Page:Philosophical Review Volume 1.djvu/413

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
No. 4.]
CLASSIFICATION OF CASES OF ASSOCIATION.
397

b. Radiation of stimulus from p (stimulated for the second time), into q and r.
II. In Desistent Association.
a and b (as in I. above).
c. Cessation of neural activity in the brain-tract p, before the activity spreads to q and r.
III. Persistent Association.
a and b (as in I.).
c. All or part of p must remain stimulated, during stimulation of q and r.
Note: 1. In cases of Assimilation, p, q, and r must have been originally simultaneously stimulated.
2. In cases of successive Association, p, q, and r may have been successively stimulated.

D. Secondary Laws of Association.[1]
(Principles of connection between particular objects of consciousness.)
I. "Suggestiveness"[2] of portions of the object of consciousness is through
a. Interest.
b. The number of them.
II. "Suggestibility"[2] of objects of consciousness is through
a. Interest.
b. Recency.
c. Frequency { 1. Of recurrence. 2. Of recurrence in the same connection.


The names which I have given to the different sorts of association demand explanation. The distinguishing fact is the presence or absence of persistence with the association. So the name Persistent Association seems fairly applicable to what is known as Association by Similarity, though strictly speaking, since the persistence is not a form of association, it should not be co-ordinated with association proper. An appropriate opposite to the term is hard to find, and I have ventured to suggest Desistent Association. The names Total, Partial, and Focalized, for the subdivisions of the general classes, are given by Dr. James. In cerebral terms, "the difference between the three kinds of association reduces itself to a simple difference in the amount of that portion of the nerve-tract supporting the going thought which is operative in calling up the thought,

  1. The consideration of these "secondary laws" has been omitted from the text.
  2. 2.0 2.1 These terms are employed for convenience and must not be understood in any "dynamic" sense. They refer to probability, not to necessity, of sequence.