A SOURCE BOOK OF

GESTALT PSYCHOLOGY

Prepared by
WILLIS D. ELLIS
ASST. PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA

With an Introduction by
PROFESSOR K. KOFFKA

NEW YORK

HUMANITIES PRESS

LIBRARY
WESTMONT COUEGE
955 LA PAZ ROAD
SANTA BA
 I. GENERAL PROBLEMS
SELECTION 1

GESTALT THEORY
By MAX WERTHEIMER
Über Gestaltthcorie [an address before the Kant Society, Berlin, 17th December,
1924], Erlangen, 1925.

39 What ·is Gestalt theory and what does it intend? _<:;~~t~IL

theory was the outcome of concrete investigations in psychology,
Iogic, and episternglogy.. The prevailing situatio~ at the time
of its origin may be briefly sketched as follows. (y¡e go from
the world of everyday events to that of science, and not unnaturally
assume that in making this transition we shall gain a deeper and
more precise understanding of essentials. '\ The transition shou!d
mark an advance. And yet, though one nfay havé learned a great
deal, one is poorer than before. It is the same in psychology.
Here too we find science intent upon a systematic collection of
data, yet often excluding through that very activity precisely
that which is most vivid and real in the living phenomena it
studies. Somehow the thing that matters has eluded us.
40 What happens when a problem is solved, when one suddenly
" sees the point " ? Common as this experience is, we seek in
vain for it in the textbooks of psychology. Of things arid, poor,
and inessential there is an abundance, but that which really matters
is m1ssmg. Instead we are told of formation of concepts, of
abstraction and generalization, of class conrcpts and judgments,
perhaps of associations, creative phantasy, intuitions, talents-
anything but an answer to our original problem. And what are
these last words but names for the problem ? Where are the
penetrating answers? Psychology is replete with terms of great
potentiality-personality, essence, intuition, and the rest. But
when one seeks to grasp their concrete content, such terms fail.
This is the situation and it is characteristic of modern science
that the same problem should appear everywhere. Severa!
attempts have been made to remedy the matter. One was a frank .
defeatism preaching the severance of science and life : there are
41 regions which are inaccessible to science. Other theories established
a sharp distinction between the natural and moral sciences : the
B
 2
GENERAL PROBLEMS
exactitude and precision of chemistry and physics are characteristic
of natural science, but " scientífic " accuracy he1s no place in a
study of the mínd and its ways. This must be renounced in favour
of other categories.
Without pausing for further examples, let us consider rather a
guestion naturally underlying the whole discussion : Is " science "
really the kind of thing we have implied ? The word science has
~ften sugg~sted a certain outlo~k, certain fundamental assump-
twns, certam procedures and attltudes-but do these imply that
this is the only possibility of scientific method ? Perhaps science
already embodies methods leading in an entirely different direction
methods which have been continually stifled by the seemingl;
necessary, dominant ones. It is conceivable, for instance, that a
host of facts and problems have been concealed rather than
illuminated by the prevailing scientific tradition. Even though
the traditional methods of science are undoubtedly adequate in
42 many c~ses,_ there may be others where they lead us astray. Perhaps
somethmg m the very nature of the traditional outlook may have
led its exponents at times to ignore precisely that which is truly
e~sential.
\ Gestalt theory will not be satisfied with .sham solutiqns suggested
?Y a simple dichotomy of science and life.. Instead, (";estalt theory
!S resolved to penetra te the probfem itseJf oy examining the funda-
mental assumptions of science..> It has long seemed obvious-
and is, in fact, the characteristié: tone of European science-that
'' ~(:ience". means.b¡-e.lking. !lP . cornplexe.;;imo.Jheir ... <::9rnP9!1~nt
elemems: Is(iláte.the ele!Uents, discover their laws thenreassemble
tliem;·al1tf tf1e problem Ts sol ved. AII wholes are ;edu¿ed t~ pie¿és
and piecewise relations between pieces.
43 .~he. fundamental . ''formula" of Gestalt the()ry míght pe
~)(p¡:fsse~inrhisway 1 : There are wholes, the behaviour of which
is not determinéd by that of their individual elements, but where
the part-prócesses are themselves determined by the intrinsic
nature of the whole. It is the hope of Gestalt theory to determine
the. nature ofsuch wholes.
