THE EXPERIMENTAL THEORY 91 



formation, self-indicated and self-demanded, of the 

 tensional into a harmonious or satisfactory situa 

 tion, fulfilment or disappointment results. The 

 odor either does or does not fulfil itself in the rose. 

 The smell as intention is borne out by the facts, 

 or is nullified. As has already been pointed out, 

 the subsequent experience of the fulfilment type is 

 not primarily a confirmation or refutation. Its 

 import is too vital, too urgent to be reduced in 

 itself just to the value of testing an intention or 

 meaning. 1 But it gets in reflection just such veri- 

 ficatory significance. If the smell s intention is 

 unfulfilled, the discrepancy may throw one back, 

 in reflection, upon the original situation. Inter 

 esting developments then occur. The smell meant 

 a rose; and yet it did not (so it turns out) mean 

 a rose ; it meant another flower, or something, one 

 can t just tell what. Clearly there is something 



*Dr. Moore, in an essay in &quot;Contributions to Logical 

 Theory &quot; has brought out clearly, on the basis of a criticism 

 of the theory of meaning and fulfilment advanced in 

 Royce s &quot; World and Individual,&quot; the full consequences of 

 this distinction. I quote one sentence (p. 350) : &quot; Surely there 

 is a pretty discernible difference between experience as a 

 purposive idea, and the experience which fulfils this purpose. 

 To call them both * ideas is at least confusing.&quot; The text 

 above simply adds that there is also a discernible and im 

 portant difference between experiences which, de facto, are 

 purposing and fulfilling (that is, are seen to be such ab 

 extra), and those which meant to be such, and are found to 

 Jbe what they meant. 



