830 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
those which are reflective, the motor elements possessing on Mr. Pat- ten's showing relative permanence and independence. We are again face to face, therefore, with Mr. Patten's sensory-motor distinction. All that we have previously said upon the subject is necessarily relevant here, and it can hardly be doubted now that Mr. Patten really has sep- arated the two realms as completely as we indicated. From the practi- cal, common-sense point of view we venture to inquire whether the average intelligent reader is ready to admit that the results of ethical and religious thought are as transitory and fleeting as this conception requires, and whether motor activities are in any sense so obstinate against the ravages of time as this theory implies. If not, it may be that the seemingly technical contention which we discussed earlier in the paper in maintaining the fallacy of Mr. Patten's sensory-motor doctrines, had involved in it consequences of real practical moment for the psychological interpreter of history. Either thought and action are more intimately related than Mr. Patten's views admit, or else our psychological and common-sense notions are all wrong.
Mr. Patten advances several other interesting theories, which we cannot examine at this time. His treatment of the transmission of psychological characteristics from generation to generation is one of these. He has also a good deal to say of curves of thought and visu- alization, although these points strike me as chiefly interesting for the suggestive light they throw upon the author's own thought pro- cesses. These matters are mentioned simply to indicate that we have not touched upon the whole of Mr. Patten's psychology.
If our criticism has been almost wholly hostile, it must not be assumed that we regard Mr. Patten's accomplishment as worthless. Quite the contrary. Where we have been obliged to differ with him most sharply, his shortcomings, as we believe them to be, exhibit in the most conclusive manner the really vital uses to which psychology can be put in the service of such inquiries. Too often writers have con- fined themselves to the mere enunciating of a program. Mr. Patten has made an extremely interesting effort actually to realize such a pro- gram, and for this he deserves every credit. Furthermore, psychology has not yet emerged so completely from the limitations of individual- ism as to render impossible the cherishing of diverse and opposing views. We have attempted to state the merits of the case as between Mr. Patten's views and what we believe to be the facts. The reader must decide the issue for himself. James Rowland Angell.
The University of Chicago.
