The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-11-30
THE ENIGMA OF WOMAN.

In the Atlantic Monthly for Decenl-
ber, Professor Munsterberg makes
pleasant excursion into the highways
and byways of literature, to discover
how much psychological analysis may
be obtained outside of text books The
article which is entitled "Naiye Psy-
chology," is intended to be suggestive
rather than exhaustive. Professor
MunSterberg concludes that 1t Is impos-
sible to construct anything approaching
q scientific system out of mans COM
ment on man in literature
In conclusion the professor discusses
the one topic to which perhaps more
"naive psychology has been devoted
than to any other psychological problem,
the mental difference between man and
woman. He says that volumes could be
filed with quotations about this eternal
source Of happiness and grief, but he
wisely adds, "almost all is metaphor
or comparison, or is practical advice or
warning, or is enthusiastic praise, or is
maliciousness. He is forced to the
decision that no psychological system
can be erected from the remnants that
are the result Of honest observation ard
bear the stamp Of truth.
The mental difference between man
and woman has been n fascinating sub
ject since man and woman wrote their
love letters in hieroglyphics on stone
One of the most persistent observations
is that man can never understand WON
an, and founding their other maxims on
this basis, the observers of all ages
have made many extra VACANT contrasts.
They forget that the primal fact is one
Of identity rather than of difference.
by nature man and woman are the
same, and whatsoever mental varIences
exist, therefore, are the result Of diff
ferent environments and physical ca
pabilities. The reason that no syste-
matte psychology on this subject has
boen evolved may be due to tne fact
that the mental differences between
man and woman are so slight instead
Of being SO great as the generality have
imagined.
When we come to distinguishing be-
tween beings Of q different nature IN
tho animal kingdom 1t is easy to pick
out notable points Of diversity. For
example, when we contrast man with
g. dog, we say that a man thinks and
dog does not, a man laughs and a dog
does not, man talks and a dog does
not, man can see a joke and a dog
cannot. On the other hand, when we
contrast man and n woman, we are
apt to make distinctions that do not
exist. For example. it has been said
that women have little sense of humor.
but when we repeat this old fallacy we
do not believe it. It Is customary for
man in evaporation or in contempt
to say, "that is just like woman, ,"
whereas 1t may be equally just like
man.
1t is always unsafe to state general
propositions without long thought and
investigation, but we shall venture one
here on the spur Of the moment. Every
sin that Is believed to be peculiar to
man, woman can commit, but she does
IL infrequently; and every sin that
woman can commit, a man can commit
but he does it infrcquently. Is there
any greater difference between man
and 4 woman than between a man and
another man or woman and another
woman' We frequently say that char.
acteristic is peculiar to 4 woman, when
il is also peculiar TO certain classes Of
men, and we say that certain charac-
teristics arc peculiar TO men when they
are also peculiar to certain classes Of
women. Women have no monopoly on
hysteria or unreasouing emotionnlism