Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T06:25:22.867Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Physiology of Mind, the Unity of Nature, and the Moral Order in Victorian Thought

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 January 2009

L. S. Jacyna
L. S. Jacyna
Affiliation:
Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine, 183 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BP.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In 1879 G. H. Lewes described the state of current British mental science. There were, he maintained, three main ‘schools’ of psychology. The first of these Lewes called the ‘ontological’ school; its members traced their lineage to Thomas Reid and to the common sense philosophers of the early nineteenth century, especially Dugald Stewart and William Hamilton. The second school was the ‘empirical’, which stood in the tradition of Locke, Berkeley, Hume, Condillac, Hartley, and James Mill. The ontologists and the empiricists differed in their theories of knowledge: the former held that certain beliefs were native to the mind; the latter that all ideas originated, mediately or immediately, from experience. However, both schools agreed on the object of psychological enquiry. They ‘quietly ignore the complex conditions of the living organism, and treat mental facts simply as the manifestations of a Psychical Principle’. Further, the ontological and empiricist schools concurred on the means by which this principle should be studied; both made introspection the ‘exclusive method of research’.

Type
Research Article
Information
The British Journal for the History of Science , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , July 1981 , pp. 109 - 132
Copyright
Copyright © British Society for the History of Science 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1 Lewes, G. H., Problems of life and mind, 2 vols., London, 1879, i, 3–4.Google Scholar

2 Ibid, 6–8.

3 Young, R. M., Mind, brain and adaption in the nineteenth century: cerebral localization and its biological context from Gall to Ferrier, Oxford, 1970Google Scholar; see especially chapters II, III, VI, VIII.

4 Jacyna, L. S., ‘Scientific naturalism in Victorian Britain’, University of Edinburgh PhD thesis, 1980Google Scholar, chapter IV, section ii.

5 Smith, R., ‘Physiological psychology and the philosophy of nature in mid-nineteenth century Britain’, University of Cambridge PhD thesis, 1970, p. 42Google Scholar. For the connexions of physiological psychology with wider philosophical issues, see idem, ‘The background of physiological psychology in natural philosophy’, History of science, 1973, 11, 75–123.Google Scholar

6 Maudsley, H., The physiology and pathology of mind, London, 1867, p. 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Martineau, J., ‘Cerebral psychology: Bain’, National review, 1860, 10, 500–21 (501).Google Scholar

8 Hodgson, S. H., ‘Presidential address: Mind’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 1894, 2, 1–20 (19).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

9 Laycock, T., A treatise on the nervous diseases of women, comprising an inquiry into the nature, causes, and treatment of spinal and hysterical disorders, London, 1840, p. 86.Google Scholar

10 Laycock, Thomas (1812–1876)Google Scholar was lecturer on clinical medicine at York Medical School until 1855, when he became professor of the practice of medicine at Edinburgh.

11 See Smith, , op. cit., 1970 (5), pp. 71–97.Google Scholar

12 See Fearing, F., Reflex action: a study in the history of physiological psychology, New York & London, 1964, especially pp. 68–96.Google Scholar

13 Hall, M., Memoirs of the nervous System, London, 1837, pp. 5, 20, 49–50, 70Google Scholar. On Hall, see Liddell, E. G. T., The discovery of reflexes, Oxford, 1960, pp. 60–75.Google Scholar

14 Laycock, , op. cit. (9), pp. 85–6.Google Scholar

15 Jacyna, , op. cit. (4), chapter IV, section i.Google Scholar

16 Laycock, T., On the reflex function of the brain, London, n.d. [1844], p. 8Google Scholar. Laycock's view of cerebral function was highly unconventional: Flourens, together with most physiologists of the period, excluded the hemispheres from the reflexive cycle; cf. Young, , op. cit. (3), pp. 66–74.Google Scholar

17 Laycock, , op. cit. (9), pp. 93–6.Google Scholar

18 William Benjamin Carpenter (1813–85) lectured in medical jurisprudence at Bristol Medical School, and became Fullerian Professor at the Royal Institution in London in 1844. He was subsequently active in the teaching and administration of University College London.

19 Carpenter, W. B., On the voluntary and instinctive actions of living beings, Edinburgh, 1837, pp. 2–7.Google Scholar

20 Carpenter, W. B., A manual of physiology, including physiological anatomy for the use of the medical student, London, 1846, pp. 221–2, 490–504.Google Scholar

21 W. B. Carpenter, ibid., 3rd edn., London, 1856, pp. 599–600.

22 Carpenter, , op. cit. (20), pp. 503–4.Google Scholar

23 Carpenter, , op. cit. (21), pp. 599–600.Google Scholar

24 Laycock, , op. cit. (16), p. 16.Google Scholar

25 Carpenter, W. B., On the differences of the laws of regulating vital and physical phenomena, Edinburgh, 1838Google Scholar; see especially pp. 4–5, 23–4.