. \V:irh a formula such as this, one might close, for Gestalt theory
r
!S nea~er mor~ nor le~s than t?is. It is not interested in puzzling
out plulosoph1c questwns wh1<;h ~uch a formula might suggest. \
1
"Man kiinnte das Grundproblem . der Gestalttheorie etwa so zu formulieren .
suchen : Es .gibt Z~sa":lme.nhange, bei denen nicht, was im Ganzen geschieht, sich
daraus herlettet, wte dte emzelne Stücke sind und sich zusammensetzen sondern
umge.kehrt, W?-im prii.gnanten Fall-sich das, was an einem Tei! dies;s Gan{en
gescluelu, hestzmmt von uzneren Srrukturgesetr,en dieses seines Ganren."
GESTALT THEORY 3
Gesta! t. r.heory has to. d.o>Vith C()J1Cret.e.r<:~t'!.aE~h; .~tj~ n?\only .
merely 1
....... · · b ·· · ·· r ·· · not only a theory about resu ts uut a
-¡¡n outcotomwear·d\ltf~r;h;:c~lscoveries. .. Thfs is not 1:he pro-
means . . . ·· h ·
·. ¡··.fo.····n·e.· . o . y
p~~r ~aking plªce in sciel}ce. <!his pro.blem can~ot ~e sol ved
···r·· .m·o·r·e· ..p.r. o. b..l. e.ms. ut .a.nattempt .to see..w .. at.ts...
r~ 3¡·;··t·;··g...... ~ossibilities for systematizatton, class¡ficatwn, and
·¿ d b
by !S In t•
arrangeme nt ~ ) If it is to be attacked at a , we must e fgu1
JJ b
1 e1 · Y
the s irit of tl1é new method and by the concrete nature o t 1e t ungs
therrfseives which we are studying, and set ourselves to penetrare
to that which is really given by nature. .
There is another difficulty that may be Illustrated by the fol~~w-
44 · g example. Suppose a math.err1'.1~ic;i'.ln sbo~7)'()U a p¡-op()~.Iti()I: .
m b 1· to.."classífy·".it. This proposttwn,y()u.s;_¡y,¡s of
~~~¡{~~a··~~ 0l.· íyp~~ b~Jo6g~ iñ .. i111~.()fthat hlst~rical cat~go%
d 0 on Is that how the mathemattcian wor~s.:
an.. ~hy,. yo u háven'i: graspe(f ihe 'thing 'at .all," the_.l!l~!l.l~=.
atician will exclaim. " See here, this form~l~ is not an mde-
~'f1dent;Closed fact that.c;an bedealt:witl:i:.Jor Itselfalone.. You
~ust see its dynamic functional relatwnslup to :ti;~ who,le from
which it was lifted or youwill never und~rstangiF·.
·(·.Cwhat holds for the mathematical .fo. rm . u la.. apphes also to the
• ·formula " of Gestalt theory1. T~e attempt of G~stalt theory .to
disclose the functional meaning of lts own formula !S n~ less stnct
than is the mathematician's~ The attempt to explam Gestalt
theory in a short essay is the more difficult beca~se ?f the te.rms
which are used : part, whole, intrinsic determ~natw~. All of
th m have in the past been the topic of endless d1scusswns where
ea~h disputant has understood them differ~ntly.
And even
worse has been the cataloguing attitude adopted t.oward them.
What they lacked has been actual research. Like many another
"philosophic" problem they have been withheld from contact
with reality and scientific work. . . .
About all I can hope for in so short a dtscusswn ts to s~ggest
45 a few of the problems which at present occupy the. attentwn of
Gestalt theory and somethíng of the way they are bei.ng at~ack:d.
To repeat : ..Jhe pi'Qb/em has noLrnerely to QQ...wtth....sctenttfic ·
work-it is a fundamen!ªI pr9blem of our times. gestalt.!.~e.?¡-Y
• · · · ·· •
!S .. d. 1
·-¡:·.· • · · ..... d
not SOIU~tl1~11g su ellx an u
d nexpectedly dropped u pon 11~
. ·····
from above ; it is, rather, a palpable converg;e~(:e .o r.ro e~s
. bT r.
rangin~. throughol1t t~~ .scierttes artd th~ .. varwus phi!oso.ph!c
standpoillts of modernti~es. . .
Let lis take, forexámple, an event m the h1story of psychology.
