698 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLII. No. 1089 



raised stands on the -whole somewhat apart 

 from the main doctrines of the book and need 

 not be further considered in this place. 



Considering the work as a whole, the re- 

 viewer has only one caveat to offer, and that 

 relates to the critique, both implied and ex- 

 plicit, upon certain features of the James- 

 Lange theory of emotion. Taking Professor 

 James's somewhat playful announcement that 

 we feel afraid because we tremble or run away, 

 a good deal of futile criticism has been ex- 

 pended in attempts to disprove the doctrine. 

 The really significant feature of James's con- 

 tention has by most of these assaults been left 

 wholly unscathed; i. e., the doctrine that the 

 peculiar modus of emotion, as contrasted with 

 other mental states, was to be found in the 

 dominant part played therein by the reflex ele- 

 ments arising from bodily and especially from 

 visceral sensations. Criticisms such as those 

 of Sherrington and Cannon rest on altogether 

 more substantial foundations than the earlier 

 objections, and deserve more serious considera- 

 tion. Sherrington has maintained, on the 

 basis of his " spinal dog " that emotion 

 may perfectly well be experienced when all 

 connection of the brain with the viscera is 

 estopped. Dr. Cannon maintains that the vis- 

 ceral agitation is very similar in many other- 

 wise dissimilar emotions, and that in conse- 

 quence we must abandon hope of finding in 

 visceral sensations any differentia for the vari- 

 ous emotions. 



Eefiexes of the facial and cranial muscles, 

 by which in part at least Sherrington must 

 have judged the presence of emotions in his 

 dogs, are also instinctive and that is really 

 James's important point, not that the reflexes 

 are exclusively visceral. Visceral excitement, 

 especially that of cardiac and respiratory char- 

 acter, undoubtedly often gives emotion its body 

 and hu\k. Moreover, even in emotions much 

 alike in many respects and showing many vis- 

 ceral similarities, it is not clear that there are 

 not abundant other differences, extending to 

 the reflex conditions of the general skeletal 

 system, and in no wise directly dependent upon 

 purely cerebral activities. Sickening fear in 

 the face of imminent peril has in it not a little 



in common with the breathless excitement of 

 the lover about to receive the first kiss of his 

 beloved, but it also has many points of differ- 

 ence. In both there may be a fluttering of the 

 heart and a quickened spasmodic breathing, 

 but in the first there is generally relaxation of 

 the tonus of the entire skeletal system; in the 

 latter instance quite the contrary may be the 

 case, and the skeletal system may be toned to 

 an extremely high pitch. 



Until it is shown that consciousness is not 

 characteristically modified in emotion by exci- 

 tation refiexly aroused whether in skeletal 

 muscles, glandular activities or visceral 

 organs, the main point of James's doctrine will 

 stand firm. Neither Cannon's nor Sherring- 

 ton's contributions seem to the reviewer to 

 accomplish this. 



Dr. Crile's volume, comprising eight ad- 

 dresses delivered from time to time during 

 recent years, is much more loosely integrated 

 than the studies by Dr. Cannon. The essays 

 vary greatly in present value, and connect 

 themselves with the subject of the emotions in 

 very different degrees. One gets the impres- 

 sion that Dr. Crile either is not widely read in 

 modern psychology, or that he attaches very 

 slight value to its literature. Certainly the 

 essay entitled " The Mechanistic View of 

 Psychology " suggests only the slenderest 

 acquaintance with the contemporary views on 

 this issue, and contains, so far as the reviewer 

 has observed, no material not already more 

 forcefully expressed by other writers, especially 

 by Dr. Loeb. In one passage,^ he says : " Could 

 we dispossess ourselves of the shackles of 

 psychology, forget its confusing nomenclature, 

 and view the human brain, as Sherrington has 

 said, ' as an organ of, and for the adaptation 

 of nervous reaction,' many clinical phenomena 

 would appear in a clearer light." It is not clear 

 what special psychological shackles Dr. Crile is 

 dragging, but the reviewer is at a loss to think 

 of any psychologist of note who would for a 

 moment call in question the formula quoted 

 from Sherrington. Meantime the book, which 

 in portions is over-illustrated with cuts of the 

 kindergarten type, contains a large amount of 



2 P. 48. 



