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！
Another danger lies in the testimony of witnesses who have a certain sense of form in representation and whose inferential leaps consists in their omitting the detailed expression and in inserting the notion of form instead。 I learned of this notable psychosis from a bookkeeper of a large factory； who had to provide for the test of numberless additions。 It was his notion that if we were to add two and three are five； and six are eleven； and seven are eighteen we should never finish adding； and since the avoidance of mistakes requires such adding we must so contrive that the image of two and three shall immediately call forth the image of five。 Now this mental image of five is added with the actual six and gives eleven； etc。 According to this we do not add； we see only a series of images； and so rapidly that we can follow with a pencil but slowly。 And the images are so certain that mistake is impossible。 ‘‘You know how 9 looks？ Well； just as certainly we know what the image of 27 and 4 is like； the image of 31 occurs without change。''
This； as it happens； is a procedure possible only to a limited type； but this type occurs not only among bookkeepers。 When any one of such persons unites two events he does not consider what may result from such a union； he sees； if I may say so； only a resulting image。 This image； however； is not so indubitably certain as in the case of numbers； and it may take all kinds of forms； the correctness of which is not altogether probable。 E。 g。； the witness sees two forms in the dark and the flash of a knife and hears a cry。 If he belongs to the type under discussion he does not consider that he might have been so frightened by the flashing knife as to have cried out； or that he had himself proceeded to attack with a stick and that the other fellow did the yelling； or that a stab or cut had preceded the cryno； he saw the image of the two forms and the knife and he heard the cry and these leap together into an image。 i。 e。； one of the forms has a cut above his brow。 And these leaps occur so swiftly and with such assurance that the witness in question often believes himself to have seen what he infers and swears to it。
There are a great many similar processes at the bottom of impressions that depend only upon swift and unconscious inference。 Suppose； e。 g。； that I am shown the photograph of a small section of a garden； through which a team is passing。 Although I observe the image of only a small portion of the garden and therefore have no notion of its extent； still； in speaking of it； I shall proba… bly speak of a very big garden。 I have inferred swiftly and unconsciously that in the fact that a wagon and horses were present in the pictured portion of the garden； is implied great width of road； for even gardens of average size do not have such wide roads as to admit wagons； the latter occurring only in parks and great gardens。 Hence my conclusion： the garden must be very big。 Such inferences＇1＇ are frequent； whence the question as to the source and the probability of the witness's information； whether it is positive or only an impression。 Evidently such an impression may be correct。 It will be correct often； inasmuch as impressions occur only when inferences have been made and tested repeatedly。 But it is necessary in any case to review the sequence of inferences which led to this impression and to examine their correctness。 Unfortunately the witness is rarely aware whether he has perceived or merely inferred。
＇1＇ Cf。 Gross's Archiv； I； 93； II； 140； III； 250； VII； 155。
Examination is especially important when the impression has been made after the observation of a few marks or only a single one and not very essential one at that。 In the example of the team the impression may have been attained by inference； but frequently it will have been attained through some unessential； purely personal； determinative characteristic。 ‘‘Just as the ancient guest recognizes his friend by fitting halves of the ring； so we recognize the object and its constitution from one single characteristic； and hence the whole vision of it is vivified by that characteristic。''＇2＇
＇2＇ H。 Aubert： Physiologie der Netzhaut。 Breslau 1865。
All this is very well if no mistakes are made。 When Tertullian said； ‘‘Credo quia impossibile est；'' we will allow honesty of statement to this great scholar； especially as he was speaking about matters of religion； but when Socrates said of the works of Heraclitus the Obscure： ‘‘What I understand of it is good； I think that what I do not understand is also good''he was not in earnest。 Now the case of many people who are not as wise as Tertullian and Socrates is identical with theirs。 Numerous examinations of witnesses made me think of Tertullian's maxim； for the testimonies presented the most improbable things as facts。 And when they even explained the most unintelligible things I thought： ‘‘And what you do not understand is also good。''
This belief of uncultured people in their own intelligence has been most excellently portrayed by Wieland in his immortal ‘‘Abderites。'' The fourth philosopher says： ‘‘What you call the world is essentially an infinite series of worlds which envelop one another like the skin of an onion。'' ‘‘Very clear；'' said the Abderites； and thought they understood the philosopher because they knew perfectly well what an onion looked like。 The inference which is drawn from the comprehension of one term in a comparison to the comprehension of the other is one of the most important reasons for the occurrence of so many misunderstandings。 The example； as such； is understood； but its application to the assertion and the question whether the latter is also made clear by the example are forgotten。 This explains the well known and supreme power of examples and comparisons； and hence the wise of all times have used comparisons in speaking to the poor in spirit。 Hence； too； the great effect of comparisons； and also the numerous and coarse misunderstandings and the effort of the untrained and unintelligent to clarify those things they do not understand by means of comparisons。 Fortunately they have； in trying to explain the thing to other people； the habit of making use of these difficultly discovered comparisons so that the others； if they are only sufficiently observant； may succeed in testing the correctness of the inference from one term in a comparison to the other。 We do this frequently in examining witnesses； and we discover that the witness has made use of a figure to clarify some unintelligible point and that he necessarily understands it since it lies within the field of his instruments of thought。 But what is compared remains as confused to him as before。 The test of it； therefore； is very tiring and mainly without results； because one rarely succeeds in liberating a man from some figure discovered with difficulty。 He always returns to it because he understands it； though really not what he compares。 But what is gained in such a case is not little； for the certainty that； so revealed； the witness does not understand the matter in hand； easily determines the value of his testimony。
The fullness of the possibilities under which anything