few truly precious gifts of a personality, +is probably the expression of a certain +balanced activity of the ante-pituitary and +the post-pituitary (glands).... It is possible +to speak of thyroid moods, adrenal moods, +ante-pituitary or post-pituitary moods, gonadal +moods. Each of these is the echo in the mind +of cells stimulated or depressed, by concentration +or dilution in the blood of particular internal +secretions....”</p> + +<p>Whether or not such arguments will “hold +water” must be proved by further investigation. +The <i>pros</i> and <i>cons</i> cannot be argued in +this place. It may be said, however, that such +extreme views as those outlined above are +not yet generally accepted, either by the medical +profession or by psychologists, and it seems +an extreme statement of a partial truth. The +mental life is certainly influenced by the secretion +of the internal glands, but to what extent +it is fundamentally altered by them is still +<i>sub judice</i>.</p> + + +<h3 id="MOTIVES"> + MOTIVES. +</h3> + +<p>Why do we act as we do, under certain circumstances? +There is usually some “motive” +at work, prompting our action. Human motives +find their source in the subconscious +mind of man; here they take root, and their +products alone are seen by us—mostly in +varied actions. Dr. James J. Jackson has written +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</span>an interesting volume on “Human Motives,” +in which he distinguishes two sorts of motives—motives +of constructiveness and motives of +adaptation. These are, of course, biological in +origin. Usually, we speak of “good” and “bad” +motives. They all arise from a complex of +sentiments, which shape the form and tenor of +the subconscious thought—which, in turn, is +symbolically expressed in thought and action. +Without discussing this question at greater +length, it may be said that all our motives +originate within the subconscious mind—which +thus constitutes the spring of our thoughts and +actions.</p> + + +<h3 id="CONSCIENCE"> + CONSCIENCE. +</h3> + +<p>Conscience was for long thought to be the +“voice of God” speaking to the spiritual ear of +man. Nowadays, a more matter-of-fact solution +has been sought, and, to a certain extent, found. +Modern psychological investigations have deprived +conscience of its supernatural origin.</p> + +<p>Until these newer researches were undertaken, +however, any clear understanding as to +the nature of conscience was impossible. (See, +<i>e. g.</i> George W. Reid’s “Conscience,” and +Hastings Rashdall’s “Is Conscience an Emotion?”) +With a clearer understanding of the +subconscious mind, came greater light. We +now believe that conscience is, very largely, the +inhibitory action of a portion of the subconscious +mind, which inhibition is exercised +whenever the thoughts or the actions of the +individual run counter to those generally accepted +by the community in which he dwells, +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</span>or by his own individual up-bringing, or both. +It is a sort of Censor; but it is an acquired +thing, which has come into being, and evolved, +like everything else. What the conscience of +one man would prevent him from doing, another +will do without the slightest qualms. +Conscience is not, therefore, a universal principle, +judging good and bad, alike in all men. +It is a type of repression, exercised upon us +from within. Early moral precepts, etc., have +much to do with its formation. Here, then, we +find the psychological basis for the existence +of conscience, which is more or less active in +all of us, according to our heredity, environment, +education, etc. It is a normal attribute +of the inner man.</p> + + +<h3 id="INTUITION"> + INTUITION. +</h3> + +<p>This is the term loosely applied to certain +inner feelings, giving rise to a form of conviction +as to the truth and reality (or the reverse) +of something then present in the mind. Intuitions +are popularly supposed to be right, +and women are said to experience them far more +often than men! No statistical evidence is +available, so far as I know, upon either of +these questions; indeed, it may be said that +the whole subject has been grossly neglected, +from the psychological point-of-view.</p> + +<p>Intuitions probably present themselves to +the mind as the result of subconscious mentation. +A hidden and unknown process has been +going on within the mind, the result or product +of which finally emerges in vague form into +consciousness. Usually it takes the form of a +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</span>more or less vague feeling. Miss Goodrich-Freer, +who had experienced many such intuitions, +attempted to analyze some of them, +from introspection, and contributed a valuable +Chapter entitled “How it Came into my Head; +the Machinery of Intuitions,” in her book, +“Essays in Psychical Research.” Her conclusion +is approximately that mentioned above. +Mr. Walter N. Weston has also written a book +entitled “Intuition,” in which, however, little +of value can be found.</p> + + +<h3 id="INSPIRATION"> + INSPIRATION. +</h3> + +<p>This term is generally employed to signify +“divine” inspiration—ideas which are implanted +directly into the human mind by some +external Divinity. Such a conception, needless +to say, is not in accord with modern +thought. Throughout the ages, inspirational +addresses have been heralded as evidence of +the supernatural. The Pythoness at Delphi inhaled +the mystic vapor, rising from a cleft in +the rock, and gave forth her Oracular utterances. +(See Dempsey: “The Delphic Oracle”; +H. N. Bate, “The Sibylline Oracles.”) Even in +our own day, “mediums” give similar inspirational +addresses, at various spiritualistic centers.