CHAPTER XIX

THE SCIENTIFIC IMAGINATION

Psychology, or the science of mental life as revealed in behavior, has

been greatly indebted to physiologists and to students of medicine in

general. Any attempt to catalogue the names of those who have approached

the study of the mind from the direction of the natural sciences is

liable to prove unsatisfactory, and a brief list is sure to entail many

important omissions. The mention of Locke, Cheselden, Hartley, Cabanis,

Young, Weber, Gall, Müller, Du Bois-Reymond, Bell, Magendie, Helmholtz,

Darwin, Lotze, Ferrier, Goltz, Munk, Mosso, Maudsley, Carpenter, Galton,

Hering, Clouston, James, Janet, Kraepelin, Flechsig, and Wundt will,

however, serve to remind us of the richness of the contribution of the

natural sciences to the so-called mental science. Indeed, physiology

would be incomplete unless it took account of the functions of the sense

organs, of the sensory and motor nerves, of the brain with its

association areas, as well as the expression of the emotions, and the

changes of function accompanying the development of the nervous system,

from the formation of the embryo till physical dissolution, and from

species of the simplest to those of the most complex organization.

At the beginning of the nineteenth century the French physician Cabanis

was disposed to identify human personality with mere nervous

organization reacting to physical impressions, and to look upon the

brain as the organ for the production of mind. He soon, however,

withdrew from this extreme position and expressed his conviction of the

existence of an immortal spirit apart from the body. One might say that

the brain is the instrument through which the mind manifests itself

rather than the organ by which mind is excreted. Even so, it must be

agreed that the relation between the psychic agent and the physical

instrument is so close that physiology must take heed of mental

phenomena and that psychology must not ignore the physical concomitants

of mental processes. Hence arises a new branch of natural science,

physiological psychology, or, as Fechner (1860), the disciple of Weber,

called it, psycho-physics.

Through this alliance between the study of the mind and the study of

bodily functions the intelligence of the lower animals and its survival

value, the mental growth of the child, mental deterioration in age and

disease, and the psychological endowments of special classes or of

individuals, became subjects for investigation. Now human psychology is

recognized as contributing to various branches of anthropology, or the

general study of man.

Wilhelm Wundt, who, as already implied, had approached the study of the

mind from the side of the natural sciences, established in 1875 at the

University of Leipzig the first psycho-physical institute for the

experimental study of mental phenomena. His express purpose was to

analyze the content of consciousness into its elements, to examine these

elements in their qualitative and quantitative differences, and to

determine with precision the conditions of their existence and

succession. Thus science after contemplating a wide range of outer

phenomena--plants, animals, earth's crust, heavenly bodies, molecules

and atoms--turns its attention with keen scrutiny inward on the thinking

mind, the subjective process by which man becomes cognizant of all

objective things.

The need of expert study of the human mind as the instrument of

scientific discovery might have been inferred from the fact that the

physicist Tyndall read before the British Association in 1870 a paper on

the Scientific Use of the Imagination, in which he spoke of the

imagination as the architect of physical theory, cited Newton, Dalton,

Davy, and Faraday as affording examples of the just use of this creative

power of the mind, and quoted a distinguished chemist as identifying the

mental process of scientific discovery with that of artistic production.

Tyndall even chased the psychologists in their own field and stated that

it was only by the exercise of the imagination that we could ascribe the

possession of mental powers to our fellow creatures. "You believe that

in society you are surrounded by reasonable beings like yourself....

What is your warrant for this conviction? Simply and solely this: your

fellow-creatures behave as if they were reasonable."

On the traces of this brilliant incursion of the natural philosopher

into the realm of mental science, later psychologists must follow but

haltingly. Just as in the history of physics a long series of studies

intervened between Bacon's hypothesis that heat is a kind of motion

(1620) and Tyndall's own work, _Heat as a Mode of Motion_ (1863), so

must many psychological investigations be made before an adequate

psychology of scientific discovery can be formulated. It may ultimately

prove that the passages in which Tyndall and other scientists speak of

scientific _imagination_ would read as well if for this term, intuition,

inspiration, unconscious cerebration, or even reason were substituted.

At first glance it would seem that the study of the sensory elements of

consciousness, motor, tactile, visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory,

thermal, internal, pursued for the last half century by the experimental

method, would furnish a clue to the nature of the imagination. A visual

image, or mental picture, is popularly taken as characteristic of the

imaginative process. In fact, the distinguished psychologist William

James devotes the whole of his interesting chapter on the imagination to

the discussion of different types of imagery. The sensory elements of

consciousness are involved, however, in perception, memory, volition,

reason, and sentiment, as they are in imagination. They have been

recognized as fundamental from antiquity. Nothing is in the intellect

which was not previously in the senses. To be out of one's senses is to

lack the purposive guidance of the intelligence.

