Editorial. 381 



receptors" instead of sense organs of touch, for thus we avoid the 

 implication of sense experience. Even in human (sense!) nerve 

 physiology it is not always possible to prove that receptive organs 

 have a sensory function (witness, the semicircular canal organs of 

 the ear); far greater are the difficulties in justifying the use of sub- 

 jective terms in the nerve physiology of other animals. 



The objective nomenclature scheme provided purely objective 

 terms for processes in the peripheral and central nervous system 

 and for the reactions of the organism. Because of ignorance of 

 the nature of physical processes and the lack of satisfactory physi- 

 cal terms, no terms for stimuli were proposed. 



This much will suffice to indicate the nature of the scheme. I 

 do not wish to give the terminology itself unnecessary prominence 

 here, for, in my opinion, it is clumsy, inconvenient and unsuitable 

 for general use; I desire instead to emphasize the convictions which 

 led to the attempt at an objective system of terms: namely, that 

 comparative physiology has nothing whatever to do with subjec- 

 tive phenomena in its descriptions, and that comparative psychol- 

 ogy is either valueless or impossible, since we can never directly 

 observe the consciousness of animals. 



With the efforts of the advocates of the use of objective terms 

 to the exclusion of subjective in the physiology of the nervous sys- 

 tem I am in complete sympathy; with the contention of many of 

 them, that comparative psychology is impossible I heartily dis- 

 agree. Since the material of comparative physiology is objective 

 phenomena and its goal the accurate and complete description ot 

 these phenomena in objective terms, the appearance of a subjective 

 term in a descriptive formula of physiology indicates either ignor- 

 ance of the nature of the phenomena in question or slovenliness 

 on the part of the scientist. So much one may maintain without 

 affirming or denying the existence of psychic phenomena in con- 

 nection with the organism whose physiological processes are under 

 consideration. 



As a matter of observation, the objective nomenclature of Beer, 

 Bethe and von Uexkull has not proved satisfactory in practice. 

 It is highly artificial, unnatural and roundabout. Not even its 

 authors have used it consistently, and Nuel's' recent attempt to 



'NuEL, J. P. La Vision. Bibliotheque internationale. Paris, 1904. Pp. 376. See also, Nuel. 

 La Psychologie comparee est-elle legitime ? Repouse a M. Ed. Clapar'edc. Archives de Psychologic, 

 T. 5, p. 326-343. 1906. 



