1896.] Psychology. 953: 
is disputed no less by the infants movements than by the as of uni- 
cellular creatures. There are characteristic differences in vital movements 
wherever we find them. There is a characteristic initka: in vital 
movements always. Healthy, overflowing, overstretching, expansive, 
vital effects are associated with pleasure ; and the contrary, the ay - 
drawing, depre sive, contractive, decreasing, vital effects are associated 
with pain. This is exactly the state of things which the theory of the 
selection of movements from over-produced movements —* i. > 
that oroa vitality, represented by pleasure, should give the excess 
move s, from which new adaptations are selected ; and that decreased 
vitality, "represented a A sete should do the reverse, 7. e., draw off energy 
and suppress mov 
TẸ: the othe we aim that here is a type of reaction which all vitality 
shows we may give it a general descriptive name, 7. e., Tee ‘* Circular 
Reaction,” in that its significance for evolution is that it dom 
response in movement to all = alike, th wt (ie bang aac 
i in its very form and a 
i and 
press the ba is e it requires the direct 
co-operation of the organism itself, 7 hes called oo Ort Selection.’ 
“This” (note the last sentence), then, is the “Organic Selection ’” 
which Prof. Baldwin himself specifically declares (p. 451) he names a 
“ new factor.” As the reader must see for himself, the author’s descrip- 
tion of it is a description of pleasure-pain functions pure and simple’ 
and nothing more. It is not merely the old pleasure-pain tradition, for 
nothing remains inexpansive in this vigorous author’s hands. Butit is 
the orthodox tradition unfolded to “a type of reaction which all vitality 
shows ;”’ which “ distinguishes in form and amount between stimulations. 
which are vitally good and those which are vitally bad;” “ whichis a 
characteristic antithesis in vital movements always;” which “is the 
selective property which Romanes pointed out as characterizing and 
differentiating life ;”’ and which performs its task of the “ selection of 
fit movements” generally, by its universal exercise in all creatures from 
first to last and at all times. 
It is dangerous to grapple with an author who is so macrocosmic im 
his thought, and so amorphous in his diction. But I discussed Mr. 
Baldwin’s “ New Factor” from the point of view of his “expanded ” 
pleasure-pain functions because heso completely identified it with them. 
I cannot conceive this to have been done more explicitly and completely 
than in the author’s specific exposition of Organice Selection in his 
Part IV. Under this situation it was surely “to the point” to prove 
Mr. Baldwin’s New Factor a myth. The tone of Mr. Baldwin’s “ Note” 
seems to indicate that this was done with peculiarly exhaustive effect. 
66 
