On this page

• Text (2)

  Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

  • 

    Untitled Article

  • 

    Untitled Article

• Transcript

  • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

    Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

    Untitled Article

    .. ,. „ ; .. ...... HISTORY OS PSYCHOLOGICAL METHOD . The Principles of Psychology . By Herbert Spencer . Author of "Social Statics . " ; , : * .. ¦ . '* . . ¦ **¦> , " .. Xorigman and Co . '""' ' ' ' ' ' : ' ' •' ¦ '• ¦ . ;' : " ' ' . , ' ¦ ( SBCO ^ D 'A KmtctE . ) ; I ^ ' ' pvr 6 wn ^ iour pxi » jf > pt ' of BketcBing the Methods psychologists bav

    more than this ; he saw , dimly it is true , yet never overlooking it altogether , thn ' t the mind co-operated . 'Not only Sense , but Reflection on the materials g * vew through ( Sense , furnished , he said , the complex thoughts ofm&n . Tbus he ' proclaimed Experience the source of all knowledge . The Mind of theiChiltf was like ft Sheet of blank paper on which Experience wrotei its various v * &teate > ' > 's . ifriLocke we see the initial steps of the Physiolog ic al Method ; "ttnd As h'emas himself nn anntomitit , there 13 nothing surprising in his . ' having bb ^ n led 1 tty his study of mail ' s structure to some conclumdns respecting niAnV mind . He directed that ? attention to Sense which metaphysicians had > bedn in the habit of directing to ideas and verbal subtleties ; and 1 by so doing , took > an important step towards confrontation of speculation with / acf , ' and initiated the still riu > re > Important Wen of a constant relation between or ^ ak ^ xndfunctiQtk > He ulk > wasied to study the growth of mind ; and h « nce ' Wb freaueht reference to savaffes and children , which

    distresses / "Victor OousinV'who is as terrmdd at Tact as nt a ghost . If experience be our echoolmnafter ; | t ia blear thut we gain immense benefit from considering the 'lessons in their diflfeWnt stages children and savages aire young scholars . •¦ - ; »¦ .... > . ;• . . •¦< .. «» ^ ,, . , „ , ¦ , „ .., ,,. , .... . .. » . ... .. \ Greo | as Locke ' a services were ; there "was ii radical vide in his system wthioh prevented it « acceptance . Ho beg * in the Physiological Method , but hu ^ mly began it . The Experience hypotliesis would not avflrce to explain aULfihenomena ( fat least not as thai hypothesis W « a then understood ); ' there wiapafoTCne'of thought neither reducible 1 o : setose ajhd 1 reflection nor to expd ~ riwWiei i -Mfe ' . ieferred to children and ' towagea ; but he neither did this a ^^ vg ^^ AW ^ rt ^ r did- Tie extend the Comparative Method to animals . The p ^ ja ^ B * of tha t ape forbade it . The ignorance of thnt v » ge made it imppisible . Comparative Physiology is no older than Goethe , and Comparative Psychology is only now glimmering in the minds of men as a possibility .