 4 GENERAL PROBLEMS
~ne turned from a living experience to science and asked what
tt had to say about. this e.xperience, and one found an assortment
of elen;ents, sensatwns, 1mages, feelings, acts of will and Iaws
govermng these elements-and was told, " T ake your choice,
reconstruct from them the experience you had " S h
led to difficulties in concrete psychological r~searc~c a~Jo~~ ~~=
emerg~nce of proble~s ':'hich defied solution by the traditional
~~methods. HISto~tcally the most important impulse cªme
~ rom V,· Ehrenfels ":ho ra:sed the following problem.(Psychol~gy"
ha~ ¿atdt~athxperte,r:~=--;t-·a· compQund . of dement~n~
1 t11<:?.. ?:.a~ . t~~,_ypon earing it again, memory enables us to
'J:~!;ogmze.. lt•..~t ''wliáf isit'' tlíatenaoles'us to recognize th .
~el?dy wlien it ts played in a new key ? Tlie sum of tlie element;
1s dtfferent, yet tlie melody !s. the same ; indeed,_one is often not
even awa_re tliat a transposltlon nas been made. ·· ...\
Wlien m retrospect we consider tlie prevailing sifuation we are
stru~k by r:vo aspects of v. Ehrenfels's tliesis; on tlie one hand
one ts surprtsed at tne. esse~tially summative character of his tlieory,
o~ tlie otlie_r _one admtres hts courage in propounding and defending
lit~ ~roposttwn. S_t:ictiy interprete~, v; .~hreiifels'S positiot}.was
~lits · I ~!ay aJ~~~~~O::.l1"l~ho1y ?f SI)( )ones and employ six new
o~~sky: )'OU 'Íl~c~~~~-ze t_~ meloc;!ydespitetbe cbange~ There
.must ~ a some.t tn!S more !han tlie sum of six tones, viz. ~- severith
§,()J;n~!~1 !1;~' .:Wnt.c~ t?.~fe>rm~gu~lity, tlie GestaltqualitcÚ, of tlie
1:
..C>:~!?~~~I stx. It ts tlits seYenth factor or elerrierit wliicli eriábled 0
to recogtiize tñe'mélod'~'Cies' r•
·· · ·· · · ·· .. Y. • P..te..It~ !ri!.I'l.~PPSlJtqQ,
' F •·• '"' y •
H will themselves, c1etermine .. the . effect qf..s,~imgla~iqn ? )Th~s~ki~__ 2_f
owever strange tliis view may seem, · it sliares witli many
another subsequently abandoned hypothesis the honour of having
clearly_ ~en and e.m.gh~:i~~d .a fundamental problem~
47 B~t ·,?th~l""~~f>la~~HC>ns were also proposed .•. One maintained
that m addttwn to tlie ~ix to~:sthere were intervals--relá@ijs::::_
and tha~ these were what re1Uained constan t. l!:!.Pther. "'ords ·;e
are as~~~. to ~ss~~e not ()nly ele~ents but " relations-pétween·:·
e~eme,nfs as _ac;ldttwnai comp<me,nts .e>ftlie tot~j~()1Uj)le,x( But this
Vle": fatled tO account for the phenomenon because in some"cases the
rela~()~stoo fl1a)' ~:ai~e,:e_d_'\','it~o~t destroying the original melody.)
<___A_~C>:?e,r .t)'pe ()f e~pl~nauon, J~lso designed to bolster the'
elementansttc hypotliests, ,.:was..iliaLto.iliis total of six or more
tones tliere ;com e_ . ~ert~tn · "h" ~-- .... ;;-··-- ··:--· ......
................................ ... _l&_her . processes
YP9f1. ilie gtyen .mat~rtal to ''produce" uniry.l ·
Thts was the sttuatton umil · Géstalt tlieory 'raised the radical
1
Compare Selection .32, below.
GESTALT THEORY
question :Ú~üreally~rue that -;'henlh~~:~~e~o~y~!~~~e a sum
of individual tones (pteces) wgtch_ constltute tlieprunary ~un~::·
t'án of my experience? ls-not.per:hap~tpe¡:ey(!¡:se, _ o(!ht~tr,t1e?
What I reªUy have, . :What l h~ar of ~aGh: individuaLn?te,_y¡~at)
d
experience at each place in the mel?<lY . ~~}· part .wh~ch ts".~~se..[f
determinedby the c,har¡:¡c!~L.QfJht'! y.;ggJe,: ...\:~hat ts gtven ~~ by
the melody does not arise ( through the agéricy of any auxthary
factor) as a secondary process from the sum of the pieces as such.