</p> + +<p>It is not necessary, however, to consider +such utterances divine, or supernatural, for the +vast majority of them may be interpreted in +terms of psychology, with relative ease. They +are the products of the subconscious mind of +man. George N. Raymond has written an interesting +book, entitled “The Psychology of Inspiration,” +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</span>to which the reader may be referred +to further <i>data</i> upon this subject. While it is +somewhat religious in tone, it has some good +material in it. Like Intuition, this subject +has been much neglected by academic psychology, +and there is much need for a careful study +of its various problems.</p> + + +<h3 id="GENIUS"> + GENIUS. +</h3> + +<p>Genius is a term hard to define, though we +all have a more or less clear idea as to what +is meant by a genius. He is a man who stands +apart from his fellows, head-and-shoulders +above them, mentally or artistically. But what +is it that thus causes him to rise above others? +Is it vision? Is it originality? clever anticipation? +breadth? constructiveness? concentration? +patience? common-sense? Doubtless +genius is all this, but it is also more! A genius +can perform feats which another man can not, +try as he will; and more than that, he performs +them without effort or without training, +very often! A certain type of genius amounts +to what we term a “prodigy,” and then we have +cases of musical, mathematical or artistic +genius. These gifts are often exhibited very +early in life, for no apparent reason; they last +for a few years, and then disappear. Few +youthful prodigies retain their gifts into adult +life. Often, their possessor is not even normally +gifted with reason and common-sense in +other directions. Such cases as these are unusually +difficult to account for. Theosophists +are apt to turn to the doctrine of “reincarnation” +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</span>for an explanation; but we must endeavor +to seek its explanation upon more naturalistic +lines.</p> + +<p>Ostwald has contended that there are two +main types of genius; the one which is emotional, +erratic, temperamental, artistic, etc. +This type acquires its genius without “elbow +grease.” The other is the intellectual type, +and hard work is essential for the creation of +genius of this type.</p> + +<p>Nordau, Lombroso, and others, have endeavored +to prove that genius is closely allied +to insanity. In a sense, this is true; but so +are dreams, and yet perfectly normal and +healthy people dream. Because certain marks +of <i>resemblance</i> may be found, this does not +prove <i>identity</i>, by any means! A yellow ball +may resemble an orange; but it is not identical +with it—certainly not in its most essential +part—its interior, and its utility.</p> + +<p>Genius is probably hereditary, to a certain +extent. Ribot has gathered together a mass of +data, in this connection, which he has published +in his work on “Heredity.” An interesting +study of this and allied questions may also be +found in N. K. Royse’s book on “Genius.”</p> + +<p>Frederic Myers has advanced the idea that +genius represents an “uprush from the subliminal +consciousness” (subconsciousness) of +ideas matured below the threshold. These +ideas burst upon the surface, much as bubbles +might be said to break upon the surface of +water. When the stratum of the mind from +which these ideas originate is <i>diseased</i>, we +have insanity; when, on the other hand, it is +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</span><i>healthy</i>, we find the products of genius. Some +such theory as this is doubtless true; but the +study of genius, from the scientific point-of-view, +is yet in its infancy, and the final solution +of its mystery has yet to be found.</p> + + +<h3 id="INSANITY"> + INSANITY. +</h3> + +<p>Until the present generation, the word Insanity +was popularly thought to mean either +imbecility on the one hand, or a raving maniac +on the other. We now know that this idea +is quite untrue; insanity is a disease of the +mind, just as small-pox is a disease of the +body. Moreover, we speak of insanities, and +not insanity; for there are many varieties—all +shading-off one into another. A physician +who deals with such cases is called an “alienist”; +and the terms psychiatry, psycho-pathology, +abnormal psychology, etc., are employed +to designate various branches of the study of +the diseased mind.</p> + +<p>Certain types of insanity are, of course, due +to actual brain disease. A degeneration of the +physical substance of the brain may have taken +place. In other cases, however, no such gross +degeneration can be traced, and we must assume +microscopic alterations, or blood changes, +or nerves improperly functioning, or purely +physical changes and dissociations, as explained +above. There has grown-up an extensive literature +on insanity, within the past few years. A +good primary book of this character is Dr. Bernard +Hart’s “Psychology of Insanity.” See also +Dr. Charles Mercier’s “Sanity and Insanity.”</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</span></p> + + +<h3 id="INTELLIGENCE-LEVELS"> + INTELLIGENCE-LEVELS. +</h3> + +<p>The tests conducted upon the male adult +population of the United States, during the +Great War, revealed the astonishing fact that +the average mental “age” was approximately +twelve years; that is to say, the average adult +possesses an intelligence of a boy at that age. +The body may have grown, but the mind has +not! Of course, many were above that level; +but many fell below, and the above represented +the <i>average</i>. In many other countries, the +average would certainly have been far lower.