JUDGMENT AS SYNTHESIS.

439

apprehension of a relation of time, place, conjunction of qualities is an object, or other mode of contiguous conjunction of presentations, issues in a judgment. In this way we obtain such forms as: 'A is after B' (in time), 'A is at the side of B' (in space), 'A has the quality B'. We may thus say that the full reflective carrying out of each of the three intellective functions expresses itself in the form of a judgment.

FORMS OF SYNTHESIS IN JUDGING.

§ 4. Assertions respecting Difference and Likeness. It is not necessary in a psychological work to enter upon the discussion of the question what are the precise relations set forth in the judgment. The treatment of this subject falls under logic or theory of knowledge. We may adopt the common view that the relation specially set forth in a judgment differs in different cases, and may confine ourselves to a brief account of the psychological development of the corresponding modes of synthesis.

After what has been said under the head of comparison on the detection of the fundamental relations of difference and likeness little need be here added. That we bring things into a relation of likeness, as when we judge that a violet is like a pansy, that two lines are equal (i.e., perfectly like) in length, seems intelligible enough. The working of the forces of assimilation (suggestion by similarity) tends, as we have seen, to bring about this comparison of things, and the interest in tracing out resemblance acts as a strong stimulus to the analytical separation of points of likeness.

It is somewhat otherwise in the case of detecting difference. Difference does not seem to be a binding relation in the same sense as likeness. To see things merely as different is to separate rather than to combine, and does not give rise to any customary form of judgment. Thus we do not think or say that the colour red is different from the taste of a walnut, or that roast beef is different from an eclipse of the sun. As pointed out above, we do not under ordinary circumstances

1 It has been discussed by J. S. Mill and others under the head: "Import of Propositions".

Occupy ourselves about mere difference.1

Nevertheless, a large number of our judgments undoubtedly have to do with the setting forth of difference. Thus we are interested in and observe differences among homogeneous presentations, as when we say two colours differ in respect of hue, intensity, and so forth. As regards complex presentations, as has been shown above, we only discriminate where, at the same time, we virtually class or assimilate, e.g., a man and a wall in respect of height. And here it is evident that we do carry out a process of synthesis, that is, a combination of two notions by means of a relation. To think of a particular wall as higher than the average human height is to bring the object into a definite relation, to effect a connexion of thought. This establishment of a relation is especially manifest in the case of all impressive contrasts in which the element of feeling serves, as we have seen, to fix the connexion in the mind.

§ 4a. Relations of Quantity. Under the general head of relations of likeness and difference come relations of quantity. The relations specially set forth in the science of quantity, arithmetic, geometry, etc., are those of equality and its correlative inequality, in its two aspects greater or less. This equality (or inequality) may hold with respect to discrete or numerical quantity, e.g., 3 + 2 = 5, or to continuous quantity, e.g., "The angles at the base of an isosceles triangle are equal to one another". Such equality is plainly likeness in respect of quantity or amount. It constitutes the type of perfect likeness. To this extent judgments of quantity differ psychologically from other judgments. The source of this peculiarity in mathematical judgment, viz., the detection of perfect likeness or equality, lies in the very perception of quantity. Thus, as is well known, the exact comparison of two lines in respect of length is carried out by means of juxtaposition by which the eye at once sees whether the one extends beyond the other. With respect to numerical equality the exact judgment grows out of those processes of number-formation already referred to. Numerical equality is equality or equivalence in respect of

1 Hence the truth in the observation of Hume: "Difference, I consider, rather as a negation of relation than as anything real or positive,” quoted by Ward, loc. cit., 80, col. 1.

44I

JUDGMENTS RESPECTING LIKENESS AND DIFFERENCE. counting or summation of units; and in the process of summing, e.g., in counting a succession of beats, we gain in the apprehension of the whole succession as a number the most definite and exact appreciation of what we call quantity, or the definitely measurable aspect of things.1

§ 4b. Identity. Closely related to the relation of similarity is that of identity or sameness. Many of our everyday judgments have to do with this relation. Thus we speak of one colour being the same (or not the same) as another, one person being identical with himself, and so forth.

