But memory in the sense of recollection of past events, if it can be explained as a habit, will have, one might suppose, to be a _verbal_ habit. As to this, Dr. Watson says: “What the man on the street ordinarily means by an exhibition of memory is what occurs in some such situation as this: An old friend comes to see him, after many years’ absence. The moment he sees this friend, he says: ‘Upon my life! Addison Sims of Seattle! I haven’t seen you since the World’s Fair in Chicago. Do you remember the gay parties we used to have in the Wilderness Hotel? Do you remember the Midway? Do you remember ... etc.,’ _ad infinitum_. The psychology of this process is so simple that it seems almost an insult to your intelligence to discuss it, and yet a good many of the behaviourists’ kindly critics have said that behaviourism cannot adequately explain memory. Let us see if this is a fact.” He goes on to say that during the period, long ago, when the man on the street was seeing Mr. Sims, they formed verbal and manual habits towards one another, so that “finally, just the sight of man, even after months of absence, would call out not only the old verbal habits, but many other types of bodily and visceral responses.” He sums up: “By ‘memory’, then, we mean nothing except the fact that when we meet a stimulus again after an absence, we do the old habitual thing (say the old words and show the old visceral--emotional--behaviour) that we learned to do when we were in the presence of that stimulus in the first place.”