New-York tribune., 1879-06-06

The present volume is deVoteu to 'ho ho'
Problem of the " Study of Psychology" and is pub
Ished separately in accordance with the wish OF
the author, with no alterations from the original
manuscript but such as it is deemed certain would
have met with his sanction. In discussing the sub
iect the work is divided into three parts, showing
j. What 1t is we study in Psychology 2. Why we
study it; and 8. How we ought to study It, The
development of the science. Mr. Lewes remarks,
has been along three lines. Locke, Berkeley Hume
Condllac. and James Mill made invaluable contrl-
buttons TO tie interpretive analysis Of the pheno
mena In their mental aspect. Cabanis, Gall. and
recent psychologists have given their attention TO
the physical aspect, revealing many of the biolog
cal conditions. Lotze, Wundt Balm. Spencer and
Taine have combined these efforts of subjective ard
objective research, and have given the science
new impulse by their constant recognition OF the
twofold aspect of the phenomena.
Still, Mr.. Lewes maintains, that as yet the con-
stituton of the science of psychology has not been
effected in an organized science the discoveries of
to-day enlarge but do not overturn the conceptions
of Yesterday. Each worker brings his labors as
contribution to the common fund, not as an an
archical displacement of the labors of bls prede-
cessors. There is system. but systems. Schools
and professors no longer give their names as author
ities in place of reasons Astronomy, for example.
is in constant progress but the progress Is tnat OF
evolution, not revolution. The doctrines taught
ere not taught as Copernican. or Newtonan. but as
astronomical The same may be said of Physics
ana Chemistry, and even of Biology, but it cannot
be said Of Psychology. We still hear Of the In
tuitional Psychology and the Sensational School
We are referred TO the psychology of Kant or Hegcl
of Locke or Spencer, if the doctrines were still
individual apprecatons of facts. on tine guarantee
Of each authors TenOwn.
But Psychology cannot be constructed by any ex-
elusive method. Neither intrOspective analysis
alone nor objective observation alone, nor even the
union Of the two if confined to the investigation
of the individual mind and individual organism Is
sufficient. Psychology investigates the human
mind not the thoughts and feelings Of an indivld-
ual 1t has TO consider II the product of the hu-
man organism, not only in relation to the cosmos.
but also in relation to society. According to these
premises, Mr.. Lewes would define Psychology as the
analysis and classification Of the senent functions
and faculties, revealed to observation and induc-
ton. completed by the reduction of them to their
conditions of existence biological and sOcioogi-
CAL The place of physiology is that of the
organic conditions of production the place
Of psychology being that of the products
Physiology deals directly with the objective aspect
of sentleDt facts and their relation to the visible
organism; psychology with the same facts IN their
subjective aspect as states of feeling. not as
sequence Of stimulation through sensory nerve,
centre, motor nerve, and muscle. He is directly
concerned with the mechanism though indirectly
occupied with changes of feeling. Were it not for
the implied identity of molecular md sentient
changes. the sequences would have no more sig
nifcanee for him than similar sequences in q
machine The psychologist has the same
events before him, but regards them from
different standpoint. He is concerned with
the feelings SUCH not with the pro-
ducts not with the conditions of production
He must indeed assume the coeXistence of organic
change because the feelings are those of a living
organism, but so long he is attracted by the sub
jective aspect of the phenomena, he need only
tacitly imply the coexistence of the objective
His concern is purely with changes of feeling
with processes which are conscious processes, or
which have been and may again be conscious. Mr..
Lewes remarks, with great discrimination and
point "There is q physiology of the sentlent or
gansm, and this is the theory of the sentien func-
ton the direct activity of the organs. There is
psychology Of the sentient being. and this is the
theory of the SOUL its functions and acquired facul
ties considered less in reference TO the organism
than in reference to experience and conduct, The
physiOlOgst presuppOses that the psychcal facts
are known, his task beng to detect the physical
factors The psychologist presupposes the physical
factors, his task beng to exhibit the mutual Tea-
tons of the psychcal facts. theory of the organ
ism and a theory of the soul equally demand a COM
bination of the objective and subjective data"
In regard to the question which has recently been
revived with great eamestness by eminent philo-
sophical writer's, that of unconscious intellectual
processes, Mr.. Lewes takes strong ground on the
Affirmative side maintaining the unconscious char
acter of many of the sensual and voliional well
as of the intellectual processes. Hence Psychology
is not limited to the facts of consciousness. This
would exclude the greater part of our mental life,
and imply that Judgment or a tram of reasoning
was not a psychological fact when il passes I'M
consciously. Improves, moreover, that Psychology
the science of the products, cannot be divorced
from Physiology, the science of the condition of
production, without excluding all the processes
known to be physiological and known
to be unconscious The two studies represent the
two aspects of the relation between Body and Mind
expressed in objective and subjective terms. But
Psychology is somewhat less, aud somewhat more,
than the subjective theory of the organism. 1t is
less because restricted TO the sentient phenomena
whereas Physiology embraces all vital phenomena.
1t is more, because it includes the relations Of
the organism To the Social Medium. whereas Physi-
ology is concerned with the relations to the cos
mos The numerous and profound notifications
which arise from experience and history, are not
accessible to physiological investigation, and in
treating Of the human soul we have largeyto admit
the influences called spiritual. No physiolog-
ica explanation of mental phenomena can
dispense with constant reference to spiritual con-
ditions. Present stimulatiOns must be completed
by past experiences. In the case of human beings
the experiences are complicated by the operation of
social influences. 1t is through these that the high
est powers are evolved. The differences between
Goethe and Carib are due not to differences i'll
their organisms and functions but 10 their developed
faculties. The organization of Goethe in the so
o,ol ,,odun, of tho Carib v,ould constitute supe-