Page:Philosophical Review Volume 4.djvu/676

660 endeavors, the danger, namely, that in trying to be simple we shall be merely puerile, while in trying to be familiar with our readers we shall become offensively patronizing. Dr. Scripture, we regret to say, falls hopelessly into this pitfall. Imagine, for instance, a keen-witted business man taking up Thinking, Feeling, Doing in a leisure moment, and reading the opening words: "Eyes and No-Eyes journeyed together. No-Eyes saw only what thrust itself upon him; Eyes was on the watch for everything." A child of ten would be pleased and attracted by this sort of thing; the effect on any intelligent adult would, we fear, be quite the contrary. Let us quote a few more passages. "In the first place, what is attention? It is a very sad fact, but I cannot tell you what it is" (p. 89). "If I were writing a dictionary I would define memory as that portion of mental life about which everybody has been talking for three thousand years without telling us anything more than anybody of common sense knows beforehand" (p. 239). Let us devoutly hope that Dr. Scripture will rever write a dictionary. Notice the following flight of the scientific imagination: "Probably no better illustration of this method for finding the threshold [of sound intensity] could be found than distant footsteps heard in a still night. All is silence. The assassin in his hiding-place feels secure from pursuit. Suddenly he notices a faint sound; is it pursuit or imagination? It becomes louder and distinct enough to be clearly, though faintly, heard; avenging justice is at hand. The intensity of the sound at the first hearing represents the threshold. The pursuers come nearer and nearer, but never think of searching the bushes by the wayside. Their footsteps die away in the distance; the last faint sound disappears at the threshold. Silence; escape at last" (pp. 147, 148). "What is rhythmic action? Such a hard Greek word as rhythm (alas! there is no English word) must mean something very dreadful" (p. 253). Is the state of mental development to which these remarks are addressed that of all the non-psychological members of the community? If so, no wonder that Dr. Scripture feels the imperative necessity of acquainting 'the people' with psychology. The passages quoted are, however, models of dignity when compared with some of the illustrations, those, for instance, on pp. 39, 47, and 114. The principle which governs Dr. Scripture's attempts to write 'for the people' seems to be that expressed by himself on p. 248: "If you wish your class to remember the story of Waterloo make a pun about it, and a bad one, too."

However, the best way to reach the multitude is a matter of opinion; possibly a matter of taste. But a more serious criticism