Difficulties and Methods 21 



is not the slightest scientific justification for assuming psychic 

 qualities. They may exist, but there is no probability of it, 

 and hence science should deny them. Hence if one ventures 

 to speak of a Psyche in animals at all, one should give the 

 preference to those which can modify their behavior " (29). 

 But that Bethe himself prefers not to make the venture is 

 evident from statements in .the text of the same article. The 

 psychic or subjective, he says, is unknowable, and the only 

 thing we may hope to know anything about is the chemical 

 and physiological processes involved. "These chemo-physi- 

 cal processes and their consequences, that is, the objective 

 aspect of psychic phenomena, and these alone, should be the 

 object of scientific investigation " (29). 



Together with Beer and von Uexkiill, Bethe shortly after- 

 ward published " Proposals for an Objectifying Nomen- 

 clature in the Physiology of the Nervous System." The 

 main purpose of this paper was to suggest that all terms 

 having a psychological implication, such as sight, smell, 

 sense-organ, memory, learning, and the like, be carefully 

 excluded from discussions of animal reactions to stimulation 

 and animal behavior generally. In their stead the authors 

 propose such expressions as the following: for responses to 

 stimulation where no nervous system exists, the term anti- 

 types; for those involving a nervous system, antikineses ; 

 the latter are divided into reflexes, where the response is uni- 

 form, and antiklises, where the response is modifiable. A 

 sense-organ becomes a reception-organ, sensory nerves are 

 receptory-nerves, and we have phono-reception, stibo-reception, 

 photo-reception, instead of hearing, smell, and sight. The 

 after-effect of a stimulus upon later ones is the resonance 

 of the stimulus .(20). 



This attempt at an objective terminology meets the cor- 

 dial approval of H. E. Ziegler and J. P. Nuel. The former 



