按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
eness （Schleiermacher） Vigor Sensitivity to stimulation （Beneke） Conscious activity Unconscious activity （Hartmann） Conscious deduction Unconscious induction （Wundt） Will Consciousness （Fischer） Independence Completeness （Krause； Lindemann） Particularity Generally generic （Volkmann） Negation Affirmation （Hegel and his school）
None of these contrasts are satisfactory； many are unintelligible。 Burdach's is correct only within limits and Hartmann's is approximately true if you accept his point of view。 I do not believe that these explanations would help anybody or make it easier for him to understand woman。 Indeed； to many a man they will appear to be saying merely that the psyche of the male is masculine； that of the female feminine。 The thing is not to be done with epigrams however spirited。 Epigrams merely tend to increase the already great confusion。
Hardly more help toward understanding the subject is to be derived from certain expressions which deal with a determinate and also with a determining trait of woman。 For example； the saying； ‘‘On forbidden ground woman is cautious and man keen；'' may； under some circumstances； be of great importance in a criminal case； particularly when it is necessary to fix the sex of the criminal。 If the crime was cautiously committed a woman may be inferred； and if swiftly； a man。 But that maxim is deficient in two respects。 Man and woman deal in the way described； not only in forbidden fields； but generally。 Again； such characteristics may be said to be ordinary but in no wise regulative： there are enough cases in which the woman was much keener than the man and the man much more cautious than the woman。
The greatest danger of false conceptions lies in the attribution of an unproved peculiarity to woman； by means of some beautifully expressed； and hence； apparently true； proverb。 Consider the well known maxim： Man forgives a beautiful woman everything； woman nothing。 Taken in itself the thing is true； we find it in the gossip of the ball…room； and in the most dreadful of criminal cases。 Men are inclined to reduce the conduct of a beautiful sinner to the mildest and least offensive terms； while her own sex judge her the more harshly in the degree of her beauty and the number of its partisans。 Now it might be easy in an attempt to draw the following consequences from the correctness of this proposition： Men are generally inclined to forgive in kindness； women are the unforgiving creatures。 This inference would be altogether unjustified； for the maxim only incidentally has woman for its subject； it might as well read： Woman forgives a handsome man everything； man nothing。 What we have at work here is the not particularly remarkable fact that envy plays a great rle in life。
Another difficulty in making use of popular truths in our own observations； lies in their being expressed in more or less definite images。 If you say； for example； ‘‘Man begs with words； woman with glances；'' you have a proposition that might be of use in many criminal cases； inasmuch as things frequently depend on the demonstration that there was or was not an amour between two people （murder of a husband； relation of the widow with a suspect）。
Now； of course； the judge could not see how they conversed together； how he spoke stormily and she turned her eyes away。 But suppose that the judge has gotten hold of some lettersthen if he makes use of the maxim； he will observe that the man becomes more explicit than the woman； who； up to a certain limit； remains ashamed。 So if the man speaks very definitely in his letters； there is no evidence contradictory to the inference of their relationship； even though nothing similar is to be found in her letters。 The thing may be expressed in another maxim： What he wants is in the lines； what she wants between the lines。
The great difficulty of distinguishing between man and woman is mentioned in ‘‘Levana oder Erziehungslehre；'' by Jean Paul； who says； ‘‘A woman can not love her child and the four continents of the world at the same time。 A man can。'' But who has ever seen a man love four continents？ ‘‘He loves the concept； she the appearance； the particular。'' What lawyer understands this？ And this？ ‘‘So long as woman loves； she loves continuously； but man has lucid intervals。'' This fact has been otherwise expressed by Grabbe； who says： ‘‘For man the world is his heart； for woman her heart is the world。'' And what are we to learn from this？ That the love of woman is greater and fills her life more？ Certainly not。 We only see that man has more to do than woman； and this prevents him from depending on his impressions； so that he can not allow himself to be completely captured by even his intense inclinations。 Hence the old proverb： Every new affection makes man more foolish and woman wiser； meaning that man is held back from his work and effectiveness by every inclination； while woman； each time； gathers new experiences in life。 Of course； man also gets a few of these； but he has other and more valuable opportunities of getting them； while woman； who has not his position in the midst of life； must gather her experiences where she may。
Hence； it remains best to stick to simple； sober discoveries which may be described without literary glamour； and which admit of no exception。 Such is the statement by Friedreich＇1＇： ‘‘Woman is more excitable； more volatile and movable spiritually； than man； the mind dominates the latter； the emotions the former。 Man thinks more； woman senses more。'' These ungarnished； clear words； which offer nothing new； still contain as much as may be said and explained。 We may perhaps supplement them with an expression of Heusinger's； ‘‘Women have much reproductive but little productive imaginative power。 Hence； there are good landscape and portrait painters among women； but as long as women have painted there has not been any great woman…painter of history。 They make poems； romances； and sonnets； but not one of them has written a good tragedy。'' This expression shows that the imaginative power of woman is really more reproductive than productive； and it may be so observed in crimes and in the testimony of witnesses。
＇1＇ J。 B。 Friedreich： System der gerichtlich。 Psychol。 Regensburg 1852。
In crimes； this fact will not be easy to observe in the deed itself； or in the manner of its execution； it will be observable in the nature of the plan used。 To say that the plan indicates productive creation would not be to call it original。 Originality can not be indicated； without danger of misunderstanding； by means of even a single example； we have simply to cling to the paradigm of Heusinger； and to say； that when the plan of a criminal act appears more independent and more completely worked out； it may be assumed to be of masculine origin； if it seeks support； however； if it is an imitation of what has already happened； if it aims to find outside assistance during its execution； its originator was a woman。 This truth goes so far that in the latter case the woman must be fixed upon as the intellectual source of the plan； even though th