תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

We love and admire Andrew Carmichael. We love him for his worth, his benignity, his gentleness, his honest devotion to what he believes to be truth. We admire him, because of his varied learning, and his rare and extensive intellectual powers and attainments. But we do not think that his systems, either philosophical or theological, are sound: or even that he is the best expounder of his own opinions. While, therefore, we may find it necessary to differ from our excellent friend upon many points that have been touched upon in the little tract of which we are about to give a brief analysis, we are much mistaken if we do not do his subject more justice than he has

done it himself.

The publication before us is a paper that was read before the Dublin Phrenological Society, containing some account of the Life and the Philosophy of the late Dr. Spurzheim, of whom Mr. Carmichal was a steadfast disciple and an enthusiastic admirer. This may, in itself, furnish a theme for contemptuous ridicule; and it would be as easy, perhaps, for us as for others, to purchase a little ephemeral reputation at no greater cost than the expenditure of some half dozen sarcastic jokes upon the superficiality of the new theory of mind. But such is not our bent at present. Whether founded in truth or in error, it has been adopted by individuals, far too respectable, both as men and as writers, to permit us, for a mo

ment, to treat them with curtness or contumely; and, without committing ourselves as the advocates of the new system, we are desirous of candidly discussing its merits, and of laying before our readers, in a spirit of perfect fairness, what has been advanced by its friends, or objected by its enemies.

Of the science of phrenology the late Dr. Gall must be considered the founder. It was enlarged, illustrated, and defended by his able and laborious pupil and coadjutor, Dr. Spurzheim, by whom the knowledge of it was first introduced into these countries, and whose life was devoted to the propagation of a doctrine which he believed to be intimately connected with the progression and happiness of the human species. Of his early history Mr. Carmichael has the following brief notice

"Thom Gasper Spurzheim was born on the 31st December 1776, at Longuick, near Treves, on the Moselle, between sixty and seventy English miles from its confluence with the Rhine, at Coblentz. It is stated in recent public journals, that his father was a farmer, and educated him for the clerical profession. He acquired the first rudiments of Greek and Latin in his native village; to which he added Hebrew at the University of Treves, where he matriculated in 1791, in his fifteenth year, and where he also entered upon the study of divinity and philosophy, of both of which, in his riper years, he was a consummate master. In 1792, the republican armies of France overran the South of Germany, and seized upon Treves. Spurzheim retired to Vienna, where he was received into the family of Count Splangen, who entrusted to him the education of his sons."

When he arrived at Vienna, Gall was lecturing upon the new system. He attended him as a student, and soon became convinced of the soundness of the principles upon which phrenology was founded. That the brain is, in some way or other, connected with the process of thought, we have a kind of instinctive evidence; and there seems nothing startling or contradictory in the notion, that its different compartments may be allocated to the development of the various modifications of the thinking principle; even as the eye has been appropriated to the reception of the ideas of colour, and the ear to those of sound.

Unquestionably, the state of metaphysical science, at the period when

Gall originated his new theory, was not such as to discourage an adventurous mind from seeking for some more satisfactory mode of accounting for intellectual phenomena than philosophers had at that time devised. It may be truly affirmed that no two of the leading doctors who were eminent in that department of learning, could be said to be entirely agreed amongst themselves; nor was it to be deemed extraordinary that an individual should arise, who should differ from them all with as little ceremony as as they differed from each other. Each might be said to have protested, in some one particular, against the infallibility of every other; and Gall did no more than protest against the infallibility of all, and appeal from the dicta of the schools, to nature and to observation, for the truth of his peculiar views, by which, as he conceived, more light was thrown the human understanding, than by any other theory with which he was acquainted.

