criminal psychology-第133节
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！
es； non…partisan friends of A and B； and among them the parish priest。 Simulation is completely excluded inasmuch as B； a simple peasant lad； certainly did not know the symptoms of brain…fever； and could not hope for any damages from the absolutely poor A。 Let us now consider what the nearest facts are。 The elements of the case are： B sees a heavy ball in A's hand； A threatens B with it and pursues him； B feels a blow on the head。 The compounding of these elements results in the invincible assumption on B's part that A had struck him on the head with the ball。 The consequence of this imaginative feeling was the development of all the phenomena that would naturally have followed if B had actually been struck on the head。
It would be wrong to say that these cases are so rare as to be useless in practice。 We simply do not observe them for the reason that we take much to be real because it is confirmed reliably。 More accurate examination would show that many things are merely imaginative。 A large portion of the contradictions we meet in our cases is explicable by the fact that one man is the victim of his fancies and the other is not。 The great number of such fancies is evinced by the circumstance that there can nowhere be found a chasm or boundary between the simplest fancies of the normal individual and the impossible imaginings of the lunatic。 Every man imagines frequently the appearance of an absent friend； of a landscape he has once seen。 The painter draws even the features of an absent model； the practiced chess…master plays games without having the board before him； persons half asleep see the arrival of absentees； persons lost in the wood at night see spirits and ghosts； very nervous people see them at home； and the lunatic sees the most extraordinary and disgusting thingsall these are imaginations beginning with the events of the daily life； ending with the visions of diseased humanity。 Where is the boundary； where a lacuna？
Here； as in all events of the daily life； the natural development of the extremely abnormal from the ordinary is the incontrovertible evidence for the frequency of these events。
Of course one must not judge by one's self。 Whoever does not believe in the devil； and never as a child had an idea of him in mind； will never see him as an illusion。 And whoever from the beginning possesses a restricted； inaccessible imagination； can never understand the other fellow who is accompanied by the creatures of his imagination。 We observe this hundreds of times。 We know that everybody sees a different thing in clouds； smoke； mountain tops； ink blots； coffee stains； etc。； that everybody sees it according to the character and intensity of his imagination； and that whatever seems to be confused and unintelligible is to be explained as determined by the nature of the person who expresses or possesses it。
So in the study of any work of art。 Each is the portrayal of some generality in concrete form。 The concrete is understood by anybody who knows enough to recognize it。 The generality can be discovered only by him who has a similar imagination； and hence each one draws a different generalization from the same work of art。 This variety holds also in scientific questions。 I remember how three scholars were trying to decipher hieroglyphs； when that branch of archology was still very young。 One read the inscription as a declaration of war by a nomadic tribe； another as the acquisition of a royal bride from a foreign king； and the third as an account of the onions consumed by Jews contributing forced labor。 ‘‘Scientific'' views could hardly of themselves have made such extraordinary differences； only imagination could have driven scholars in such diverse directions。
And how little we can apprehend the imaginations of others or judge them！ This is shown by the fact that we can no longer tell whether children who vivify everything in their imagination see their fancies as really alive。 It is indubitable that the savage who takes his fetish to be alive； the child that endows its doll with life； would wonder if fetish and doll of themselves showed signs of vitalitybut whether they really take them to be alive is unknown to the adult。 And if we can not sympathetically apprehend the views and imaginings of our own youth； how much less possible is it so to apprehend those of other people。 We have to add to this fact； moreover； the characteristic circumstance that less powerful effects must be taken into consideration。 The power of imagination is much more stimulated by mild； peaceful impressions than by vigorous ones。 The latter stun and disquiet the soul； while the former lead it to self…possession。 The play of ideas is much more excited by mild tobacco smoke； than by the fiery column of smoking Vesuvius； the murmur of the brook is much more stimulating than the roar of the stormy sea。 If the converse were true it would be far easier to observe the effects in others。 We see that a great impression is at work； our attention is called to its presence； and we are then easily in the position of observing its effect in others。 But the small； insignificant phenomena we observe the less； the less obvious their influence upon the imagination of others appears to be。 Such small impressions pass hundreds of times without effect。 For once； however； they find a congenial soul； their proper soil； and they begin to ferment。 But how and when are we to observe this in others？
We rarely can tell whether a man's imagination is at work or not。 Nevertheless； there are innumerable stories of what famous men did when their imagination was at work。 Napoleon had to cut things to pieces。 Lenau used to scrape holes in the ground。 Mozart used to knot and tear table…cloth and napkins。 Others used to run around； still others used to smoke； drink； whistle； etc。 But not all people have these characteristics； and then we who are to judge the influence of the imagination on a witness or a criminal are certainly not present when the imagination is at work。 To get some notion of the matter through witnesses is altogether too unsafe a task。 Bain once justly proposed keeping the extremities quiet as a means of conquering anger。 Thus it may be definitely discovered whether a man was quite angry at a given instant by finding out whether his hands and feet were quiet at the time； but such indices are not given for the activity of imagination。
Moreover； most people in whom the imagination is quite vigorously at work know nothing about it。 Du Bois…Reymond says somewhere； ‘‘I've had a few good ideas in my life； and have observed myself when I had them。 They came altogether involuntarily； without my ever having thought of them。'' This I do not believe。 His imagination； which was so creative； worked so easily and without effort that he was not aware of its activity； and moreover； his fundamental ideas were so clear that everything fell into lines spontaneously without his being conscious of it later。 This ‘‘working'' of the imagination is so effortless to fortunate natures that it becomes an ordinary movement。 Thus Goethe tells of an imaginary flower which broke into its elements； united again； broke again； and united in another form； etc。 His story reveals one of the reasons for the false descriptions of perception。 The perception is correct when made； then the imagination causes movements of ideas and the question follows which of the two was more vigorous； the perceptive or the imaginal activity？ If the one was intenser； memory was correct； if the other； the recollection was erroneous。 It is hence important； from the point of view of the lawyer； to study the nature and intensity of witnesses' imagination。＇1＇ We need only to observe the influence of imaginal movements on powerful minds in order to see clearly what influence even their weak reflection may have on ordinary people。 Schopenhauer finds the chief pleasure of every work of art in imagination； and Goethe finds that no man experiences or enjoys anything without becoming productive。
Most instructive is the compilation of imaginative ideas given by Hfler＇2＇ and put together from the experiences of scholars； investigators； artists； and other important persons。 For our purposes it would be better to have a number of reliable statements from other people which would show how normal individuals were led astray by their imaginations。 We might then learn approximately what imaginative notions might do； and how far their limits extend。 Sully calls attention to the fact that Dickens's characters were real to him and that when the novel was completed； its dramatic person became personal memories。 Perhaps all imaginative people are likely to take their imaginings as actual remembered events and persons。 If this happens to a witness； what trouble he may cause us！
A physician； Dr。 Hadekamp； said that he used to see the flow of blood before he cut the vein open。 Another physician； Dr。 Schmeisser； confirms this experience。 Such cases are controlled physically； the flow of blood can not be seen before the knife is removed。 Yet how often； at least chronologically； do similar mistakes occur when no such control is present？ There is the story of a woman who could describe so accurately
