worlds from the same monotonous and inexpressive chaos! My world is but one in a million alike embedded, alike real to those who may abstract them. How different must be the worlds in the consciousness of ant, cuttle-fish, or crab! * * * * * But in my mind and your mind the rejected portions and the selected portions of the original world-stuff are to a great extent the same. The human race as a whole largely agrees as to what it shall notice and name, and what not. And among the noticed parts we select in much the same way for accentuation and preference or subordination and dislike. There is, however, one entirely extraordinary case in which no two men ever are known to choose alike. One great splitting of the whole universe into two halves is made by each of us; and for each of us almost all of the interest attaches to one of the halves; but we all draw the line of division between them in a different place. When I say that we all call the two halves by the same; names, and that those names are '_me_' and '_not-me_' respectively, it will at once be seen what I mean. The altogether unique kind of interest which each human mind feels in those parts of creation which it can call _me_ or _mine_ may be a moral riddle, but it is a fundamental psychological fact. No mind can take the same interest in his neighbor's _me_ as in his own. The neighbor's me falls together with all the rest of things in one foreign mass, against which his own _me_ stands out in startling relief. Even the trodden worm, as Lotze somewhere says, contrasts his own suffering self with the whole remaining universe, though he have no clear conception either of himself or of what the universe may be. He is for me a mere part of the world; for him it is I who am the mere part. Each of us dichotomizes the Kosmos in a different place. Descending now to finer work than this first general sketch, let us in the next chapter try to trace the psychology of this fact of self-consciousness to which we have thus once more been led. FOOTNOTES: [215] A good deal of this chapter is reprinted from an article 'On some Omissions of Introspective Psychology' which appeared in 'Mind' for January 1884. [216] B. P. Bowne: Metaphysics, p. 362. [217] L'Automatisme Psychologique, p. 318. [218] Cf. A. Constans: Relation sur une Épidémie d'hystéro-démonopathie en 1861. 2me ed. Paris, 1863.--Chiap e Franzolin: L'Epidemia d'istero-demonopatie in Verzegnis. Reggio, 1879.--See also J. Kerner's little work: Nachricht von dem Vorkommen des Besessenseins. 1836. [219] For the Physiology of this compare the chapter on the Will. [220] _Loc. cit._ p. 316. [221] The Philosophy of Reflection, i, 248, 290. [222] Populäre Wissenschaftliche Vorträge, Drittes Heft (1876). p. 72. [223] Fick, in L. Hermann's Handb. d. Physiol., Bd. iii, Th. i, p. 225.