8/13/2019 The Art of Human Understanding

1/6

,.,'4f

-

William IamesDavid E. Learyi,rrr i34,F = itut"nino,te

and the Art of Human Undel i,.andilrg4uNc Ttortht'r r"rou

ranging fronr the philosophical and psych r :or l calrhrough the common-sensical and ;cier tifi.: Italso influen-ced the waf in which he ttlol3htabout and tbrmulated his own specifig p:;11,fq-logical and philosophicrJ dqctrines. To r.nl:r-score its centrality as a fundamentaI n,ctifthroughout all his rvorlq I shall begir by .:vitw-ilg rhe wavs in which - and the ardstit m,:a_'phors through which, farnes characleriledphilosophv and philosophizing ovef tr le r-( rrrsr ofh is cateer. Subsequentlv, I shall turn my at,rnri rnro lames's riew of hunran undersranding, itsdeveloprnent, and its turther articulaticn andirpplication in his psycholrrg.v. .

fames's Porrrair of philosophyIl*tl1l. goal of philosophy, according tolames, is to-TChiEVFthFTi6s[ili-encimr,riiifia'>'--.-_-.$etv.9_rterslr'ctlve,possjbIe.Inpractii{fi oi\ei.rr,r-_--a.-+--'-no phrlosophy gan ever be-gry.thing [.ur airlrnmaryiGtE,api.t*"ortr'.-wilGi:';;la*-nren t,- a -{6reiiliofrEniE*6ii.l;i-eve vie,v ott-,},ifrctlslrCdrGmiltin,eil'iii)e/ iiti j. i r.Because no single pjrso_n or group carr acl :ev: aj s:': -15-"t.G _Ti:i;[si[1ffis _( r rzoj r i zii t -diflned_phii999Bhis $ i.t*----_r"sthe hab.t olr rv r s_:*lne 1" .] ::l{iyt f r gainins anc?F, ir[,r g"mental p-erspective," like a ioruioissErir ir.r krr garound a three-dirnensional statue (p.4).Just as Plato 'once described sci'ence ,r. t[ esearch for likely stories, fames ( l9t)5/ I 97gr . sr:.dtfat the philosopher searches for ,.nrr,;e r,r l: spleusible picrures" (p. l4l). Conceprs are .,.ie ., stiken on realir.v," he suggested (James, 1910. 91.1,,p. 200i, and "pljlgCplieg3 onlv pictures : Ir i:world rvhich hii,e ff6ffi*up in'ihe minds r . d,;_lerent indiriduals" (quoted in l\lver,r 19 i i, 1 .570). ifyou..t'ant to understand anyor.r's l, ril:-sophical system, Ianres argued, yor.i ihoirld :1,Ia::vourself. . . ar the centre ofithat p:rsontl lrrilr.sophic visiqn." 1\'hen you do, .,you undersrrnd at.once all the ditterent things it makes Ithat pe-,o r it'*tteorsa,v. Butkeepoutside Ithat visiorrJ . . . rr ,lotcourse you fail" (James, lg}gt l9:,7.p I I i i Frr -

.Phllosophf is more a matter of passionatc r:;iclrth:}n of logic.... Logic onlv find1s| reasofi rorne vrsion afrenvards" (p. g l ). Given rhis ro - r.i : .tton, it is not surprising that James fe,t thlt .umon's vision ts the great iact about hin:" (p. l4l

Although lan:.rrr h:d I special affinity fOr thenotion that-r ;it

8/13/2019 The Art of Human Understanding

2/6

are (or should be) always changing rather thanfued. In the words of his much-beloved Emerson,they should be "fluxional' rather than *frozen'(Emerson, 1897/1983a, p. 55i l8'14/r983c, p.46iion these important points, see tames, 1 890/1 983c,pp. 500,753-754;984; Leary, 1987, pp. 326-327i1986; 1990a, pp. l9-?0, 45-47l.In orherwords,James felt that the analogies, conrparisons, ormetaphors that provide the means of huinanunderstanding are partial and temporary in theirutility, and that they shoutd be changed as neweraspects of reality come to the fore in the streamoi experience. For lameb, a staunch empiricist,Ihere was always a new yray to experience anyreality and a new way to categorize'any experi-ence. Although a given analogy may provideuseful insight into experience and realiry, it cannever provide a truly definitive and final view ofit. His convictions in this regird pertained per-.tbrce to his philosophy of siienc.. "Any bit ofscienti6c research," he wrote, "becomes an angleand place-o_{vantage from rvhich argrrnrents arebrought to bear" (l&mcs, tB85/l9B7b, pp. 383-384). \r'henever a si.ienrific theory is takenls "delir:irive," it crtts oit'other vantage poinrsand hence becomes "perspectiveless and shorrl'(lanres, 1896/1986a, p. i36).For exumple, if one rr'lshes to understandthe nature of the mind, it might be helpful tonote that the nrind is like a machirre in a irumberoi regards, and it may prove fruitful to e;":plicalethe H'ays in rvhich, and the degrees ro rrhrch,this is the case. But Jaures rvould insist thatthe nrind is not identical, strucrurally or frrr,.:-tionally, rvith any knorvn machine, including riremost sophisticated cr:nrprrter of our ortn f .ry.The use ol other.analogies will be necessar) :ioelncidrte the mind's other, perhaps negiectedaspacts..{rrotherrvay to express }an:es's belief-a beliefthat he began to arriculat in the 1870s - is tosav that h,c humans con understand things,eyents, and e:rperiences only froni and rhroughthe r.ierrpoint ofother things, er.ents, and exper.i-ences. '[his belief or thesis by no nreans rulesout valid and reliable human understanding. Onthe contrary, if in addition to noting paialtelsamong a variely of phe*ont9flit, rve abstract andname the specific similarities that account tbrthese paraltels; rr.e can develop reirsonable andcoherent arguments regarding the aptness ol

