March io, 1921] 



NATURE 



Z7 



arises whether such a definition of a complex as 

 Mr. Lane-Fox Pitt suggests can be accepted, at 

 any rate so far as " the submerged part of the ice- 

 berg" is concerned. Are there ideas, or memory- 

 images, or wishes, or thoughts in the uncon- 

 scious? Or are there psychical processes, ten- 

 dencies, dispositions, urges, hormes, or however 

 else they may be named, which determine the char- 

 acter and colour of ideas which, as such, live only 

 above the threshold? Under the influence of 

 what some regard as picturesque Herbartian 

 mythology, of Prof. Bergson's fascinating 

 poetry, of the rather repellent Freudian treat- 

 ment of the latent dream, we have an interpreta- 

 tion in terms of unconscious ideas and memory- 

 images. Is this science or mythology? That is 

 the central question, whatever the answer may be. 

 Lewes was tireless in his emphasis on the dis- 

 tinction between what he called empirical ^nd 

 metempirical treatment — between what one may 

 speak of as integration in fact, and the real or 

 supposed cause or source to which that integra- 

 tion is due. In his illuminating discussion of 

 aesthetics (4), founded on Croce, but containing 

 s6me interesting modifications of treatment, Mr. 

 McDowall accepts the view that the only reality 

 is living spirit, and that beauty is expression, 

 or the form given by the spirit to its intuitions, 

 through which it makes contact with reality ; but 

 whereas for Croce the living spirit is immanent and 

 unfolding, for Mr. McDowall its ultimate ex- 

 planation is in its relatedness to a transcendent 

 source whence all personality is derived. Our 

 ** expression " enables us to realise a greater and 

 more perfect Expression than ours. Love is rela- 

 tionship, and beauty the expression of relation- 

 ship ; but there must be reciprocity. Give and 

 take must go hand in hand in the realm of per- 

 sonal being, which is the only ultimate reality. 

 Beauty in evolution is the progressive purifica- 

 tion of that which may have its temporal founda- 

 tions in that impulse of sex which psycho-analysis 

 reveals. 



Now one may agree with Lewes that empirical 

 and metempirical solutions of the problems of life 

 and mind should be carefully distinguished. It 

 may be that in matters of science the latter may, 

 by a self-denying ordinance, be rigorously ex- 

 cluded ; but they cannot be ruled out from philo- 

 sophical discussion; and Mr. McDowall 's well- 

 developed thesis, in this and other writings, 

 demands full consideration before a court in 

 which not only men of science, as such, are 

 represented. 



Regarded, however, from the purely empirical 

 point of view, aesthetic expression and its correla- 

 tive impression must take their due place among 

 NO. 2680, VOL. 107] 



the problems of life and mind. To whatever 

 source the integration may be due, integration 

 there is. Nay, but is there not more than inte- 

 gration? Is there not the progressive evolution 

 of the new? Unquestionably there is; and for 

 its interpretation we must accept the concept of 

 emergence, emphasised by Lewes and elaborated 

 by Prof. Alexander. How comes it that in thought 

 there arise universals which cannot be got out of 

 a mere summation of particulars? How comes 

 it that the proteins of even closely allied species 

 are different? How comes it that the unconscious 

 complex has characters all its own? How comes 

 it that from lust in the animal there is the beau- 

 tiful expression of love in man? In each case 

 there are emergent characters which cannot be 

 interpreted as resultants in terms of algebraical 

 summation. Science must accept emergence as 

 a natural datum, in the absence of which there 

 would be no evolution to be interpreted. It then 

 falls to the lot of philosophy to ask and, if it may 

 be, to answer the deeper question : What is it 

 that makes emergents emerge? 



Plant Biology. 



A Text-book of Plant Biology. By Prof . W. Neilson 

 Jones and Dr. M. C. Rayner. Pp. viii -f 262 -t- vi 

 plates. (London : Methuen and Co., Ltd., 1920.) 

 75. 



MANY have tried their hands at writing books 

 on botany, and although not a few have 

 achieved some success, none has won it in that 

 full measure which to the uninitiated might seem 

 so easy of achievement. The subject is so rich 

 and varied, and plant life so intriguingly beau- 

 tiful, that it is, indeed, hard to understand why 

 we have to wait so long for a really good element- 

 ary text-book of botany. It may be that the older 

 among us did in our youth drink too deep of the 

 German springs of botanical knowledge, and that 

 the supplies from those sources, though excellent 

 for local consumption, have the defect which is 

 often inherent in their mineral and yet stronger 

 waters — that of travelling ill; or it may be that 

 the writing of a good text-book of botany is in 

 truth a peculiarly difficult task. 



The science owns a broad domain — morphology, 

 physiology, pathology, all lie within its range, and 

 those botanists are few who have wide knowledge 

 of them all. Moreover, the laboratory, which has 

 done so much for research, has not proved so 

 useful as a centre for the dissemination of know- 

 ledge. It is not a good propagating house, and 

 as plants grown therein are apt to thrive but 

 poorly, so books written by the dwellers in labora- 

 tories are perhaps lacking in freshness. This at 



