BY GEORGE F. ARPS
The Ohio State University
THE first case here reported came to the notice of the writer through the attending physician; the second case was reported by the father of the child after the attending physician had failed of satisfactory treatment. The second case is especially interesting and serviceable in connection with the phenomenon of visual space perception.
The first case is that of a boy, nine years of age, healthy, vigorous, who in his play ground and street reactions parallels that of any normal boy of his age. Aside from measles and an occasional disturbance of digestion he has been singularly free from childhood's common diseases. The father and mother are strong Hanoverian Germans holding with puritanic strictness to the dogmas of the Lutheran religious faith. So far as is ascertainable there can be no question of faulty inheritance, at least not so far as the immediate parents and grandparents enter into the problem.
The child upon retiring and usually while still wide awake uttered wild screams of terror. Upon inquiry the child complained of falling and clutched vigorously to the bed clothes and the arms of the parents. Usually the phenomenon disappeared when he was taken out of bed and walked about but reappeared when he lay down. He complained of pain in his eyes, neck and fore- and after-parts of his head. No amount of persuasion dispelled the illusion. It should be emphasized that the illusion occurred in full waking state and rarely as a dream.
An attempt was made to correlate the illusion with the momentum of the day's activity. According to the parents the illusion appeared in aggravated form when the neighborhood boys congregated in a cluster of trees at the edge of the village and when playing "train" in which case the barn-top functioned as the locomotive while a high board fence and an adjoining neighbor's barn functioned as the cars and caboose respectively.
The village physician offered no explanation. He prescribed a hot bath and a "closer supervision of the evening meal." The dilatation of the cutaneous capillaries consequent to the bath lowered the cerebral circulation and to some extent reduced the intensity of the illusion.
The cue to the cure appeared when the child, in expressing his fear, complained because he could not see the parent who sat beside him on the bed. Upon lighting the room the child seemed pacified but still held tightly to anything within reach. As a rule the illusion disappeared within thirty minutes after illumination. It was then suggested that the child be put to bed in a well lighted room. This was done but the phenomenon reappeared although in a less aggravated form. Degree of illumination and intensity of the illusion appeared related. The phenomenon failed to appear at all when a coal oil lamp was placed beside the bed not over two feet from the child's head. For six months the boy went to sleep facing the full glare of the lamp. Gradually the lamp was removed until it occupied a position in the hall. Whenever the illusion recurred the lamp was replaced in its original position.
It is quite probable that the intensity of the visual stimulus (the lamp) deflected the nervous current from the neural processes underlying the illusion and thus changed the direction of attention. Any intense distraction, other than the one employed, would probably have served the same purpose. At the end of a year and a half the phenomenon entirely disappeared.
The second case is that of a six-year-old girl, the daughter of highly educated parents. With reference to this case two interesting phenomena were observed: (a) that of mirror-writing of the common variety and (b) that of ambiguous interpretation of the retinal impressions.
The phenomenon of mirror-writing here observed parallels that of many other cases in which the left-right direction is reversed. These commoner cases take on an added interest when considered in connection with a case of double space inversion. Such a case is on record.[1] The double inversion consists in writing all verbal symbols and digits up side down and backward. In this case the boy had perfect pseudoscopic vision at the beginning of his school work. Stratton, by a system of lenses, artificially produces the same distortions and throws some light on the phenomenon.[2]
[1] G. F. Arps, a Note on a Case of Double Space Inversion. Annals of Ophthalmology, July, 1914, Vol. XXIII, p. 482.
[2] Psychological Review, Vol. IV, pp. 341-360 and 463-481.
It is in the phenomenon of ambiguity in the interpretation of the retinal eye processes that this case finds its value. At the dinner table the child complained of the decrease in size of a number of objects in the room, especially was this true of the apparent size of the father's head. The frequency of the complaint led the father to seek the advice of an occulist who pronounced the child's vision perfect in every way. Over and over again while seated at the dinner table the child would exclaim, "O father how small your head is!"
The explanation of this phenomenon is found in the method employed to dispell the illusion. It was suggested that, at the moment of the appearance of the phenomenon, the child be requested to fixate the end of the father's index finger which was revolved, in the air, to form various geometrical figures. This had the desired effect. Clearly we have here a case of the object altering its apparent size without altering its distance. Under normal conditions a change in size is followed by a corresponding change in the distance. It is probable that we have here inadequate convergence and that the optic axes do not intersect at the object but beyond, so that the axes are more or less parallel. Thus the feeling of convergence is less intense than experience teaches is necessary to perceive the object as such a size and at such a distance. If degree of convergence is a criterion for distance and if distance is a measure for the apparent size of an object then we have the conditions necessary for the appearance of the illusion.