The psychology of individuals and groups shows startling differences in

the kind and vividness of imagery. Many cases are on record where the

mental life is almost exclusively in visual, in auditory, or in motor

terms. One student learns a foreign language by writing out every word

and sentence; another is wholly dependent on hearing them spoken; a

third can recall the printed page with an almost photographic

vividness. The history of literature and art furnishes us with

illustrations of remarkable powers of visualization. Blake and Fromentin

were able to reproduce in pictures scenes long retained in memory. The

latter recognized that his painting was not an exact reproduction of

what he had seen, but that it was none the less artistic because of the

selective influence that his mind had exerted on the memory image.

Wordsworth at times postponed the description of a scene that appealed

to his poetic fancy with the express purpose of blurring the outlines,

but enhancing the personal factor. Goethe had the power to call up at

will the form of a flower, to make it change from one color to another

and to unfold before his mind's eye. Professor Dilthey has collected

many other records of the hallucinatory clearness of the visual imagery

of literary artists.

On the other hand, Galton, after his classical study of mental imagery

(1883), stated that scientific men, as a class, have feeble powers of

visual representation. He had appealed for evidence of visual recall to

distinguished scientists because he thought them more capable than

others of accurately stating the results of their introspection. He had

recourse not only to English but to foreign scientists, including

members of the French Institute. "To my astonishment," he writes, "I

found that the great majority of men of science to whom I first applied

protested that mental imagery was unknown to them, and they looked on me

as fanciful and fantastic in supposing that the words 'mental imagery'

really expressed what I believed everybody supposed them to mean. They

had no more notion of its true nature than a color-blind man, who has

not discerned his defect, has of the nature of color." One scientist

confessed that it was only by a figure of speech that he could describe

his recollection of a scene as a mental image to be perceived with the

mind's eye.

When Galton questioned persons whom he met in general society he found

"an entirely different disposition to prevail. Many men and a yet larger

number of women, and many boys and girls, declared that they habitually

saw mental imagery, and that it was perfectly distinct to them and full

of color." The evidence of this difference between the psychology of the

average distinguished scientist and the average member of general

society was greatly strengthened upon cross-examination. Galton

attributed the difference to the scientist's "habits of highly

generalized and abstract thought, especially when the steps of reasoning

are carried on by words [employed] as symbols."

It is only by the use of words as symbols that scientific thought is

possible. It is through coöperation in work that mankind has imposed its

will upon the creation, and coöperation could not have been carried far

without the development of language as a means of communication. Were it

not for the help of words we should be dependent, like the lower

animals, on the fleeting images of things. We should be bound to the

world of sense and not have range in the world of ideas. Words are a

free medium for thought, for the very reason that they are capable of

shifting their meaning and taking on greater extension or intension. For

example, we may say that the apple falls because it is heavy, or we may

substitute synonymous phraseology that helps us to view the falling

apple in its universal aspects. The mind acquires through language a

field of activity independent of the objective world. We have seen in an

earlier chapter that geometry developed as a science is becoming

gradually weaned from the art of surveying. Triangles and rectangles

cease to suggest meadows, or vineyards, or any definite imagery of that

sort, and are discussed in their abstract relationship. Science demands

the conceptual rather than the merely sensory. The invisible real world

of atoms and corpuscles has its beginning in the reason, the word. To

formulate new truths in the world of ideas is the prerogative of minds

gifted with exceptional reason.

To be sure, language itself may be regarded as imagery. Some persons

visualize every word spoken as though it were seen on the printed page;

others cannot recall a literary passage without motor imagery of the

speech organs or even incipient speech; while others again experience

motor imagery of the writing hand. With many, in all forms of

word-consciousness, the auditory image is predominant. In the sense of

being accompanied by imagery all thinking is imaginative. But it is the

use of words that permits us to escape most completely from the more

primitive forms of intelligence. So directly does the printed word

convey its meaning to the trained mind that to regard it as so much

black on white rather than as a symbol is a rare and rather upsetting

mental experience. Words differ among themselves in their power to

suggest images of the thing symbolized. The word "existence" is less

image-producing than "flower," and "flower" than "red rose." It is

characteristic of the language of science to substitute the abstract or

general expression for the concrete and picturesque.

When, therefore, we are told that the imagination has been at the bottom

of all great scientific discoveries, that the discovery of law is the

peculiar function of the creative imagination, and that all great

scientists have, in a certain sense, been great artists, we are

confronted with a paradox. In what department of thought is imagination

more strictly subordinated than in science? Genetic psychology attempts

to trace the development of mind as a means of adjustment. It examines

the instincts that serve so wonderfully the survival of various species

of insects. It studies the more easily modified instinct of birds, and

notes their ability to make intelligent choice on the basis of

experience. Does the bird's ability to recognize imply the possession of

memory, or imagery? Increased intelligence assures perpetuation of other

species in novel and unforeseen conditions. The more tenacious the

memory, the richer the supply of images, the greater the powers of

adaptation and survival. We know something concerning the motor memory

of rodents and horses, and its biological value. The child inherits less

definitely organized instincts, but greater plasticity, than the lower

animals. Its mental life is a chaos of images. It is the work of

education to discipline as well as to nourish the senses, to teach form

as well as color, to impart the clarifying sense of number, weight, and

measurement, to help distinguish between the dream and the reality, to

teach language, the treasure-house of our traditional wisdom, and logic,

so closely related to the right use of language. The facts of abnormal,

as well as those of animal and child psychology, prove that the

subordination of the imagination and fancy to reason and understanding

is an essential factor in intellectual development.

