February 4, 1921] 



SCIENCE 



107 



Viewed as functional aspects of human 

 life, these phenomena appear to be wholly 

 appropriate material for the science of 

 physiology. That they have not been con- 

 sidered other than casually is doubtless 

 due to the difficulty of devising methods 

 for their exact study, and the historical 

 relation of conduct and experience to phi- 

 losophy and to the experimental psychol- 

 ogy which emerged from it. 



It seems entirely fitting to ask, in view 

 of this limitation of the scope of physiology 

 and the dependence of medicine upon thor- 

 oughgoing and intimate knowledge of life 

 processes, does medicine need a science of 

 human behavior and exiperience as one of 

 its fundamental or basic disciplines? A 

 generation ago this question would have 

 been answered in the negative by the 

 majority of physicians, possibly even by 

 many of those who were most intimately 

 responsible for the development of physi- 

 ology. At present, the situation is radic- 

 ally different, because it has become clear 

 that the science of psychology has devel- 

 oped important methods and assembled a 

 body of facts whose theoretical and prac- 

 tical importance can not safely be ignored. 

 Demonstrations of the practical applica- 

 tions of mental measurement, as for ex- 

 ample in the army, in educational institu- 

 tions, in industry, in penal institutions, 

 and in hospitals, have attracted the atten- 

 tion of intelligent physicians, and have 

 caused many of them to take an aggressive 

 and constructive attitude with respect to 

 the relation of psychology to medicine. 

 They will unhesitatingly give an affirma- 

 tive reply to the important question which 

 has been formulated, and will earnestly 

 support their position by pointing out the 

 vital importance of knowledge of human 

 action and human experience in every 

 practical situation which confronts the 

 practitioner. Some of them may go so far 



as to maintain that the average physician 

 of to-day is quite as ignorant of the struc- 

 ture and functions of the human mind and 

 of the activities through which experience 

 gains expression, as were his predecessors 

 of a thousand years ago of the structure 

 and functions of the body. And they may 

 further maintain that most physicians are 

 entirely untrained in methods of observing 

 and measuring human action and experi- 

 ence, and therefore unable to apply even 

 the simple and well established procedures 

 of practical mental measurement. 



Assuming, then, that the medical pro- 

 fession recognizes its need of systematic 

 knowledge of human behavior and experi- 

 ence and of the technique necessary to the 

 acquirement and extension of such knowl- 

 edge and its practical use, it is necessary to 

 consider next whether psychology or any 

 other existing discipline is prepared to 

 meet this need, and if so, how it may best 

 be done. This necessitates an examination 

 of the status and meaning of psychology. 



It is unfortunately true that many in- 

 telligent and highly educated persons, 

 among whom are some physicians, are con- 

 fused and misled by the diverse develop- 

 ments of psychology. This is chiefly 

 because psychical research, spiritualism, 

 certain kinds or fragments of philosophy, 

 mental telepathy, isolated products of in- 

 trospection, and various methods of study- 

 ing behavior and conduct, each and all 

 claim the name psychology. It is inevit- 

 able that this state of aifairs should con- 

 fuse the person who, unacquainted with, 

 the problems of behavior and experience 

 and likewise unfamiliar with the methods 

 of solving them, views the manifestations 

 of psychology as an interested observer. 

 It should be remarked, however, that the 

 situation is not essentially different frona 

 that in medicine, for there the disin- 

 terested observer notes the existence of 



