Here, again, I think, a better scientific theory bears out
the result of one's individual self-examination. Psychology
has made it clear that in recognising an object, say a weasel
crossing the road on which we are walking, we do not need
to have present to our mind (in addition to the perception
of the object) a pictorial idea or image of a weasel as
formed from past observations. Owing to the organising
of a certain perceptual disposition — a readiness to see an
object as a familiar one, as of a particular "sort" — our mind
instantly greets it as a weasel. In other words, we recognise
things by the help not of images present to the mind at the
moment, but of certain ingrained " apperceptive " tendencies
or attitudes. All the higher animals seem to share with us
this highly useful capability of immediate and instantaneous
recognition.
Now I take it that there is another side to these apper-
ceptive tendencies. Not only do they secure for us, without
the necessity of calling up distinct ideas, these instant
recognitions of a sort of thing, they enable us as weU as
intelligent animals mentally to reject presentations which
do not answer to " the sort of thing ". I can say that this
wax figure is not a man without having any distinct image
of the living man present to my consciousness. This ability



FURTHER INSPECTION OF HAT-COMEDY 15

to recognise what we see as not of a particular kind of
thing, without calling up a definite idea of this kind, extends
to combinations and arrangements of parts in a whole.
