Knowledge, Theory of; Mind and body; Perception; Senses and sensation
Now the sense of touch and the muscular sense have, by most writers,
been confounded together; hence, we are told that weight is determined
by touch, but this is erroneous; it is determined by the muscular
agency and sense, under the dictation of the will. The abbé Nollet says
of touch, that "it not only puts it in our power to judge of what makes
an impression upon us, but also of what resists our impulsions." Here
the sense of touch and the muscular sense are confounded together. The
agency of touch has nothing to do with weight or resistance; and herein
we differ from Dr. Fleming, and agree with sir Charles Bell, by whom,
indeed, this muscular sense was first demonstrated. To feel, or touch,
is not to resist or struggle. Laocoon, striving with the serpents,
resists--his muscular sense is called into action, as is that of the
wrestler when engaged in a trial of skill or strength; but what has
muscular feeling to do with that tact, which distinguishes between
the texture of tissues, or the smoothness or roughness of bodies? For
ourselves, we refer the sensations of hardness and softness rather to
a muscular sense than a simple sense of touch; but, as we have said,
the sense of touch and the muscular sense, or sense of resistance,
inter-amalgamate with each other, nevertheless, there is a definite
muscular sense of which every one is conscious, and it is by the
education of this sense that the infant learns to walk, the man to
ascend the lofty ladder, or traverse the ledge of the precipice. It is
not connected with feeling alone, but also with sight; and, indeed, the
senses of sight, feeling and support, or resistance, are in as close
relationship, as are those of smell and taste. This is exemplified in
the fencer, whose muscular sense obeys his eye, and in the artist, who
strikes out the bold outline of a figure on the canvass.
This muscular sense is sometimes called the sense of motion; and
rightly, because it is a feeling of muscular action; not a feeling
of extraneous bodies, but a feeling of what passes within ourselves,
as far as such feeling is permitted (many internal operations go on
without our consciousness)--a feeling of what we do, according to our
will, and the permission of God Almighty. Does the uninstructed man,
who looks upon and admires a lovely landscape, think about the inverted
picture on his retina? No. Does the athlete who lifts a great weight
think of the biceps, or the deltoid, or the pectoral muscles? No. But
does he not feel, while he strives, while he struggles, while he runs,
an internal consciousness of action totally distinct from touch?
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