26 Henry Maudsley (1835–1918) was medical superintendent of the Manchester Royal Lunatic Hospital 1859–62, editor of the Journal of mental science 1864–1870Google Scholar, and professor of Medical jurisprudence at London University, 1869–79.

27 Maudsley, H., ‘The correlation of mental and physical force; or, man a part of nature’, Journal of mental science, 1860, 6, 50–78 (59–62).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 Alexander Bain (1818–1903) was the author of works on psychology, logic, and education. From 1860 he was professor of logic and english at Aberdeen University.

29 Bain, A., The emotions and the will, 2nd edn., London, 1865, p. 433.Google Scholar

30 Ibid, pp. 435–7.

31 Bain, A., ‘On the correlation of force and its bearing on mind’, Macmillan's magazine, 1867, 16, 372–83 (374–5).Google Scholar

32 Laycock, T., ‘Reflex, automatic, and unconscious cerebration’. Journal of mental science, 1876, 21, 477–98 (477–8).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

33 Laycock, T., ‘Further researches into the functions of the brain’, British and foreign medico-chirugical review, 1855, 16, 155–87 (155–6).Google Scholar

34 Laycock, to Combe, , 26 03 1845Google Scholar, in Combe papers, National Library of Scotland, 7276 ff 5–7 (5–6).Google Scholar On the general importance of phrenology to the development of physiological psychology see Young, , op. cit. (3), chapter I, and pp. 150–61.Google Scholar

35 Laycock, T., ‘Phrenology’, Encyclopaedia britannica 8th edn., 1859, xvii, 556–68 (565, 556).Google Scholar

36 Laycock, T., ‘A journal, 1833–1857’, Edinburgh University Library, MS. Gen. 1813, 26–7, 65–6.Google Scholar

37 Carmichael, A., An essay, on such physical considerations as are connected with man's ultimate destinations, the essential constitution of superior beings; and the presumptive unity of nature, Dublin, 1830, pp. 8–10, 16–7. 21.Google Scholar

38 Laycock, to Combe, , 26 02 1845Google Scholar, Combe papers, loc. cit. (34), 7276 ff 3–4 (4).Google Scholar

39 B[ucknill], J. C., review of Thomas Laycock's ‘Further researches of the functions of the brain’, Journal of mental science, 1856, 2, 175–88 (176–9)Google Scholar. Bucknill's claim that Laycock's views endangered the concept of God the lawgiver and ruler of the universe deserves special attention.

40 Bucknill, J. C., review of D. Noble's ‘Elements of psychological medicine’Google Scholar, ibid, pp. 188–97 (190–1).

41 Carpenter, W. B., Nature and man: essays scientific and philosophical, London, 1888, pp. 52–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

42 Pollock, F., Spinoza: his life and philosophy, London, 1880, p. 355.Google Scholar

43 Stephen, L., History of English thought in the eighteenth century, new edn., 2 vols, London, 1962, i, 26–7.Google Scholar

44 Ibid, p. 27.

45 Pollock, , op. cit. (42), pp. 84–5, 344–8Google Scholar. For the contrary, hostile, interpretation of Spinoza's philosophy see Martineau, J., A study of Spinoza, London & Edinburgh, 1882.Google Scholar

46 Stephen, , op. cit. (43), pp. 70–1Google Scholar. On the nineteenth-century relevance of ‘deism’ see Bicknell, J. W., ‘Leslie Stephen's English thought in the eighteenth century: a tract for the times’, Victorian studies, 1962, 6, 103–20.Google Scholar

47 Mansel, H. L., ‘Freethinking—its history and tendencies’Google Scholar, in idem, Letters, lectures, and reviews, London, 1873, pp. 293–336 (298).Google Scholar

48 See Harvie, C., The lights of liberalism: university liberals and the challenge of democracy, 1860–86, London, 1976Google Scholar; and Annan, N. G., Leslie Stephen: his thought and character in relation to his time, London, 1951, see especially, pp. 141–61.Google Scholar

49 Everett, E. M., The party of humanity: the Fortnightly review and its contributors, 1865–1874, Chapel Hill, 1939Google Scholar, see especially pp. 106–44.

50 Quoted in Hirst, F. W., Early life and letters of John Morley, 2 vols., London, 1927, ii, 131.Google Scholar

51 Morley, J., Diderot and the Encyclopaedists, 2 vols., London, 1879, ii, 185.Google Scholar

52 Gellner, E., ‘French eighteenth-century materialism’Google Scholar, in idem, The devil in modern philosophy, London, 1974, pp. 113–48 (126).Google Scholar

53 Whewell, W., The philosophy of the inductive sciences, founded upon their history, 2nd edn., 2 vols., London, 1842, i, 66–7, 165–9.Google Scholar

54 Mansel, H. L., The limits of religious thought, Oxford, 1858, pp. 108–11 and passim.Google Scholar

55 Drummond, J. and Upton, C. B., The life and letters of James Martineau, 2 vols., London, 1902, ii, 268–9Google Scholar. James Martineau (1805–1900) was a Unitarian minister who acted as professor of mental and moral philosophy at Manchester New College from 1850. He was an ‘Old Whig’ in politics, and strongly supported the maintenance of a National Church.