upon

We differ from our excellent friend Mr. Carmichael, respecting the intellectual powers of Gall and Spurzheim; and any value which we are disposed will be surprised to learn, from the to set upon their theory, arises, he comparatively very humble estimate which we have formed of their capacity the adoption of the leading principle and attainments. The first was led to which forms the basis of phrenology, less by design than accident. It was reflection; and the latter merely folmore a result of observation than of lowed out the lucky thought of his cursor, while he brought to the prosecutor of his discovery a larger share of sagacity, and a greater power of generalization. If, therefore, such men have hit upon a theory which affords a fuller and a juster explanation of all moral and mental phenomena, whether emotional, cogitative, or perceptive, than any that has been invented either before or since, there is a kind of evi

pre

dence in its favour, arising out of the very intellectual deficiencies of Gall and Spurzheim, which confers upon it, in our eyes, a value not belonging to any other, where great power of mind has been exhibited in an endeavour to make

phenomena agree with preconceived principles, instead of basing principles upon an observation of facts.

Had Gall or Spurzheim been capa

ble of originating as a theory, what they may be said to have discovered as a system, it would, to our minds, come before the public in a much more suspicious character than it does at present. its very plausibility would, in such a case, cause it to be regarded with great distrust. But, when they were led from facts to observations, from observation to principles, and from principles to a system, without, in the first instance, having any other object in view than to follow nature wherever she led, the system, whatever it is, at which they have arrived, is clear of all imputation of having been the result of that love of theory by which, upon metaphysical subjects, the human intellect has been so bewildered; and, if that system should afford a more simple and natural account of the passions, propensities, and intellectual operations than any other, the less ground we have for supposing that it was ingeniously contrived, the less hesitation we can have in admitting that it must have a foundation

in nature.

We are therefore of opinion that Mr. Carmichael, in doing what appears to us more than justice to the intellectual powers of Gall and Spurzheim, has done less than justice to phrenology. In seeking to magnify the men, he has, in a certain degree, depreciated the system, which stands, if it stand at all, as a science built upon observation of facts, which would lose all their value if they could be supposed to have been sought out by theorists for the support of their peculiar views. It makes all the difference in the world, whether the system arises out of the facts, or, the facts are arranged with reference to the exigencies of the system.

Gall's first course of private lectures were delivered in 1796, and that, even in 1800, when Spurzheim first attended him, his notions of the science, of which he may be considered the founder, were extremely vague and inaccurate, is manifest from the following passage, which Mr. Carmichael quotes from Spurzheim's notes to Chenevix's pamphlet on phrenology.

"He then spoke of the brain as the general organ of the mind. of the necessity of considering the brain as divided into different organs and of the possibility of determining those organs by the development of different parts of the brain, exhibited in the exteral configuration of the head." He admit

ted organs of different specific memories, and of separate feelings.

"Such," says Mr. Carmichael, was the physiological state of the science, when Spurzheim became a convert to its doctrines, in his twenty-third year. Gall was sensible that physiognominical means alone were not sufficient to discover the physiology of the brain, and that anatomy was a necessary coadjutor. He was confirmed in this opinion by observing a poor woman affected with hydrocephalus, whe, tinued to possess an active and intelligent though reduced to great weakness, conmind. After her death four pounds of water were found in her head; the brain dissolved; he therefore concluded, that was much distended, but not destroyed or the structure of this organ must be very different from what it was commonly supposed to be."

This opinion was confirmed by a more careful dissection. The brain was found to consist, not, as was supposed, of a pulpy substance without any distinction of compartments, but of a congeries of organised parts, corresponddevelopments as exhibited in the craing, accurately, to the physiognominical nium. This was a most important improvement in anatomy, and has, we believe, been universally acknowledged as such by the faculty; nor is it denied or undervalued even by those who are by no means converts to the doctrines of phrenology, and who set but very little value upon the other labours of its founders.

