being, but the predication of being could never constitute growth. Were it possible for us to be conscious of any number of existences, there could be no development of consciousness without an act binding these states of consciousness together. Successive predications of the same thing, existence, would pass through the mind as waters flow down a river, and leave no product of growth. It is only when two different states of consciousness are compared with each other, and a likeness is found by which they are linked together in a kind of larger unity of thought that the mind grows. The identification implies a consciousness of the existence of things that are different from each other, but the essential principle in the process of development is the identification, the unification, or the synthesis of the different. This, then, is the general principle in mental development. By what law does the principle manifest itself? 4. The great work of Kant began in an attempt to show how synthesis of a priori concepts is possible. He took it for granted that if we have seen any thing as a whole, and the parts are presented to us, it is possible to put the parts together again and make the whole. The mind may build up a unit if it has first an idea of the unit; hence it may perform a synthesis of all objects of experience. But how is it possible, it was asked, to build up the idea of a circle as a surface with necessary characteristics when we have never seen a true circle? His answer to the question was that while there is no innate idea of the circle in the mind, yet there is a native capacity of the mind, depending on its constitution, in consequence of which the observation of that which resembles a circle may develop the idea of the perfect figure. But granting that this supposition of a native fitness in the constitution of the mind is a sufficient expla nation of the possibility of building up such notions, there is still another question back of it. What explanation can be made of the fact that the mind does build up such notions? It is possible, but what power makes the possible actual? This question should be asked, not only of a priori synthesis, but of all synthesis. Why does the mind connect any two sensations together? Why does it take a single step in the process of development? Objects can not of themselves give us the consciousness of likeness to each other. At best they can only give a consciousness of being, and of being what they are individually. By what power does the mind pass beyond this to the consciousness of identity, by which it is caused to grow? It is evident that a correct answer to this question is the key to the science of mental development. 5. If the eye rests upon a chair, we are able to distinguish color, form, and so forth through the sense of sight, and the perception of such qualities is the end of what the organ of vision can do for us. But we do not stop with the contemplation of these separate qualities. Without any further external stimulus, the mind goes on to identify the color and form with other colors and forms which we have seen, to associate these qualities together as belonging to one object, and to identify this object with other objects we have seen; and we call such an object a chair. The idea thus gained remains a permanent form of thought. All this identification the mind makes of its own accord. Vision only stimulates by the presentation of differences. The mind is awakened by these and brought into a state of unrest until it unifies them, when it is satisfied, and rests in the unity. 6. In a similar manner, different representations of a circle set the mind to work to discover what is the true idea with which all circles may be identified. When the idea of the true circle is developed, the mind rests satisfied with this, and has no inclination to push its inquiry further. The attempt to unify circular figures, like the effort to identify the chair, is a spontaneous act of the mind, of which we can give no other account than to say it is the natural tendency of mental energy, when stimulated to action by differences, to take this direction. The discriminations are excited by objects, but the unification is spontaneous in the mind. From such facts we infer the following GENERAL LAW.-WHEN LATENT MENTAL ENERGY IS STIMULATED TO ACTIVITY BY THE INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENCES IN OBJECTS, IT IS THE NATURAL TENDENCY OF THIS ENERGY TO UNIFY The DifferenceS, AND FOR THE UNITIES TO BECOME FIXED Forms of the Mind, and the UNIFICATION Restores the EQUILIBRIUM OF THE ENERGY EXCITED. 7. If the mind in unifying loses consciousness of differences, and retains only the one point of identity, no growth is made. For instance, if we pass by many men on the street, and we do not distinguish them one from another, but only think of each one as a man, we gain no distinct knowledge beyond what would have been imparted by seeing the same person many times. But if the mind holds its discriminations clear in consciousness while it unifies, it develops the consciousness of variety in unity, and adds to its power. Unification must contain conscious discriminations to be development. 8. The unities of thought which we seek to develop are always higher than conscious experience. In our conceptions of an object perceived by the senses, we bind the qualities of matter together by a power in the mind itself. In comparing objects with one another, and classifying S. E.-6. them we seek to develop a notion more comprehensive than that of the individual objects themselves. When we seek to understand an object or event, we develop notions of cause, form, or purpose from the understanding. The mind adds something from its own awakened power to the products of sensation. 9. We have seen before that education is an evolution; we are now prepared to see somewhat more distinctly the character of this evolution. While the process is not, on the one hand, like building with timbers or blocks of stone prepared to hand, neither is it, on the other hand, an unveiling of truths that lie hidden in the mind. We do not lay a foundation of truth in the understanding that rises into a clear atmosphere on which we may stand and gaze at higher truth with unobstructed vision, and thus build and climb; nor is truth brought down to a level with the understanding by unfolding it to its simplest elements. The native energy of the mind is aroused to action, and there begins a struggle to rise to the understanding of the new and the unknown by assimilating or identifying it with the old and the known. There must be this struggle of the power within, or there will be no development. We climb the ladder on which we rise by reaching to the rounds above us. |