278 On the process of Memory. 



Art. VIII. — On the process of Memory; by Isaac Orr. 



TO THE EDITOR. 



Dear Sir. — The following suggestions ate probably new, and not 

 altogether unimportant, since if they are correct they throw at least 

 some light on the subject of Intellectual Philosophy. 



In every primary intellectual operation, there are two things to be 

 especially noted. 1st. The impression or influence on the organ or 

 faculty of the mind, from the object of perception or observation ; 2d. 

 The perception of that object by the mind, or the attention of the 

 mind directed toward it. The former of these, as far as impressions 

 from without are concerned, Dugald Stewart has distinguished by the 

 name of sensation, though it is questionable whether it does not often 

 take place when the organ is entirely torpid. The latter he calls 

 perception. The process is simply the following. The light from an 

 object strikes upon the retina. If the mind is sufficiently unoccupied 

 and awake, it perceives or observes the impulse. This is a volun- 

 tary or involuntary act of the mind ; and may be in part both. It re- 

 quires but a moment's reflection, to understand fully, that it is merely 

 the repetition of this very act, which afterwards constitutes the recol- 

 lection or memory of that object. Again, the air vibrates upon the 

 ear, from some one of the various causes, to which sound is ascri- 

 bed. The mind perceives or observes the vibration. This also is a 

 mental act : and memory of the sound in question, is plainly a mere 

 repetition of this very act, or otherwise the power of repeating it. 

 In the same manner impressions are made on the organs of smell, taste 

 and touch ; the mind perceives or observes the impressions ; and the 

 memory of all the objects by which the impressions are made, is most 

 evidently mere repetitions of the primary act, that is, the act of per- 

 ception. One answer, then, to the question, what is memory? is, 

 that it is a part of the very act of observation or perception. The 

 only difference is, that the impression is not made on the organ. 

 The act of the mind itself, is the very same in kind, and can differ 

 in no respect, unless it is in the degree of vividness. 



It is doubtful, even, whether the mind has not the power of produ- 

 cing on the organs of sense, just such impressions as are made by 

 external objects. This power is at least indicated by the electric 

 light,* which appears to exist in the eye, so scarcely latent, or slightly 



* May not this perception of light, (we know of nothing to prove that it is elec- 

 tric,) arise, merely, from the impulse on the optic nerve ? — Ed. 