cal studies before he united with Gall,
Spurzheim had terminated his medi-
and was therefore enabled to devote
all his time and intelligence to his new
pursuit.
riod, a chaos, a shapeless mass of facts
Phrenology was, at this pe
and observations, "rudis indigestaque
moles." It is perfectly clear that it
spirit, which would, at least, have given
was not the result of any theorising
and doctrines; and we cannot but re-
a unity and consistency to its views
gard with considerable interest, the
progress by which it assumed its pre-
sent form. The first important step
towards methodical and systematic ar-
rangement is thus described in the me
moir. Gall and Spurzheim, Mr. Car-
michael tells us,

peculiar memory were gratified in exert-
"Observed that those who possessed a
ing it, and felt a pleasure in pursuing the
objects connected with it. Those en-
dowed with a verbal memory, had a
strong propensity to exercise it in recita-

tion, or in the study of languages; while those who were remarkable for a local memory, entertained a similar inclination to visit a variety of places, and observe and compare the diversified relations of sensible space; and so of the memory of persons, times, and facts, &c. It therefore naturally occurred to their understandings, that the organs of the mind are very different from those supposed by philosophers, from Aristotle down to Lock, Reid, and Stewart; and that there is not a general perception which takes cognizance of all sensations a general memory which retains the recollection of names, numbers, places, times, facts, and every kind of object—a general imagina

tion which combines them in new forms, and a general judgment which compares and ascertains their differences; but that the organ of language, the organ of space, the organ of number, the organ of music, are gifted, at once, with their own separate and distinct perception, memory, imagination and judgment, and actuated by a propensity to exercise their respective faculties upon their appropriate ob jects. They, therefore, were led to behieve that each organ was devoted to a special purpose, not hitherto imagined by philosophers; and, in subserviency to that purpose, was separately endowed with all the faculties, which, till now, were ascribed to the understanding at large.”

Whatever may be the ultimate judgment to which the world will come, respecting the soundness of this view of the nature of the human faculties, there are few who will deny that it affords a more complete and ready solution of many facts connected with them, than any other theory which has been as yet proposed. How else can we account for the extraordinary power which horses possess of remembering and distinguishing places; that dogs seem to possess of remembering and distinguishing scents? How else are we to account for the prodigious power of memory exhibited by individuals of the human species upon some subjects, while upon others, they seem deficient in that faculty to a degree that is equally extraordinary ? Let two men enter a concert room, and hear a piece of music: one will be able to carry away with him almost the whole of a long, difficult, and complicated composition; the other will not remember a single note. Let the same men pass from the concert room to the House of Commons, and the man who

could not remember a note of music, will be able to report, with an almost verbal accuracy, the whole of a long debate, while he who could repeat the tune with such marvellous correctness, will be unable to convey to a third person an intelligible notion of what had been said by any one of the Speakers. The best account which can be given of this, upon any of the old hypothesis, is, that the one man attends to the music with peculiar intention to the debate; and that the tenseness, while he pays but little atother, "vice versa," attends to the deThus it is that facts are made to square bate, while he neglects the music. with theory. But we utterly disbelieve that any attention could have made the musician a good reporter, or the reporter a good musician. We are not at all disposed to undervalue the degree in which the faculties may be improved by skillful training. We speak now of a natural aptitude which some men have for some things, and other men for other things; and which exists, and is manifested previously to any par ticular training. Of this, the received philosophy of mind gives no account that to us appears intelligible; and there are many who deny that there is any such natural aptitude, whose love of theory, blinds them to a fact that is obvious to the most cursory observation. Gall and Spurzheim admit the fact, and explain it in a manner that appears to us to confer no small degree of plausibility upon their peculiar system.