particular analoges hr.d of ihe thcorlcs bascdon them. Sueh arguments will sometitnes resultin quite reliable inferences. Crafting such argu.inents, Iames pointed out, is something thatoccupies both scientists and philosophers: Dis-confirming or verifying them is somcthing atwhich scientists .rcel, and leaving rnalogical ormetaphorical insights in their more complex,'unresolved," but highlysuggestive ibrm accolrntsfor the gefius aad lertile n'orks of poets, artists,and others (see James, 1890/1983c, pp.984-988),\Vhatever the various uses to ${rich analop5iesand rnetaphors cafl be put, James emphasizedthat the offering of rvhat he called 'siinilarinstances," far froin being "a perverse act ofthought," is "the necessary 6ist step" in any t'?eof human understanding, rvhether scientific ornonscientifis.(p. 987).It should alio be noted, because it will un6er-score.the drt invoh'ed (according to lames) increatile cosnirion. that the coniurins ol "similar-ffi.^lnstances rvas, tor hrm, a ven, subue alfalr. someindir"iduals, "rid no, othurs, ur. unusually adeptat this tasli:?s ht stated in The Principles ofPs1'r:fiol.rgy, 'sonrc pe,rple are Jitr nore sertsitiyeto resentblancrs, tmd,Jhr ttore rcntly to poittt ottt*,herein thel' cansist, tha:l oificr-r nrg" (;n6.t,1890/1983c; p. 5C0), Indeed, he rvas convincedthat "n aati;,E talettTlor' perceiving annlogiesis. ,. the leading fnct in geiius of *zry order"(p. 5001. For.rhereas most people "have no eyesbui for ttios,l a;)ects of things rr'hich Irhey]have alleady t:ecn taught io discern," creativeindir'iduais are precisely those rvho furtherhuman u,idersta'rding by noting analogies thatothers 'r:oul(l ne'ier cogltate alone," althoughthey nray recogr-iize. and appreciate them oncethey are pointed out, rvhether b1' Shakespeare,N\{on, Dax-qvin, Tolstby, or some other gehius(p. alO). (Tbe persons I have just named rveresome of lenres'r laroritc ex;rmples of genius. Seelantes, 189011983c, pp. 98.1-988.)Development of James's Portrait ofHuman Understandingfames's theo4' of rr'hat I shall call the art oflnnnan understtrrlding - the arr of graspingsimilarities anrongt phenomena and of thusforging perceptual patterns and conceptual cat-

egories out of thE flux or' ch..ros pf experience- pvolved in the i876s from a very rich rnixtureofhis orvn reading anti dxpcrience.'I'he reading,as I have argried elsevrlreie (Leary, 1988), includedespecialiy th $rork and thought ofRalph \AraldoEmerson and William Wordsworth - for instance,Emerson's essays on "The rAmerican Scholar"(1837t1981a), l.A,rt" (18+l/ 989b), and "ThePoet" {i8.14/1983c), and Wordsrrtortht lorigpoem, "The Excursion" (1814/1977). ti alsoincluded rvorks by Robert Brorsring, JohhnnlVolfgang von Goethg and Nathaniel Har+thorne.The experience, as opposed to the reading,that formcd th. -S?Tis-6ijifrFilnsight andbelief had nrore to do rviih his effiorts andrncounters rr'ith art, and it started lorig beibrehis time as a paintr and artist's ?rpprentice.Here is the rvay that his brother, the novilistHenry lames (1913/1983b), subsequentlydescribed the yourhful \ltillianr: 'As I catchW. l.'s image, ftbrn far back, at its most char-acteristic, he sits drawing .'and drawing,alrvays drarving... and nor a-s with a ploddingpatience...but easili, frei:$ and'. -. infallibll"'ip. I lB). This inrnge is repidteil in Heirr ,'svarious reminiscencei, and ii is a pi(:ture thatenerges from other sources as vrell, not lelstfrom William's olvn Jrawing notebooks (nranyfine examples of lames's draruicgs e,:r reproducedin Feinstein, 1984). From early in lile, lanresshowed a renrarkable.aptitude rvith a pencil anda strorlg inclinatiori to givE tree rein to it.In addition, lirst in Nerv Ycrii C:ry, then inEurope, and finally irr irlerrport, llhode Island,Iames took lessons aird deveio'pgcl the obviousahilities that he h:ri. 5up..lenl,:niir,f rhe exerciseand development.of his orrn tolent,..he alsoshowed a distinctivl interest and an unusualsensitir.ity as an observer'oi art. Thioughouthis life he rvas a iurious and omnivorousmuseu[r risitor, often attracied to $.hat $xsnerv and experimenirl.lIn this context, James rvas'persuatled at theage of l8 to become an xrtist, and he comnrittedhimself rvholehearterJly ro an apprenticeship inNerrport, Rhode Island, rvith the highlv.regardedpainter, William lvlorris Hunt (on this period ofJames's life, see Bjork, t988, pp. ?2--36; Feinstein,1984, pp. 103-145; Perry, t935, Vol. t, pp. t90-201). Signifi.cantly, this rvas fames's first conrnrir-Ihent to any field ol study or poterrtial career.

Laul'),ltttt:t;i.i,t.l t.iz Arr .:i ilurlt?n Ltnicrstandutg 9lIn arplaining his.lecision to his father, he said. that he contiiruallr rec'cived from his "intercourse' with a*. , . spiriiu.rl impressions the inrensesrand puresr I knorr'." Not bnlv rr'as he inclinedtorr'rrd art, he said. but life "would be embineredif I rr-ere kept frorn it." With foresight he added,'Thar is the rva:- I feel at prercrrt. Of'course Imar change'; (qu..red in Perqi, 1935, Vol. l, pp.199-r0o).: The foilowing , ear was frrll of the explora-tions. discovEiiEs, rnd trials of apprenticeship,enhanced in signiricanr rval's br the friendshipand ideas of his feUorv apprentice, Iohn La Farge.Lp Farge rras se\rcn riears older than William andmuch more e:,perienced than cither lVilliam or\Yilliam's )oljtngEr brother Henry rvho oftEnacconrpanled him to Hunt's studio. As Henry(l9l.lrl983a) larer rccalled, La Fargc qui"-klybgcame "quite the most interesring p.rron ,"iknert" (p. )87). .fithough Hunt rvas.clearlr' "a' 6gure unmistakable'(p;279) from rvhom \\tilliamle4rngd a -qreat de,ri, La Farge be.--ame "the 6eureof'figrrresi'lbr born \Villiam and Henri, (p. lS9)."An i:nbodin:enr. ol' rhe gospel rrf aesrherks" r p.?901, La Farge "oprped up , . . prospecrs and poi-sibilities thar rnade the future tlush and srr'arnr"(p..16;r. Eesides iniroducing them to Brorr,ningaud Eulzacl rsho rnyre to influente \Villianr anrlIi;.pry respectivelr', he represented for lVillianr accnlinuatior of the vidal and intellectuat 'ch;rl-lenges. pres

8/13/2019 The Art of Human Understanding

3/6

-

_ ,rever Decontc nxed of solld. {Adam;. Whatever laCtOrS r,ere llr,,,rrlvccl,,t jj m(rli.,/es1987' p' 30) ar:d rationlle for lhrner,'* tur'"h riionr i.rt :u scierrcer. 1.. .L- , .r: less imponrnt tha,, thc l*ct thnt tre had srrch.rry- Wiltiam.n'as sostruck by the technical a,rd con- , formativl .*porur. ,, ar. ,rnd painting,r ,i.his

