VOL. III. NOVEMBER, 1902. NUMBER 3 A STUDY OF "PSYCHOLOGIC FOUNDATIONS OF EDUCATION," XII. HOWARD SANDISON. On page 90, in chapter xii there are presented two modes of psychologic investigation, the rational and the physiological. The first is often spoken of as the "old psychology" and the physiological psychology, together with other phases of psychological investigation, are termed the "new psychology." Dr. Dewey, of Chicago University, regards the new psychology as including these things: First, physiological psychology; second, genetic or child psychology, and third, the general field of modern psychology. In an article entitled, "Harris's Psychologic Foundations of Education," in the Educational Review for June, 1898, Dr. Dewey holds that Dr. Harris, in chapters xii, xiii and xiv, does three things: 1. He allows a too limited scope to physiological psychology. The following is a quotation from Dr. Dewey's article in regard to this first point: "The same is true in principle of physiological psychology. Those who conceive this as simply an effort to correlate physical and psychical phenomena are certainly now few in number. Its interest lies rather in its affording a method of approach to the investigation and interpretation of psychical phenomena for their own sake. Here, too, then, the barrier which Dr. Harris seems inclined to set up between rational psychology as an account of the development of spiritual being, and physiological psychology as merely an account of the material conditions of this development, breaks down. Physiological psychology so called becomes simply a definite and controllable method of getting at psychical development itself." 2. He ignores the great field of modern research in psychology which is not included under rational nor physiological psychology. Herewith is given a brief quotation under that: "What shall be said of the great field of modern psychology as pursued by contemporary exponents, a field certainly falling within neither physiological psychology nor child-study in any limited. sense of these terms? How shall we account for Dr. Harris's complete ignoring of this field? It is certainly neither empirical in the old sense of that term, occupied simply with observing and inventorying a mass of mere facts, nor yet is it rational in the sense of being simply a logical analysis of the general concepts. of self-activity, soul, feeling, reason, will, etc. Indeed, its essential characteristic is that it attempts to combine the two points of view, to get rid of the abstract dualism involved in setting it up. It is an effort to determine, from the standpoint of the concrete examination of a tremendous variety and complexity of material, the essential principles of the development of psychical life. At one moment the biological, at another the physiological, or the experimental, or the child-study, or the pathological, or the 'empirical' (in the old sense) aspect may be uppermost; but in any case these are simply methods or modes of approach to the central principle of origin and growth. All this industry, which is really the distinguishing characteristic of psychology, as pursued today, whether in Germany, France, England or this country, can not be lightly waved one side. It is indeed quite true that some of its followers here and there-but these much less numerous and influential than one might suppose--conceive of their method and results in a more or less materialistic and mechanical way, and oppose them to the interests of a spiritual philosophy. But I am willing to venture the prophecy that in the long run the concerns of the latter may be intrusted most safely to the hands of psychological science as it is now developing itself; that this will be the great means of translating the chief points of view and results of the former into specific, clearly realizable forms, capable of being set forth in terms of our common language without recourse to the technical terminology of transcendentalists; and that, excepting as the idealistic philosophy does reinforce and vivify itself in this way, it will become more and more scholastic and arbitrary, degenerating into the barren explication of certain formal general categories." 3. He relies too much upon the ingenious but doubtful speculations of J. Luys in his work. Upon this Dr. Dewey comments as follows: "Physiological psychology simply studies the correlation of mental phenomena with bodily changes. In this connection Dr. Harris gives a resume, occupying two chapters, of some results of this science concerning localization of function in the brain-a summary in which he has unfortunately relied too much upon the ingenious but doubtful speculations of Luys, and which do not, as a whole, appear to serve any particular purpose.' Having thus noticed the claim that the treatment set forth in chapters xii, xiii and xiv gives too limited a view of physiological psychology, let the attention be turned to the thoughts presented in chapter xii. It is found that there is presented: 1. The method and results of rational psychology. The method is introspection. Of introspection it is said that in it the ego discovers itself to be logical in all of its processes, both conscious and sub-conscious. This logical process is in the third figure one of moving from the general down to the particular, and in the second figure one of moving from the particular to the general. Dr. Harris says: "In these investigations there can be no doubt that we have the real nature of the mind revealed to us. It is a selfactivity whose forms of action are these three logical figures." 2. The thought is that physiological psychology (termed "so-called" thereby implying that it may be more largely physiology than psychology) deals with the structure of the body and the corresponding mental changes in order to bring out their relation. 3. The thought that there is, of course, a certain relation between the body and the mind; that all experience shows some relation; and that the body is employed in order to apprehend through the objective world and to modify that world. 4. The thought of the two modes of nervous activity, the centripetal current and the centrifugal current, or afferent and efferent nerve activities. In connection with this the important thought is brought out: "Sensation, the mental experience, is the sequence of centripetal nerve action, and motor-impulse, another mental state is an antecedent of centrifugal activity." 