Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 9.djvu/297

PHILOSOPHICAL PERIODICALS. -J.S:( year. They extend to about 150 pages as against 270 in 1898 ; but they do not fall in any degree below these in interest, and present in a convenient and readily consulted form the results of a great deal of the latest work done by French, German and American psychologist**. Once more the English make a very poor appearance. You may turn over dozens of pages without seeing a single British name. Is it not about time that something should be done to remove this reproach ? During the last few years we have produced some admirable general works of a theoretical character, but in systematical experimental re- search, at any rate as regards human consciousness (for we must not overlook the inquiries of Prof. Lloyd Morgan), we have done next to nothing. There is no doubt need to review and co-ordinate the researches of men engaged in comparatively small and isolated corners, and in psychology, even more than in other sciences, excessive limitation of interest can lead only to unsatisfactory consequences. But while this is true, yet the divorce of theoretical exposition from exact quantitative research must have in the long run an effect almost equally deplorable. Work in properly equipped laboratories is necessary in order to keep the psychologist in touch with fact. The theorist, who deals largely with loose generalities and who bases his opinions on casual data obtained by more or less unsystematic introspection, must be at a considerable dis- advantage. It may be a question whether general theory is not too much neglected in the psychological teaching of some foreign universities. Whether this be so or not, it is clear that we Englishmen are making a mistake in devoting our whole attention to it, and trying to study and teach without any serious experimental and quantitative work. The original papers which take up the first 600 pages of the volume seem on the whole somewhat less important than usual. The longest is an article by M. Victor Henri, entitled " Revue generale sur le sens musculaire," which contains a historical and critical account of the subject, running to more than 150 pages. The writer includes in his survey the various sensations (articular, dermal, etc.) which accompany and make known to us states of rest and motion, as well as those which may more properly be called muscular. He recalls some of the main contributions made by different psychologists and physiologists from Berkeley to Goldscheider and makes clear the exact nature of the various questions they have attempted to solve. M. Henri shows him- self as usual a fair and acute critic. His own position is seldom very decided, though he takes sides against Goldscheider in regard to the existence of muscular sensation. He argues that Goldscheider's negative view on this subject rests on an insufficient basis of fact. The non- visual sensations of movement cannot be entirely resolved into those arising from the surfaces of the joints. If they can, how is it we have such sensa- tions through the eye and the tongue ? Goldscheider apparently examined only cases of passive movement, that is changes of position of a member when the subject remains passive, while the member is moved by external means. Henri rightly objects to our extending to the case of active movement results which have been found to hold good only in the case of passive movement ; also to our assuming that in movements of a whole limb only the same sensations will be involved as when a single digit is lifted. It is reasonable to expect that the psychical processes involved in the wide and complex movements of an arm will be in many ways different from those which accompany the displacement of a single finger. The whole question needs a great deal more experimental in- vestigation. It seems to me that M. Henri overlooks the importance of tendon-strain as a possible factor. In the main his attitude must com-