Principles of literary criticismRichards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
Philosophy
Principles of literary criticism
Richards, I. A. (Ivor Armstrong)
Criticism
[45] The fashion in which the term ‘feeling’ shifts about in psychology
is notorious as a source of confusion. It would be convenient
if it could be kept for pleasure-unpleasure, and used no longer
as a synonym for ‘emotion’, since emotions can much more easily
be regarded as built up from organic sensations.
CHAPTER XIV
Memory
Within the surface of Time’s fleeting river
Its wrinkled image lies, as then it lay
Immovably unquiet, and for ever
It trembles, but it cannot pass away!
Shelley, _Ode to Liberty_.
So far we have alluded only casually to memory, to that apparent
revival of past experience to which the richness and complexity
of experience is due. Every stimulus which is ever received leaves
behind it, so it is said, an imprint, a trace capable of being
revived later and of contributing its quota to consciousness
and to behaviour. To these effects of past experience the systematic,
the organised character of our behaviour is due; the fact that
they intervene is the explanation of our ability to learn by
experience. It is a way peculiar to living tissue by which the
past influences our present behaviour across, as it might appear,
a gulf of time.
How we should conceive this influence is perhaps the most puzzling
point in psychology. The old theory of a kind of Somerset House
of past impressions has given place to an account in terms of
facilitations of neural paths, lowered resistances in synapses,
and so forth. It was natural that as the broad outlines of neural
activity came to be known, psychologists should attempt to make
use of them. But on close examination it is clear that their
interpretations were far too crude. Fixed ‘paths’, one for every
item of experience which has ever taken place, and others for
every kind of connection into which the items come, however multitudinous
we make them, no longer explain what can be observed in behaviour
and experience. As Von Kries and, more recently, Koffka have
insisted, the fact, for example, that we _recognise_ things
in cases where it is certain that quite different paths must
be involved, is fatal to the scheme. And mere multiplication
of the entities invoked leads to no solution. Semon even goes
so far as to say that when we listen to a song for the hundredth
time we hear not only the singer but a chorus of nine and ninety
mnemic voices. This corollary by itself is almost a refutation
of his theory.
We have to escape from the crude assumption that the only way
in which what is past can be repeated is by records being kept.
The old associationists supposed the records to be writ small
inside separate cells. The more modern view was that they were
scored large through a deepening of the channels of conduction.
Neither view is adequate.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account