IMAGINATION. 51 



personal diversity. "It would be interestiiig," he writes, 

 "to work up the subject statistically; and I regret that 

 other occupations have kept me from fulfilling my earlier 

 intention to proceed in this way." 



Flechner's intention was independently executed by Mr. 

 Galton, the pubhcation of whose results in ISSO may be 

 said to have made an era in descriptive Psychology. 



" It is not necessary," says Galtou, " to trouble the reader with mp 

 early tentative steps. After the inquiry had been fairly started it took 

 the form of submitting a certain number of printed questions to a largg 

 number of persons. There is hardly any more difficult task than that 

 of framing questions which are not likely to be misunderstood, which 

 admit of easy reply, and which cover the ground of inquiry. I did my 

 best in these respects, without forgetting the most important part of 

 all — namely, to tempt my correspondents to write freely in fuller ex- 

 planation of their replies, and on cognate topics as well. These sepa- 

 rate letters have proved more instructive and interesting by far than the 

 replies to the set questions. 



" The first group of the ratbei long series of queries related to the 

 illumination, definition, and v^oloring of the mental image, and were 

 framed thus : 



" ' Before addressing yourself to any of the Questions on the opposite 

 page, think of some definite object — suppose it is your breakfast-table 

 as you sat down to it this morning — and consider carefully the picture 

 that rises before your mind's eye. 



" ' 1. lllu7nination. — Is the image dim or fairly clear ? Is its bright- 

 ness comparable to that of the actual scene ? 



" ' 2. Definition. — Are all the objects pretty well defined at the same 

 time, or is the place of sharpest definition at any one moment more con- 

 tracted than it is in a real scene ? 



" ' 3. Coloring. — Are the colors of the china, of the toast, bread-crust, 

 mustard, meat, parsley, or whatever may have been on the table, quite 

 distinct and natural ? ' 



" The earliest results of my inquiry amazed me. I had begun by 

 questioning friends in the scientific world, as they were the most likely 

 class of men to give accurate answers concerning this faculty of visual- 

 images and imagination-images at once, even when they are of the same 

 object and might be expected to combine. All these differences are true 

 of Fechner; but many of them would be untrue of other persons. I quote 

 them as a type of observation which any reader with sufficient patience 

 may repeat. To them may be added, as a universal proposition, that after- 

 images seem larger if we project them on a distant screen, and smaller if 

 we project them on a near one, whilst no such change takes place in men- 

 tal pictures. 