Instead, what takes placein eachsit1&1~ p~r,t ~1E~~dy_ c;le,e:t1dsup?t1
what tlw .w.fiOie:Is. Tlie a~§Ifand.blóódof a t()t1e, c;le,pe,nc;ls f~()ll:l
the sta~t uponits r()le Íf1_ the1U:í9~x-:: á b as le_ading tone to e is
something radically different from the b as tome. )t belong~ tQ
the flesh and blood of the things given in expérienct'!J(;egebe'lf¡,~ü~n.],
4s hor;t ¡:;:~:o~~ei~';i~~~f~~~~~etha¿d~~~:~--~~ei~~~~~~r--··
Take the caseof threshold phenomena. It hasJongheen.held thªt ª
certáin stimulus necessa~ily prodl1ces a certain sensation.. Thus,
when two stimuli are sufficientlydifferent, thesensations also will
be diffeient. Psyéh0 logy is filled with careful inq~iries regarding,
threshold phenomena. To account for the difficulties constantly
being encountered it was assumed tha,t thes~ phenomena. mu~t be
influenced by higher mental functt()ns, ¡¡.¡.dgments,. tllustons,
attention, etc. And this continued until the radical question was
raised : Is ft really true that a specific stimulusa(ways give,s rise
to the same sensation .? Perhaps the prevai!ing.wbole,;oconditions
~ y y
,, .·· ·• '·•·
formulation leads t() ·. expeEÍll:1t'!l1tatio.u, .<m.cl e~pe,riiJ:letftSs1iC>'YJ or f
example tharwhen T'see two coloursthe. sensations I have are
detetmi~edbythé wli6le~coriditions ofthe entire stimulus situatio~
Tht1s, also, the same.. local physical stimulus p¡:¡ttern can giyeJÍse
to either aunitary and homogeneous figure,or to an articulated
figure :With different parts, all dependi11g u pon the'Y!,wle:-,conditjons
which may favour either unity or articulation. {Qbviously t~e
t<i~~~ th~!l~ Js. toinvestigate these " whole-co~ditlo;!_s " and dis:-
cover what influences they exert u pon e~pe.rtence.. ~ ,, , .. , .....
49 Adváncing another step we come to the queS'tlon whether
perhaps any part depends upon the particular whole in which
it occurs. Experiments, largely on vision, have answered this
whtch opera te question in the affirmative. Among other things they demand
that the traditional theory of visual contrast be replaced by a··
theory which takes account of whole-part conditions. 1
1 See, e.g., Selection 8.
 GESTALT THEORY
7
6
condition~,
GENERAL PROBLEMS
way to .a surrogate (under certain pathological) new
;o Our next point is that m field .
is not from the beginnin yan E compnses a!so my Ego. There balance.~ '¡ ' ; 1 ~
genesis of an Ego offers o~e of th~o over-ag?ms~ others, but the
_further discussion ofthis point wouldcarry us into the work of
solution of which seems to lie in G~:: fasct~att.ng problems, the
s~cial and cultural science which cannot be followed here, Instead
let us consider certain other illustrations. What was said above
t~ u~ctwnal
once constituted the Ego . fi . a t pnnctples. However
of stimulus and sensation is applicable to . physiology and the
Proceeaini as b:fore we malS part of the total fiell
,Ego as a part of the field ~ 'I~ th;r: o7 .askb: h_'What happens to the
biological sciences no less than to psychology;, It has been tried,
sort of thing associatio~lsm
for example, by postulating sums of moré' and more special
esu. tmg eh aviour the piecewise
would have us believe ~ \ É ex~enence t eory, and the like, apparatus, to account for meaningful or, as it is often callf'd,
interpretation and again ·~ , x[erm~e~talh results contradict this S3 purposive behaviour. Once more we find meaninglessly combined
proce~ses operati~e in sych ~ t~~ld n ~ at the laws of ~hole- reflexes taken for granted although it is probable that even with
minute organisms it is not true that a piece-stimulus automatically
Jlep<jyt.our of its parts. ·· ten toward a meanmgful
bring about ·its corresponding piece-effect.
Opposing this view i~.2:'i1ttܧ,~"~hich, however, as it appears to
it ~!u.'
