criminal psychology-第89章

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！


hall　be　able　to　explain　every　phenomenon　characteristic　of　this　period。

Senile　individuals　require　especial　treatment　as　witnesses。　An　accurate　study　of　such　people　and　of　the　not　over…rich　literature　concerning　them　will；　however；　yield　a　sufficient　basis　to　go　on。　What　is　most　important　can　be　found　in　any　text…book　on　psychology。　The　individual　cases　are　considerably　helped　by　the　assumption　that　the　mental　organization　of　senility　is　essentially　simplified　and　narrowed　to　a　few　types。　Its　activities　are　lessened；　its　influences　and　aims　are　compressed；　the　present　brings　little　and　is　little　remembered；　so　that　its　collective　character　is　determined　by　a　resultant；　composed　of　those　forces　that　have　influenced　the　man's　past　life。　Accurate　observation　will　reveal　only　two　types　of　senility。＇1＇　There　is　the　embittered　type；　and　there　is　the　character　expressed　in　the　phrase；　‘‘to　understand　all　is　to　forgive　all。''　Senility　rarely　succeeds　in　presenting　facts　objectively。　Everything　it　tells　is　bound　up　with　its　judgment；　and　its　judgment　is　either　negative　or　positive。　The　judgment's　nature　depends　less　on　the　old　man's　emotional　character　than　on　his　experience　in　life。　If　he　is　one　of　the　embittered；　he　will　probably　so　describe　a　possibly　harmful；　but　not　bad　event；　as　to　be　able　to　complain　of　the　wickedness　of　the　world；　which　brought　it　about；　that　at　one　time　such　and　such　an　evil　happened　to　him。　The　excusing　senile　will　begin　with　‘‘Good　God；　it　wasn't　so　bad。　The　people　were　young　and　merry；　and　so　one　of　them。''　That　the　same　event　is　presented　in　a　fundamentally　different　light　by　each　is　obvious。　Fortunately；　the　senile　is　easily　seen　through　and　his　first　words　show　how　he　looks　at　things。　He　makes　difficulties　mainly　by　introducing　memories


＇1＇　H。　Gross：　Lehrbuch　fr　den　Ausforschungsdienst　der　Gendarmerie。

　which　always　color　and　modify　the　evidence。　The　familiar　fact　that　very　old　men　remember　things　long　past　better　than　immediate　occurrences；　is　to　be　explained　by　the　situation　that　the　ancient　brain　retains　only　that　which　it　has　frequently　experienced。　Old　experiences　are　recalled　in　memory　hundreds　and　hundreds　of　times；　and　hence；　may　take　deep　root　there；　while　the　new　could　be　repeated；　only　a　few　times；　and　hence　had　not　time　to　find　a　place　before　being　forgotten。　If　the　old　man　tells　of　some　recent　event；　some　similar　remote　event　is　also　alive　in　his　mind。　The　latter　has；　however；　if　not　more　vivid　at　least　equally　vigorous　color；　so　that　the　old　man's　story　is　frequently　composed　of　things　long　past。　I　do　not　know　how　to　eliminate　these　old　memories　from　this　story。　There　are　always　difficulties；　particularly　as　personal　experiences　of　evil　generally　dominate　these　memories。　It　is　not　unjust；　that　proverb　which　says　‘‘If　youth　is　at　all　silly；　old　age　remembers　it　well。''


Section　83。　（d）　Differences　in　Conception。

I　should　like　to　add　to　what　precedes；　that　senility　presents　fact　and　judgment　together。　In　a　certain　sense　every　age　and　person　does　so　and；　as　I　have　repeatedly　said；　it　would　be　foolish　to　assert　that　we　have　the　right　to　demand　only　facts　from　witnesses。　Setting　aside　the　presence　of　inferences　in　most　sense…perceptions；　every　exposition　contains；　without　exception；　the　judgment　of　its　subject…　matter；　though　only；　perhaps；　in　a　few　dry　words。　It　may　lie　in　some　choice　expression；　in　the　tone；　in　the　gesture　but　it　is　there；　open　to　careful　observation。　Consider　any　simple　event；　e。　g。；　two　drunkards　quarreling　in　the　street。　And　suppose　we　instruct　any　one　of　many　witnesses　to　tell　us　only　the　facts。　He　will　do　so；　but　with　the　introductory　words；　‘‘It　was　a　very　ordinary　event；''　‘‘altogether　a　joke；''　‘‘completely　harmless；''　‘‘quite　disgusting；''　‘‘very　funny；''　‘‘a　disgusting　piece　of　the　history　of　morals；''　‘‘too　sad；''　‘‘unworthy　of　humanity；''　‘‘frightfully　dangerous；''　‘‘very　interesting；''　‘‘a　real　study　for　hell；''　‘‘just　a　picture　of　the　future；''　etc。　Now；　is　it　possible　to　think　that　people　who　have　so　variously　characterized　the　same　event　will　give　an　identical　description　of　the　mere　fact？　They　have　seen　the　event　in　accordance　with　their　attitude　toward　life。　One　has　seen　nothing；　another　this；　another　that；　and；　although　the　thing　might　have　lasted　only　a　very　short　time；　it　made　such　an　impression　that　each　has　in　mind　a　completely　different　picture　which　he　now　reproduces。＇1＇　As　Volkmar　said；　‘‘One


