the views of eighteenth century British empiricists. Their psychology provided a basis for ethics, although other ingredients went into it also. In their search for a theory of knowledge they enlarged gratifyingly the existing fund of psychological knowledge, besides laying thereby the foundation for a Logic that in J. S. Mill reached its most perfect and persuasive form. What was expounded in the countless treatises on human nature in those fruitful years has remained up to this date a groundwork for textbooks on price and distribution.

With the Renaissance of learning there came of course also a renewed interest in problems of thought and behavior. What the Greeks had said on that subject served once more as an inspiration for the speculators of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It was apparent from the outset that much had been overlooked, even though a great deal called for a revamping. Descartes here as elsewhere led the van and made noteworthy contributions which, however, need not detain us because they did not as such influence the founders of economics. What continental thinkers brought to light on this matter was little compared to what Englishmen added themselves. Hobbes, who had visited Paris and had met both Descartes and Gassendi, could properly attribute his start in materialism to these two scholars. As materialist, however, Hobbes did not further the cause of economics, and as psychologist he was only a pioneer, the central figure in the whole history of empirical psychology being John Locke.

Still, this much should be said about Hobbes' views on fundamentals of consciousness. He was emphatic in his avowal of a materialistic thesis. He reduced psychics to physics and put up the equation: Notion is motion; that

is, matter and motion suffice to explain all experiences.

He begins in his exposition with nerve vibration, which is held to move the minutest particles of neural and cerebral stuff. Contact with the outer world is made responsible for this agitation within. Responses result. Sensations become consciousness, or are it. And regardless of what the complexities of consciousness, they are derivable each and all from the first principle announced. Thus in his "Leviathan" which represents mature thought after earlier essays in psychology, he informs us: “The original of them [that is, of our thoughts] all is that which we call sense; for there is no conception in a man's mind which hath not at first, totally or by parts, been begotten upon the organs of sense. The rest are derived

from that original." 1

"To know the natural cause of sense, is not very necessary to the business now in hand; and I have elsewhere written of the same at large. Nevertheless, to fill each part of my present method I will briefly deliver the same in this place." 2

"The cause of sense is the external body or object which presseth the organ proper to each sense, either immediately as in the taste and touch; or mediately as in seeing, hearing, and smelling: Which pressure, by the mediation of nerves and other strings, and membranes of the body, continued inwards to the brain, and heart, causeth there a resistance or counter-pressure, or endeavor of the heart to deliver itself, which endeavor because outward seemeth to be some matter without. And this seeming or fancy is that which men call sense; and consisteth, as to the eye, in a light, or color figured; to the ear, in a sound; to the nostrill, in an odor; to the tongue and palat, in a savor; and to the rest of the body,

1 Quotations are from the first edition of 1651. See Part I, ch. 1. 2 Ibidem.

in heat, cold, hardness, softness, and such other qualities as we discern by feeling."

"3

Only four mental states are recognized, viz., sensation, imagination, memory, and desire, the second and third figuring as "decaying sense." And then we are told that of the two possible kinds of trains of thought sprung from single ideas the "second is more constant; as being regulated by some desire and design. For the impression made by such things as we desire, or fear, is strong and permanent, or (if it cease for a time) of quick return." "From desire ariseth the thought of some means we have seen produce the like of that which we aim at; and from the thought of that, the thought of means to that mean; and so continually till we come to some beginning within our own power." 4

Hence two general facts arise that economists up to J. S. Mill have considered seriously in discussing motives and methodology, namely, in the first place truth consists in an agreement of ideas among each other, not of ideas with things outside as others maintained, and in the second place, desire rests on sensations or a memory thereof, the net result being a moral judgment standardized by society.

Hobbes said: "When a man reasoneth he does nothing but conceive a sum total, from additions of parcels; or conceive a remainder, from subtraction of one sum from another; which (if it be done by words) is conceiving of the consequence of the names of all the parts to the name of the whole; or from the names of the whole and one part, to the name of the other part." 5 And à propos of this it is further remarked: "Cause is the sum or aggregate of all such accidents, both in the

• Ibidem.

• Ch. 3. Ch. 5.

agent and in the patient, as concur to the production of the effect propounded, all which existing together it cannot be understood but that the effect existeth with them; or that it can possibly exist if any of them be absent," 6 ... a way of looking at the problem of causation that does not differ greatly from J. S. Mill's in his Logic written nearly two centuries later.

As to desire, this is simply a kind of motion "within the body of man," which is commonly called endeavor; and "this endeavor, when it is toward something which causes it, is called appetite or desire; . . . . and when the endeavor is fromward something, it is generally called aversion." "But whatsoever is the object of any man's appetite or desire, that is it which he for his part calleth good: And the object of his hate and aversion, evil; and of his contempt, vile and inconsiderable. For these words of Good, Evil, and Contemptible are ever used with relation to the person that useth them: There being nothing simply and absolutely so; nor any common rule of Good and Evil to be taken from the nature of the objects themselves; but from the person of the man, or from an arbitrator or judge, whom men disagreeing shall by consent set up, and make his sentence the rule thereof." 8 In other words, concepts of good and bad are acquired like other knowledge, being usually purposive, and variable for time and place.

There is much in Hobbes' view that Locke, who belongs to the next generation, shared with him; but the differences are no less striking. Hobbes ranked high as systematizer, but evinced little originality. He repeated himself in order to drive home his main doctrines, and

Hobbes, The. Elements of Philosophy, 1655, W. Molesworth edition, 1839, Part I, ch. 6. See also Part II, ch. 9.

Leviathan, Part I, ch. 6.

• Ibidem.

moreover repelled readers by his lumbering style both in Latin and in his native tongue. Locke was equally practical at bottom, as his public career proves to satisfaction, but on the whole was more thorough and versatile. Though depending much less upon continental models of thought, he succeeded in making himself clear to a large circle of readers. He greatly improved the psychology of his older compatriot. His influence was enormous and

affected the political events of two continents. He took his time in meditating over abstruse questions. He waited twenty years before giving his "Essay Concerning Human Understanding" to the world (in 1689). His main aim is to reveal the roots and limits of knowledge, not to clarify ideas on passions and ethics. He does away with the argument for innate ideas, and in the fourth book of his Essay enters cautiously upon his central topic.

9

In general he adheres to sensationalism, but adds that reflections, being "the perception of the operations of our own minds within us as it is employed about the ideas it has got, which operations, . . . do furnish the understanding with another set of ideas which could not be had from things without" must be distinguished from sensations directly traceable to outside stimuli. All ideas are thus derived from sense or from reflection. Simple ideas become complex "by combining several simple ideas into one compound," 10 or through like processes. Through association ideas are built into more or less regularly recurring and compact groups of thought, and through wrong associations many errors arise, as for instance superstitions and fallacies in argumentation.

• Locke, J. Essay Concerning the Human Understanding, 1689, Book II, ch. 1, § 4. 10 Ibidem, ch. 12, § 1.