Of the received philosophy, Lock's, for instance, it may be generally observed, that it makes all intellectual phenomena exteriorate. Lock's theory is, that all ideas are derived from sensation and reflection ;-or rather, indeed from sensation alone; for reflection only works up, as it were, the raw materials which have been received through the inlets of the external senses. It were needless to remark, that this great man has exhibited prodigious ability in support of this theory; for it could not have so extensively prevailed, and continue to this hour to be received with so much respect, if his powerful mind had not conferred upon it a plausibility which is certainly not to be found in its correspondence with facts. But although his treatise still holds its place in our schools, it is, we

believe, by no one whose opinion is entitled to any considerable weight, received with the same implicit reverence, with which, by the by-gone generation, it was regarded. His general mode of proof is, to take ideas, apparently the most remote from sensation, and endeavour to shew, that they may be resolved into simple elements, which were all originally derived therefrom. We will not here enter into any analysis of what he says of the ideas of infinity, eternity, immensity, because we have no wish to hide our heads in the clouds of theory, and our view in writing this paper may be answered without encumbering our pages with any matter that may not be intelligible to the simplest

reader. We will therefore have recourse to that class of ideas of which any one may form a distinct conception. Let us take, for instance, the idea of benevolence. What is that, according to Locke? Why, he will tell us, it is a complex idea, formed so and so; and he will consider that he has fully satisfied the enquiry, when he shews, that it is composed of simple ideas, which have been all derived from sensation and reflection. But even if we grant that, as far as the idea goes, this explanation is good, what light does it throw upon the feeling of benevolence? Does it throw upon it any light at all? Does it not, on the contrary, treat it as though it never existed? And what sort of a theory of mind must that be, which does not even attempt an explication of by far the most important and interesting class of mental phenomena ? Yea, which, in point of fact leaves them more inexplicable than they were before? For if, as Locke would have us believe, the idea altogether exteriorates, one of the uses, at least, of the emotion is done away; and we are so far less able to perceive the purpose. for which it has been implanted in us by Providence. Upon this subject, phrenology, even as a mere theory, has decidedly the advantage of the received philosophy. Gall and Spurzheim refer to an organ of benevolence. They give such an account of the emotion as explains the idea; while Lock gives such an account of the idea, as leaves the emotion even more mysterious than he found it. On the one hand, we have very great powers of

mind exerted to construct a specious and captivating theory, out of a slender scantling of verisimilitudes;-on the other hand, we have very moderate abilities crowned with much more complete success, simply because they rejected theory, and confined themselves to an observation of the processes of nature.

"Gall," says Mr. Carmichael, « bad been led to the discovery of all the organs he had yet ascertained, by observing the actions of individuals, and attending to their mental operations in a state of activity; such, for example, as the facility in recollecting and repeating what

ever series of words had been committed to memory-skill in the mechanical arts, designing and music-the exercise of memory in respect of places, persons, numbers, events, and phenomena -the propensity to travel, to calculate, to search after knowledge, to compare the analo gies of things, to ascend to causes, to descend to effects. These several faculties, during their activity and manifestation in individuals, betrayed, one after another, the seat of their respective organs. It was, therefore, not surprising, that Gall, when he abandoned the beaten track of the schools, after an irksome and unprofitable search for general organs of memory, judgment, and imagination, should seize with eagerness the conjecture, that every class of actions might have an appropriate organ in the brain. In considering, therefore, the most striking and energetic actions of men, he noticed rapine, murder, lusthe observed benevolence, justice, piety-unshaken firmness, and hesitating caution-pride wrapped in its own opinion, ambition wrapped in the opinions of others cunning that succeeds in the dark

violence, courage, and magnanimity, that disdain any but an open triumph. He visited the prisons, the hospitals, the schools, and the churches of Vienna; and he found organs which he did not hesitate to name as the organs of theft, murder, He considered the actions of men, wheand cunning, benevolence, and religion. ther good or evil, as necessarily flowing from the organization they received from nature, without adverting to the primitive power their organs were destined to exercise in a healthy and unvitiated state. But as no man is a universal genius, it was here his philosophy was eclipsed by that of his coadjutor. Spurzheim had the merit of pointing out the primitive powers of the different organs, and discriminating between the institutions of God, and the abuses of these institutions."

« הקודםהמשך »