</p> + +<p>The majority, therefore, do not possess +normal adult minds; there has been an arrested +development. A scale of mental development +was accordingly constructed, and individuals +were placed somewhere in that scale. The human +mind may be anything, from a genius to +an idiot. In this scale, there were many “defectives.” +Those individuals who possessed a +mentality of from eight to twelve years, were +classed as “morons”; those who ranged from +three to seven years, “imbeciles”; and those of +two, and under, “idiots.”</p> + +<p>The mental-age or intelligence-level of any +person may be ascertained by special tests, devised +for the purpose. These tests were originated +by the psychologist Binet, but Terman +and others have greatly extended and amplified +the original methods. Such tests have now +been conducted extensively, and the results +show us that surprisingly low levels of intelligence +are the rule, and not the rare exception. +The importance of an extensive educational +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</span>campaign is therefore manifest; and the +Editor of this series, Mr. Haldeman-Julius, is +carrying on one of the most important campaigns +in the world today—by spreading general +culture and education. For, by this means +alone, and by suitable eugenic measures, can +the human race be elevated and improved, with +each succeeding generation.</p> + + +<h3 id="THE_PRACTICAL_USE_OF_THE_MIND"> + THE PRACTICAL USE OF THE MIND. +</h3> + +<p>There is an old saying that a man may be +worth only five dollars a day from his eyes +down, but he may be worth a million dollars +a year from his eyes up. That is to say, man’s +value, both to himself and to the community, +lies in his <i>brain</i>, and the use he makes of it. +Manual labor is not well paid, proportionately, +to creative brain work, so that it is to our advantage +to develop and utilize our brains to the +best possible advantage.</p> + +<p>Cultivation of the mind will give us greater +powers of concentration; improved memory; +stronger will; more poise; soul judgment; +greater wisdom; increased value. But mere +book learning will not do this. We must learn +how to apply the mind in a practical way, to +the problems of daily life, and utilize the powers +within ourselves. Curiously enough, there +is no text-book of this character in use in any +school or college in the world; but the necessity +of such a practical work is obvious. Boys +and girls emerge from College without the +slightest idea as to how to apply their minds +in any practical manner; their theoretical +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</span>knowledge is of but slight advantage to them. +A few practical hints of this character should, +therefore, prove useful. I select the following +passages from Christian D. Larson’s excellent +little book, “Your Forces: and How to Use +Them.” He says:</p> + +<p>“To make thinking scientific, there are three +leading essentials to be observed. The <i>first</i> is +to cultivate constructive mental attitudes, and +all mental attitudes are constructive when +mind, thought, feeling, desire and will constantly +face the greater and the better. A positive +and determined optimism has the same effect, +and the same is true of the practice of +keeping the mental eye single on the highest +goal in view. To make every mental attitude +constructive, the mind must never look down, +and mental depression must be avoided completely....</p> + +<p>“The <i>second</i> essential is constructive mental +imagery. Use the imagination to picture only +what is good, what is beautiful, what is beneficial, +what is ideal, and what you wish to realize. +Mentally see yourself receiving what you +deeply desire to receive. What you imagine, +you will think, and what you think, you will +become....</p> + +<p>“The <i>third</i> essential is constructive mental +action. Every action of the mind should have +something desirable in view and should have +a definite, positive aim.... When the +average man thinks of the future, he usually +pictures a variety of conflicting events and +conditions. He has nothing definite in mind. +There is no actual leadership therefore in the +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</span>mind, and nothing of great worth can be accomplished....</p> + +<p>“Those people who fail, and who continue to +fail all along the line, fail because the power +of their minds is either in a habitual negative +state, or is always misdirected. If the power +of mind is not working positively and constructively, +for a certain goal, you are not going to +succeed. If your mind is not positive, it is +negative, and negative minds float with the +stream. We must remember that we are in +the midst of all kinds of circumstances, some +of which are for us and some of which are +against us, and we will either have to make +our own way or drift, and if we drift we go +wherever the stream goes. But most of the +streams of human life are found to flow in the +world of the ordinary and the inferior. Therefore, +if you drift, you will drift with the inferior, +and your goal will be failure.”