All the past experience of the organism--all its perceptions, and
all the actions it has performed--endures, either as motor habits or
mechanisms, or as pure memories. All this need not be present in its
consciousness; the motor habits would not, of course, and only so
much of the past would be recalled as would be relevant to the choice
which the organism was about to make of the many kinds of responses
possible to its motor organisations. Out of this past it would select
all that was connected in any way with the actions which were possible
to it in the present. It would recall all actions previously performed
which resembled the one provisionally decided upon; but recalling also
the other circumstances associated with those past actions, it would
discover something which would lead it to modify that provisional
action. Now in describing the whole behaviour of the acting organism
in this way are we doing any more than simply expressing in more
precise terms the “commonsense” notions of the ordinary person? The
latter would sum up all this discussion by saying that what he would
do in any set of circumstance depended not only on the circumstances
themselves but upon his experience. Physiology shows us as clearly as
possible that in the stimulation of a receptor organ, the propagation
of a nervous impulse along an afferent nerve, the transmission of this
impulse through the cord or brain, or both--in the propagation again of
the impulse through an efferent nerve and the transformation of this
impulse into a releasing agency, setting free the energy potential in
the muscle substance--that in all this there can be nothing more than
physico-chemical energy-transformations. All this is clear and certain.
But why should the same afferent stimuli, entering the central nervous
system at different times by the same avenues, and in the same manner,
traverse different tracts, and issue along different efferent nerves,
producing different results? Or why should different stimuli entering
the central nervous system take the same intra-cerebral paths and then
affect the same efferent nerves and effector organs? It is because
these stimuli lead to perceptions which fuse with, and become part of
the duration of, the organism. And the response then becomes a response
not to the physical stimulus, but to the duration modified in this way.
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