aj that timc tliat he rcmembired and ,t,sc-,irs"j tude, prepared hi, .1"',i:.t'T;;lr:ilff tj.];thenrrvithLaFarge-toLaFarge'sama::ement- re;ponsi1.e,inthclB(.t) nr.f ..gZ0t,toF.mcrron,ralmost 50 years later-(La Farge, 19l0). Althoug,r ani htordsnvortht i,rr* ,*lrurli;; il;il:;James's subsequs6l i'ps),chology of conscious- ht,r,rair thought. I" I.r.;,;;*;;";;,;;;,;; i,ness" rr';ts no doubt_nrultiply determined, Ga1' 1 fmerson's aid Wordsrvorth,r, thq norion fhatwilson '{llen (1967) had good reasqn.to suggest human understanding is baricnlty onllogical o,that La Firrge }t'as tnrong those rvho inf-uence,l metaphorical ,"., ofl**n qxpresled rvith visuolits develoPment (p. 69),:Despite the c,eati'e ene,gv and gro*th pro- l:Hfl:ijdH:::xiljl;:i,:ffi]ilT"Hljlduced during thls apprenticeship, by the fall of .u' urrffiffit#i"rvpoints and achievc nerv186l lames had left Hunt's $tudio, given up his perspectives. As a fbrmcr artist, fnmes felt theaspiration to an artistic career, ar:d moved with righiness of Emerro"', ""; w;.;r;;;'r;tril.his familv to Cambridgc, Massachusetts. He He was deeply and intimately arvare rhat onc canentercd L4wrencc Scientific School at Harvarcl comc to see things aneltr, ro notice fresh aspects,Univcrsi4', thus st4rting dorvn the parh thar and to create nlvel possibilifles in reality, ,{sled to his accomplishments and renorvn in \Vordsrcoith put ir in'lThu E*.urgon,,, rvhich. plychologl' qnd philosophy' Iarnes read and rerearl n the early lgz0s nruchMuchhrrsbeenwrittenaboutrames'soire-yeaias Charles Dannin had done to sinrjlar effact inapPrcntic?ship' In panir-ufar' there has been a rhe earh. 1840s (see perry, 1935, vol. t, pp. 33s-grcrrt rdell of speculation about James's rRoiives . j39, _ii5l, the mind has tn ..e-.icursive porvrr,, tofor giving up his calling to become en artiit, .wander "bpoi. ti,, ,"'6rtti, vi.erving it from thjs. dgs,prite pl.cntiful cvidence of his inter.sir and an.4 n'or*. thar vaitagi: Foifi rh; siraping itsrbilitl'; but in fact,.littlc is knorvn foi ceriain. Thar "prpspecrs' tworarliorir':driitptt, rip. iri,hislqtherrvasnothappr.abouthischoicenfvoca- til1.'E"en rihat is taken i:, be normal reulirytion is abundantly clear, and this alrnost crrtainry neeas to be learneJ, o, J".u,, "rn . to realize, Asplayed a role in famejs decision (see especially he pur it quitg tellingly in T\e printiplu of psy-Feinstein, 1984, pp. l.lr)-t43). Horr;erer, ir is qlso rnciggl.t f iSOif SSl.tl jurt ", "in po.iry "rij,i.lausible,asPerry(19,1-i,vol. l,p.?00),andBjork arts--someone has ro t:orre and rell us rvhat(1988, prp. - 0-31) have suggestid, rhar ,a.mes, aspctts rre may single out" (n 420), ro too olisinrply concluded thar he could not be,:ome a hu:..ons "must go tlruugh _'l";;r;;r;;; ;-pairter o[ the *ery ti.1,s]g&"nd,nence turned the eye and eur b"efort the'y c;: e*i-,." r,..rl,i-to science. another of hisland his father's) many tie;, rvhich adults peritire" r-q. 724). lC";lly,-;h.intprests. In any case, as his brother Henn. labeis tbr reality ihar *.,lru".ir,;p.a-li',r,i,( l914/ 198-lajpur ir, "norhing . . . could have been ,ni"a tf,rorgh i'hi, forf .au,r; ,ipn rrill gg llux_less logicrl. ),e[ ar the same'tine more rratural. ion:ri rathei than lr..icn. , -,io,,,,r;.t,';lr;,than thirt \\tilliant's interest in the Jrs1qgi66.1 ' prctesottennottober: (Las;.,sot.r,:lr.rsbeco*rcpiiinting shorrld have suddenly ani ahruptly oll too.onuu.,tional ci.r iiterr.J.i^,ou: r,:entolity.ceased" (p. 100). There rvas in rhe event '.no As a resuli,"liriiEssaii, ,,if.," lost o,,, stock ofrepininq 1t ptot'ta 'ffi fiiilieffigtt (nr'. labe,s rre should be inrellecruirly lost in the midststlb:3unTcTffiFl;ilure;,*a..p.rG*t rt,"* of ri,.,rorld,,fp.;;;.tjr.*;;"a.rr*jr.'.el 1lvils no 'lnste' As Henrv ( I9l J/I98lb) had noted he realized, depends on .;uch iahels, rvhose mean-eorlier, }l'illiam "flor.ered i" .u:rf [secnringl ings are derived (or rvere der:,ed long ago) frornl .irste" lp. ll7)- And indeed, rvith hint*ight, I their analogical'reladnns. l_ car ire advance{,rrquld argue thrrt his.vear-long stay in Nervport lrorvever, oily ruith ,tu *otr.,.';io J_f*r" f"i.f,rras a rurorial tbr his later philosophical and sci- for lrer.. .oni.p,, and termL. grounded in newentihc r 'ork, not a detour on the lva1'to ii. viervs of realit*

f urtfi er A-rticulation and .Applicatj rinof famests View of HumanUnderstanding in prychologyJanres's belief in lhe analogicai or met;rirhoricir.foundations .of knowledgc is richly irl;.rs::rate:in his psychological rvritings. His trea,;rnett ot:thought or consgiousness as r s1:i.eani ihstend' of a chain or train is rvell-knolvn (ser iirmes,1890/198-1c, chap,9), and his discussion ofotherpsy,chological ropics is similarly infornred byunderlying analogies and metaphors. The ulti-mate ntetaphors that founded and franrr.d hispsr-chological thinking, and rhar carne to under-gird his philosophical pragmarism, pluralism,and ndical empiricism, s'ere the Danvinian nret_aphors of rariation, selection, and funciion.,tllpsvchological states and actions, acqor,ling toIarnes, are products ofspontaneous varjation orselection in terms of their consequential urilitl..'l'his functionalist orielrtation has influencedman,v other Anreriean psrchologists and hasstructured rnurrh of the theorelical argunlenta-tir'n in nrodern isychologp. Unfcrrturratelv, it hasin sonre rcspecs beconre lroren, despire l,rmes.sadr.ocacy of a fluxional approach to human andscientifc understanding and it is ofter: trken