</p> + +<p>In this connection, it is well to remember +that negative people and non-constructive +minds never attract that which is helpful in +their circumstances. The reason why so many +people fail is due to the fact that they do not +fully and constructively apply the forces and +powers they possess, and the reason so many +succeed only to a slight degree is found in the +fact that only a small fraction of their power +is applied properly. The positive and constructive +use of the power of mind, with a definite +goal in view, will invariably result in advancement, +attainment and achievement; but if we +wish to use that power in its full capacity, the +action of the mind must be <i>deep</i>. We must +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</span>not merely think from the surface of the mind; +ideas and aspirations must come from the deep +within. Such ideals and thoughts only come, +as a rule, after a certain period of quiet and +meditation. Hence the necessity of being +quite alone for a certain time each day—and +utilizing that time in actual reflection, and not +merely in idling the time away!</p> + +<p>We have now learned something of the general +functions and powers of the mind; how it +works, its mechanisms and “faculties.” Having +this ground-work, the next thing to do is to +apply this knowledge in our daily life, and +this can be done by following out suggestions +such as those given above—provided the aspiration +and the will be present, to drive us +onward to achievement and success. The mind +of man is assuredly his greatest possession; we +must first understand it; then use it! Theoretical +and applied Psychology enable us to do this.</p> + + +<h3 id="MIND_AND_BRAIN"> + MIND AND BRAIN. +</h3> + +<p>The relationship between brain and mind is +one of the most puzzling questions in the whole +field of scientific and philosophic thought. For +every thought we think, there is a corresponding +brain-change; that we know. The problem +is: What is the nature of this connection, and +how can a thought (an immaterial thing, apparently) +be connected in any actual sense with a +brain change (which is certainly a material +thing?) I have discussed this point at considerable +length in my little book on “Life,” +in the present series, and have therein stated +the various theories so far propounded. The +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</span>interested reader may refer to such books as +McDougall’s “Body and Mind,” Binet’s “The +Mind and the Brain,” Bain’s “Mind and Body,” +Calderwood’s “The Relation of Mind and +Brain,” and C. A. Strong’s “Why the Mind has +a Body,” for further and detailed discussion +upon this subject.</p> + + +<h3 id="PSYCHOLOGY_AND_PHILOSOPHY"> + PSYCHOLOGY AND PHILOSOPHY. +</h3> + +<p>Inasmuch as psychology deals with the mind, +the spirit, the soul, (provided there be such a +thing), and with purely imponderable and +immaterial things generally, it is only natural +that psychology and philosophy should be +closely related. Many of the problems of +metaphysics, as a matter of fact, deal with +semi-psychological problems; among which +may be mentioned the relation of brain and +mind, free-will, the science of perceiving the +reality of the outer world (epistemology), etc. +How an external object and the “idea” of that +object can ever be in any way “related” to one +another, and how the mind can see a definite +“sameness” or similarity between the two is, +in fact, an extraordinary phenomenon. The +idea of a beefsteak and the beefsteak itself are, +indeed, as dissimilar as possible; and yet the +two somehow correspond! This relationship is +a remarkable fact, and awaits a full solution.</p> + +<p>Again, every night when we fall asleep, we +lose our individuality, in a sense; yet we are +sure of waking up the next morning the same +“person” who went to sleep—with its memories, +thoughts, ideas, emotions, etc., practically +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</span>unchanged. How do we know that we shall do +so? What guarantee have we that we shall +wake up the same person that went to sleep +and not some one else? As a matter of fact, +this <i>does</i> sometimes happen, in cases of alternating +personality; but such cases are exceptional, +and the rule holds good. Yet consciousness +is constantly changing. We are not the +same person that we were five, ten, twenty +years ago; we do not consider ourselves morally +responsible, as it were, for acts committed by +ourselves, when children, any more than if +they had been committed by some one else. +Nevertheless, underneath all these changes and +modifications, there seems to flow a stream of +“selfness,” or uniformity, binding the whole +together, and we recognize that Self as Ourself—behind +and beyond all. What is the innermost +nature of that Self? What is its +origin, its destiny? These are questions which +only the Science of the future can decide!</p> + + +<div class="footnotes"> +<h3 id="FOOTNOTES"> + FOOTNOTES: +</h3> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_1_1" href="#FNanchor_1_1" class="label">[1]</a> It can be shown, theoretically, that this is possible +in the “fourth dimension,” but not in the third. +This illustrates the difference between theory and +practice—a point it might be well for Christian +Scientists to keep in mind!</p></div> + +<div class="footnote"><p><a id="Footnote_2_2" href="#FNanchor_2_2" class="label">[2]</a> Although this theory of the “composite” nature +of mind is now generally held, Mr. Myers has contended +that the Self must have some <i>fundamental</i> +unity—to enable it to withstand the shock of death—provided +it does so.</p></div> +</div> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> + +<div class="transnote chapter"> +<p class="center"><b>Transcriber’s Notes</b></p> + +<p>Perceived typographical errors have been silently corrected.</p> + +<p>Footnotes have been moved to the end of the text.</p> +</div> +<div style='text-align:center'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78996 ***</div> +</body> +</html> diff --git a/78996-h/images/cover.jpg b/78996-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..3c705ef --- /dev/null +++ b/78996-h/images/cover.jpg |
