194 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XVIII. No. 450. 



(1-8S3). The end of the fourth decennium 

 permits us to see the organization of our 

 association. And the close of the fifth 

 finds us here and now— in full psycholog- 

 ical array, shall we say? To the chronicler, 

 at least, the decennia accentuate themselves 

 by reason of the paramount importance of 

 the events which have brought us together. 

 Our hoped-for historian will probably 

 find himself in a position to point out the 

 importance of these fifty years as residing 

 in their revolutionary results in defining 

 the conception and the method of psychol- 

 ogy. Prior to this era, psychology was 

 well regarded as a waif ; it was not received 

 by the students of facts, and it was gingerly 

 given a berth by the great chasei*s after 

 world categories. The revolution which 

 has given us a 'scientific' psychology, the 

 historian will have to say, proceeded in 

 two directions. First, it developed a gen- 

 eral type of method, which wrought the 

 great change from a speculative defense of 

 the application of certain theoretical in- 

 terpretations of every variety of inner 

 experience, to a factual, inductive, meas- 

 urable, experimental mode of approach to 

 that same experience. The central signif- 

 icance of this change is amply seen in the 

 contrast presented by the fact that modern 

 psychology finds its object is constant with 

 that inner experience— the soul of man re- 

 maining the same, so we may assume— but 

 the conclusions of the study of it— how 

 different from the conclusions of any era 

 which has preceded! No less has its in- 

 fluence been exerted in the direction of 

 creating essentially new problems concern- 

 ing the behavior of mind. Second, it has 

 introduced a basal conception which has 

 shifted from the individualistic, or sub- 

 stantial view of the system builder, to that 

 of the functional, phenomenal view of 

 cosmic evolution, irrespective of the par- 

 ticular formulation given to that idea. In- 



stead of continuing to regard mind as a 

 point of persistent regard with the old 

 psychology, the 'new' has demanded that 

 the 'process' interpretation shall alone be 

 considered fniitful. The revolution in 

 psychological method arose and flourished 

 in Germany; that in conception is the con- 

 tribution largely of English thinking, 

 which took its definite shape about 1855. 

 The flowering of the former has given us 

 'experimental' psychology; of the latter, 

 'genetic' psychology. Such, it seems to 

 me, must be looked upon as the polarization 

 of the psychological thinking which it is 

 given to us to perpetuate or radically to 

 modify. 



It may seem to be a piece of venturesome 

 youthfulness and daring jingoism to speak 

 of 'American' psychology, and to define for 

 a science precise boundaries both in space 

 and in time. That this is but a super- 

 ficial impression is to be seen readily from 

 our desire to emphasize the domestication 

 of the term 'psychology' within our 

 national borders, which has practically — 

 not essentially— occurred within the time 

 limit of the decennium just ended. In the 

 past, American psychology sailed under 

 the terms of 'mental and moral philos- 

 ophy, ' which have even now some fixed and 

 secure anchorages. It, too, was molded 

 chiefly by the theologians, whose line of 

 intellectual descent runs back almost with- 

 out break to Scottish realism. The good 

 thing in this step-motherly care over psy- 

 chology consisted in the wholesome fact 

 that that form of speculation attributed a 

 rather definable degree of primacy and 

 reality to human consciousness, which are 

 so fundamental to the genuine psycholog- 

 ical attitude. And that was about the 

 only good thing in this theological foster- 

 ing. That one may venture to speak of 

 an 'American' psychology is to be re- 

 garded as a recognition of an undoubted 