{in one or another of its contemporary T:rsic.ns}as a defiiritively auihoritative portrrit ofhuman nature.I have discussed this elservhere (tenrI. lg.:,0ir,pp. 2G-21.47*19). The poinr here is that larres'sorvn psi'chology- (not to ntenriot his phil,rso- -rvrrellected and reinforced his vierv of iu.ranunderstanding, Ianres used analogie; inrl n,, ra_ rphors thrlughout his rvorks, not sinroly ii:s .rarsoi expressing his ideas, but irs rva1,s of orr tri rt-ing then:. He oftcn drery on his arrrstic r:x|, yi-en-ces in his anenrpt to understand ,rnd triJ irinpsi'chological phenomena as \\'eli as ii ris u tr - rp1to pursue philosophical retlection. ,.n [r.:r, .hefrcquenry rgith rvhich he drerv on his ;,.rti,ticexperience in important, ohen critical, F.is${esis trotcrvorthy. I nsohr as these passogus oft * n hr.r,eto do tvirh the namre of human cogniti;n andttnderstanding, rvhictr he conceivetl fronr t;e st:rton the nrodel of artistic experience, thi,r is rrotsurprising. But his use of arristic expcrient e as asource ofmetaphorical referents suggests a hasicprinciple of human cognition _ ih"i hr*rn,lcnd, naturally enough, to drarv their nrost .elling

analogies lioni their own experience. In otherrvords, thei. use what is familiar to urd.r"t..rithc less funiilia:-_ In rhis sertion I quote at length fromvanous pa:j.;dges in The prbtciples of psychology(1890/198'3r--) ro demonsrrate- rum.;.oily nJ*Janree often used a transparently artistic analowto re;rch, explicate, and defend a point. tn ihelepssrges nore how ofteri the notion ofperspec_rirr, -of seeing li.om a diffcrent angle oi *,iihina dilllrent ,::.onlextr rvas crucial foi l"*.r, onJ1tt1nj to r:s ri.equent references to \.t"t t.nao tearned as an artist. For instance, looking. fonvard to \is chapter on perreption, ,ameselvfote,

\\'e shaii see hory inr,eterate is our habit of notarrending to sensations ir5 subjective far:ts, bur ofsimply using them as steppilrg-stones to Dissoter tn tire recognition of rhe realities rvhosepresence thcv reve,il. Tlre grass out of the rvindorvnorv looks to me ofthe same green in the sun asin the shade, and yet a painter would have topoinr one part of it dark brorrn, anorher pant'right ).e ,r.r. to give its ..nl *unr"rionnl *fi"_t.\\'e rake ,lrr l,i:.d, is a rule, of the difl-erenr rvavin rvhich l:re stme tlrings look. and sounrl u,rdsnrell at rJiiferent distancrs and under differentcir{unrsrarrici. The sarneness of the rhnl.E isrrhat rve are concerned to ascertain; in.l anlsen_sarions rhai a.ssure us of that rtill probably becon5idere

8/13/2019 The Art of Human Understanding

4/6

-

?. elJ,,,J r7 I J/ rrv''$'r

,nurr think ofit in a fresh manner. see it uridera somewbat different angle, apprchend it in dif-ferent relatious ,from *iose irt which it lastappeared... From onc year to another we seethings in new lighrs, lvhat wirs unreal hasgrorvn reai, and rt'hat was olciting is insipid. (p.227)In summing trp at the end of his critical"streanr of Thought" chapter' in a famous

passage that articulated his vierv of humanundtrstanding as rvell as anything he everwrotc, James wrote'Looking back, then, over this review, we sec thatthc mind is at cvcry stage a rhatre sf simulta'ncous possibilitics. Cqnscidusness consists in theconrporison of thssc with each other, the sclec'tion of some, and thc suppiesrion of the restby tht rclhforcing and inhiblting agency'-ofaitcntion. . .. Thc min4 in short, works on thedata it reccives very much as a sculptor workson his block of stonc. ln a senle thc staruc itood,rliir...lhere froirr etcrnifo. But there werc a thbusandclitt+rent ones besitle it [rr'ithin the scnl* blockoi stonel, and thc sculptor alonc is to thank forhcting ercricated this one from th resr' iust sothe rvorld of each of us, howsoever differentour several views of it may be, all lay embeddedin the primordial chaos ofsensations, rvhich gavethe nrcre ,hatter to thc thought of all of us in-difterently. . '. Other sculptors, other statuesfrom the samq stone Other minds, other worldsfrom the game nlonotonous and inespressivechatjsl NIy rvorld io but one in a million b'likeembedded, alike real to those rvho may abstractthem. How different must be the rorlds in theconsciousness of ant, cuttle-fish, or trab (p'l:; \The selection of one possible staiue, of one

possible view of the rvorld, rather than anothelrvas intricately and deepl,v related, for Janres, tothe interests ofeach person. The concePt Dfintet-csr is (hus fundanrental to lamcs's psycht*logl- andphilosophy, and in particular to his vierv cihu*an understanding. The next passage provideslrrmes's defirrition oi interest. It should be clearthat the artistic analogids that he used in thispassage ate not secqndary; rather, they retlect themost hrndamental rr'a.v in rvhich he conieived thisinrport:rnt concept.

lvlillibns of itcm of thc 6]iinvartl order arepreseht to my lcnrcs $/hlch ncver propcrly enterinto my expericnce. Whyl Blcituc thcy hrve nointcrrtt for rne, Nly erPerianl. it whdt I agrcc toanettd to. Only those itornl which I nntica rhapemy mind - without solecti{c intercat ixPeriencris an uttcr chaos. lntcn:st rlorrc giver rcccnt sndimphasis, light and sha,le, background and fore-ground - intelli8iblc PsrsPrf-tivrr in a word' Itiaries in cvery creature' but viithout it the con-sciousness of every creatura would be a graychaotic indiscrjn:inateness,''imPossiblc for useven to conceive. ' . . Thc interest itself, thoughits gencsis is doubtless perfectly naturnl, ulakes'experience niore than. lt ir made by h' (pp'380-38 I )

To underscore horv fundamentel this contePtof interest is, recall thflt in James"$ Bsychology' .intel*st difects attmtion, attention dirccts selcc'tion, and selection confers cohereo{e *n eachlevei of psychological fi:nctioning - the per-ceptual, the conceptuai the gecti':al, the aes'thetie, and thc moial isee James, 1890/1983c'pp. I7-r*27Sl.r Interest' lhen, dq$ned ns "intel-iigibie persp"'ctive," unde.dies lhe a{ of humanundersianding.' )ames .uppii.d " nice,exarnple of the applicd-tion of this art:

Let tbur men make a tour in Europe' Onervitl bring home only picturesqug impressions.-casru*ei.nd colors, parks and riews and works6f atchitecture, pictur* and Statuetu To anotherall rhis witl b" non-rxirtror; and. distances andr rices, populations and dr; inage-arrar'gemellts'aoor- *d' windorr-fastenings, and other useiulstatistics will take their place' A third will give arich lccount of thc theatrer. restauian$; andprblic balls, and naught besidc; rvhilst the fourrhruiB pcrhaps have been s -{raPped in his on'nsubjictive broodings a$ to tall litttn nrore than af.* nu-os of places thtc*sil t' :i{h he passcd'Each has selected' c,ut of tl.' $aut nrass of gre-. sented objecrs, thor'l whi;l suircd l*is pri':atr' interest and has made his experience thereby'(pp.273-276)

lvinny other paisages could be citeri, nraking thesame point. -For instance, in a passage alreadyquoted in p.rrt, ,ames rYroti,

