‌I could give many other illustrations of the narrow scope of this Method of Accidents, though genuine within that scope, and how, in all cases, by the Synthetic Method we can find in the facts to be remembered the means of their recollection. One case more: In regard to memorising the statement that “the Posterior Nerve of the Spinal Column is Sensory, and the Anterior Nerve is Motor,” using this Method of Accidents, “You observe that Posterior and Sensory go together, and that Anterior and Motor go together. The initial letters of Posterior and Sensory are P and S, and the initial letters of Anterior and Motor are A and M. By considering that A and M are in the upper part of the Alphabet and P and S are in the lower part of it, you will be sure to remember that Anterior is associated with Motor and Posterior with Sensory.” I admit that the first time one hears this elaborate method applied the novelty of the principle of it might make an impression; but, after that, the method would probably fail from its lengthy exposition; because it is difficult to retain the steps of an argument in a weak Memory and therefore such a method cannot certainly act as a Means for Aiding the Memory. How do I manage this case? By correlating Posterior to Sensory, thus: Posterior … Post-Mortem … Insensible … Sensory; or Anterior to Motor, thus: Anterior … Ant … disturbed anthill … commotion … Motor; or Anterior … antediluvian … rush of water … water-power … Motor. In uniting the two unconnected “Extremes” together by means of a developed Analysis memorised, the Natural Memory is aided in a very high degree.

  1. What is every correlation?
  2. Does Analysis ever make a correlation?
  3. Why would not “A” make a good In. by sound with “Anchor” on preceding page?
  4. Is the method of remembering by accidental coincidences always reliable?
  5. If not, why?
  6. Are there cases where it cannot be used?
  7. Make an original correlation between “Mitral valves” and “left.”
  8. How does the accidental coincidence in connection with the University crews compare with Synthesis?
  9. Does this method make an impression on the novice at first?
  10. Does the novice adhere to it?
  11. Why?

By memorising a Correlation, you so unite the two extremes in memory, that you need not afterwards recall the intermediates. The intermediates drop out of the memory by what Prof. E. W. Scripture, Psychologist, of Yale University, calls the Law of Obliteration.

  1. Why does the method fail?
  2. Is it difficult to retain the steps of an argument in the natural memory?
  3. Can you give any instances in your own experience where Analysis has helped you to cement Extremes together?
  4. Can such a method act as a means for aiding the memory?
  5. How would I manage the case spoken of?

‌HOW TO MEMORISE A CORRELATION.

To memorise a Correlation you must at first, if your Natural Memory be weak, repeat from memory the intermediates forwards and backwards, as:—Anchor … sheet-anchor … sheet … bed … Bolster—Bolster … bed … sheet … sheet-anchor … Anchor, at least three times each way. These six repetitions from memory, three forward and three back, are only required at first. In a short time you will infallibly remember every Correlation you make; at last, the memory will become so strong, that you will no longer have to make Correlations at all. After you have repeated the Correlation, then repeat the two extremes, thus—“Anchor” … “Bolster.” “Bolster” … “Anchor.” “Bolster” … “Anchor.” “Anchor” … “Bolster.”

Nothing else is so easy to memorise as a Correlation, for a Correlation is not a “mental picture” or “story”—it is neither a proposition, sentence or phrase. It has no rhetorical, grammatical, argumentative or imaginative character. It is simply an elemental primordial Psychological Sequence of Ideas in which one includes another, excludes another, or in which one idea has been so often or so vividly united with another in past experience that the two are inseparably connected in memory—and a little practice in making and memorising these Correlations soon makes it impossible to forget them.

  1. What is the result of uniting two unconnected “Extremes” by means of a developed Analysis?
  2. What are the first steps in memorising a correlation?
  3. How long are these repetitions required?
  4. What will be the result in a short time?
  5. What will be the final result?
  6. Are correlations easy to remember?
  7. What is the result of making and memorising them?
  8. When does the most vivid concurrence take place?

ASSIMILATIVE ASSOCIATION AND MEMORY.

Probably no psychological mistake was ever fraught with greater injury to the cause of public or self-education than the too prevalent opinion amongst teachers generally that “physiological retentiveness” is the memory’s sole reliance in all stages of life. It is nearly the sole reliance in infancy, and a partial reliance in youth. But when an‌ accumulation of experiences and a fair command of language have been gained, new acquisitions are henceforward principally made by the affiliation of one idea upon or with another or the making of associations between ideas already established.