Here we have the retinal image constant for the apparent and the real size of the object (head). Obviously the retinal processes are constant for the two interpretations of magnitude and the ambiguity is due to the concomitant factor of convergence.
The conditions necessary to decrease the real size of an object while still maintaining an unaltered image are produced without artificial means. Wheatstone, a long time ago, arranged his stereoscope so that a negative correlation obtained between the degree of convergence and size of the retinal image.[3]
[3] Philosophical Transactions, 1852.
Very interesting is the fact that Stratton demonstrated by artificial means what was naturally the case in that of the boy reported in the Annals referred to above. Wheatstone demonstrated by artificial means what was naturally the case in that of the girl here reported.
REVIEWS
FEEBLE-MINDEDNESS, ITS CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES. By H. H. Goddard. The Macmillan Co., N. Y., 1914. 599 pp., illustrated.
Two comprehensive attempts have been made in recent years to study the inheritance of mental abnormality, one in England at the Eugenics Laboratory of the University of London, the other in this country under the leadership, more or less immediate, of the Eugenics Record Office. Both the English and the American school of workers agree that different grades of mental ability, mental defect and insanity are strongly inherited. But the two schools have reached very different conclusions as to the manner of inheritance of mental traits and mental defects. Each school entertains profound disrespect for the scientific methods and conclusions of the other and with the frankness and honesty which devotion to truth demand has freely criticised the other. By this criticism, at the bottom friendly though sometimes caustic, science has undoubtedly profited. The later work of each school begins to show the chastening influence of adverse criticism.
The English school has leaned backward in its devotion to the inductive method of accumulating inheritance data, ostensibly without prejudice for or against any particular theory but in reality with an ill-concealed bias against anything savoring of "Mendelism." The American school recognizing in Mendelism a great advance and an important instrument for the discovery of new truth, has ignored the possibility that other undiscovered laws of heredity may exist and has cast aside as superfluous the valuable biometric tools wrought with much patient toil by Galton and Pearson. It will be the part of wisdom for students of genetics to imitate the hostile attitude of neither school, but to utilize the positive results of both. This is what Dr. Goddard has done in the work under review.
He apparently began studying the inheritance of feeble-mindedness without theoretical prejudice, but with a practical end in view, to discover, if possible, the causes of feeble-mindedness so as to deal intelligently with the inmates of the Vineland (N. J.) institution with which he is connected. Goddard received inspiration and suggestion from the Mendelian principles which dominate the work of the Eugenics Record Office, but has published his observations in detail so that the reader may test by them any theory he likes. This method can not be too highly commended for it gives permanent value to the publication, however much prevailing theories may change. The book contains a detailed study of 327 "cases," each being the family history of a different inmate of the Vineland institution, as made out by trained investigators who visited the homes of the inmates and held interviews with their parents, relatives, friends and neighbors. English criticism of American work of this sort had prepared the reader to expect carelessness of method and inaccuracy in the accumulation of data, but Dr. Goddard is evidently on his guard against this. He goes very fully into the method of obtaining and verifying the data, and in doing so gives a very strong impression that the data are "reliable." His treatment of the data is also cautious but thorough, so that when he works his way to a conclusion it stands firmly established. The conclusions reached are numerous and important, but the one of greatest theoretical interest is this, that feeble-mindedness is inherited as a simple recessive Mendelian unit-character. This conclusion, so far as earlier publications were concerned, might be regarded as insufficiently established, but the evidence presented in this work renders it, I think, beyond question. Goddard was himself apparently considerably surprised at the conclusion reached. He had expected to find different kinds or grades of mental defect independently inherited as units and confesses to leanings toward views of the physiological independence of different mental functions, but his "cases" give him no evidence of such inheritance. He finds only that feeble minds are minds of arrested development in regard to all functions, and that different grades of feeble-mindedness correspond with different stages of normal mental development completely arrested. How different grades may occur in one and the same Mendelian unit is apparently a puzzle to Goddard, who does not attempt its explanation. It is indeed an absurdity to the "pure line" Mendelian, but not to one who appreciates the fact that Mendelian units are subject to quantitative variation sometimes continuous, sometimes discontinuous. An example of the former is found in the hooded pattern of rats,[4] of the latter in albinism and other Mendelizing characters which assume multiple allelomorphic conditions.[5] Pearson has steadfastly refused to admit that albinism in man is a Mendelizing character, because it may assume various forms ranging from colorless to quite heavily pigmented conditions (blondes). We now find that albinism in guinea-pigs shows an even greater range of variation,[6] yet there can be no doubt of its fundamental unity as a Mendelian character, each grade of which is allelomorphic to every other grade and to normal pigmentation.
