PRESIDENT HALL: It would take an encylopedia and an omniscient mind. and many hours and days to exhaust such a topic as this. Dr. Southard has said some of the things I would have said. I supposed this society was primarily interested in pragmatic discussions. At any rate, I left the American Philosophical Society some years ago and entered this to get rid of metaphysics and arid abstractions. As to what Dr. Swift says, it seems to me imitation plays a great but is by no means the sole role. It is of course purely instinctive, and the social instinct comes in everywhere, so much so that discussion on almost any topic is liable to raise the question of the individual versus the social forces in the world. As to Dr. Jelliffe's opinion whether after all hate and love are at bottom the same, he perhaps bottoms on the recent discussions of what I might call the expanded theory of ambivalence, as represented by Weissfeld. But I do not interpret this to mean that there is any sense whatever that has any pragmatic value in the statement that love and hate are the same. If you assume this, one is dizzy and the world seems to spin around. Hegel showed a sense in which being and not being are the same but that is a most abstract and purely methodological statement. What in the world is more opposite than love and hate, from every practical and truly psychological point of view? We must not be credulous about the unconscious and ascribe to it absurdities, nor must we lose our orientation for surely up and down, right and left, light and dark, do differ. If the unconscious can be used to cause a darkness in which everything loses its identity and fuses into a general menstrum, as Hegel said all cows were black in the dark, it seems to me we can get nowhere. Ought we not to start by admitting that there are certain immense differences in the emotions, whether conscious or unconscious, and that the tendency to find a common background or identify them is a matter largely of speculative interest? DR. MORTON PRINCE, Boston, read by title a paper entitled "The Theory of 'Settings' and the Psychoneuroses." DR. L. PIERCE CLARK, New York, N. Y., read a paper entitled, 'The Mechanism of Essential Epilepsy."[*] [*] Reserved for publication. DISCUSSION DR. E. E. SOUTHARD, Boston: Idiopathic epilepsy as found in Massachusetts material and estimated from the appearances in the gross anatomy of the brain occurs in about one of every three cases. There are accordingly more idiopathic epilepsies than there are idiopathic or "functional" psychoses, if the data of gross anatomy form a reliable index.