We may here distinguish between what has been called "material" identity, that is, the presence in two or more things of a common element, as a particular colour, and "individual" identity. The former, being a point of likeness, that is, a perfectly similar element, recurring at different times, is opposed to difference of kind. Thus the same colour is opposed to a discernible difference in colour. The latter, which is the relation of identity commonly spoken of, is opposed to numerical difference or individual distinctness. The idea of the same man is opposed to that of two distinct men.2

The germ of identification proper, that is, the identifying of an individual thing, appears in perceptual recognition. Here, however, what we call recognition is at first not more than an act of assimilation or the detection of a material sameness, e.g., the common presentative constituents in the group answering to 'mother,' 'dog,' and so forth. Before the clear consciousness of individual sameness arises the child must have advanced some way in the formation of the idea of the external world as a permanent arrangement or system. Thus when he saysThis is my doll,' he must realise not merely that the present presentation is materially the same as, that is, perfectly like (in certain features), previous presentations, but

1 For an examination into the kind of relation set forth by mathematics, see Bain, Logic, v. chap. i.

2 Hume brings out this distinction in his discussion of sameness. The two kinds of 'difference' here referred to are of course not absolutely distinct. Plurality, numerical difference, involves a difference of kind, if only in spatial and temporal marks. It has been much questioned whether we should speak of two presentations occurring apart in time as the same. The fixed usages of language, however, make it impossible to ignore this meaning of the word. (Cf. Hume, Treatise, bk. i. pt. i. § 5.)

that it has persisted in the interval as a renewable presentation under certain conditions (e.g., movement to a particular place). In other words, a judgment of sameness involves the idea of the temporal continuity of our presentations, or their permanent renewability. The child who says "This is my doll" has already begun to represent the doll as existing from moment to moment, whether he happens to be actually seeing it or not.1 In addition to this temporal continuity the relation of sameness involves the idea of spatial continuity. By this is meant that what we know as an object maintains one place or position, or, if it alters this, does so continuously by what we call movement. Thus the assertion This is my doll' means 'It is the thing I left here,' or 'the thing which somebody has carried from where I left it to this place'.

When this consciousness of continuous objective existence in a particular place (or succession of related places) independently of our occasional perception grows clear, the child learns, as was hinted above, to recognise a thing as the same in spite of considerable difference. Thus he recognises the broken toy as the same as the once intact plaything, just because he realises the continuity of existence under the altered conditions. When the temporal and spatial continuity is doubtful he will, as we know, hesitate to call a thing the same. The suspicion of a covert exchange of toys, for example, will lead him to hesitate in judging of sameness, even though the substituted toy is scarcely distinguishable from the original.

The popular idea of individual identity is based on continuity and material sameness (similarity) conjointly. The introduction of a considerable amount of change, especially if sudden, as in the restoration of a church, makes people hesitate to attribute identity, even where the object preserves an unbroken continuity of existence as a whole. The importance attached to similarity is seen in the fact that we hardly speak of the oak tree as identical with the acorn, out of which it has nevertheless grown by a series of perfectly gradual changes. This shows that a clear conception of individual identity, as based on continuity of existence, belongs to a comparatively high stage of intellectual development. A new basis of identity is arrived at when the idea of substantial continuity is formed. Thus to the scientific mind the water is in a sense the same as its constituents, in spite of the numerous and palpable differences of sensible quality between the compound and its ingredients. This idea of substantial identity, again, introduces a further difficulty into the apprehension of organic sameness after it is recognised that organisms undergo a

1 Cf. above, p. 234.

JUDGMENTS RESPECTING IDENTITY.

443

continual change of material constituents. The conception of organic sameness, as residing in the continuity of a sum of vital forces, and in the unbroken renewal of a similar structure, modified only by those perfectly gradual changes which we call growth, is the highest development of the consciousness of identity.1

§ 5. Relations of Space and Time. In addition to judgments which have to do with likeness and unlikeness there are others which especially set forth relations of space and time. Thus a child observes the position of an object, and sets forth the fact, as in saying 'Puss is under the table'; or he observes the succession of two events, as when he says, 'Carlo is gone after father,' and so forth.

As has been pointed out above, in the account of the development of the perceptions of space and time, all presentations have what may be called spatial and temporal marks by the help of which we localise them in space and in time. Imagination which, as we have seen, is limited by the conditions of our perceptual experience uniformly sets its objects in place and time. The relation thus realised may be very indefinite, as in the common form of child's story beginning' Once upon a time,' or 'A long, long way from here'. Still these relations are present, and the clear apprehension of them becomes more and more a part of our ordinary thought as intelligence advances. Thus in different ways the propositions of geography, astronomy and geometry set forth the relations of space, and the propositions of history and natural science, the relations of time.

§ 5a. Substance and Attribute. Closely connected with the apprehension of time- and space-relations is that of the relation of an attribute to its substance (co-existence or co-inherence), as when the child says, "The grass is wet". This relation plays so large a part in our everyday thought that logicians often speak of it as if it were the only relation set forth by propositions. The psychological development of the idea of substance as the groundwork of the presentative, or,

1 In this slight account of the relation of sameness no reference has been made to personal identity or the identity of the conscious self, a point that has been much discussed in the history of philosophy. This will occupy us later. The student who requires a fuller analysis of the notion of identity should consult Hume's examination of the idea in his Treatise, bk. i. pt. iv. § 2, and the careful discussion in Mr. G. S. Fullerton's volume On Sameness and Identity, a psychological study (Philadelphia, 188ɔ).