5. The inquiry as to the nature of this activity called centripetal and centrifugal currents. Is it mechanical, vital or psychical? What is mechanical activity? It is an activity that does not originate its own activity but obtains it from something else. It is a mere transmitter. Vital activity is a combination of selfactivity and mechanical activity. It seems that certain processes, such as digestion, are vital activity, because the mechanical activity of the muscles and bones and the activity of the nerves must be directed and guided so that they take possession of foreign material, destroy its existing shape, bring it over into the acting object, transmitting it into that object. Such action is a mode of self-activity because the object takes things not in itself and changes them into itself. In that sense it is vital activity. If a plant take hold of some material in the atmosphere and transform it into itself and so modify the element that it becomes plant and in turn acts on the environment as plant, it seems evident that the original nature of the material is transformed. Instead of being foreign material it is plant and is self-active. The thought is that whenever an object changes a thing into itself, the activity is self-activity. 6. The question as to where the selfactivity begins and where it closes. The author seems to hold that the muscles and bones manifest mechanical activity, and that sensation and the motor impulse are psychical activity. In that case the vital activity will lie in the nerve current itself. Whether the nerve current is mechanical or vital seems to be left as an open question. It is said that "the activity of the nerve current may be explained as mechanical, but it has not been so explained." 7. A general principle as to the relation of the soul to the body-"the spiritual individuality of the soul builds its body and uses it in interaction with the world, in preception and in volition.” 8. A summary in which some things that have been accomplished by physiological psychology are mentioned, and a tribute is paid to its importance, with the promise that in the next two chapters the results will be given. Attention will now be invited to the principle cited above since it is evident that if that principle be established the mechanical element in nerve activity would be wholly under the control of vital and psychical action. If the soul as a creative activity, commencing with the single cell, gradually develop it until the complex nervous organism is complete, then the relation of the body to the spirit would be this: the former is effect and instrument. There would then be no ground for the thought that the body existed prior to the soul, and after it had developed to a high state of organization consciousness appeared as an attribute of highly organized nervous structure. This principle that the soul is a spiritual individual producing its own body is a theistic conception, in accordance with the doctrine that the principle at the center of the universe is a self-conscious personality. The opposite view, namely, that conscious activity is an attribute and a result of a highly organized nervous system, is atheistic. This position is similar to the doctrine that matter is a real substance and that energy is an attribute of matter. A great many physicists would hold that matter is here, and that one of the characteristics of matter is energy. According to the category of self-activity, however, that is reversed in that from the standpoint of self-activity the prominent thing in the realm of physics, or chemistry, or botany, is the invisible energy and matter is the result. A mind thinking under the category of being, which is characteristic of the primary stage of thought, would consider that matter is here; that it already exists; that one of its attributes is color, another weight, another energy, etc. In commenting on Dr. Harris's book, Dr. Dewey admits that some of the inquirers in modern psychology conceive the processes and products somewhat from the category of being; i. e., from the category of "thing and composition." His language is: "It is indeed quite true that some of its followers here and there, but these much less numerous and influential than one might suppose, conceive of their method and results in a more or less materialistic and mechanical way, and oppose them to the interests of a spiritual philosophy." They seem to seek a psychology without a psyche. It is generally of the younger students who commence the work in physiological psychology that this is true. To such students it often appears that consciousness. practically disappears and that the whole thing is physiological and mechanical. The quotation from Dr. Dewey seems to indicate that he himself conceives the relation of body and mind from the standpoint of self-activity; from the standpoint of a spiritual personality at the center of the universe. What grounds are there to indicate the validity of the position given here by Dr. Harris, that the soul, a spiritual individuality, builds its body and uses it in interaction with the world, in conception and in volition? To ordinary thought the body is created complete and entire. It then has breathed into it the breath of life, and in consequence becomes a living soul. It is not the ordinary thought that beginning with the single cell there is enthroned at the heart of the cell a spiritual activity which governs and controls the cell in all of its modifications until the human body is complete. It is not the ordinary conception that each spiritual activity constructs its own body. Do people generally admit this? Only to a degree. They admit that there are modifications in the countenance and in the gait through spiritual influence. Even if they do not admit that the spirit has constructed the body for itself they seem to hold that the spirit by its activity transforms certain lines in the body, that the body is an outward expression of the inner state, and that if the soul be penurious, the nerves will exhibit that penuriousness in the posture or in the counte nance. In Hawthorne's "Great Stone Face" one may read: "By this time poor Mr. Gathergold was dead and buried; and the oddest part of it was, that his wealth, which was the body and spirit of his existence, had disappeared before his death, leaving nothing of him but a living skeleton, covered with a wrinkled yellow skin." * * * In the same occurs the following: "And therefore the marvelously gifted statesman had always a weary gloom in