{This field is nota summation of d
· eh considers such sepa rae Gestalt theory, ¡¡ls~i-.r~ in i~~ ~ft:q.;:ti;to solve tl1e probl~¡n, for it,
t pteces
. sense ata and no description
to beprim ·¡¡ b of
··.
1t were, then for children . .. ary Wl e correct;,
If
experience would be nothin ' :nmtt!ve peopl~s and animals"
toQ, begin.s. with the~assumptíon that natural. occurrences are
/themsel:ves essemial1y plind and haphazard-and .add.§a mysti~al
most . developed crea tu res ~o u~~ ~=~:-se.nsatwn~.. The n~xt somethif!g . .Q:ve.r .<ln.<L<IPQYe.Jhern w}1ich impos~s gnler. Vitalism
dependent sensations someth' l . h ' m addttwn to m-
whole picture is the ~ osite ;~g ug er, a?d S? on. But this
41fils~fo···rnquire of physical events whether a genuine order might
not already prevail amongst them. 1~nd yet naturé d.oes exhibit
We have learned to re~~gnize th;?.at actu~l m9,utry has disclosed.
5I as products of a late culture utte 1 ~~ffisatwn:: of our textbooks
numerous instances of physical wholes in whicp 2
part events are
of more primitive sta es Wh r y t e.rent rom the experiences determined by the inner structure of the whole. )
specific red in that sens~ ~ .Wh h 1.These brief references to biology will suffice to remind us that
expenences the sensation of a
primitive men normal!; reac~t ~oeran of th~ streets, children, or
whole-phenomena are.!lot " merely " psychological, but appear in
the same time exciting gay ~t s ~m~thmg coloured but at
other sciences as well.) Obviously, therefore, the problem is not
Th ' ' " rong, or anectmg- t" . , sol ved by separating off various provinces of science and classify-
e programme to treat the o a . no . sensatwns .
necessitates the reformulation f rgh msmra~ a part m a larger field
ing whole-phenomena as something peculiar to psychology.
54 The fundamental question can be very simply stated: Are the
parts of a given whole determined by the inner structur~ of that
between organism and . o t e pro em as to the relation
envtronment The st' ¡
connection must be re laced b · . . tmu us-sensation
in the field conditions ~he vit !y .a c~nnectwn between alteration
whole, or are the events such that, as independent, ptecemeal,
the organism by a ch;nge . .a stt~at~on, a~d. the total reactipn of fortuitous and blind the total activity is a sum of the part-activities?
There is, however, ªnoth~;t:t:ttt:u e, strtv~ng, and feeling;¡
Human beings can, of course, devise a kind of physics of their
only a p<~rt of his field h. . ..· ¡····· p o. be c.onstdere.d... Ama. p.tyi no.t
own-e.g. a sequence of machines-exemplifying the latter half
.. · ··f· · .... ' .e lS a SO one among oth w·h of our question, but this does not signify that all natural phenomena
group o people work together it rar ·¡ . . . .. er .roen... \. en a
~nder very special conditions th e y occ~rs, and then only
are of this type. Here is a place where Gestalt theory is least easily \
1

md~pendent Egos.) Instead tl;e c~~they constttu.te a mere su m of understood and this because of the great number of prejudices
about nature which have accumulated during the centuries. Nature'
thetr mutual concern and each . . k mon enterpme often beco mes
is thought of as something essentially blind in its laws, where
part of. the whole. Con 'd wor s as arn(!apingfullyfunctioning
)2 engáged in sorne comm ~~ er a gro~p of South Sea Islanders
whatever takes place in the whole is purely a sum of individual
. untty occupatton 0 f
Playmg together. Onl und ' .r a ?roup o children (The suggestions gi ven in this paragraph have been worked out in furthcr
al1 "1" stand out a!o'ñe:"'The~\hvt!f!Tspectalr~tr~ums~an~es does
1
cletail by Schulte. Selection .Jl.]
harmonious and svstem~'fi e .a ance WHch obtatned durin~f 2 See Selcction .3·.. ·:._·) \
J e occupatwn may be upset and give \
 8
GENERAL PROBLEMS
GESTALT THEORY 9
occurrences. This view was the tu 1 1 f
physics has always had to pur~: i;:elfe~~ ~ ~ ~e struggle whic~ consciousness. Is this true ? Suppose you see a person who is
can be seen that we are obli ed t e eo ogy. To-day tt kindly or benevolent. Does anyone suppose that this person is
suggested by this kind of g ~ t~averse other routes than those feeling mawkish? No one could possibly believe that. }'.he
L purpostvtsm.
