New-York tribune., 1907-11-10
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.
MUENsTERBERG AND DIR. HYsL0P.
Correspondents Views of Formers Article

~OA%SSPonucAL VIEWS OF EOrmSr CILACAC'
To the Editor of TIE Tribune
Sir; In the Sunday Magazine section OF The Trio-
une OF November Professor Munsterberg. of Har-
vard University, has assumed the duties of fool
killer. He seems TO have been forced to this by
correspondence from people who wanted to know
whether the immortality of the soul had not been
proved and in his disgust at the probability that
he would have to believe so contemplate doc
trine he has sought relief in attacking the work
OF the Society for Psychical Research. Every one
ought TO read his article and then read the papers
which he is criticising The most interesting part
OF his discussion is the evasion and misrepre-
sentation in which he INDUCES regarding the
statements and views of the he is criticising.
II Is necessary to attack something, and the only
chance to do this effectively is to quote what suits
his prejudices and to ignore all that his opponent
had valued.
There can be no objection to Professor Minister
berg's not liking to exist hereafter. his indis-
position to see the truth might prevent his adjust
ment TO an environment that requires this. But
we have some right TO exact of a scientist. or one
that claims to be one. the correct representation
of the facts which he IS considering The
clusion of others he might be privileged to reject
but he hardly claim immunity when he delib-
erately evades the issue laid down. and garbles
the records on which his opponent depends for his
hypothesis
What Professor Minsterberg does not seem 70
realize is the fact that the ablest in Europe
have taken up the subject and mean TO see that
some of them that have consented to become hon
orary fellows in the American Society for Psychical
Research, which was organized little more than
a year ago. They Sir Olive Lodge. Sir Will
lam Crookes, the Hon James Arthur Balfour,
former Prime Minister; DR.. William OSer, OF OK
ford University; Lord Raleigh Professor Barrett.
of Dublin; Baron Schrenck-Notzing, of the
University of Munich; Professor Max Dessoir. of
the University Of Berlin; Professor TIL. F1ournoy,
of the University OF Geneva, Switzerland; DR..
Pierre Janet, of the College of France; Dr. c. G.
Jun, privat-doCent IN psychiatry in Zurich; DR..
Charles L. Dana and DR.. Frederick Peterson, of
New York, and several others of similar standing.
With this sort Of support II IS time TO treat the
subject seriously. matter what the phenomena
views held.
am sure that the author of the articles which
Professor Munsterberg criucising does not
care so much for the correctness Of his working
hypothesis as he does for the need Of scientific
seriousness in so important matter future life.
All that he would complain OF in Professor Min
sterberGs animadversions is his deliberate evasion
of issues stated and the insinuations made
which he does not support by evidence. Moreover.
It is clear that his critic is playing to the gal
leries and using assumptions for which he has no
warrant and which hs IS willing for the public
to believe represents the views of his opponent.
Any reader Of Or Hyslops articles will see that
his position bears no resemblance TO the implied
conceptions of Professor Munsterberg.
One curious fact OF his paper ia the solemn way
in which he gives instruction about subconscious
personality. II he the discoverer OF H. and
If no one else had ever presented II as eau
tion against hasty speculation in the field OF spir
itistic theories He seems to be ignorant, though
he is really not so. of the that the chief in
nzed limitation TO the claims OF spirtualsm
has been the men and work which he likes 10
ridicule. WILLIAM S. CRANDALIA
New York. Nov. :. 1907