the deep set caverns of his eyes as of a man of mighty faculties and little aims, whose life with all its high performances was vague and empty, because no high purpose had entered it with realitv." The reference is to Old Stony Phiz who used his intellect for purely selfish ends, and this mode of spiritual activity had written itself in the arrangement of the eyes. In the story of Silas Marner one may notice the same thought: "So, year after year, Silas Marner had lived in this solitude, his guineas rising in the iron pot, and his life narrowing and hardening itself more and more into a mere pulsation of desire and satisfaction that had no relation to any other being. His life had reduced itself to the functions of weaving and hoarding, without any contemplation of an end towards which the functions tended. The same sort of process had perhaps been undergone by wiser men, when they have been cut off from faith and love-only, instead of a loom and a heap of guineas, they have had some erudite research, some ingenious project, or some well-knit theory. Strangely Marner's face and figure shrank and bent themselves into a constant mechanical relation to the objects of his life, so that he produced the same sort of impression as a handle or а crooked tube, which has no meaning standing apart. The prominent eyes that used to look trusting and dreamy now looked as if they had been made to see only one kind of thing that was very small, like tiny grain, for which they hunted everywhere; and he was so withered and yellow that, although he was not yet forty, the children always called him 'Old Master Marner.' In Shakespeare's Sonnet CXI the same thought is beautifully expressed. But the influence of the soul upon the body is indicated in another way. The body is the most satisfactory picture of the soul. It is its most accurate portrait. In what way? In this way: Consciousness is at the beginning an undisturbed unity, a potentiality. In its movement there arises diversity, differentiation. This is its second phase. Then there is a return. This is its third phase. A striking thing about the body is that it shows just that. First of all, the body is bilateral. Each side is not a mere repetition of the other side. It is a symmetrical representation of the other side. The human body being a bilateral whole indicates the original unity, the division and the return of the spirit. With all its divisions it is still a unit. The body indicates this triple movement of consciousness still more clearly in the several senses. Note first the sense of touch. The entire skin is the organ. It is a unity and yet it has diversity in its sensibility. Some portions are highly sensitive, as the ends of the fingers, the end of the tongue, etc. Other portions, as the middle of the back, are much less sensitive. The tongue is a unit, and yet if one examine it he will discover a line running down the middle of it. This is a hint of a dualism out of which it returns to unity. In the organ of smell, the diversity becomes more marked. The diversity results in a more complete unity. Hearing is a unit, and yet the organs of hearing are differentiated still more distinctly. In the highest sense-sight-the differentiation is greatest and also the unity. Any object put before the two eyes is known as one. A person does not have, except in a diseased condition of the eyes, two images of the object. The activity of the sense of sight is a unit. This same objectification of the unity and diversity of consciousness appears in the activity of the afferent and the efferent nerves. The current is a unit, but the inner movement differs from the outer movement- a diversity in the unit. One examining the brain will be impressed at once with the fact that there are two divisions. At the same time, he will be more fully impressed with the fact that it is a unit. All these things are indications to some extent that the spiritual individuality does construct for itself its "tabernacle of clay" and employ it for its development and revelation. The pedagogical implications are that the teacher would gain by: 1. A close study of important works on mental life and its bodily expression. This would aid in establishing systematic habits of observing children with the view to determining the mental states and traits symbolized by their postures. and features. Among the valuable books to study are: a. The Expression of the Emotions, by Charles Darwin. b. Physiognomy and Expression, by Paolo Montegazza. (Published by Scribner & Welford, New York.) C. The Study of Children and Their School Training, by Francis Warren. (Published by The Macmillan Company, New York.) The following from the contents (page 10) will indicate the kind of work given: "Studying children: observing in place of questioning the child. Example. Case: A well-made boy. Exhausted. How to observe. Points to look for: development, nerve signs, nutrition," etc. 2. A study of works on the nervous system; as, for example, "The Growth of the Brain," by H. H. Donaldson. (Published by Charles Scribner's Sons, New York.) 3. A study of works on the nervous organism in relation to fatigue. ELECTIVES IN THE HIGH SCHOOL. high J. H. TOMLIN, SUPERINTENDENT SHELBYVILLE SCHOOLS. The elective system had its beginning in the United States at the college of William and Mary in the year 1779. The idea of elective studies originated in the fertile brain of Thomas Jefferson, and the introduction of the system into the above named college is attributed to him, he being trustee at that time. Later, through the influence of Jefferson, electives found a place in the University of Virginia. Although this was considered one of the wise measures of Jefferson, it made very slow progress until about eighteen years ago. In 1884, Dr. Eliot, of Harvard, gave the elective system a great impulse by introducing it, practical ly without qualification, into the courses. of Harvard. The idea was contagious and spread with alarming rapidity to other colleges and universities and the high schools, with the instinct to let nothing good escape, soon began to introduce the principle into their courses of study. There are now comparatively few colleges and high schools in the United States that have not adopted the elective system in some form. The major and minor courses so prominent in the colleges of the middle west, the parallel courses, the core of constants, the absolutely free choice of subjects are,—all forms of election now in operation in American |