[4] Castle and Phillips, 1914, Publ. No. 195, Carnegie Inst. of Wash.
[5] Castle and Fish, Amer. Nat., Feb., 1915.
[6] Wright, S. Amer. Nat., March, 1915.
Goddard's findings as regards feeble-mindedness fit in perfectly with this scheme. That Goddard was unaware of it when his conclusions were reached is all the more evidence of their soundness because it shows that they were reached independently. Among albinos every higher grade of pigmentation dominates all the lower grades in inheritance, and so apparently it is with mental development; the higher grades dominate the lower. At every point there appears to be agreement in method of inheritance between albinism and feeble-mindedness. Each is a unit character but showing graded allelomorphic conditions which correspond probably with different stages of arrested development of pigmentation or mentality respectively.
The fact noted by Goddard that the feeble-minded resemble savages, that is backward races of low mentality, has much interest to the student of evolution. It indicates that the evolution of intelligence has occurred by a gradual progressive advancement, stages in which reappear as the higher grades of feeble-mindedness. Of course it is not certain that the ontogenetic stages, at which mental development may be arrested, correspond accurately with earlier phylogenetic stages, but the idea receives considerable support from the observed resemblance between the mentality of morons and that of savage peoples, if the observation may be accepted as accurate. I do not understand however that Goddard makes any claim to first-hand familiarity with the mental life of savages, so that no great emphasis should be laid on the point. But the mere fact that RETROGRESSIVE variation in mentality is GRADED favors the view that its PROGRESSIVE evolution has been gradual, rather than the view that it has arisen by mutation or sudden loss of inhibitors. (Bateson, Davenport).
Goddard points out that a high grade moron may be a useful and self-supporting member of society in some environments (usually rural) whereas he would be quite helpless in the keen competition of urban life. This suggestion leads the reader to wonder whether many peasant and peon populations of the old and new world represent survivals of an older and lower grade of mental evolution than has been attained in the more advanced nations, or whether it is merely lack of opportunity that makes these populations backward. The fact that in every generation great men come from the lower social levels shows that the lower classes are not entirely devoid of capacity; nevertheless it seems probable that a low grade of intelligence would stand a better chance of escaping elimination in the struggle for existence when placed in a simple environment than when placed in a complex one. Consequently, under modern conditions, we might expect a peasant or peon population to average lower in mental capacity than a community more advanced in civilization. Whether the peasant population would equal in average intelligence a band of North American Indians or a tribe of native New Zealanders is very doubtful, for in such peoples natural selection for intelligence was undoubtedly severe because of their intense struggle with nature and with other tribes, unaided by the accumulated knowledge and tools of civilized communities. Among such peoples greater demands were probably made on inborn intelligence than among modern industrial populations.
As regards the CAUSES of feeble-mindedness Goddard's findings are wholly negative, but not less valuable on that account. His case histories statistically studied indicate no causal relation to a number of reputed agencies in the creation of feeble-mindedness, such as alcoholism (which he regards as oftener a symptom than a cause), tuberculosis, sexual immorality, insanity, syphilis, accident and consanguinity. He recognizes HEREDITY as its principal source, i. e. he recognizes feeble-mindedness as a stage of mentality already existing and transmissible by the ordinary mechanism of heredity, but does not attempt further to account for it, either as a survival or as an atavism.
That humanitarian governments by shielding and supporting the moron without putting a limit on his naturally high reproduction will speedily increase this class at the expense of the more intelligent classes of the community is self-evident, if it is admitted that feeble-mindedness is hereditary, as all who have investigated the matter carefully now declare. Goddard shows further that a large percentage (probably more than half) of the alcoholism, pauperism, prostitution, and crime, of the United States are directly traceable to hereditary feeble-mindedness, another strong reason for taking measures to reduce it.
How is this to be done? Goddard has no cure-all to offer but urges first of all that the mental grade of each individual be accurately determined and education and occupation be provided suited to his capacity. This will tend to make the moron a useful and contented member of the community, not a menace to it. Segregation is recommended so far as practicable, but in view of the large number (estimated at 300,000 to 400,000 in the U. S.) Goddard considers segregation of all impracticable. Nevertheless he urges further and energetic efforts in this direction, that as many as possible may be segregated as a safeguard against their reproduction. In individual cases "sterilization wisely and carefully practiced" must be employed to insure non-reproduction.