. et us proceed another step and ask . H d . characteristic .fe¡ture of such behaviour hasvery little to do:with
wtth regard to the problem of bod d ?W oes al! thts stand consdousness:_¡'It has been one of the. easiest cont·r·ivances of philoso-
knowledge of anothe ' ¡ Y ~n mmd ? What does my phy to identifY a man's real ,beha~~ur and tQ,e direction of his
do I obtain it? Ther~ :r:e~;a expeneWces amount to and how mind with his consc.io~sn:s~ ·Parenthe~ic<flly,An the opini?~ of
on these points . Th ' lcourdse, o and established dogmas many people the dtsttnctton between tdeahsm and materta!tsm
· e menta an phys· ¡ h
geneous : there obtains between the tea ~re w o1l_Y hetero- implies that between the noble and the ignoble. Yet does one really
(From this point of departure philoso;1e~~ ~ sol~te dtchotomy. mean by this to contrast consciousness with the blithesome budding
of m~taphysical deductions so as to attribute a~v;b raw~ an ~~r~y of trees ? Indeed, what is there so repugnant about the materialistic
to mmd while reserving for nature the d" ) ~goo qua lttes and mechanical ? What is so attractive about the idealistic ? Does
55 second question my discernin ° wus. s regards the it come from the material qualities of the connected pieces ?
the principie here is that r
traditionally expÍained as inferen~emental phenome.na i~ others is
analogy. Stnctly mterpreted
coupled with something ph;~i~~t t~g ~ental is meaninglessly
Broadly speaking most psychological theories and textbooks,
despite their continued emphasis upon consciousness, are far
more "materialistic ", arid, and spiritless than a living tree-
infer the mental from it more or j o se~~e the physical and which probably has no consciousness at all. Th~_pg)nt is not
scheme : I see someone ess accor mg to the following what the material pieces are, ~l1t ~h¡¡t kittd ..of whole k is. Pro-
that he wants the light to :~e~sn a ~htton on the wall and infer i::eeding in terms ofSpeciflc problems one soon realizes how many
sort. Howe~er, many scientists h;ve b::~ ;;;:~:~ ~o~plin.gs of ~his bodily activities there are which give no hint ofaseparationbetween
and have trted to save them ¡ b e Y thts dualtsm body and mind. Imagine a dance, a dance full of grace and joy.
hypotheses. Indeed, the ordi~:;es y recourse to. very curious What is the situation in such a dance ? Do we have a summation
to believe that when he h" y person would vwlently refuse of physicallimb movements and a psychical consciousness? No.
angry he is seeing only ~:;:ai~sp~ompafion startled, frightened, or Obviously this answer does not solve the problem ; we have to
selves have nothing to do (in th . :ystca occurrences which them- start anew-and it seems to me that a proper and fruitful point
b . 1 etr mner nature) with the 1 of attack has been discovered. 1 One finds many processes which,
emgon ysuperficiallycoupledwith "t· h fi menta'
h
and this combined . . . etc. Ther~ you b ave requently seen this in their dynamical form, are identical rega~gless of variations in
surmount this problem One k ave een many attempts to S7 the material character of their elements. ~hen a man is timid,
says there can be no ~the sp~ba·¡~' fo¡: example, of intuition and afraid or energetic, happy or sad, it can often be shown that the .
r I . r posst 1 tty, wr I see my e . '
,ear. t ts not true argue the . tu" . . h ompamon s course of his physical processes i~. Gestalt-identical with the course<\
·¡ '
bodt y activities meaninglessl m ttwmsts
1 '. t at I see ¡
0 n y t e bare
h
pursued by the mental processes:)
activities. However inadmis/blc~up1
ed whtth o.ther and invisible Again I can only indicate the direction of thought.. J_h<lY~
theory does have at least th" . e 1t . may{; ot erwtse . be, an mtmtwn
· ··
touched on the question of body and. rni?d merely t? show. th~t·
that the traditional proced ts m t~s avour, tt shows a suspicion the problem we are discussing also has its pfiílosopFiic 'aspecfs:
But the :word intuition is at ~:st ~~ht be s~ccessfully re~ersed. T o strengthen tfie import of the ·· foregóing suggestions' Jet· ús
must stnve to Iay hold of. Y a nammg of that whtch we consider the fields of epistemology and logic. For centuries the
This and other hypoth;ses, apprehended as h . assumption ha7.prevailed that our world is essentially a summation
not advance scientific pursuit ¡¡ . d t ey now are, wtll of elements. [ F or Hume and largely also for Kant the world is
tion, not mere cataloguing and s~s:~~~~~at~:an~s fruitful pe?et~a- like a bundle 'bf fragments, an9 ,the dogma of meaningless summa-
56 How does the matter really stand~ L k" . ut the questwn ts, tions continues to play its part:;t As for logic, it supplies : concepts,
a third assumption namely that . oo mgh more el ose! y we find which when rigorously viewed are but sums of properties ; classes,
' a process suc as fear is a matter of 1 Compare Selection 17.
