No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 February 2018
There are two methods by which an approximate analysis of the elements or constituents and of the laws of Mind may be arrived at. They may be submitted to examination in the mind itself; or they may be inferred from character, conduct, or individual acts. In both processes there are sources of error, and limitations. When subjectively considered, the nature and the accuracy of the result depend upon the original capacities to observe, abstract, report; upon those as affected by education, physical health and external circumstances, and upon the influence of preconceived opinions in estimating mental phenomena.
∗ This anaesthesia or obtuseness observed in many is a barrier to training. It interposes between tbe stimulus of pain as well as of pleasure, and consciousness as factors of cerebral excitement and thought. It may predispose to subjectivity; it certainly diminishes greatly the multitude of slight impulses by which the activity of intercourse with the external world is sustained.Google Scholar
∗ p. 18. “Third and Final Report of Experimental School, &c., and First Report of Trastees of Massachusetts School for Idiotic and Feeble-minded Youth.”Google Scholar
∗ Rev. Edwin Sidney, Rev. W. Knight, &c.Google Scholar
∗ Ann. Med.-Psych., t. viii, p. 108.Google Scholar
† Ann. Med.-Psych., t. ii, Quat. Ser., p. 57.Google Scholar
∗ Esquirol, t. ii, p. 302.Google Scholar
∗ See on this subject, ‘Life of Girolamo Cardano,’ by Morley, H., vol: i, p. 35.Google Scholar
∗ ‘Des Hallucinations,’ &c., p. 180.Google Scholar
eLetters
No eLetters have been published for this article.