Readers familiar with the study of mental maladies will not be astonished to find among idiots the following signs of degeneracy: dulled senses, obtuse perceptions, a poor condition of sensibility and consequently of mobility, and anomalies or perversions of the instincts, sentiments, etc. But that which makes of them a group apart, is the constitution of the perfect type from infancy, while among the degenerates properly so-called, the perversions, the manias, etc. present, are the episodical concurrences of a morbid evolution which unrolls itself capriciously in the course of a whole life.
M. Sollier has interesting remarks nearly everywhere in his book. We may refer, for example, to what he says concerning pity, courage; of writing; of hereditary organic memory; of ideas, etc. It is curious, certainly, to see idiots suddenly show themselves skilful in playing an instrument which was that of their father and of their grandfather. A passing observation on impressionability, greater for color in girls and for form in boys, deserves to be developed: I regret that the author should have been sparing of details on this point as on some others. M. Sollier appears, we may say, to have aimed not so much at giving new explanations in psychology, as at verifying those which have been proposed by good authors. He is precise, positive; from the medico-legal point of view, he presents practical conclusions, and does not embarrass himself in sentimentalism, from which the Philosophie pénale[88] of M. TARDE, let it be said parenthetically, is not always sufficiently free.
[88] First volume of the Bibliothèque de Criminologie. Masson, publisher.
A word more with reference to the "great suggestibility" of imbeciles, on which M. Sollier reasonably insists. Since I spoke in this place, three months ago, of the work of M. Bonjean, the awkward intervention of M. Liégeois in the Eyraud-Gabrielle Bompard case has contributed to compromise the Nancy school, much more than to serve it. M. Brouardel is able to object with ingenuity that certain persons, supposed to be victims of hypnotism, unfortunately obey suggestions "which are the most agreeable to them." It is good advice to be cautious. Still it is necessary to take into account (it is what I had omitted to say) the character of the subjects, in order to be able to judge of the possible accomplishment of acts suggested in sleep. For, it is not doubtful that among the abnormal, the imbecile, the mentally feeble, one could not count much on the revolt of a moral personality which is not constituted, on the efficiency of a power of inhibition which is almost null, and that generally criminal suggestion can become formidable when it is attended by bad instincts.
It remains to speak of a work by M. A. RICARDOU, De l'Idéal, Etude philosophique.[89] I avow without any disguise that I have not taken any interest in it. M. Ricardou declares himself a deist, spiritualist; the misfortune is that he follows so much the vague and wavering manner of his school. A fine rhetoric, elevated aspirations; but few facts, not sufficient realities freely seen. What end is served by rebelling against physiological psychology, and by laying claim to the rights of the method of introspection? In truth, no one denies its right; it is suspected only when it affects supremacy, and rejects all control.
[89] Alcan, publisher.
I simply mention, in conclusion, the interesting work, which appeared last year, of M. L. LEVY-BRUHL: L'Allemagne depuis Leibniz, Essai sur le developpement de la conscience nationale en Allemagne.[90] It belongs, in great part, to the history of philosophy, and furnishes to it a valuable contribution.
[90] Hachette, publisher.
Paris, March, 1891. LUCIEN ARRÉAT.