NIen have no ey'es but fot thosc aspccts of thingsrvlrich they have already bcen trught to disccrnAhv one ofus can notice a phenorirenon aftlq.i1has once been pointed out, which not onc irl tel.tlousand could ever bave discovercd .foir'himself. . ..Tl:r- only things which'wc continbnlysce cre tliose which we preperceivc [those forwhich we are on the lookoutl, and the onl;rthings which rt'c preperceive are those whichbarr been labelltd for us, and the labels starnp,:dinro our mind. 1p.420).{fter discussing thc perception of likeness'

rvhich is to sa)', the perception of analogies ornrctaFhors, Jarnes said,

lfthe readqi feels that this faculty [of perceivingsinrilaritiest is having small justice done it. ' . . irhink I emphasize it enough when I cail it one ofthe ultimate foundation-pillais of the intellec-ru.rl life. (p.500)Not sur'prisingly, James drerv on his sensibilt'

ties and experience as an artist and artist's appreri-tict throughout bis chaprcr cin perceptiorr,pointi:rg out (for instance) that the "eye-pictule"crerted by stimuli impinging on the optic rierreis quire different from the mind-picture th4t isproiluced, the mind somehow correcting for lhelngie ofvision and substituting a concept ofthcobject as it rvould appear from a hpotheticaliyideal vantage point (Janres, 1890/1983c, p. 724).Sinrilarly, in the chirpter on space perceptles,James.discussed rvhat is now called brightnessand size constanc.v. In one passage he explicitiyrelerred to the troining that underlay his ps,vchrlogical insights:

Usudly rve see a shect of p.rper os unift'rr:ti.rr.'hirc, although a part of it nray be in shadr:,v.But rte can in an instant' ifrve please, notice rlreshadorv as lo.-al color. A man r,'alking torvards trsdoes not usually seem to alter his size; but r*ecan. by setring our attantion in a peculiar noy',

. make him appenr to tlg so. The u'holr edur',rtit,nof the anigt consists in his leaming to (c i;ilpresented signs as well as the represelted t,rin1;s.No matter rvhat the field of vierv rreari-s, he se; isit also as it/rel.< - that is, as a collection ofp,rrc.iesof color bounded by lines - the whcle ft'.mi.rgan optical diagram.of rvhose intrinsic plopcr-tions one who is not an artist has hardly a corr-

LL\try,l,l, i,rri::s ttn.I the Ar't: aj liunlan Undersnuttlitg 95scious inkling. :l]rc ordinary rnan's attntionpasses ovei thcm to their import; the artist'stuins back and d'rells upon them for their ownsake. "Don'.t dravr the thing a$ it ii, but as itloo,ts " is the endless advice ofevery [art] teacherto his pupil; forgetting that rvhai "is" is rvhat itrr'ould also'rlook," provided it rver placed inrvha we have sllad the "norrnal" [that is, theideall situation for vision. (pp. S7.l-875fIn his chapter o'l the perception of realiry, inrvhich the psychology of belief rvas his central

concern, James:r'ent beyond the usual focus onlhings and disiinguished r.ery effectivelv among anumber of different lvorlds - the world of sensorythings, the rvorld ofscientific qualities and forces,the world of ide-al relations and abstract truths,the ivorld of "idols of the tribe," the varioussupernatural rvorlds of religious belief, the inntr-merable worlAr of indMdual opinion, and theivorlds of"shctr mirdness and vagary" (pp. SZO-922), "Every ob.lecr v'e think of gets at last referreilto one world ar anather af t]lit ot of some sinilnrlist," hc rvroti {p. -o?2).

Propositions conc,:ming the ditferent rrodds arenrade ftom "dittirent points ot vieili'; and in thismorr or less chsotiq state the conscitrusness ofmost thinkers rrmains to the end. F,ach rvorldvlilst it is nttended to is real after its or*n tashion;[butl the reality lapses with the attention. (p.92-i)

I neetl not remind you thal attention is directedby interest, whi.::h fdr Janres is a natural, individu-ating firctor. Thus, he said,

I/rcfons et origo lr)rrrr sr,lrring Erirrt nml f'arutda'tionl ofall rcnlitl', t4relher frout the obtolftte or thepfictititl poirrr u.f vie:v, is. ,. ;rrbiert;l'* i-r orrr--'"rsllcs. . . Rrrtrlity, startin$ lrom our Ego, thussheds itself f'rorr;, poinr tr point. . . . It onl1. tiilsrvhen the c*nnerting tlireld is lost. .{ \'holes)'stem nra be r:al. rf it oah' hrng to irt'r Egoby one inrnrediately stia.png term. {pp. 925-926 )

lrrhat is filt arid ,rnderstood to br: real, then, isrvhat is of "stiril;ing" interust, rvhich according toJames's de$ni:ion oIinter:;t is 1\'hatever is linkedto a compellinri irtclligible perspective.i

h

ri l1:: lliI1ilt,iil.ti.ti't,*,*.,r't:.':)l{ii'4,rti

8/13/2019 The Art of Human Understanding

5/6

-

,."i, ,t " fundlmental role of perspectise inAiames's thought becomes clearer' his later red"lc-- iion of the self or ego to a point of view orfield of vision, in the years after the Publica1ionof TIu Principles of Psychology, begins to makeincreasing sense (see Leary, 1990b' pp' I 16-l l7)'"ln this little-knorvn development of his rhought'tames came to depict the individual cgo' nothumon ,rnd"rrtnnding alone, in ternrs of thefundamental artistic concept of Perspective'From the presenl historical vinuge point' onecan see how this largely unexplored dxtensionof his thotlgiht lvas consistent with his crreer-long relionce on the concept of perspecrive'sta;;inB from his esrliqst definition ofphilosophyas "the-possessio4 of mer'rtal perspectfue" {iarnes'ls76/li78b, F' 4), lames had intused his prin-ciples of psTchology rvith his PersPectivalistvision, and he rvent on 5utisequently to developversions of philosophical pragmatism' pluralism'and ra,licai empiricism that wcre equally pre-nrised on the assumption that there is alwaysirnother view to be had' Together with manyothar orristic insights and nretaplrors' this bcliefin the funrlrrntentol reality of :rlternltivc andsupplcnrental PersPectives permeated larnes's.ntire sYstlm of thought'

s-rsrer,n o;f:thought, he rald, w.tr "tnnlantic" r0'therthan'lclassic" (lamcs, I 90 I / 198$b, pp; l9$'194)'His views, hc esplaincd, rvcre concrc 9' ul99f .'complex, overflorving," opcn-ended, and incom-pt.i.. on -m-oft-fiila:mti'tiified the "clean,oure lines and noblc simpliciry" rypical of the;S"';i -;;;mi[i6iitt ilii iiiaisic'acadcmic"apprcB9ii, bur ou thc otber, thcl.wcre 99:lTlglt*ilfiti th" art of hurnan uriderstdhding as he c-orn-lqlrnd3.d it (see lames, i90i/1975b' pp' lfr-17;l'910/1979, ppt i 6-79)'

