292 
ANNALS NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 
coincide; therefore everybody is by the nature of the case acquainted with 
the contents of his present consciousness. The psychological theory (set 
forth by Mr. Santayana) is that it is instinct and habit, the constitutional, 
which determines a man’s action and forms his nature; that these can better 
be observed by the external spectator; that the play of consciousness matters 
little in comparison. As regards all these it is clear that the philosophical 
theory is right. A man is acquainted with the contents of his consciousness. 
But the important thing in knowing his temperament is not what his con¬ 
sciousness is at any moment, but what further consciousness and what acts 
it will lead to. Thus a man is acquainted with his consciousness, but 
generally fails to “know himself.” As for the psychological theory, it can¬ 
not be true that consciousness matters nothing, or even matters little. All 
consciousness is “impulsive” or motor. All consciousness is, therefore, a 
force toward action. Consciousness which is prevented by circumstances 
or stronger impulses from being realized is still a force, though a defeated 
and buried force. Were the circumstances changed or the paramount 
impulses altered, the defeated consciousness would have its way. Thus a 
person who knows his consciousness knows real forces making for action. 
A person may also observe his own acts and life as truly as an external 
spectator may observe them. The conclusion is, then, that as between the 
observer from within and the observer from without it is the inner observer 
who can see everything. The difficulty for him lies in the many false 
emphases of consciousness. It is a difficult art for the inner observer really 
to read the prognostic signs of his consciousness and acts. The advantage 
of the outer observer is in simplification; all the baffled forces are omitted 
from his view. But on that very account the outer observer lacks the full 
material for judgment. It is the inner observer who has them all, could he 
but master the art of reading the tokens correctly. 
Professor John Dewey opened the discussion on the “Concept of a 
Sensation” and distinguished the following meanings of the term: 
1. The anatomical — for so it must be called — according to which 
the sense organ and its central connections are thought of as if dissected out, 
isolated from the rest of the system, and acting alone. The isolation is 
unreal; the activity of any part is interlinked with simultaneous activities 
in other parts and preceding and following activities in the same and other 
parts. There is never a state of rest, which might serve to isolate the sub¬ 
sequent activity, but everything is really a process of readjustment through¬ 
out the system. 
2. The physiological or biological conception of a sensori-motor reac¬ 
tion, as frequently stated, is subject to the same criticism: the reaction is not 
isolated, nor is the stimulus exclusively peripheral, for the existing condition 
