Chapter XII: Part 12

[38] Once, Bühler tried to give an explanation of at least one very characteristic form, viz., the straight line. As he assumed that all retinal points which form a straight line are connected with each other in a special manner anatomically and that, therefore, the straight line is something specifically determined, his hypothesis has the character of a machine theory. I do not think that this is the way in which we may hope to solve our problem. There are a great many particularly characteristic forms besides the straight line. Shall we assume for each of them a preëxisting anatomical apparatus? or rather, a great many for each single form, since it may be projected upon many different parts of the retina? If not, “form” must be explained _dynamically_ in general, and the most characteristic or regular forms must be explained by the special regularity of dynamics occurring under appropriate conditions.

[39] _Psychol. Forsch., 8_, 1926. Figures 11-13 are reproduced from Gottschaldt’s paper.

[40] We may remark however that, for adults, one more condition must be fulfilled if we wish to transpose, without altering, specific form: most forms show a changed aspect _as_ forms when they are turned around, for instance, upside down. This fact reveals a curious anisotropy of the visual field, which does not seem to exist in early childhood (Cf. W. Stern, _Zschr. f. angew. Psychol._, 1909, and F. Oetjen, _Zschr. f. Psychol., 71_, 1915). On the other hand, Wertheimer has laid stress upon the point that, for a given form, not all relations of stimulation are equally important. Some of them may be changed considerably without any remarkable effect upon the actual form.

[41] _Die physischen Gestalten in Ruhe und im stationären Zustand_, pp. 230, 231.

[42] Obviously it does not matter in this connection whether or not this localization, for instance of sounds in relation to visual objects, be _correct_ in all cases. If it is _not_ correct, then precisely the fact that we are able to state and measure the error is in itself a proof that the two appear in the same space.

[43] The boundary between “ourselves” and objective experience around us is not altogether sharp and constant. Experiences of touch, for instance, are rather variable in this respect. Sometimes they are felt as things and their properties; but they _may_ also be experienced as “subjective.”

[44] Usnadze, _Psychologische Forschung, 5_, p. 24 f., 1924.

[45] von Hornbostel, _Festschrift Meinhof_, 1927.

[46] L. Klages, _Vom Wesen des Bewusstseins_, Leipzig, 1921.

[47] _Psychologies of 1925_, pp. 52 and 54, Clark University Press.

[48] In this case there is a complication, since weather influences our physical body and its nervous system, apart from our sensory experience of the weather.

[49] We may say, then, that the second noise has a definite rôle or property which belongs to it as to the second member of a pair (cf. Chapter VI).

[50] _Psychologische Forschung, 4_, 1923.

[51] _L’Apprentissage du mouvement et l’automatisme_, Louvain, Paris, 1928.

[52] Becher, _Gehirn und Seele_, Heidelberg, 1911.

[53] Or in the organization of a larger whole, as O. L. Tinklepaugh has shown (_The Journal of Compar. Psychol., 8_, 1928).

[54] Cf. the schemes given by Frings, _Arch. f. d. ges. Psychol., 30_, p. 430 f., 1914.

[55] _Arch. f. d. ges. Psychol., 23_, p. 156 f., 1912.

[56] Kühn, _Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 68_, 1914. Also Poppelreuter, _Zeitschr. f. Psychol., 61_, 1912.

[57] G. E. Müller, _Abriss der Psychologie_, p. 25, Göttingen, 1924.

[58] _The Ped. Seminary, 32_, p. 681, 1925.

[59] Here as always when I talk about animals I use terms like “seeing” for simplicity’s sake. Whether or not the chick experiences a visual field or anything else, the terms have a definite functional meaning in which alone I am interested.

[60] _The Journal of Animal Behavior, 7_, p. 87 ff., 1917.

[61] Something of the kind has been done in the meantime by Mr. Tinklepaugh insofar as his “substitution method” is an excellent means for studying certain properties of the traces. (_The Journal of Comparative Psychology, 8_, p. 224 ff., 1928.) Cf. also _Psychol. Forsch., I_, p. 10, 1921.

[62] _Psychol. Forsch., I_, p. 333 ff., 1922. Cf. also Werner, _Ztschr. f. Psychol., 94_, 1924.

[63] _Psychol. Review, 20_, 1913.

[64] _Arch. f. d. ges. Psychol., 30_, 1914. These experiments were planned by Bühler.

[65] It will be the theme of the last chapter.

[66] Cf. _Psychologische Forschung, 9_, 1927.

[67] This means that if the average person remembered n finished tasks he remembered 90 per cent. more unfinished ones; that is, n + 90/100 n.

[68] In passing we may remark that, here at least, a relationship becomes discernible between a result of experimental psychology and Freudian theory.

[69] _Psychologische Forschung, 1_ and _2_, 1922. Somewhat similar experiments had been done before by Poppelreuter (_Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 61_, 1912), who was also the first to bring forward the criticism mentioned in the last paragraph.

[70] _Op. cit._

[71] From these results it would follow that we are not able directly to measure conation by antagonistic association, as Ach has proposed.

[72] I have not yet been able to see McCarthy’s book _The Measurement of Conation_ (Chicago, 1926). From what I have heard about it, it would seem to be a highly valuable contribution to the problems discussed in this chapter.

[73] _Gehirn und Seele_, 1911. Lashley has done similar experiments with rats. I can confirm his findings: after learning certain visual discriminations with one eye blindfolded, a chick will react according to the new habit when, afterwards, the other eye is blindfolded. Becher’s experiments, however, still seem to me to be more conclusive anatomically.

[74] I have not been able to find an adequate translation of the German adjective _sachlich_ in this connection. “Intrinsic” would come near to it, perhaps.

[75] Lewin and Karsten, _Psychol. Forschung, 10_, 1927.

[76] In some of Plato’s discussions about the properties of the truly real world, the same tendency is quite obvious.

[77] _The Meaning of Truth_, Preface.

[78] _Some Problems of Philosophy_, p. 213.

[79] _A Pluralistic Universe_, p. 376.

[80] Since James’ time this view has been defended by several authors whose names will be found in the bibliography at the end of this chapter.

[81] For brevity’s sake the term “self” is applied here, though for more correct expression I should say: “the actual process corresponding to the self in actual experience.”

[82] I do not forget, of course, that subordinate parts of our organism will show reactions, externally similar to those described, though belonging to the reflex type of movement. Stimulated by a prick, the foot will be withdrawn by reflex. In no case would this fact create an objection against the theory of insight-reaction. In some of its activities the organism is doubtlessly similar to a very practical machine; at the same time in others, and most of all those in which it behaves as a whole, direct dynamics may decide what happens.

Transcriber’s notes

In plain text, superscript is indicated with a caret: A^1; and subscript with an underscore followed by braces: H_{2}O. Italic text is surrounded by underscores.

Figures have been moved from mid-paragraph to after the first paragraph that mentions them.