tively. The feeling of amusement, of course, is a mental fact. The next time you are amused, suppose you try to analyze the feeling. Some psychologists say that it consists in part of a feeling of superiority. If you make a study of your experience to see whether they are right, your feeling of amusement will disappear. Or suppose you try to ascertain what sort of a mental fact pity is. When you find yourself pitying some one, if you examine your experience to see what pity is, the feeling will vanish. If the nature of flowers were such that they disappeared the moment one began to observe them closely, the study of Botany would exactly illustrate the difficulty of studying the mind by means of the introspective method. And as, in such a case, the botanist would have to content himself with observing his facts in the dim light of memory, so also must the psychologist. As his facts disappear the moment he begins to examine them, his only resource is to appeal to the memory-his introspection becomes retrospection. Study of Children. Of course the minds that are of the most importance for you as teachers to study are the minds of children, and it is evident that you must study them by means of the inferential method. If you would get that knowledge of them that will enable you to teach them well, you must note their likes and dislikes, their amusements, their games, the books they read, the mistakes they make everything, in short, that may throw light on their minds. Do not rely on any knowledge of the mind you can get from this or any book. A good book on Psychology is like a guide in a strange cityuseful chiefly in telling you where to look. But, as a guide is of no service to a man who refuses to use his eyes, so a writer on Psychology can be of little use to his readers unless they constantly test his statements by their own experiences and by the study of the minds of those around them.1 QUESTIONS ON THE TEXT. 1. What kind of mental facts constitutes the science of Psychology? Illustrate. 2. What is a law of mental facts? Illustrate. 3. State and explain and illustrate the two ways of studying mental facts. 4. Illustrate how the inferential method uses historical facts to enlarge our knowledge of mind. 5. How can you study your own mind by means of the inferential method? 6. Point out the relations that exist between the two methods. 7. State and illustrate the difficulties of the two methods. SUGGESTIVE QUESTIONS. 1. Are there any mental facts which do not form part of the science of Psychology? 2. Do you know any facts which indicate that there is a difference in the keenness of internal perception in different people? 3. If you were a Turk or a Chinaman, and knew nothing of any other people, how would it influence your notion of human nature? 4. Is pity a state of pleasure? 5. How does the quotation from Fiske illustrate the difficulties of the inferential method? 1 For a brief explanation of some varieties of the inferential method, see Appendix B. LESSON X. NECESSARY TRUTHS AND NECESSARY BELIEFS. We would all agree that Geometry does right to state its axioms at the beginning. All its demonstrations depend upon them, and therefore it is proper that they should receive our attention at the outset. What we can Learn by Means of the Introspective Method. For similar reasons it is important for us to ascertain as clearly as possible what we can learn by means of the introspective method. Since the introspective and the inferential methods are the only methods of studying mental facts, and since the inferential is based on the introspective, what we learn by means of the introspective method lies at the foundation of our knowledge of mind. If you were building a house, you would be especially careful about the foundation. You would want it all strong and well made, but you would take particular pains to see that there was no flaw in the foundation. No matter how strong and fine and beautiful the rest of the house might be, you would feel that if the foundation was weak the whole thing might come tumbling down about you any day. So it behooves us to look carefully to the foundation of our knowledge of mind, and therefore to ascertain precisely what kind of knowledge we have of the INTROSPECTIVE METHOD. 87 facts known to us through introspection, and what we can learn by means of it. But the knowledge gained by introspection so closely resembles another kind of knowledge that the two are liable to be confused, unless at the outset the latter is clearly explained. To this end permit me, in imagination, to talk with you about some familiar matters. "Have you ever seen a stick with but one end, or a white crow?” "No," you answer. "Do you think it possible that you ever will? ” "Possible to see a white crow? Certainly there is no impossibility in that. I know no reason why a bird might not exist like the crow in every respect except the color of its feathers. But a stick with one end? merely an impossibility; it is an absurdity. even assert its existence." Pardon me, but I think That is not You can not you are mistaken. 'This stick has but one end.' Have I not asserted its existence?” "Apparently, but not really. You have indeed strung a sen a lot of words together in the form of a sentence tence to which I have no objection on the score of grammar. But there is one fatal objection to it: it does not mean anything." "Does not mean anything? I do not understand you." "Your statement does not express any action of the mind. All sentences that mean anything are expressions of thought. But when you say, 'This stick has but one end,' you have simply used your organs of speech; you have not thought anything. I might teach a parrot to say, 'Kant's arguments in defense of the antinomies of human reason have never been refuted.' But what would those words mean in the mouth of a parrot? Nothing, and that is all you mean when you assert the existence of a oneended stick." Possibly I am stupid, but I really do not see why." "For this very simple reason: The word 'stick' means a thing that has two ends. When, therefore, you say, 'This stick has but one end,' it is equivalent to saying, 'This two-ended thing has but one end; this thing, which has two ends, has but one end.' Now it is easy enough to say that, but impossible to think it, is it not?" "I see that it is. but one end at the not be." 2 A thing can not have two ends and same time; it can not both be and Necessary Truths. This is an example of what metaphysicians call necessary truths1-"a truth or law the opposite of which is inconceivable, contradictory, nonsensical, impossible." A little reflection will enable us to think of many others. Two straight lines can not inclose a space; two+three five; these are examples of necessary truths because the opposite of each of them is inconceivable, contradictory, nonsensical, impossible. If two straight lines could inclose a space, they could be straight and crooked at the same time; if two + three could be more or less than five, it could be itself and not itself at the same time, which is absurd, contradictory, impossible. To determine whether a proposition expresses a necessary truth or not, we must see if we can put any meaning into the proposition which contradicts it. But in applying the test we must be on our guard against confusing 1 These are sometimes called intuitions. |