 11
GESTALT THEORY
IO GENERAL PROBLEMS
· hich a manifold is not compounded from adjacently situated
whi~h u pon clost? in~pection prove to be mere catchalls ; syllogisms, m w . 1 . h
pieces but rather such that a term at tts pace m ~ at aggregate
dev~sed by arbltranly lumping Jogether any two propositions
havmg t~e ~ha~a~ter that . . . etc) When one considers what a is determil1.<:!d by the whole-laws of the aggregate ttself. .
<Píctoria11y: suppose the world were .a va~t platea u upo~ whtch
concept. zs m hvmg though.t, what it really means to grasp a
··e· many musicians. I walk about hstenmg and watchmg the
concluswn ~ when one constders what the crucial thing is about wer . · ¡ ¡ ¡·
Jayers. First suppose that the world ts a meanmg ess p ura tty.
a mathemattcal proof and the concrete interrelationships it involves
one sees that the categories of traditional logic have accomplished
~veryone does as he will, each for himself. What happens .together
when I hear ten players might be the basis for my guessmg as to
nothing in this direction. 1
what they a11 are doing, but this is merely a matter of chance and
It .is our task to inquire whether a logic is possible which is
robability much as in the kinetics of gas molecules.--A second
not ptecemeal. Indeed the same question arises in mathematics
al.so. !s it n~cessary that all mathematics be established upon a
~ossibility would be that each time one musician played e, anot~er
ptecewtse basts ? What sort of mathematical system would it be played f so and so many seconds la ter. I wo~k out a t~eory ofblm?
couplings but the playing as a whole remams meamngless. Thts
in which this w~re not the case ? There ha ve been attempts to answer
¡ what many people think physics does, but the real work of
the latter questton but almost always they have fallen back in the 5
physics belies this.-The third possibility is, say, a Beethoven
end upon the old ,r:ocedures. This fate has overtaken many, for
symphony where it would be possible for o~e to select one part
the ~esult of .trammg in piecewise thinking is extraordinarily
of the whole and work from that towards an tdea of the structural
tenacwus. It ts not enough and certainly does not constitute a
principie motivating and determining the whole. Here the funda-
solution of the principal problem if one shows that the axioms
mental laws are not those of fortuitous pieces, but concern the
of mathematics are both piecemeal and at the same time evince
so.met.hing of the opposite character. The problem has been very character of the event.
scte~ttfically. ~rasped only when an attack specifically designed
~o yteld postttve results has been launched. Just how this attack
ts to be made seems to many mathematicians a colossal problem
but perhaps the quantum theory will force the mathematician~
to attack it.
59 This brings us to the close of an attempt to present a view of
the problem as illustrated by its specific appearances in various
fields. In concluding I may suggest a certain unification of these
illustrations somewhat as follows. I consider the situation from
the point of view of a theory of aggregates and say : How should
a world be where science, concepts, inquiry, investigation and
comprehension of inner unities were impossible ? The a~swer
is obvious. This. world would be a manifold of disparate pieces.
Secondly, what kmd of world would there have to be in which a
piecewise science would apply? The answer is again quite simple,
fo~ here on~ nee~s o.nly a system of recurrent couplings that are
blmd and ptecev:tse m character, whereupon everything is avail-
able for ~ pursutt ~f the traditional piecewise methods of logic,
m~the~attcs, and sctence generally in so far as these presuppose
thts kmd of world. But there is a third kind of aggregate which
has been but cursorily investigated. These are the aggregates
1 Compare in this connection Selection 2.].