criminal psychology-第124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！
resolved upon； they were carried out。 Numbers of such phenomena； many of them quite unbelievable in appearance； may be retroduced to similar sources。
A like thing occurs when a witness； e。 g。； reflects about some event while he is in bed。 When he thinks of it again he is convinced； perhaps； that the matter really occurred in quite another way than he had newly supposed it to。 Now he may convince himself that the time at which he made the reflections was nearer the event； and hence； those reflections must have been the more correct ones in that case he sticks to his first story； although that might have been incorrect。 Helmholtz＇1＇ has pointed to something similar： ‘‘The colors of a landscape appear to be much more living and definite when they are looked at obliquely； or when they are looked at with the head upside down； than when they are looked at with the head in its ordinary position。 With the head upside down we try correctly to judge objects and know that； e。 g。； green meadows； at a certain distance； have a rather altered coloration。 We become used to that fact； discount the change and identify the green of distant objects with the shade of green belonging to near objects。 Besides； we see the landscape from the new position as a flat image； and incidentally we see clouds in right perspective and the landscape flat； like clouds when we see them in the ordinary way。'' Of course； everybody knows this。 And of course； in a criminal case such considerations will
＇1＇ Handbuch der physiologischen Optik。 Leipzig 1865。
hardly ever play any rle。 But； on the other hand； it is also a matter of course that the reason for these differences might likewise be the reason for a great many others not yet discovered； and yet of great significance to criminalists。
Such is the situation with regard to comparison。 Schiel laid much emphasis on the fact that two lines of unequal length seem equal when they diverge； although their difference is recognized immediately if they are parallel； close together； and start from the same level。 He says that the situation is similar in all comparison。 If things may be juxtaposed they can be compared； if not； the comparison is bound to be bad。 There is no question of illusion here； merely of convenience of manipulation。 Juxtaposition is frequently important； not for the practical convenience of comparison； but because we must know whether the witness has discovered the right juxtaposition。 Only if he has； can his comparison have been good。 To discover whether he has； requires careful examination。
Conception and interpretation are considerably dependent on the interest which is brought to the object examined。 There is a story of a child's memory of an old man； which was not a memory of the _*whole_ man； but only of a green sleeve and a wrinkled hand presenting a cake of chocolate。 The child was interested only in the chocolate； and hence； understood it and its nearest environment the hand and the sleeve。 We may easily observe similar cases。 In some great brawl the witness may have seen only what was happening to his brother。 The numismatist may have observed only a bracelet with a rare coin in a heap of stolen valuables。 In a long anarchistic speech the witness may have heard only what threatened his own welfare。 And so on。 The very thing looks different if； for whatever reason； it is uninteresting or intensely interesting。 A color is quite different when it is in fashion； a flower different when we know it to be artificial； the sun is brighter at home； and home…grown fruit tastes better。 But there is still another group of specific influences on our conceptions and interpretations； the examples of which have been increasing unbrokenly。 One of these is the variety in the significance of words。 Words have become symbols of concepts； and simple words have come to mean involved mathematical and philosophical ideas。 It is conceivable that two men may connote quite different things by the word ‘‘symbol。'' And even in thinking and construing； in making use of perceived facts； different conceptions may arise through presenting the fact to another with symbols； that to him； signify different things。 The difference may perhaps not be great； but when it is taken in connection with the associations and suggestions of the word used； small mistakes multiply and the result is quite different from what it might have been if another meaning had been the starting…point。 The use of foreign words； in a sense different from that used by us； may lead us far astray。 It must be borne in mind that the meaning of the foreign word frequently does not coincide with the sense it has in the dictionary。 Hence； it is dangerous in adducing evidence to use foreign expressions when it is important to adhere strictly to a single meaning。 Taine says； correctly： ‘‘Love and amour； girl and jeune fille； song and chanson； are not identical although they are substituted for one another。'' It is； moreover； pointed out that children； especially； are glad to substitute and alter ideas for which one word stands； so that they expand or contract its meaning haphazard。 Bow…wow may first mean a dog； then a horse； then all animals； and a child who was once shown a fir tree in the forest said it wasn't a fir tree； for fir trees come only at Christmas。
This process is not confined to children。 At one time or another we hear a word。 As soon as we hear it we connect it with an idea。 This connection will rarely be correct； largely because we have heard the word for the first time。 Later； we get our idea from events in which this word occurs； of course； in connection with the object we instantaneously understand the word to mean。 In time we learn another word； and word and meaning have changed； correctly or incorrectly。 A comparison of these changes in individuals would show how easy both approximations and diversifications in meaning are。 It must follow that any number of misunderstandings can develop； and many an alteration in the conception of justice and decency； considered through a long period； may become very significant in indicating the changes in the meaning of words。 Many a time； if we bear thoroughly in mind the mere changes in the meaning of the word standing for a doubtful fact； we put ourselves in possession of the history of morals。 Even the most important quarrels would lapse if the quarreling persons could get emotionally at the intent of their opponent's words。
In this connection questions of honor offer a broad field of examples。 It is well known that German is rich in words that show personal dislikes； and also； that the greater portion of these words are harmless in themselves。 But one man understands this； the other that； when he hears the words； and finally； German is in the curious position of being the cause of the largest number of attacks on honor and of cases of slander in the world。 Where the Frenchman laughs and becomes witty； the German grows sullen； insulting； and looks for trouble。 The French call sensitiveness to insignificant and worthless things； the German way of quarreling （faire querelle d'allemand）。 Many a slander case in court is easily settled by showing people the value of the word。 Many who complained that they were called a creature； a person； etc。； went away satisfied as soon as the whole meaning of the words had been explained to them。
In conclusion； just a word concerning the influence of time on conception。 Not the length of past time； but the value of the time… span is what is important in determining an event。 According to Herbart； there is a form of temporal repetition； and time is the form of repetition。 If he is right it is inevitable that time； fast…moving or slow…moving； must influence the conception of events。 It is well…known that monotony in the run of time makes it seem slow； while time full of events goes swiftly； but appears long in memory； because a large number of points have to be thought through。 Mnsterberg shows that we have to stop at every separate point； and so time seems； in memory； longer。 But this is not universally valid。 Aristotle had already pointed out that a familiar road appears to be shorter than an unfamiliar one； and this is contradic