56 Martineau, J., ‘Modern materialism: its attitude towards theology’Google Scholar, in idem, Essays, reviews, and addresses, 4 vols., London, 1891, iv, 197–267 (242).Google Scholar

57 Ibid, p. 236.

58 Martineau, J., ‘Church and state’Google Scholar, in idem, op. cit. (56), ii, 1–45 (34).

59 Mineka, F. E. and Lindley, D. N. (eds.), The later letters of John Stuart Mill, 4 vols., Toronto & Buffalo, 1972, ii, 817.Google Scholar

60 Mill, J. S., Autobiography, new edn., Oxford & London, 1971, pp. 134–5Google Scholar. For the interlocking of radical philosophy and radical politics in Mill's career see Hamburger, J., Intellectuals in politics: John Stuart Mill and the philosophic radicals, New Haven & London, 1965.Google Scholar

61 Martineau, , op. cit. (56), ii, 34, 36.Google Scholar

62 Martineau, J., ‘John Stuart Mill’Google Scholar, in ibid., iii, 489–536 (516–18).

63 Martineau, ibid., ii, 43–4.

64 See Macobby, S., English radicalism, 1835–1886, London, 1938, pp. 150–78.Google Scholar

65 Searle, G., The quest for national efficiency, Oxford, 1971, p. 31Google Scholar. On anti-liberal thought in nineteenth-century Britain see Lippincott, B. E., Victorian critics of democracy, Minneapolis, 1938.Google Scholar

66 Goodsir, J. T., The divine rule proceeds by law, London & Edinburgh, 1868, pp. 45, 57, 43.Google Scholar

67 Ibid, pp. 60–2.

68 Huxley, T. H., ‘On the hypothesis that animals are automata, and its history’Google Scholar, in idem, Methods and results, London, 1893, pp. 199–250.Google Scholar

69 Carpenter, W. B., Principles of mental physiology, with their applications to the training and discipline of the mind, and the study of its morbid conditions, London, 1874, pp. 16–21.Google Scholar

70 Ibid, p. 691.

71 Ibid, pp. 699–701.

72 Carpenter, , op. cit. (41), pp. 122–3.Google Scholar

73 Smith, R., ‘The human significance of biology: Carpenter, Darwin and the vera causa’, in Knoepflmacher, U. C. and Tennyson, G. B. (eds.), Nature and the Victorian imagination, Berkeley, 1977, pp. 216–30.Google Scholar

74 Carpenter, W. B., ‘Man the interpreter of nature’Google Scholar, in idem, op. cit. (41), pp. 188–210 (208–9); emphasis added. The event to which Carpenter alluded was the Bristol riot of 1831 which he witnessed as a young man.

75 Carpenter, W. B., ‘Nature and law’Google Scholar, in ibid., pp. 365–83 (365–8).

76 Mannheim, K., ‘Conservative thought’Google Scholar, in idem, Essays on sociology and social psychology, London, 1953, pp. 74–164 (89–90).Google Scholar

77 William Kingdom Clifford (1845–79) was an undergraduate and fellow of Trinity College Cambridge before taking up the Chair in applied mathematics at University College London in 1871.

78 See Pollock, F., ‘Introduction’ to W. K. Clifford, Lectures and essays (ed. by Pollock, F. and Stephen, L.), 2 vols., London 1879, i, 1–72.Google Scholar

79 Conway, M. D., Autobiography: memories and experience of Moncure Daniel Conway, 2 vols., London, 1904, ii, 352–4.Google Scholar

80 Mallock, W. H., ‘Professor Clifford's Lectures and essays’Google Scholar, in idem, Atheism and the value of life: five studies in contemporary literature, London, 1884, pp. 1–82 (4–5).Google Scholar

81 Clifford, , op. cit. (78), ii, 59.Google Scholar

82 Clifford, W. K., ‘Mind and body’, Fortnightly review, 1874, 16, 714–36Google Scholar. References below are to the reprint of this article in Clifford, , op. cit. (78), ii, 31–70.Google Scholar

83 Ibid, 33–4.

84 Ibid, 46–7, 50–7.

85 Ibid, 61.

86 Smith, C. U. M., ‘Charles Darwin, the origin of consciousness, and panpsychism’, Journal of the history of biology, 1978, 11, 245–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lovejoy, A. O., The great chain of being, Cambridge, Mass., 1936, chapter V.Google Scholar

87 Clifford, , op. cit. (78), ii, 61–4, 87–8Google Scholar. See also idem, ‘On the nature of things-in-themselves’, ibid, pp. 71–88.

88 Ibid., pp. 67–8.

89 Ibid., pp. 69–70, 58.