Maxim on the Transferrence of Force from Impressions
Table of Contents
Beliefs are Strengthened by Impressions
Belief consists in a lively idea related to a present impression.
What bestows the vivacity on the idea?
I establish another general maxim: “when any impression becomes present to us, it transports the mind to related ideas and also communicates its force and vivacity.”
All the operations of the mind depend greatly on the disposition of the mind.
The action will always have vigour and vivacity depending on:
- the elevation of the spirits, and
- the level of attention.
Therefore, when any object which elevates and enlivens the thought is presented, the mind’s actions will be stronger and more vivid, as long as that disposition continues.
The continuance of the disposition depends entirely on the objects the mind is employed in.
Any new object naturally:
- gives a new direction to the spirits, and
- changes the disposition.
On the contrary, the disposition has a much longer duration when the mind:
- fixes constantly on the same object, or
- passes easily and insensibly along related objects.
Hence, when the mind is once enlivened by a present impression, it forms a more lively idea of the related objects by a natural transition of the disposition from the one to the other.
The change of the objects is so easy.
The mind is not sensible of it.
The mind conceives the related idea with all the force and vivacity that the mind acquired from the present impression.
I trust experience to prove so material a principle.
We see the picture of an absent friend.
Our idea of him is enlivened by the resemblance.
Every feeling created by that idea, acquires new force and vigour.
A relation and a present impression concurs to produce this effect.
If we removed the picture, the idea of him would be weakened by that transition.
If the picture does not resemble him, it would never make us think of him.
We take a pleasure in viewing the picture of a friend.
But when it is removed, we choose to think about him directly in our minds.
Both ways are equally distant and obscure.
The Roman Catholic ceremonies are experiments of the same nature.
The devotees of that strange superstition usually plead in the rituals that they are scolded with.
They feel the good effect of those external motions, postures, and actions, in:
- enlivening their devotion, and
- quickening their fervour.
These would otherwise decay away, if directed entirely to distant and immaterial objects.
They say that they shadow out the objects of their faith in sensible images.
They render those objects more present to us by their immediate presence.
This would be less possible through an intellectual view and contemplation.
Sensible objects always have a greater influence on the fancy than any other.
They readily convey this influence to those related and resembling ideas.
From these practices and this reasoning, I infer that the effect of resemblance in enlivening the idea is very common.
In every case, a resemblance and present impression must concur.
We can do many thought experiments to prove the effects of contiguity and resemblance.
Distance reduces the force of every idea.
As we approach any object, we do not sense it.
But it operates on the mind with an influence that imitates an immediate impression.
The actual presence of an object gives a superior vivacity to the idea of that object when the mind thinks about it.
When I am just a few miles from home, the things that I see can remind me of my home better than the things that I see when I am 100 kilomters away.
When I am 100 kilomters away, I can still think of my friends and family.
In both cases, my mind can transition between my ideas of them easily.
But this transition alone cannot give a superior vivacity to those ideas because they lack the immediate impression. (Footnote 6)
Footnote 6
According to Cicero de Finibus, lib. 5:
“When we see those places where famous men lived, we are more powerfully affected than when we hear of their exploits.
Is this from instinct or some illusion?
Plato held discussions here.
- His nearby gardens make me remember him and sets Plato himself before my eyes.
Speusippus, Xenocrates and his pupil, Polemo were here.
- That very seat which we view was Polemo’s.
The old Senate building of Hostilius was enlarged, which reduced it in my view.
When I look at our old Senate building, I used to think of Scipio, Cato, Laelius and my own grandfather.
Such is the power of places to evoke associations.
So it is with good reason that they are used as a basis for memory training.”*