30 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CANADIAN INSTITUTE. 



ditioned and predetermined, and thus, in some sense at least, caused 

 by that end to which it is so well adapted as a means. 



To the above-mentioned three causes we may in all probability 

 trace the inadequacy of the discussion which our subject has hereto- 

 fore received. We find it formally examined, with greater or less 

 minuteness as to detail, by most of those who profess to study with 

 any method or precision the conduct of men and the laws of human 

 nature ; but nowhere have we a final settlement of the points in- 

 volved. We Can nowhere find a definition of habit comprehensive 

 enough to embrace the whole field of its energies ; there is nowhere 

 to be found any logically complete and exact analysis of its pheno- 

 mena ; of their manifold variety we find seldom attempted any sys- 

 tematic classification ; psychology, even though associated with 

 physiology, has not yet philosophically unfolded the law by revealing 

 any general fact or uniformity through which all specific varieties of 

 manifestation may be reduced to system. 



There is iio general tendency to ignore or underrate the importance 

 of the law of habit. But although the word is in very common use, 

 and the significance attached to it familiar to the experience of every- 

 one, and although writers and thinkers are aware of the importance 

 of the law, and recognize its bearings upon the stability of character, 

 it is yet true that they are unable to dispose of the varied facts which 

 confront them, and do not know how to make provision for them. 



It will be our duty, before making further advance, to define pre- 

 cisely that field of study into which the foregoing remarks have to 

 some distance led us. This will best be done, in the first place, by 

 excluding from our discussion all treatment of topics which are 

 irrelevant, the handling of which, unfortunately in difierent works, 

 has been incorporated with the remarks concerning habit. We note, 

 accordingly, that a strict line of demarcation must be laid down in 

 discussion between our subject on the one hand, and natural instincts 

 and ap2)etites on the other. True, there is an intimate connection 

 between habits and these latter. An instinct or an appetite may 

 furnish us with an impulse, continued obedience to which will lead 

 to the formation of a habit, and one of the results of habitual action 

 in a certain direction may be the creation of an appetite, as happens 

 in the cases of the libertine and the drunkard. This close connection 

 between the phenomena referred to has been the cause of some con- 

 fusion in their study. For example, Macvicar, in his work " On 



