inadvertently implies that unconscious event is not mental. But, though it had been inductively shown, the scientific spirit would exact a corresponding deduction if the latter were possible; not indeed in these days when induction is celebrating its prodigious successes in an orgie, but so soon as Philip shall have become sober.

This treatise purports-1st, a reconstruction of psychology; 2nd, exposure of the alternative that gives the treatise its title. The alternative is thiseither puppet, dupe, and victim of unconscious forces, or self-denying conduct for the achievement of Wisdom. Although the work of reconstruction occupies nearly the whole of the treatise, and, if it bear any fair proportion to the labour bestowed upon it, should not be

and pains. Emotion, passion, affection, sentiment—are names of Feeling."

"II. Volition, or the Will, embracing the whole of our activity as directed by our feelings."

“III. Thought, Intellect, or Cognition.

Our Sensations, as will be afterwards seen, come partly under Feeling, and partly under Thought."-The Senses and The Intellect.

Does Professor Bain advertently imply in the term, inextended mind, that there is such a thing as extended mind? If he do and intend us to understand that extended mind is a bodily organ of which inextended mind is a function, are we also to understand him as teaching that mental event does not exclude unconscious event? No; for he limits inextended mind to the conscious events, feeling, volition, and thought.

A better instance of the intoxication of the scientific spirit by the successes of the inductive faculty than the foregoing extract could scarcely be found. It tells us-1st, That operations and appearances constitute the mind; 2nd, That mind is a species of experience, viz. experience of the inextended; 3rd, That it is the totality of Being minus extended things; and then it implies (I believe inadvertently) that a species of mind is extended. In the old days, before induction had kicked over the traces, Professor Bain, by whose valuable contributions to philosophy I have profited, would not have thought and written thus.

unworthy of the attention of psychologists, it is, in respect of the exposure, a mere husk. My intention in laying bare the abjectness and wretchedness of our condition coincides with that of the Gospel without its supernaturalism and mysticism. It is to stir an insurrection against the Infernal in Nature, for the subversion of the reign of Instinct and substitution of that of Wisdom and Will.

BOOK I.-DEFINITIONS.

CHAPTER I.

CONSCIOUSNESS.

I.

ACCORDING to the primary meaning of the word perceive, one perceives not only when he sees, hears, smells, tastes, and undergoes tactile consciousness, but also when he imagines, remembers, conceives, judges, apprehends danger in an emotion of fear or sacredness in one of reverence. According to this signification and the corresponding one of the cognate term, perception, the latter denotes the affection of mind that is correlated to objectivity, the mind's embrace. of an object. Philosophers have in modern times assigned a narrower signification to the term, perception. Convenience demands another alteration of its meaning, opposing it, as I shall presently explain, to what Leibnitz terms apperception. Accordingly, stripping the word discernment of its connotation of contrast, I assign to it the meaning originally annexed to the term, perception. Discernment and objectivity are correlatives, and perception is a species of discernment. This arrangement is facilitated by the fact that the term, discrimination, has been a synonym of, and can do duty for, the term discernment.