APPENDIX and sociological material is required, that is, the develop¬ ment of art production is traced from the earliest begin¬ nings of savages, even from the similar pursuits of animals. For the second group direct experiments in æsthetic enjoy¬ ment are made in the laboratory. Indeed, æsthetic emo¬ tions are excellent material for experimental study as, un¬ like those of practical experience, they are independent of individual circumstances. From the fruits of such ex¬ perimentation the teacher of art may profit somewhat, for from them some prescription may be deduced for achiev¬ ing æsthetic results. The study that pertains to the crea¬ tion of art, however, is not desirable for specific educa¬ tional use. Psychology cannot make a genius, not even a man of talent. Moreover, the artificial adoption of a pseudo-primitive style and other fads in schools shows the need of a wholesome attitude that must be instilled not by psychological study, but by a firm belief in the ideals of beauty. “ Truth and beauty represent duties, logical and æsthetical duties, just as morality represents ethical duties/’ And “whoever understands art as wnll-function believes in art and appreciates it as a world of duties.” Psychological aids may be useful in the teaching of art, but belief in absolute values is essential. In the essay on “Psychology and History” the author has shown the difference in attitude between the two sciences toward their material. The real difference between psychology and history is a difference of aim. In psychol- ogy, as in physics, every object is considered as the cause of an expected effect, and laws are types of causal connection. For this purpose objects are transformed into combinations of elements. History, too, reconstructs life into a complete system in the service of connection: this is not a causal system, however, but a teleological system of individual will relations. The antithesis between psychology and 314