In this volume there is a pleasing absence of the rant which pervades some eugenic literature. The author has something of importance to contribute to science and he presents his contribution in a sober, dignified manner in keeping with the important character of his contribution. W. E. CASTLE.
CHRISTIANITY: THE SOURCES OF ITS TEACHING AND SYMBOLISM. By J. B. Hannay.
(Francis Griffiths, London; pp. 394).
This is an attempt to expound the symbolism of the Christian religion. It is divided into three main parts: ancient cults (phallism and sun worship); ancient cults in the Old Testament; ancient cults in the New Testament. The author's main thesis can be stated in a sentence: the essential constituents of every religion, and the underlying meaning of its symbolism, are phallicism and sun worship. Of these the former is the more important, more primary, and more wide-spread; the latter is a superimposed layer better adapted to more civilized and educated people, but rarely penetrating into the hearts of the common people to the extent that the former has. "The great branches under which all the religious systems of the past have developed may be classed as based, on the one hand on the consideration of our world and the continuity of life upon it, expressed in Phallic symbolism, and on the other hand, on the Sun as the great giver and sustainer of man, expressed in Solar symbolism." (p. 21). "As the Phallic cult was much the older, it retained its position after the rise of the Solar cult. It required a much higher intelligence to grasp the facts of Solar worship, so it never entered the 'hearts' of the common people as did the Phallic worship, but it had a much more intelligent priesthood, and was the arbiter in all questions of dates, and regulated al) feasts; and, what was more important to the people, fixed the time for payments of debts or interest, and regulated the times of sowing and harvesting, so it became a much more 'official' religion than Phallism." In support of these conclusions the author marshals a huge number of facts, so that the work becomes a veritable encyclopaedia of symbolism.
Now in spite of the fact that the reviewer fully accepts the main thesis of the book, as stated above, and therefore has no prejudice or hostility on the score of the conclusions encunciated being distasteful, his judgment of the book is entirely unfavourable, for the following reasons: In the first place, any presence of the book to be a scientific, and therefore impartial, contribution to knowledge is invalidated by the author's moral bias evident from beginning to end, against religion in general, and Christianity in particular, which he maintains is the most phallic of all religions. His point of view is that of the older rationalists, to whom religion is nothing but an unfortunate instinct for "delight in the miraculous," expressing itself in phallic and sun worship, and fostered by the exploiting tendencies of priests. His desire seems to be, in writing the book, to "show up" religion and, by discrediting it, hasten its end.
In the second place, there is not a single new idea in all its closely packed pages, and therefore no excuse for writing them, since the material here laboriously brought together is easily accessible in other books. It never seems to dawn on the author that pointing out the sexual basis of religion, which countless other writers have already done, is but the beginning of the problem, the starting-point of all sorts of complex riddles. Having dogmatically divided all religious symbols into male and female, he is self-satisfied enough to think that he has explained religion. There is no inkling of the points of view suggested by such words as determinism, significance, genesis, so familiar to the modern psychologist.
Side by side with all this goes a disorderly arrangement and very imperfect powers of criticism. The latter feature is especially marked in the field of etymology, where the author fairly lets himself run wild. The following gem is a typical example (p. 110): "Bacchus became degraded into the God of Wine, and his fetes became drunken orgies, but he was originally the beneficent sun who ripened the fruits, and hence God of Wine, from which, indeed, is derived the English name of all our gods, angels, prophets, or even parsons,-"divines," "dei vini," "Gods of Wine." Jesus was the "True Vine."
The merits of the book are that it may direct the attention of some people to the connection between sex and religion, if there are any who are still unaware of this, and that it possesses a good index that may be useful to readers with limited facilities for looking up particular symbolisms; it is also well illustrated. ERNEST JONES.
LAUGHTER: AN ESSAY ON THE MEANING OF THE COMIC. Henri Bergson. Translated by C. Brereton and F. Rothwell. (Macmillan, London, 1913. Pp. 200).
