Prof. A. Bain criticises Mr. H. R. Marshall’s theory of pleasure and
pain as being determined by the relation between the energy given out
and the energy received, saying that it leaves a very large region
untouched and inexplicable. J. Ellis McTaggart defends the Hegelian
dialectic system which, he declares, “is not so wonderful or mystic
as it has been represented to be. It makes no attempt,” he says, “to
deduce existence from essence; it does not even attempt to eliminate the
element of immediacy, in experience, and to produce a self-sufficient
and self-mediating thought.” E. Bradford Titchener gives a general
survey of the researches carried out in Wundt’s Institute, and of the
other psychological contents of the _Philosophische Studien_, from the
date of Professor Cattell’s paper on “The Psychological Laboratory at
Leipsic” to the present time. W. E. Johnson, in his paper on “The Logical
Calculus,” brings out some of the underlying principles and assumptions
which belong equally to the ordinary Formal Logic, to Symbolic Logic,
and to the so-called Logic of Relatives. Prof. S. Alexander takes
issue with Mr. Titchener’s criticism of Professor Münsterberg’s
psychological investigations. Mr. Titchener’s article which appeared
in the October number of _Mind_, 1891, leaves the impression that the
whole of the work under review is valueless. “Many of his objections,”
however, says Professor Alexander, “refer to unimportant points, and
the graver theoretical ones are really groundless,” and thus the
critic “has contrived to give a one-sided judgment by neglecting the
other considerations which give Dr. Münsterberg’s work its value and
significance.” (London: Williams & Norgate.)
κρς.