240 BOOK REVIEWS
savs "It is not established that the operation completely separated the viscera from efferent and afferent influences with the bram ... A little farther on we see why. ". . . the dejected posture ... of the spmal dog, disgusted by dog's flesh, suggests strongly that in some manner the unpleasant olfactory stimulus has free access to the autonomic system of his dog." It is difficult to see how, and the suggestion is only strong if one has already assumed the conclusion. In these dogs the only parts behind the shoulder left in nervous connection with the forepart _were the diaphragm and upper parts of the trachea and oesophagus. Dr. Kempt suggests that the alteration in tension of the diaphragm and tension on the frame exerted by the head and neck muscles may have alterea the visceral tone, but how could these alterations have exerted any influence on the head and face muscles which indicated the emotional
One ought not to leave this work without saying something about what many in America seem to regard as Kempf s great contribution -'the physiological explanation' of conflict, repression and fixation.
Fixation is viewed as a conditioned automatic reflex, but it is not explained why some of the many conditioned autonomic reflexes become
™^Wi^*regard to conflict and repression it seems to us that instead of explainifg them, he has merely substituted his (al-st cert^nly erronTous) nomenclature for the ordinary one. It would no s^ an epoch-making pronouncement to say "The conflict of various affective ^r^vings for'expression leads to emotional states", but, translated mto "The struggle of the various often antagonistic cravmgs (of the auto nomic apparatus) for the possession of the final common pa^ leads to conditions of tension in the viscera-(unstriped muscle) and of the voluntary muscle (unstriped component, sarcoplasmic ^^bstence). These ILs of tension produce conditions of heightened visceral toms.ly^d ^ various forms of postiiral tonus" . . . White regards it as very lUumi-
^^%^r Kempf defends himself in advance, as though feeling somewhat uncertain, against the charge of precocious theorising, which he feels the 'University Professors' will bring against him. He Q-^tes ^vo extracts from Charles Darwin in defence, relative *« 'g-uprng facts under 'general laws', again assuming that his material consists of
The monograph contains a valuable collection of ^^f «^^*;°°^ J^ the synchronism of affective states and modification in tije autonomy apparatiis. but on the whole we feel we must side with the University Professors. q^ ^ Thacker.
