476 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



A quality involving pleasure or pain is obviously present in certain sensations. 

 I submit that an element of Hedonism is present, inseparably, from all sensation. 



We have seen that the inverse of Agreement is Discrimination ; every process 

 has its inverse. The universality of inversion I have indicated by the term, 

 " Negation." 



I have here indicated the processes which are present in all mental acts : 

 Immediate Presentation, Unit, Memory, Association, Agreement, Generalisation, 

 Impulse, Sense of Effort, Hedonism, Negation, Time, Space. 



I call these the Fundamental Processes. I prove that they are necessary 

 even in the simplest forms of thought. I prove that they are sufficient to account 

 for the most complex, and that this is the case for all thoughts possible as well as 

 actual. 



This, at first sight, presents a problem that by its limitless complexity and 

 delicacy, verging on the intangible, baffles the effort even to find a principle of 

 division. Certainly the solution could not be obtained in any other manner than 

 by the route that I have already indicated, yet a clear understanding of the 

 preceding discussion points the way to the command of the whole field. 



If each Immediate Presentation be a Unit, then in all these exists a common 

 ground of Agreement — viz.: all that underlies the limit of our analysis and enables 

 us to speak of Unit. The differences — objects of Discrimination — of Immediate 

 Presentations differ in the quality of the sensations involved. Underlying any 

 plexus of sensations, presented in any manner of succession and in any com- 

 plexity, there is a schema of processes such that the schema would remain the 

 same if at each Immediate Presentation the quality of the sensation differed from 

 that of the first series of complexes. But making abstraction of this quality in 

 Immediate Presentation, and remembering what has been said in regard to the 

 Unit, we find in each schema an example of simple mathematical processes. 

 Therefore, that schema, and hence all schemata no matter how complex, must be 

 developed in the manner corresponding to that in which all mathematical pro- 

 cesses, no matter how complex, are developed from counting. Therefore, we 

 know that if we cover the whole field of which the schemata correspond to the 

 whole field of mathematics, then by adjoining the actual objects of sensation — or 

 more generally, the Immediate Presentations — in each element, we cover the 

 whole field of mental experiences. 



I have said that with regard to mathematics I reserved the questions of 

 Infinity and of Imaginaries for special consideration. I have shown after ex- 

 amination that the introduction of these concepts does not make infirm the rigour 

 of the argument which, in its bare lines, I have indicated. 1 



So far we have entered on a course of thought that leads us widely apart from 

 the disquisitions in authoritative works on Psychology. I have not sought 

 originality for the sake of originality, but I have followed step by step the path 

 opened up by my analysis in the search for the underlying verities. We are here 

 dealing with the subject in a manner which is as near an approach to that of an 

 exact science, as for instance, mechanics, or even geometry, as the subject itself 

 permits ; and it will be evident to most that even if details in the course of my 

 arguments were faulty, the true method would consist simply in a rectification of 

 such errors. 



I have to add one point more, and that of particular interest, before turning to 

 another aspect of this study. 



So far I have tacitly assumed the Idealistic standpoint ; that is to say, I have 



1 In Psychology : a New System (Stephen Swift & Co.). 