No one, of course, will claim that the mental activity of the scientific

discoverer is wholly unlike that of any other class of man; but it leads

only to confusion to seek to identify processes so unlike as scientific

generalization and artistic production. The artist's purpose is the

conveyance of a mood. The author of _Macbeth_ employs every device to

impart to the auditor the sense of blood-guiltiness; every lurid scene,

every somber phrase, serves to enhance the sentiment. A certain picture

by Dürer, a certain poem of Browning's, convey in every detail the

feeling of dauntless resolution. Again, a landscape painter, recognizing

that his satisfaction in a certain scene depends upon a stretch of blue

water with a yellow strand and old-gold foliage, proceeds to rearrange

nature for the benefit of the mood he desires to enliven and perpetuate.

It is surely a far cry from the attitude of these artists manipulating

impressions in order to impart to others an individual mood, to that of

the scientific discoverer formulating a law valid for all intellects.

In the psychology of the present day there is much that is reminiscent

of the biological psychology of Aristotle. From the primitive or

nutrient soul which has to do with the vital functions of growth and

reproduction, is developed the sentient soul, concerned with movement

and sensibility. Finally emerges the intellectual and reasoning soul.

These three parts are not mutually exclusive, but the lower foreshadow

the higher and are subsumed in it. Aristotle, however, interpreted the

lower by the higher and not vice versa. It is no compliment to the

scientific discoverer to say that his loftiest intellectual achievement

is closely akin to fiction, or is the result of a mere brooding on

facts, or is accompanied by emotional excitement, or is the work of

blind instinct.

It will be found that scientific discovery, while predominantly an

intellectual process, varies with the nature of the phenomena of the

different sciences and the individual mental differences of the

discoverers. As stated at the outset the psychology of scientific

discovery must be the subject of prolonged investigation, but some data

are already available. One great mathematician, Poincaré, attributes his

discoveries to intuition. The essential idea comes with a sense of

illumination. It is characterized by suddenness, conciseness, and

immediate certainty. It may come unheralded, as he is crossing the

street, walking on the cliffs, or stepping into a carriage. There may

have intervened a considerable period of time free from conscious effort

on the special question involved in the discovery. Poincaré is inclined

to account for these sudden solutions of theoretical difficulties on the

assumption of long periods of previous unconscious work.

There are many such records from men of genius. At the moment the

inventor obtains the solution of his problem his mind may seem to be

least engaged with it. The long-sought-for idea comes like an

inspiration, something freely imparted rather than voluntarily acquired.

No mental process is more worthy to command respect; but it may not lie

beyond the possibility of explanation. Like ethical insight, or

spiritual illumination, the scientific idea comes to those who have

striven for it. The door may open after we have ceased to knock, or the

response come when we have forgotten that we sent in a call; but the

discovery comes only after conscious work. The whole history of science

shows that it is to the worker that the inspiration comes, and that new

ideas develop from old ideas.

It may detract still further from the mysteriousness of the

discovery-process to add that the illuminating idea may come in the

midst of conscious work, and that then also it may appear as a sudden

gift rather than the legitimate outcome of mental effort. The

spontaneity of wit may afford another clue to the mystery of scientific

discovery. The utterer of a witticism is frequently as much surprised by

it as the auditors, probably because the idea comes as verbal imagery,

and the full realization of their significance is grasped only with the

actual utterance of the words. The fact that to the scientific

discoverer the solution of his problem arrives at the moment when it is

least sought is analogous to the common experience that the effort to

recall a name may inhibit the natural association.

The tendency to emphasize unduly the rôle played by the scientific

imagination springs probably from the misconception that the imagination

is a psychological superfluity, one of the luxuries of the mental life,

which should not be withheld from those who deserve the best. The view

lingers with regard to the æsthetic imagination. James could not

understand the biological function of the æsthetic faculty. On the

alleged uselessness of this phase of the human mind A. J. Balfour has

recently based an argument for the immortality of the soul. This view is

strikingly at variance with that which inclines to identify it with that

mental process which creates scientific theories and thus paves the way

for the adjustment of posterity to earthly conditions.

REFERENCES

Baldwin, J. M., _History of Psychology_, 1913. 2 vols.

Dessoir, Max, _Outlines of the History of Psychology_, 1912.

Klemm, Otto, _A History of Psychology_, 1914.

Merz, J. T., _History of European Thought in the Nineteenth Century_,

vol. II, chap. XII, On the Psycho-physical View of Nature.

Rand, Benjamin, _The Classical Psychologists_, 1912.

Ribot, T. A., _English Psychology_, 1889.

Ribot, T. A., _German Psychology of To-day_, 1886.

An Introduction to the History of Science · 第 19 / 20 章