The Scottish Philosophy [244]
and physics, should also be acquainted with the laws of their own mind, and this though they have no predilection for the abstruse discussions of metaphysics. We have admirable compends of physical science made comprehensible to the common understanding' If we are to preserve the intelligent mind of the country from falling under the influence of the advancing materialism, we should have like expositions of mental and moral investigation for the use of upper schools, male and female, and the reading population who have not the advantage of a collegiate education. We have such works in Abercrombie's " Intellectual Powers " (1830),and his " Philosophy of the Moral Feelings" (1833). He proceeds throughout on the method of Reid, and his treatises summarize some of the best results of the philosophy of Scotland. They are also valuable for the admirably reported cases illustrative of the influence of mind on body and body on mind. Nor is it to be omitted that there runs through all his works a vein of evangelical piety, decisive and outspoken without being offensive.
He was the son of a minister of the Church of Scotland, and was born at Aberdeen in 1780. He studied medicine in the University of Edinburgh, and became, after the death of Dr. Gregory, the most eminent Scotch physician of his time, being distinguished for his great skill and judgment. He wrote a number of medical works, treating of the brain, spinal cord, and of disease. He died in 1844.
In his "Intellectual Powers," he begins with stating what be regards as the object of science: it is to observe facts and trace their relations. He here treats of cause and effect, which he confounds with the uniformity of nature. He makes our belief in it an original instinct, but awkwardly brings observation and inference as involved in it. He distinguishes, in the manner of Reid and Stewart, between physical and efficient cause, regarding {407} the former as the only object of philosophic inquiry. He opposes materialism, but not very effectively. He then treats of the faculties of the mind arranging them: sensation and perception, consciousness and reflection, memory, abstraction, imagination, reason or judgment. Under the last he treats of first truths. But by far the most interesting and useful parts of his works are those in which he treats of the practical application of metaphysical subjects, as, for instance, of the laws of investigation, of fallacies, attention. He is in his own field when he is illustrating dreaming, somnambulism spectral illusions, and insanity. He makes a most useful application of the whole to the study of medicine. His statement of cases may always be depended on for its accuracy. I may give a few examples. He says of Dr. Leyden that he could repeat correctly a long act of parliament, or any similar document, after having once read it. When he was on one occasion congratulated by a friend on his remarkable power in this respect, he replied that instead of an advantage, it was often a source of great inconvenience. This he explained by saying that when he wished to recollect a particular point in any thing which he had read, he could do it only by repeating to himself the whole from the commencement till be reached the point which be wished to recall. Again, "a distinguished theatrical performer, in consequence of the sudden illness of another actor, had occasion to prepare himself in a few hours' notice for a part which was entirely new to him, and the part was long and rather difficult. He acquired it in a very short time, and went through it with perfect accuracy, but immediately after the performance forgot it to such a degree that, though he performed the character for several days in succession, he was obliged every day to study it anew. Characters which he had acquired in a more deliberate manner he never forgets, but can perform them at any time without a moment's preparation. When questioned respecting the mental process which he employed the first time he performed this part, he says that he lost sight entirely of the audience,
He was the son of a minister of the Church of Scotland, and was born at Aberdeen in 1780. He studied medicine in the University of Edinburgh, and became, after the death of Dr. Gregory, the most eminent Scotch physician of his time, being distinguished for his great skill and judgment. He wrote a number of medical works, treating of the brain, spinal cord, and of disease. He died in 1844.
In his "Intellectual Powers," he begins with stating what be regards as the object of science: it is to observe facts and trace their relations. He here treats of cause and effect, which he confounds with the uniformity of nature. He makes our belief in it an original instinct, but awkwardly brings observation and inference as involved in it. He distinguishes, in the manner of Reid and Stewart, between physical and efficient cause, regarding {407} the former as the only object of philosophic inquiry. He opposes materialism, but not very effectively. He then treats of the faculties of the mind arranging them: sensation and perception, consciousness and reflection, memory, abstraction, imagination, reason or judgment. Under the last he treats of first truths. But by far the most interesting and useful parts of his works are those in which he treats of the practical application of metaphysical subjects, as, for instance, of the laws of investigation, of fallacies, attention. He is in his own field when he is illustrating dreaming, somnambulism spectral illusions, and insanity. He makes a most useful application of the whole to the study of medicine. His statement of cases may always be depended on for its accuracy. I may give a few examples. He says of Dr. Leyden that he could repeat correctly a long act of parliament, or any similar document, after having once read it. When he was on one occasion congratulated by a friend on his remarkable power in this respect, he replied that instead of an advantage, it was often a source of great inconvenience. This he explained by saying that when he wished to recollect a particular point in any thing which he had read, he could do it only by repeating to himself the whole from the commencement till be reached the point which be wished to recall. Again, "a distinguished theatrical performer, in consequence of the sudden illness of another actor, had occasion to prepare himself in a few hours' notice for a part which was entirely new to him, and the part was long and rather difficult. He acquired it in a very short time, and went through it with perfect accuracy, but immediately after the performance forgot it to such a degree that, though he performed the character for several days in succession, he was obliged every day to study it anew. Characters which he had acquired in a more deliberate manner he never forgets, but can perform them at any time without a moment's preparation. When questioned respecting the mental process which he employed the first time he performed this part, he says that he lost sight entirely of the audience,