In this stimulating little book Professor Bergson propounds his theory of the comic, which is shortly to the following effect. Noting first that laughter is purely a human phenomenon, and therefore probably has a social significance, he seeks for this by trying to define what are the essential features of the comical. He reduces the various characteristic features in the main to one, namely, automatism on the part of the comical person or thing. This automatism is of a special kind; especially is it an automatism that is out of place, that occurs at the expense of spontaneity, vitality, and freshness. It may thus be defined as "something mechanical in something living," "a kind of absentmindedness on the part of life." "The comic is that side of a person which reveals his likeness to a thing, that aspect of human events which through its peculiar inelasticity, conveys the impression of pure mechanism, of automatism, of movement without life." "To imitate anyone is to bring out the element of automatism he has allowed to creep into his person. And as this is the very essence of the ludicrous, it is no wonder that imitation gives rise to laughter. "This bald statement of Bergson's conclusion is, in the reviewer's opinion, made very convincing by the delicate analysis he proffers of numerous illustrations.
Up to this point Bergson's theory of the comic fairly well coincides with that of Freud. The latter author, it is true, summarises his conclusions in different language. But the meaning is not very different. For him the feeling of comicality is an "economy of ideational expenditure," and it is evoked by the sight of another person who in a given performance displays either a lack of mental activity or an excess of physical, i.e., who is either stupid or clumsy. Compare this formulation with Bergson's. The latter says that the opposite of the comic is gracefulness, rather than beauty. "It partakes rather of the unsprightly than of the unsightly, of rigidness rather than of ugliness." The replacement of mental by physical activity is insisted on in the following passage: "Any incident is comic that calls our attention to the physical in a person, when it is the moral (i. e. mental) that is concerned." Again, he compares a comical person to "a person embarrassed by his body." His automatism is essentially a lack of mental nimbleness, a formal lack of mental elasticity, a defective capacity for rapid adjustment, in short, a mental laziness. And especially is this defect one of consciousness. The failure is on the part of the higher mental activities, which should be the most alert, and what happens is a relapse into unconscious, automatic modes of functioning, a form of absentmindness. "The comic is that element by which the person unwittingly betrays himself-the involuntary gesture or the unconscious remark. Absentmindedness is always comical. Systematic absentmindedness, like that of Don Quixote, is the most comical thing imaginable ... ... . No one can be comical unless there be some aspect of his person of which he is unaware, one side of his nature which he overlooks; on that account alone does he make us laugh."
In substantial agreement on this general conclusion as to mental rigidity and bodily clumsiness, the two views diverge from here. According to Bergson, the comic presupposes "something like a momentary anaesthesia of the heart;" "laughter is incompatible with emotion." For Freud this absence of emotion is much more characteristic of humour than of the comic, two matters that Bergson quite fails to distinguish. Then, whereas Freud explains the subjective side of the comic purely on hedonic principles, Bergson sees in it an important social function. According to him, laughter is one of society's weapons for dealing with tendencies that threaten to diverge from the conventional and accepted norm. It "restrains eccentricity" and "corrects unsociability." "Any individual is comic who automatically goes his own way without troubling himself about getting into touch with the rest of his fellow-beings. It is the part of laughter to reprove his absentmindness and wake him out of his dream ... . Each member must be ever attentive to his social surroundings; he must model himself on his environment; in short, he must avoid shutting himself up in his own peculiar character as a philosopher in his ivory tower. Therefore society holds suspended over each individual member, if not the threat of correction, at all events the prospect of a snubbing, which, although it is slight, is none the less dreaded. Such must be the function of laughter... . It represses separatist tendencies." "Unsociability in the performer and insensibility in the spectator-such, in a word, are the two essential conditions." This interesting theory leaves some questions unanswered. Why, for instance, should onlooking society remain emotionally cold in one case, and merely laugh, and in another case adopt much graver measures? Bergson deals with this point rather imperfectly. It is not the seriousness of the case that decides, for "we now see that the seriousness of the case is of no importance either: whether serious or trifling, it is still capable of making us laugh, provided that care be taken not to arouse our emotions." Nor is it the immoral nature of the deviation from the normal. "The comic character may, strictly speaking, be quite in accord with stern morality. All it has to do is to bring itself into accord with society." "It is the faults of others that make us laugh, provided we add that they make us laugh by reason of their UNSOCIABILITY rather than of their IMMORALITY." The most specific criterion seems, in Bergson's opinion, to be that of vanity. "It might be said that the specific remedy for vanity is laughter, and that the one failing that is essentially laughable is vanity."