＇1＇　Cf。　H。　Gross's　Archiv　XIV；　83。

　nation　hears　in　thunder　the　clangor　of　trumpets；　the　hoof…beats　of　divine　steeds；　the　quarrels　of　the　dragons　of　heaven；　another　hears　the　mooing　of　the　cow；　the　chirp　of　the　cricket；　the　complaint　of　the　ancestors；　still　another　hears　the　saints　turn　the　vault　of　heaven；　and　the　Greenlander；　even　the　quarrel　of　bewitched　women　concerning　a　dried　skin。''　And　Voltaire　says；　‘‘If　you　ask　the　devil　what　beauty　is；　he　will　tell　you　that　beauty　is　a　pair　of　horns；　four　hoofs；　and　a　tail。''　Yet；　when　we　ask　a　witness　what　is　beautiful；　we　think　that　we　are　asking　for　a　brute　fact；　and　expect　as　reliable　an　answer　as　from　a　mathematician。　We　might　as　well　ask　for　cleanliness　from　a　person　who　thinks　he　has　set　his　house　in　order　by　having　swept　the　dirt　from　one　corner　to　another。

To　compare　the　varieties　of　intellectual　attitude　among　men　generally；　we　must　start　with　sense…perception；　which；　combined　with　mental　perception；　makes　a　not　insignificant　difference　in　each　individual。　Astronomers　first　discovered　the　existence　of　this　difference；　in　that　they　showed　that　various　observers　of　contemporaneous　events　do　not　observe　at　the　same　time。　This　fact　is　called　‘‘the　personal　equation。''　Whether　the　difference　in　rate　of　sense…perception；　or　the　difference　of　intellectual　apprehension；　or　of　both　together；　are　here　responsible；　is　not　known；　but　the　proved　distinction　（even　to　a　second）　is　so　much　the　more　important；　since　events　which　succeed　each　other　very　rapidly　may　cause　individual　observers　to　have　quite　different　images。　And　we　know　as　little　whether　the　slower　or　the　quicker　observer　sees　more　correctly；　as　we　little　know　what　people　perceive　more　quickly　or　more　slowly。　Now；　inasmuch　as　we　are　unable　to　test　individual　differences　with　special　instruments；　we　must　satisfy　ourselves　with　the　fact　that　there　are　different　varieties　of　conception；　and　that　these　may　be　of　especial　importance　in　doubtful　cases；　such　as　brawls；　sudden　attacks；　cheating　at　cards；　pocket…picking；　etc。

The　next　degree　of　difference　is　in　the　difference　of　observation。　Schiel　says　that　the　observer　is　not　he　who　sees　the　thing；　but　who　sees　of　what　parts　it　is　made。　The　talent　for　such　vision　is　rare。　One　man　overlooks　half　because　he　is　inattentive　or　is　looking　at　the　wrong　place；　another　substitutes　his　own　inferences　for　objects；　while　another　tends　to　observe　the　quality　of　objects；　and　neglects　their　quantity；　and　still　another　divides　what　is　to　be　united；　and　unites　what　is　to　be　separated。　If　we　keep　in　mind　what　profound　differences　may　result　in　this　way；　we　must　recogruze　the　source　of　the　conflicting　assertions　by　witnesses。　And　we　shall　have　to　　grant　that　these　differences　would　become　incomparably　greater　and　more　important　if　the　witnesses　were　not　required　to　talk　of　the　event　immediately；　or　later　on；　thus　approximating　their　different　conceptions　to　some　average。　Hence　we　often　discover　that　when　the　witnesses　really　have　had　no　chance　to　discuss　the　matter　and　have　heard　no　account　of　it　from　a　third　person；　or　have　not　seen　the　consequences　of　the　deed；　their　discussions　of　it　showed　distinct　and　essential　differences　merely　through　the　lack　of　an　opportunity　or　a　standard　of　correction。　And　we　then　suppose　that　a　part　of　what　the　witnesses　have　said　is　untrue；　or　assume　that　they　were　inattentive；　or　blind。

