280 SCIENCE AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE ORGANISM 



series was ? A detailed discussion of this problem would 

 belong to so-called physiological psychology. I only men- 

 tion here that there are strong reasons, it seems to me, 

 which allow us to deny a limine such a possibility. As to 

 the " identifying the lamp," it must be kept in mind that 

 we here have not two psychical events, firstly, the seeing, and 

 secondly the identifying, but only one ; the lamp seen the 

 second time is quite immediately a different thing psychically 

 from the lamp seen the first time. There is no need there- 

 fore to refer to the brain in the midst of the second portion 

 of our series. It was for this reason that we said the brain 

 must have been altered by a " first " stimulus with respect to 

 its reacting to the same stimulus the second and third time. 

 I fully agree here with the excellent analysis of " recon- 

 naissance " given by Bergson. 1 



The " Intra-psychical Series " 



But let us return to the three portions of our conscious 

 series. The first of them, as we now have learned, ends in 

 such a cerebral act as will allow the second portion to go on 

 in its specificity ; and this second portion, of course, ends by 

 allowing the appearance of the last portion. The second 

 portion alone is not of a cerebral character at all, but at both 

 its ends it is connected with cerebral phenomena. There 

 are very important consequences resulting from this funda- 

 mental relation. 



First let us try to find a proper terminology for the 



1 Matiere et M&noire, Paris, Alcan. Relimke, on the other hand, though a 

 partisan of the "interaction " theory, regards what we shall call the "intra- 

 psychical series " as permanently broken by cerebral acts ; compare his 

 Psychologic, and his excellent little book, Die Seele des Mensclicn. 