    If tnen' formerly : fought they £ o ^ $ tfftfe ^ tatid ; b ^ aiissedtirig' it ; and did not need the , light ; pifo ^ thejpepn . b ^/ jbh 0 '' "disse ^^ tt \ df'ia ^| d | s 49 ; they , were still jess likely , to seek psychial ^ lustrations in animals , denying as they did * that animals had minds . ; . The school of Locke , therefore , although regarding Mind as a . property of Matter , and consequently directing attention , to the human organism , trying to understand the mechanism q £ 'sensation ,, thus dealing with tangible realitiesi instead , of with impalpable and ever-shifting entities , " was really incompetent to solve the problem ' s ; it h ^ d set its . v because its Method yras imperfect , and its knowiedge incomplete . Tiiegopd effect of ; ' their labours wasjpositive ; the evil negative . PoUqwing out this positive tendency we see Hartley , Bonnet , and Oabanis advancing still nearer to a true Methodthe two first , by a bold and admirable hypothesis , making the phenomena dependent on vibrations of the nerves , thus ijeading to a still more precise and definite consideration of the organism '; , the last by at once establishing the relation of organ and function , and considering the Moral as dependent on the Physical constitution . Hartley , Bonnet , and Cabanis have passed away , and those wip point out their errors seldom appreciate the great impulse given to speculation by their writings ; a really good hypothesis always has the subsidiary merit of concentrating : attention upon some definite point ; to refute it we are forced to get hearer the real fact . From IJnzer and Prochaska , and more especially from Gall , the Physiological Method received a new and potent impulse . It is only / by comparing Gall with his predecessors that an approximative idea can be formed of his merit . People who-only know Gall as the founder of Phrenology should read hia wreatwork , L'AmtQmxe du Systeme Nerveux , if they would learn how immeasurably superior he is to the Phrenologists , and howJar they have departed from the course which he laid down . Gall seized the true princip le of the necessary relation of organ arid function . Others had seen this principle , and proclaimed it ; but he , among psychologists , was the one who made it paramount , who taught in detail that every variation in the organ must bring about a corresponding variation in the function , and that such as the organ was such -would be the manifestation ; if the piano is at concert pitch you may make it discourse eloquent music ; but as the strings relax discord becomes more and more obtrusive . He does not say the mind is the product of organisation : rious ne confondons pas les conditions avec les causes efficientes . He limits himself to the observed face of correspondence between the state of the organ and its manifestations . His first object , therefore , is to expound the anatomical structure of the nervous system : having made an exposition of the organ , he proceeds to an exposition of its physiology , of its function . ^ We may take this opportunity of varying our historical sketch by a quotation from Mr . Spencer ' s remarks on Phrenology : we omit his arguments against Phrenology , because this paper is historical , not critical : — And here this doctrine of the hereditary transmission of tendencies towards certain complex aggregations of psychical states corresponding to complex aggregations of external phenomena , and the consequent organisation of such tendencies in the race , suggests a few remarks on the tenets of the phrenologists . That an organised tendency towards certain complex-aggregations of psychical states , supposes a structural modification of the nervous Bystem- ^ -a special set of complex nervous connections whereby the numerous excitations constituting the emqtion m , ay be co-ordinated—no one having even a superficial knowledge of Physiology can doubt . As . every student of the nervous system knows , the combination of any set of impressions , or motions , or both , implies a ganglion in ^ which tho various nerve-fibres concerned are put in connection . To combine the actions of any set of ganglia , implies some ganglion in connection with them all . And so on in ever-ascending stages of complication : the nervous , masses concerned , becoming larger in proportion to the complexity of the . co-ordinations ' they have to effect . The induction that the same thing holds throughout is , I think , irresistible . And if so , it follows that every emotion implies some portion of nervous structure by which its various elements are united—a portion which is large in proportion aa'these elements are many and varied ; and which , in virtue of its co-ordinating function , is more especially the aeat of tlie emotion . .,. . . ' : •¦' ., . '• . ¦ ¦• That , in their antagonism to the unscientific reasonings of the phrenologists , tho physiologists should have gone tp the extent of denying or ignoring any localisation of function in the cerebrum , is * perhaps , not to be wondered at : it is in harmony with the coarse of controversies in general . But no physiologist who calmly considers tho question in connection with the general truths of his science , can long resist the conviction that different parts of the . cerebrum subserve different kinds of mental action . Localisation of function is tho law of all organisation whatever : separateness of duty is universally accompanied ' with separateness of structure : and it wotaldbe marvellous were on exception to exist in , the cerebral hemispheres . Let- it be granted that the cerebral hemispheres are the seat of the higher psychical activities ; let it be granted that among these higher psychical activities there are distinctions of kind , which , though not definite , are yet practically recognisable ; and it cannot be denied , without going in direct opposition to established physiological principle ? , that these more or less distinct kinds of psychical activity must . be carried ' on in more or leas distinct parts of the cerebral hemispheres . ' ' To question this , ia not only to ignore the truths of physiology as a -whole ; but especially those of the physiology of the nervous system . It is prov « d experimentally , that every bundle of norve-flbres and every ganglion has a special' duty ; and that each part of every such bundle and every such ganglion has a duty still more special . Can it be ; then , that in the great hemispherical ganglia alone , this specialisation , of duty does not hold ? If it be urged that there are no marked divisions among the fibres of the cerebrum :, I reply—neither are , there among thgpe contained , in one of the bundles proceeding from the spinal chord to any port of the body : yotj each of the fibres in such bundle has a function more or less special , though a function included in that of th