We may briefly refer to some other matters dealt with more incidentally; wit, and the relation of the comic to art and to dreams. The discussion of wit is perhaps the weakest part of the book. No analysis is given of the different forms of wit, and the important subject of what may be called its technique is quite passed by. Wit is identified in a superficial manner with the comic in general, the fundamental differences between the two, which Freud has dealt so exhaustively with, being altogether ignored. Bergson gives a more interesting and profitable study of the relation of the comic to art; especially of the nature of comedy as distinct from other forms of drama. According to him, comedy portrays character types rather than individual persons. He repeatedly insists on this point, adding that "it is the ONLY one of all the arts that aims at the general; so that once this objective has been attributed to it, we have said all that it is and all that the rest cannot be." Further, "comedy lies midway between art and life. It is not disinterested as genuine art is. By organizing laughter, comedy accepts social life as a natural environment, it even obeys an impulse of social life. And in this respect it turns its back upon art, which is a breaking away from society and a return to pure nature. "The discussion of the relation of the comic to dreams is, on the other hand, less satisfying. Comic absurdity is stated to be of the same nature as that of dreams. The main point of resemblance seems to be that in both cases there occurs an absence of social contact. In both there is a mental relaxation from the effort of "seeing nothing but what is existent and thinking nothing but what is consistent." This really applies much more to wit than to the comic itself.
As may be expected, the whole book is written in Professor Bergson's pleasing style, and is full of suggestive hints and fresh points of view. The most significant contribution, one which pervades the book throughout, is the view of laughter as a social censor. Even if this hypothesis is substantiated by detailed investigation, however, it cannot rank as a complete theory of laughter, or of the comic, until it is supplemented by some explanation, not given by the author, of the most striking feature of laughter, its capacity for yielding pleasure.
It only remains to say that the translation is literally excellent. ERNEST JONES.
ADDRESSES AND PAPERS AT THE OPENING OF THE PHIPPS PSYCHIATRIC CLINIC, JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL. The American Journal of Insanity, Special Number, Vol.
LXIX, No. 5. The Johns Hopkins Press, 1915.
This special number of the American Journal of Insanity contains the exercises and papers delivered at the opening at the Phipps Psychiatric Clinic at the Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, Md. The contents of the entire volume should prove to be of the greatest interest to all students and lovers of psychiatry. The volume opens with a brief but fitting Introduction by Dr. Adolf Meyer, Director of the Clinic, a man to whom American psychiatry owes so much for the stimulus and inspiration which he has injected into others. This is followed by A Word of Appreciation by Henry D. Harland, President Trustees, The Johns Hopkins Hospital, some brief remarks on The Psychiatric Clinic and the Community by Stewart Paton, the heart-to-heart talk on Specialism in the General Hospital by Sir William Osler, and a short talk on The Purpose of the Psychiatric Clinic by Prof. Adolf Meyer. There then follow a series of fascinating and inspiring papers, as follows: The Sources and Direction of Psychophysical Energy, by William McDougall; Autistic Thinking by E. Bleuler; Personality and Psychosis by August Hoch; The Personal Factor in Association Reactions by Frederic Lyman Wells; A Study of the Neuropathic Inheritance by F. W. Mott; On the Etiology of Pellagra and its Relation to Psychiatry by O. Rossi; Psychic Disturbances Associated with Disorders of the Ductless Glands, by Harvey Cushing; Primitive Mechanisms of Individual Adjustment by Stewart Paton; Demenzprobleme by K. Heilbronner; The Inter-relation of the Biogenetic Psychoses by Ernest Jones; Prognostic Principles in the Biogenetic Psychoses, with Special Reference to the Katatonic Syndrome by George H. Kirby; Anatomical Borderline between the So-called Syphilitic and Metasyphilitic Disorders in the Brain and Spinal Cord by Charles B. Dunlap; and Mental Disorders and Cerebral Lesions Associated with Pernicious Anemia by Albert Moore Barrett. The number is concluded by the penetrating Closing Remarks of Prof. Adolf Meyer.
The papers by Mott, Rossi, Cushing and Heilbronner are of the greatest interest. The discussions by McDougall and Bleuler are fascinating and uplifting. McDougall's paper is a masterpiece. Kirby, Jones and Hoch present us with the modern standpoints in the conception of the psychoses. Throughout the volume one sees the adoption of the broad biological standpoint in mental life. The adoption of the term "biogenetic psychoses" is indicative of the general trend. The adoption of this well-chosen phrase is, I venture to suggest, the product of Dr. Meyer.
The reviewer regrets that the papers do not very well lend themselves for brief reviews. Furthermore, he would not attempt to briefly present the views which have been so lucidly and succinctly expressed by the individual writers.