The factlhat his vierv of human understand-ing wns based on his experien,:e'as 8n orlist ma)'hip explnia rr'h,v lames's ns1'cholog '. and phi--losophy groun-ded-as. $r-e1, are on this- rierv ofhu*^n':naaiiifial"g, h;;;-itrti;Ail Iu ;itcn-tion and respect ofsq many artisls and hunranists- not tc mentiQn scientisti and psychologists - tothe present dal'.r0 As lames (1897/19874) oncesaid of someone else's rvork, his own rvr:rks donot'violate" the "deepest initincts" ofartists (p'516),

Perhrps the leading artist in |anes's lite rvashis brother Hsnry James, lr-, the novelist' It isi.nteresting to nste tliat Herr4'pubiished a novel'Thc Trnpit l\'lrrse (1890/t988). in the same year-m;fVlrii;ii p riEiish ed r|rr. P &i''rPlis- -oJJ:i.,' ?l -ogr'. \{illianr himself suggetted that this concur'iffie ma'le ls90 a b1-1151 vear for Americanliteralure (James, 19f, P. 299)' Not purely bi'chance, Henry's novel 4iil-with the r*orld ofart,tr ln his orrn inimitable language (H' James'1906-1908/195'l); the "pictorial fusion" of thenovel brings logether a "multipl-igtio-n of as-pects" (p. 85) that denies anT"'iiSui'iring lsPectaufpriviregedJ consciousness' {p. so)' ]}e 1't}]1q6Ffriry't and \Villinrn's rnatili hat otisn beennoted. I use Henry's gligratigl4--here simply toprovide r conte"tt for t;yi\s tiltt I do not.intendm1' uinv of \r'illi'.rm Jatnes's lrt oi humonunclerst'.rntling,'and of its inrpact on his i)stemof thotrght, to have any j$ privilege -overothtt pcrspcctives on lhc development ot hrsthought. Btth lames ancl his rr'ork are incred-iblv i;ch nnd or-e3dcterrilnrd' But I do belierethat thc p"rtiJifur aspect cf Wiliianr {ames'slife and work that I lrave p'ciiuted out in thisarricle is intponani alrd ner:ds to .B tlsed-in|.;;ri jrfir:1'I:-:.T1ii *t 1ia i"nqfu9tP:l:1.-

il

NotesI lames's fasciration with, and closc study o[ the

painrings of Eugtne Delacroix h Frrir - at thirieenyears of age - is a rdevgnt cxamplc (see B5ril:,198S, pp- 14-19). Thdre is goqd rcason to suppdsethrt his ruminatiotrs on thc works of Dclacroixstinrulated bis thinking about the lack of any rleardistinrtion benvcen tbc subjective and objcnivi.poler in erperiencc. This rr'as an imporhnt concern

. of his later nork. At the other end of his life,perhrps the best example of his continuing opeir-nes to novclty in art rvas his joyful astonishmcniat the rvork of litrrtisse and Picasso (sec Stc.in,1933/t960, p. 80). Clearly, hi5 au,areness thit modesof lepresentation and wdsstanding arc liable tochange rvas nurtured and sustained by his famil-iarit)' rr'ith art, lf he lometimes elprcssed rcgrrtabout his lack of fornrql education, hc couldnonetireless have. agrecd with his brother Henrythat, lbr them. "the great roonrs of thc Louvre"r.,ere "educative, formctive, fcrtilizing, in a degrecrvhich no othcr 'intellectual espefiente' ,. . couldpretend . . . to rival" (H, lams, l9l3/IgE-rb, p. 197).itly argumcnt hcre is that |anres's shoriconringsin ldrmo of nrathem.rtics and logic. rrhich fornraleducrtirrn rr'ould h,tre qorrc(ted, rvcrc nrore thlncounterbalmccd by thc insigbts he gained frtrmart. Ar his "master" lVilliam Nlorris Hunt (l8lr5*. l88iil976) said rvith considerable for;sight, atleast as regards fames, "maihenratics.,. don'tdcvclop a person like prrinting" 1p- 86). .3 Allen ( I 967) also claimed that "it would be frrtile toattempt lo trace .ny lasting influence of l\tillianrHunt on his life," although Hunt's school of paint-ing rsas consonant rr'ith Imes's later insights (p.59). \fithout asscrting any singulariry of influence,I think thrt Allen's cloinr is eraggerated. Hunt's(1875--l8$3i 1976) repeated adnronishnrents to hitstudents conlaind many hints oflames's hter drrc-trines ie.g., regarding the centrality of experienceand thr primac,v of action), and larne.s himsilf ;rg-gestcd ho.s sensirir.e and retentive he iras,r'itlrrcgurd to these hints b.r periodicall;- referring to"the endless rdvice oi every [artl ieacher to hL,pupil" {lames, I89011983c. p.875). lndeeci, )am.;s'sportrait of philcrsophv echoed his teacher s diciurlhrt iiinling ir "tht ,,r4' unileFal Liriq;rrgc: Alttuture is creittion's picture-bookl" iHunt, l8;j5-.lS83/1976, p. 7l).3 After learing Nervport, fames kept hii drarring alivelor another decade bcfore he claimed to have lt ir"die out" (quoted in Perrv, l9-15, Vol" I, p. J30). Hrregrelted this loss of saious drawing but he mtin-

tained his interest in art, with some fluctuations,throughout his life. As he told his brother in 1872,he envied Henry's belonging to "rhc world of art"because "a.way irorn it, as we live, we sink into aflatter, blanke; kind ofconsciouness, and intlulgein an ostrich-like forgetfulness of all our richestpotentialities-" T'hese potentialitis, hc said, ..stanleus norv and lhen when by accident sonre richhunran product, picrorial, Iiterarl, or architecturalslaps us with iu tail" (quoted in Perry, t 9J5, \'ol, I ,p. 327). A.1 critica.l points in 1868, ISTt-lAI,l, 1882,and 1892, art "shpped" hirn into inrportani medira-tions. This ren:ains a largely untold storJ:4 lames's critical concept ofselection was not drawnsol.ely fron-r Darwinian.thought Rarher, his artisticerpcricnce preparcd the rvay for his acceptance.ofthis Danvinian principlc and is application on alllevsls ofpsychological phenomena- As he rtrore inan unpublishcd manucripr on the psychologq ofaesthetics, there is an 'analogv betlveen ail and lifein that by both, r:esults are reached only byselection& climination." Quoting Robert Louis Steyenson,hc rycnt on to say that rthere is bu one art - toornit" (fames, ,:r. lil94), Tht imporrancr of selec-tion in famr5'r p:;ycholog.v rrias unambiguously.e-tpresed rvh