Views　are　of　similar　importance。＇1＇　Fiesto　exclaims；　‘‘It　is　scandalous　to　empty　a　full　purse；　it　is　impertinent　to　misappropriate　a　million；　but　it　is　unnamably　great　to　steal　a　crown。　The　shame　decreases　with　the　increase　of　the　sin。''　Exner　holds　that　the　ancients　conceived　Oedipus　not　as　we　do；　they　found　his　misfortune　horrible；　we　find　it　unpleasant。

These　are　poetical　criminal　cases　presented　to　us　from　different　points　of　view；　and　we　nowadays　understand　the　same　action　still　more　differently；　and　not　only　in　poetry；　but　in　the　daily　life。　Try；　for　example；　to　get　various　individuals　to　judge　the　same　formation　of　clouds。　You　may　hear　the　clouds　called　flower…stalks　with　spiritual　blossoms；　impoverished　students；　stormy　sea；　camel；　monkey；　battling　giants；　swarm　of　flies；　prophet　with　a　flowing　beard；　dunderhead；　etc。　We　have　coming　to　light；　in　this　accidental　interpretation　of　fact；　the　speaker's　view　of　life；　his　intimacies；　etc。　This　emergence　is　as　observable　in　the　interpretation　also　of　the　ordinary　events　of　the　daily　life。　There；　even　if　the　judgments　do　not　vary　very　much；　they　are　still　different　enough　to　indicate　quite　distinct　points　of　view。　The　memory　of　the　curious　judgment　of　one　cloud…formation　has　helped　me　many　a　time　to　explain　testimonies　that　seemed　to　have　no　possible　connection。

_Attitude　or　feeling_this　indefinable　factor　exercises　a　great　influence　on　conception　and　interpretation。　It　is　much　more　wonderful　than　even　the　march　of　events；　or　of　fate　itself。　Everybody　knows　what　attitude　（stimmung）　is。　Everybody　has　suffered　from　it；　everybody　has　made　some　use　of　it；　but　nobody　can　altogether　define　it。　According　to　Fischer；　attitude　consists　in　the　compounded　feelings　of　all　the　inner　conditions　and　changes　of　the　organism；


＇1＇　Marie　Borst：　Recherches　experimentales　sur　l'　du　temoignage。　Archives　de　Psychologie。　Geneva。　Vol。　III。　no。　11。

　expressed　in　consciousness。　This　would　make　attitude　a　sort　of　vital　feeling；　the　resultant　of　the　now　favorable；　now　unfavorable　functioning　of　our　organs。　The　description　is；　however；　not　unexceptionable；　inasmuch　as　single；　apparently　insignificant　influences　upon　our　senses　may　create　or　alter　our　attitudes　for　a　long　time　without　revealing　its　effect　on　any　organ　or　its　integration　with　the　other　mental　states。　I　know　how　merely　good　or　bad　weather　determines　attitude；　how　it　may　be　helped　immediately　by　a　good　cigar；　and　how　often　we　may　pass　a　day；　joyous　or　dejected；　only　to　discover　that　the　cause　is　a　good　or　a　bad　dream　of　the　foregoing　night。　Especially　instructive　in　this　regard　was　a　little　experience　of　mine　during　an　official　journey。　The　trouble　which　brought　me　out　was　an　ordinary　brawl　between　young　peasants；　one　of　whom　was　badly　cut　up　and　was　to　be　examined。　Half…way　over；　we　had　to　wait　at　a　wayside　inn　where　I　expected　a　relieving　gendarme。　A　quarter　of　an　hour　after　the　stop；　when　we　renewed　the　journey；　I　found　myself　overcome　by　unspeakable　sadness；　and　this　very　customary　brawl　seemed　to　me　especially　umpleasant。　I　sympathized　with　the　wounded　boy；　his　parents；　his　opponents；　all　strangers　to　me；　and　I　bewrayed　the　rawness　of　mankind；　its　love　for　liquor；　etc。　This　attitude　was　so　striking　that　I　began　to　seek　its　cause。　I　found　it；　first　of　all；　in　the　dreary　region；then　in　the　cup　of　hot　coffee　that　I　had　drunk　in　the　restaurant；　whic