صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

reasonable to say that the different organs of the body are means to a higher end-the life of the entire body, of which the organs are parts; and that therefore every organ is a means to bodily life, and in so far as life consists of its organs, a partial endin-itself? And would it not also be more reasonable to say that the realization of all mental states is the end, rather than that one element, which never exists alone in consciousness, is the end? It would be absurd to say that the whole body and its organs, the whole mind and all its functions, are the subordinate means to pleasure. It would be like saying that all the organs of the body are merely means of seeing, that vision is the end of life. Would it not be more plausible to reverse the statement and say, Vision is a means of life, and pleasure and pain are both means of preservation?

14. Pleasure-Pain as a Means of Preservation. We can say that pain serves as a warning, pleasure as a bait. When the animal feels pain it makes movements of defence or flight. Pleasure and pain may be conceived as primitive forms of the knowledge of good and evil, as Paulsen expresses it. When the dangerous object is near at hand, the danger to life is greatest, and pain, therefore, most easily aroused. We find greater sensibility to pain in direct touch than in indirect touching like seeing and hearing. 1

1 See Nichols, article on "Pleasure and Pain," Philosophical Review, Vol. I, pp. 414 ff.

It seems, also, that as we pass from lower to higher forms of organic life (from lower animals to man, and from the lower organs to the higher), pleasure and pain gradually fall into the background. In the lowest forms the animal must come into direct contact with objects before it can feel and know how to act with regard to them. Tactual sensations plus feelings of pleasure and pain would assist the animal in preserving itself. In the course of time, however, organs are developed which enable the animal to become aware of helpful and dangerous things without coming into such close contact with them. By means of the organs of taste, smell, hearing, and sight, the animal practically touches objects at a greater and greater distance, and the farther away the object of sense is, the less pain and pleasure does it arouse.

I see no better way of interpreting such facts as these than by conceiving the feelings of pleasure and pain as means to an end-preservation.

We may reach a similar result by considering the function which memory performs. Even though it were true that every sensation had to be felt originally as pleasurable or painful in order to inform the animal of the nature of the object before it, and to release the appropriate movement with reference to it, we can understand how an animal possessing the power to retain its experiences could learn to act without being prompted by feelings of pleasure and pain. The touch or sight of the object might call

up the thought of the pleasure or pain experienced before, and the animal might act appropriately with out feeling peripherally excited pleasure or pain. The animal could tell what was good or bad for it without directly experiencing pleasure or pain at all, because each sensation would be associated with ideas or copies of past sensations, and it could preserve itself because these ideas would call up certain movements which had been made before. Indeed, the sensation itself might come to be associated with the appropriate movements, without the intervention of any additional element. The sight of the hawk may be associated in the consciousness of the hen with certain tendencies to action, and here the association may have been formed during the history of the species; it may be the result of race experience. The sight of a cliff over which the mule has once fallen may become associated in the mind of the animal with the thought of its past experience, and cause it to hesitate. Here the association is the result of individual experience. In both cases, however, a feeling of aversion is perhaps felt in the presence of the dangerous object, and this may be followed by a movement or the inhibition of a movement.

Now in the case of man abstract reasoning is added to the other processes. We pick out certain characteristics from the concrete object which we are considering, and connect them with certain general consequences. We reason from the fact that a man

See James, Psychology: "Reasoning," Vol. II, chap. xxii.

has certain symptoms that he has a certain disease, and prescribe a particular mode of treatment. The general discovers a weakness in the enemy's line of battle, and makes the movements which will lead to the desired overthrow of the opposing force.

It seems, then, that in the lowest stages of life the feelings of pleasure and pain serve as signs that the act is preservative. Afterward this element falls into the background, and other signs are employed. Percepts and ideas are associated either with the idea of pleasure or pain, which, in turn, is associated with the idea of some appropriate movement; or the percept or idea is associated directly with the act, as is the case with instincts, habitual acts, ideo-motor action, etc.

Hence we may say again what we found to be true before: Feelings of pleasure and pain often serve as signs of what furthers and hinders life; sometimes the ideas of such feelings, that is, the expectation of pleasure and pain, sometimes other ideas, indicate it. Hence it is fair to say that pleasures and pains are means of guiding the will; they assist the will in preserving and promoting individual and generic life. Whenever these results can be attained without the help of pleasure and pain, other means are employed. Pleasure is not the end aimed at by the will, but a means. It is far more reasonable to say that the will blindly strives for the preservation and the development of life, and that pleasure and pain

are among its guides, than to say that pleasure is the end and life the means. The part is a means to the whole of which it is the part; the whole is not a means to an individual part.

15. The Physiological Basis of Pleasure-Pain. Now let us look at the matter physiologically. Let us consider what are the physiological conditions of pleasure and pain. When I exercise an organ moderately, a pleasant feeling arises; when I overexercise it, an unpleasant feeling is the result. A too intense light causes pain; a very loud sound does the same. It is often said that a very weak sensation is accompanied by an unpleasant feeling. This is true, however, only when we attempt to pay attention to it, in which case the pain is due to the effort we make. We may suppose that when an organ is exercised or stimulated, the cortical centre to which or from which the current runs has its nervous substance, its cells, destroyed. The energy in the cells is used up. But the energy is restored as quickly as possible by the blood, which carries nourishment. If the expended central energy is restored quickly enough to make up for the waste, a pleasant feeling arises. But when the cellular substance is not restored rapidly enough, we get unpleasant feelings. When the nervous system is acted upon, blood is carried to the parts in action in order to restore the expended force. The arteries are dilated. This explains the changes in pulse, respiration, etc., which accompany or follow pleas

« السابقةمتابعة »