8/13/2019 The Art of Human Understanding

6/6

2t' t.r.r{,r , i. v, t5r/r-r ".1 -tLt.tt."'. L -r)t'tt tuL)

tivarion.'I insnndy teh thai i had bccn losing thewholc inwlrd signifii:ance of the iituation,,..Whon lfiey looked on the hideous stumps, whatthcy rhought ofwas persond victory... . I had beenas blind to the peculiar idealiry of their condirionsas thcyccrtainly would also havc been to the idealitTof nrine. had they had o peep at nry strungc indooracndcmic rvays of life ot Cambridge" (pp. 193_l3ah'Ncither the whole of truth, nor tfie whole ofgoodiis reveoled to any singlc obsciwer, although eachobserver gains a partial superiority of insight frorirthe peculiar position in which he iton&" (p. 149).8 Hurirrg exrended perspectivism to his treatment ofthe sclfor ego, lames -ame to understand pcrsonalidenrity and religious conversion as invoh'ing,ferFrctively, a cflltcring or changing ofone's per-spcctivc (lamcs, 190 i t985, pp. l5t-162). Beyondthat. he came to undirutand "the Absolure" as therunr ofoll actual.pcrsFedtives, nonhumon as well ashunr,rn. ond thus to ruggest that eyen the Absoluteit opcn to continurl { \'clopmcnt, os imore picture3of reolitl' lrc crcetcd by its constituent points ofvier*( 1909/1977,pp. I 3G-l 3 I, t 39-l.l l;1899/1983d;p. {i 1902/1985, pp. 409-414), This l6d Santa}'anil( 19lJ/1940) to comment, rvith perhaps morc justi-frcstion than he krrew. thnt lamcs's God rtrs "a sortQf. . . struggling arr.ii:" il. I l0).9 Thc organization of flu Printiples ol Prycholagt(Janres, 1890/l 983q) hrs birftled manv prychologistsand rritics- Ih fact, this orgruization nrqkes reasoi -abll'good sense ifone ussunres lames's artistic pointof rilv. After gctting prcliminary discucsions out ofthe rvly in the first eight chrpters, lames providedan ol'ervierv ofhis ps1'chology of conxiousncss (or'"our study ofthe nrind frtrnr rvithin," os hc callecliton p. 2 l9) ln the "Streanr ofThought" chapter. Thischapter, lames said, is "like a painter's first charcoalsketch upon his canros, in rrhich no nicetirs appear"(p, ll0). Then, ufter ro'icrdng the various levels sfps1'cbological functiuning in this chapter, funr*s

ReferencesAdxmr. H. (1985). \{illiarn lames, lohn La Farge, andthe ibundations of rrdical enrpiricism. AnrcricttttAn lounnl, 17,6a-67..{danu. H. ( 1987). The rnind rrf John La Ferge. ln il.

'\Jrnrs (Ed.l,./ofur Lr Fitryn (pp. I l-77). Nerc 'o1"k:Ahbciille Press, :Af lB.n,,G_... -W.-,.( 9"67)._ I.t'jlli,ur J_-nrHr: :l lrrrstfdrr:, N:i:)irrlc Viking Press.Brrzrrn, I. (1983). ,{ stroll xith lt'i//irrn,fames, NervYorlu Hlrper & Row.Barzult, f. ( 1985). lVilliam lames: The mind as artist,ln S. Koch & D. E, Leary (Eds..), J rentuo ol Drthol-

\Tojl"{ \'v

I.t:tti')tJi ?us and thc Artr of'Huuttn lJnderstanling ggwent on in sqbtcqueni chlplcrs t\ fill in his char-coal sketGh with mor. dctaitcd irir,rtmcnts of thevorious arpc-ctr of his rystcm, procceding Fom themost Benerd (consqioi$ness of seio to thc mostcircumscribed (the will) of ihc mind's cipcricnces.Although his rchcmc does not sccount comPlctelyfor thc placcmcnt ofcech choptcr' ii makes sense ofthe book's ovcrall organizatioh. tl0 Besidcs the rrarious roler thrt hc played in establish-ing the physiological, behovioral, cognitive, andihernpeutic $adirloris in contemporary psychology,fames profoundly influenced individuals all ocrossthe cultural landscape - individuals as disparotc asBerntrC, Berenson, Niels Bohr, Joige Luis Botges,lohn Dewey. W. E- B. DuBois, Neison Goodman,Helcn Keller, Walter Lippmann, Stephen Pepper,Oliver Sacks, Gertrude Stein, and Vlallace Srevers.Another such pcrson, Alfred North lVhitehead, thegreat mathematician, philosopher, and historianof science, considered ,arnes to be one of the fourrnajor thinkers iir the entire Western radition,along rvith Ploto, Aristotlc, and Leibniz (sec lVhite-head, l9-18, pp. 3-4). Whitehead ( 1955) notert,thatrvhen tht foundations of the modcnr rvorldvicrvwere blonn apart by various dlscoveries lt the lurno[ this century, William lames rvrc {tne of lhe fewintc-llcc.ruals ptepaicd and ;rhle to rvithstan.l theblorr' (p. 272), and lrrnes vithstood it wiqhcruthaving ta changi his rvay of thinking.

t Art and rrtists in modern society - esFecirllF pNinr'ing and painrers - prcvidcd ticquent topics, Ihemc,ilrotif6, and devices in i{enry's rvoik (e.g. H. Jarses,I 868-- $97l 1956i t 87,f-l 909J l9$4; se*aiss &rwd*n;1956; Holland, 1964: Hopkirr, l96t; ttard, 1965it$innrfr 1967, 1970). The irnportrnce ofart, prr'ticularty painting, in Henry's toncepiual scheme isstrongly suggested by his assertion thiri "the analogybctrvern the ut of the painier rnd the art of thenovelisr is, so far as I am oble to st+, conlplere' (H,lumes, 188-l/19$7, p. t88)..

'. ,.

rlgr. rrJ Jdicr,.r (pp. 90{-910; Ner..' {urkr ilrc{]ror'HilI.Bjork, D. lrt. ( 1983 ).The tontproi:ristri;iirrtisr.' lt'illirun

J.trnes in the dn+Iopnent c,r{ Ana:imn psychologt.Nen' York Columbi;r Uniser,;ity ,prcss-Biork, D. \\t. (l98Ei. l.trillionr .inm*: T|4 cutt o.f hb_ I''a9ll,N"l.: Jo{1, 9 1mbir Uni,arsity Press.Borvden, F. T. (1956)- lhe thcntii if Hirtiy linii:ia: A

systcnr of obvn'ntion rlrroirgh the visunl nrr. NewHaven, CT: Ynle UniYersiiy Press

Dervey, t. ( l9 l0). fvilliam Jrnes. Jourunl of Philosophy'Psvclrclopv ond Scintifrc ltlethods, /, 505-508.

