OCR Text |
Show USELESS PSYCHOLODICAL FORMULAS. A delirious article by Borden P Itrowne, LL. D , professor of phllosophs In Boston Unlversltj, Is found In The Independent, under the title "Queries Respecting the New Psychology." He declares that the tlmo has come to re-Mew re-Mew the results obtained under the psychological laboratory sjstera and ask "What's the use'" Klist of all he takes up the question of the senee of touch, notes that flft ears ago K. II Weber began a series of experiments by means of dividers, mapping out the relative sensibility of the llfferent parts of the body, finding out the Narlance and showing them on a scslc, as foi Instance, In-stance, the ends of the lingers could distinguish the separate points of tho dividers when they are but a. twentieth of an Inch npart, while they had to be an Inch apart to b dlstlngulahed sep-arately sep-arately by the skin btween the shoulders. shoul-ders. The whole body was tested as to this sensibility to touch, nd the results re-sults were glcn with appioxlmite exactness. Now, I'rof Drownc asks, what does this amount lo after It Is all done? i:ery one knows of this uneo.ua! sensitiveness, and what practical good does It do to teach the minutiae of It In the schools, whero the educational funds are so much stralnel to meet needs which yield much larger results Similar studies for determining sensibility sensi-bility to rotary, horizontal and perpendicular perpen-dicular motion sleld equally small results. Hxperlments by the same E. 11 Weber, carried forward by Techner, In determining the quantltat! relations between the Intensity of stimulus and that of the resulting sensitlon, are nlso described, the result being the promulgation of what Is known as Techer's law, that "the sensation arlcs as the logarithm of the stimulus." stim-ulus." This, again, Is pronounced "a barren elaboration of the obvious and familiar." Anybody knows that there Is a relation between the stimulus and tho sensation produced; und what Is gained by undertaking to state a law of this relation? It would be different In ecry IndlMdual, and the best possible possi-ble to do In that line would be to state an approximate aerage, which would be untru of every Individual on which you might undertake to apply It. And nnjway, what does It amount to to formulate for-mulate such a law, een If sou could mako practical application of It? It loutd only bo experimentally true, anyway, any-way, and conditions of arlatlon In the system and In the strength and quality of the stimulant would ltlate every proposition other than that of the most general conclusions. As Trof. Brow no snys, "Theoretically and practically the problem Is hopelessly barren " The length of time when reaction Is to be expected has nlso been put through tho same process of formulation, with utterly utter-ly Inconclusive results, for this so obviously ob-viously depends on the temperament, strength, vitality, habits, activity and age of the person that the statement of any general law on the subject Is hope-lets. When, however, It Is undertaken tn apply thee wholly unsatlsfactody and Inconclusive "laws" to the measurement of Intelligence and mental capacity, further elements of uncertainty are added to the Infirmities already attached attach-ed to the problem, and tho nholo effort vanishes Into thin air. Tor, as Prof, Brow no says, a speedy reaction Is not necessarily a mark of mental vigor; the physical svstcm nnd habits of tho person are tho controlling factors; fac-tors; neither Is Intelligence to be measured meas-ured by the quickness with which the system responds to touch, or rebounds after a debauch. It Is not a mark of mental vigor that the skin Is sensitive In determining the points of the dividers, divid-ers, nor that the stomach can quickly assimilate stimulants. It Is therefore worse than useless to push those studies In the schools, nnd I'rof, Browne does tho public a service In pointing out the absurdity of It, |