    Untitled Article

    • 3 # 8 * ¦ 5 S % ^ ^ S ^ - B ^ - *^! . _^™ , JSfe ^ L ^ f 3 ! fi ^ Jfr

    Untitled Article

    reconciling eclecticism-to operate ? Does he expect the Papists to ag ^ ee diflfer with Protestants pii the subjects of the Papacy and Trarisubstanttation . IPnless thia is etTectfedi the Pagans of the factory and the Pantheists of the forilm , will still naVe'the retort -that though a hollow trttc ' ef'has been made betkw « en cettsaa sects * for the sake of combatiiig a third party , one half of Ghristendoni etill openly diflers in toio from the other half . Mr . Gonybeare must seek better ways of removing doiibt than that of ignoring discrepancies , arid better ways " of restoring spiritual unity than an eclecticism adopted from the fear of dissolution . In the meantime , we venture to suggest that it is neither just nor wise in him to include under " Atheisna" all that he would not tentt ^ Faieb . " ' « . , . It Js difficult to see " what Mr ^ Conybeare ' s own position in the Church is . W 6 « resume he is a sort « f abstractchurchman—a fourth party of pure reason by himself , moderating the other three . Something of the kind is requisite , sin ^ p . it in r » V . virm « f . Tiftt . thev cannot be exnected to tnoderate themselves ;

    SS to ^™* mj ^ W&w * . & i ^ . fy * &m ^ w ]» 3 # fBo nyl )!^ e ^ nld ^ present as saperficiat ,, ; are m fact € asentialj they touch the very ra ! &d [ &&J ^^ a&d : the souree- ancl character of spiritual li ^ i = iri-itW eoa ^ versie ^ w ah&itt nothing *^ those ; of ptevenient ^ grace and ; surplice preaching--are involved the ^ gre atqu estiona of the sacramen ta l system and the priesthood . To agree to differ about such question ^ for the sake of combating *? Atheists , " wtfalS be merely to recal the history of that day on which Hexod and Pilate w » ere made friends . 'We hope that so honest a man as Mr . Conybeare will not think of anything of the sort . Besides , how far does he expect his

    an , d , to set them , to moderate each ; other by collision would be a singular arrangement in the eyes of the flock . # ¦• •; ¦ JFM Man Christ Jesus . — This book is written in a spirit of unattected piety andi we have no doubt , with a sincere desire to attract to the truth those whom the writer believes to be in error . No eandid and spiritually minded person , whatever doubts he inay entertain as to ^ the general evidences of Chriistianity , will deny the dinlculty of saying that the character of Christ is less than divine . But Mr . Craig must not think that people are " % lindea by the God of this world" who fail not only to Believe , but to uhderstand , t ^ e union of the two distinct natures in one person , or to realise the perfect humanity of a being invested all the time with every attribute of God ; All the virtues on wh ^ h Mr . Craig dilates are swallowed up in divanity . How can it be said that " His perfect firmness in all good was Himself the author of all ?

    tr ^ ly astonishing ^ " when he was " good" How can He be praised for incOrruptibleness and freedom from ambition when He was Lord of the Universe all the time ? Hdw can we admire his constancy , when the doubts and misgivings , which are the hardest trial of human heroism , were impossible to Him ? Mr . Craig would evenmcur the charge of irreverence from many Christians , especially from Catholics , for the-way in which he speaks of-the Kun > an ! virtues and the > c « iff « of Christ . Again , how can we feel perfect sympathy with a king who being undefiled ( and impeccable ) was , as Mr * Craig saysi separate from us . As to piety , it is inconceivable in Him who ; was 6 rie with the object of piety ; and wisdom must have been lost in that omniscience which was ever present , and which it is revolting to think its possessor can have * ighored . These are the difficulties , not confined to unsprritual minds , perhapsi on the contrary , peculiar to spiritual minds and easily ignored by the unspirittial , which we would commend to the attention of Mr * Craig , who , we are sure , will in charity solve them if he can .

• Citation
  • Leader (1850-1860), Oct. 27, 1855, page 1036, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct2112/page/16/