Ememon, R. V. {t983a). The Americar rrholar, In l.Porre (Ed.), Eimys and lrcnna (pp, _it-7t). NnwYork Library ofAmerica. (Original nork publishedl 837)

Emerson, R. W. (1983b)- Art. In tr. p6rrc (Ed.), Essn;rsand letrures (pp. 429--t{0). New york Llbrary ofAmerica (Original rvork published.l g{l ).Emer5on, R W. (t98tc). Thc poct. In l. porre (Ed_),EssaSr and leenttes (pp. +.ti-a6SJ. Nert ynrlc LibraryofAnrerica. {Original sork prrblishcd IBla)feinstein, H. M. (19S4). Banrnhtg ltillnu lames.. lthaca, NY: Cornell Unh'crsity pres 1.HllL C. S. (t891). Revierv of iVilliam tamos's prinnplcsof p>1'chology. Atttcicnn lournal of pst:rlntlog,,, ),578-59t.Holland, L. B. (1954). Tle aperrse of vision: Essays enthe cn{t of Henry /anre.r. princeton, lil: princeronUniversity Press.Hopkins, V. (1961), Vi5u3l art devices anri prrallels inthe fiction of Henry lrmes. r\fodera Lr:rgrrr3e r{-rso-cintiin Publ;cil,ion$ 26, 561-5711.Hunt, lV. IU. (1976). On pninfing or.l ,lrnr.irrg(Ll. Nl. Knorvlton, Ed.). Nerv york Dorer. (Originiinyo-yolume rvork published lg75-lgg"iiisnres, I'1., lr. ( 193{). The nu ttf the notel: Citical pref-oces 1R. P. Blacknrur, Ed.). Nerr york: Scribner-{Originrl r.orks f ut,lished l9ii6-i90$llanres, H., [r. (1956). 7?ru prrirrreri qs 0. L. Srveene .,Ed.). Canrbiidee, Nl.-l: Han,srd Univcrsitv press(Originrl uorks published lB6F-tS9Z)lrmes, H., lr. ( I 98Ja l. Notes of r son and bruiher. ln I .Y. DuFc (Ed.), drroDiogrnpl4r (pp. 33I-5{4J_Princeton, N : Princeron Unir.crsin, prtx. (C,rigir,elrrork published t9l4)Jan:es, H., Jr. ( I 983b). A small bov and others. ll F. \r,.DuFee ( Ed.), rlrrr:l'iogrrplr;. (pp. l-?J6). princeron,Nl: Princeton Universiq' press. (Cliiginrl rork pub-lished lgll)lamcs, H.,lr. ( f 98^tl. Talts of annnd life (H. Terrie, Ed.)Schenectady. NY; Llnion Collegc pns;. iOriglinri.

rrorks published I B7.t- I 9t)9)lames, H., Jr. { l9$7). Thc rrt ofiction, ln R. Orrd (Ed. IThe rritkal rrtr.rc: Srldt.rr.t lircrrrr;. cririosrr (pp186-2061. London: Penguin Books. (Original rvorl.:publishcd I 88.1,lam_cs, H., fr. { I 968 |. Tht ttngic ttnrse. lierv }'ork: \'ikinePenguin. (Originrl rvork published 189o.Iamcs, W. (ca. 169{ r. itluu:tript ort pttiohgr .rl arr.,itctirr ln lVillirnr lrrles Papers, File Jj9j.. Hcugl-., ton Lib(an, Hrnard Unirtrsiry, Cambridge, irl,\lames, \'. {'1920). T)rc lener: rr/ llril/iirzr /,rux lVol. l;uen'ry iiniiJ rri, ij.i. iiliil;iAirui,ti.j tronir,r,Press.tam,es, lV. {l9i5r). ilrc netning oJ'trrillt: .l :eqtul ta"pragnrorilr. " Cambridge, I.l.{: Han ard L niversitv0.... tn-:--:--r - . -- r-

James, W. (1975b). Ir4gm4rrrrrt: A new nann for someoklvaysof thinking. Cambridge, lvlA: Hanard Uni.versity Press- (Original rvork published 1907)|ames, V. (79761. Essoys in railical atpirieisn. Cam-bridgcr lvlA: Harvard University prex. (Originalwork publirhed tglZ)frrnres, \V' (1927). n plurdisiic lnircrse, Camhridgc,

lvlA: Harvard University prcss. (Original rvork pub-lished 1909)|anres, W, (1978a), Prcfacc to Harald Hdffding's praD_lcnx of philosopthy. In Ess1r in phitosopl,l.tpp. t +O_143)^ Cambridge, lr,lA: Hnrvard Uniyersiq, press.(Original rrcrk published t 905)Iames, lV. (19?8b). The teaching ofphilosophl,in ourcolleges. ln Essays ht philosopliy (pp, l_O). Cam_bridge, lvIA: Haprard Universir/ press. (Originalwork published ls76-tJrrres, V" (i979). Sr,;re probleilts of philosoph1,. Can-bridgc, ir'{A: Hinard Universiq, press. (Originilmanuscript incomplete and unpublished at tames'sdeath in l9t0)fames, W. ( 1983a). *tirte rnd human intelhct. ln Essaysil psycholog (pp. l-i;"i. Cambridge, IvlA: HarvaidUniversity Press" {Original *ork published lSZt)]anres, $t. (1983b). On a certain blindnesi in humlnbcings. ln T,?lkj r(r r?dclrc^.. on pnclialogr and rc-rr.i?rr[j 1r,r -{o,ilg cJ /il;: tddl-. (pp. I _i]_ l j9 ). Crrn-bridge, ltlA: Hanard liniversiry pre s. tOriginalwork published t899)Jnnres, W- (1983c). Ilrd prirrdptes o.f ps1,rtnlogr,. Cam-bridge, iv{A: Harvard Universig press. (Originalwork published 1890)Janes, \\'. (l 98ldi: jllJk rF tcrrcher' oru ps;riolog,nuri

ro srildrdiltJ o,, son * o./li/irt rilenLt. (Canrbrirlgi, lr{A:Han'ord Univt'rs $ prc;s. (()rieinal rvork published18e9,]

lunres, V. (1985). l"fie rarerie; o/religiorrs atparienre,Cmbridge, t\1A: Harvard t.hiverliry press. (Origi_nll uork publisheC l9*"1;,apes, \'. il9S6a). r\ddrrss of the president betbrethe SocieB' for F$l:chi,tal Research. [n E-.sn]r ilosykicol resereh ipp. |]t-l-?7l. Carnlrri.lge, Nl,{;Han'ard Univcrsin. pres*. (Original rrork prlsented..I 896t.

lonres, \V. { I 98irb}. Frederir: lv{yers': sen ice to psvchol_.ogy. ln Esr:rr.rs iri pslrlica ieseo.rch iFp. lg:_?d?). .Cambridge, ir IA: t-i':rn a rd L.t nir.e rsit,v press. t t}rigi-nrl work publijhdd tg,l ilrnres, W. i 1 987a). Review of 6ieorge S:rntai,ana's llreseusc oJ betuty. In ErsrrlS (onntufis, and ru,iew:. t 1p, jrc-,119-)-. Q3qlbrid ge, f, {1 {1n;,a1{ -U{r;eroi ryPress. (Originrl rvork pr:blished 1897)lan.es, \\'. ( 1987b). Rrvierv of Josialr Royse's Ifte reli-gious nspcct ofphiltrsor,,r,,. tn Es-tr1,-i, mnnrelr-., nnilr*rian,s (pp. J83_:tiil). Cambrirlge, i lA: Harvard