422 NEW BOOKS. TJ irpvTov KIVOVV, i.e., God " (p. 156). The first note on p. 228, " i.e., the soul, etc.," is quite erroneous. Leibnitz is simply arguing that if we had sense-organs variable at will, we should need some corporeal mechanism for their control. The reference, in the footnote to p. 248, to Kant's Religion, etc., is wrong, and should be omitted. Leibnitz's statement at p. 288 about the general character of the language of children is surely more true to the facts than Mr. Langley's confident assertion, " everything for them (i.e., children) is individual, particular, separate, and by itself". The first note on p. 306, where Leibnitz is credited with the discovery of a " source of manifold far-reaching and influential errors, specially fatal in philosophy, viz., the hypostatising of concepts," is really quite absurd. Leibnitz, in the passage thus commented on, is only saying that a given word may sometimes, e.g., in a dictionary or grammar, be the subject or matter of discourse. At p. 348 Pierre Sylvain Re'gis, the opponent of Malebranche, is confused with H. Regius, a mistake all the more curious because at p. 633 Mr. Langley not only gives a correct account of Regius, but censures Dr. Martineau for having fallen into this very con- fusion. It is extremely incorrect to say (p. 362, note 1) of the " elements " of Einpedocles, without a word of qualification, that they were u adopted by Plato and Aristotle, and called by the Peripatetics warmth, cold, dry- ness, and humidity ". The diagram in Leibnitz's De arte combinatoria should at least have kept Mr. Langley from the mistake about the Peri- patetics. These are, however, after all, mere minor blemishes, and I hasten to add that the general level of Mr. Langley's notes is far above that reached by his translation. The collation of Erdinann's and Gerhardt's texts is a useful feature of Mr. Langley's notes, but it may reasonably be complained that he has too often followed the latter in cases of obvious clerical or typographical errors. The type, paper, and general get-up of the translation are as excellent as Messrs. Macaiillan's reputation would lead one to expect. A. E. TAYLOR. An Outline of Psychology. By EDWARD BRADFORD TITCHENER. New York : The Macmillan Company. London : Macmillaii & Co., 1896. Pp. xiv., 352. The distinctive merit of this little book is its adaptation to the needs of the beginner. Avoiding unnecessary subtleties, Prof. Titchener gives a clear and well-arranged sketch of the leading topics of Psychology. A feature of especial value is the description of simple experiments which can be readily performed by the reader for himself. Such experiments are easiest and most effective in the analysis of sensations, and this is undoubtedly the best part of the book. When Prof. Titchener passes to the discussion of more complicated and recondite processes, his treat- ment is often unsatisfactory. He is apt to lay down sweeping and dogmatic statements on points which are still extremely difficult and dubious. For instance, in chap. v. he affirms, apparently without any kind of misgiving, that "anabolic bodily processes correspond to the conscious quality of pleasantness, cataboh'c processes to that of un- pleasantness " (p. 94). In the same chapter he also states, as if it were a well-assured acquisition of science, that the experiences of pleasantness and unpleasantness can only occur when a neural disturbance is " carried to the highest ' co-ordinating centre ' of the brain the cortex of the frontal lobes" (p. 100). All this is speculative physiology, not a sober statement of psychological observations. Prof. Titchener has, of course, a perfect right to maintain these views, which may or may not be
