We must here guard against a small possible misunderstanding. If
and are invariably correlated, it may be said, it is impossible
that one should occur without the other, and therefore there can be no
means of judging whether one alone would elicit the response belonging
to the other. In fact, the matter is not quite so simple as we have
been taking it to be. What we learn by infantile experience is not that
and are always correlated; it is possible to touch
in the dark, or with the eyes shut, and it is possible to see without
touching. What we learn is that the correlation can be brought about
easily in many cases. Movements of the eye will usually give a visual
sensation corresponding to a previously uncorrelated tactual sensation,
and movements of the hand (or other part of the body) will, in a
certain proportion of cases, give a tactual sensation corresponding to
a previously uncorrelated visual sensation. Children practising the
hand-eye co-ordination attempt to grasp objects not within their reach;
it is only[Pg 148] gradually that distance comes to be judged more or less
correctly. When objects are not within our grasp, a new correlation
comes into play—namely, between the visual sensation and the journey
required to bring the object within our reach. Unfamiliar circumstances
will cause even adults to make mistakes—for example, that of
underestimating the depth of objects under water. Great distances
remain permanently beyond the scope of common sense: only science can
assure us that the sun is farther off than the moon.
What we can observe the infant learning is the bodily acts which will,
in fact, reinforce a percept of one sense by a percept of another; more
particularly he learns to touch what he sees—i.e. to procure
for himself a correlated pair , , instead of the isolated
. Similarly he learns to look round when he hears a voice, and
so on. All this implies that he has, so far as action is concerned,
the notion of a physical object, as something capable of affecting
several senses simultaneously. The element of recognition is logically
separable, and arises somewhat earlier.
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