‌THE BRAIN TONIC EFFECT OF THE LAWS OF MEMORY RIGHTLY APPLIED.

FIRST LAW OF MEMORY.

Building. Dwelling. } In. by G. & S.

If we examine the meaning of these two words—Building and Dwelling, we find that both indicate structures made by man. This idea is common to both. Now when we find that two words express the same thought, either completely or partially, we say that it is a case of Inclusion, because the pair of words contains or includes the same idea. Inclusion is the first law of memory.

There are several kinds of Inclusion. What variety have we here? Let us see. Building applies to many kinds of structures; house, stable, church, depot, store, etc. It is applicable to all of these in a general way, but it designates none of them. But dwelling means a special kind of structure—a building occupied by man—a place to live in. This pair of words therefore illustrates Inclusion by Genus and Species, indicated by the abridgement, In. G. & S. or simply by In. Other examples: “Planet, Mars;” “Mountain, Vesuvius;” “River, Mississippi;” “Building Material, Potsdam Sandstone;” “Fruit, Peaches.”

We may for convenience include in this class, cases of the Genus and the Individual as “Man and George Washington;” “Judge, Hon. John Gibson;” “New Yorker, Hon. W. W. Astor;” and cases of Species and the Individual, as, “Frenchman and Guizot;” “American, Abraham Lincoln.” And also Co-equal Species under a common Genus, as under “Receiver” we may include “Can”‌ and “Bin”—under carnivorous birds we may include the Eagle and the Hawk. “Head-Covering, Hat, Cap;” “Hand-covering, Gloves, Mittens;” “Foot-covering, Boot, Shoe.”

Dwelling. House. } Synonymous In.

Inhabitability by man is the thought common to both of these words. Being nearly alike in meaning, we call them a case of Synonymous Inclusion, indicated by “Syn. In.” Other cases: “Near, Close to;” “Likeness, Resemblance;” “Lift, Raise;” “Meaning, Signification;” “John, Jack;” “James, Jim;” “Elizabeth, Bessy;” “Margaret, Maggy;” “Gertrude, Gertie;” “Ellen, Nellie.”

House. Parlor. } In. by Whole & Part.

Another case of Inclusion. House is the whole containing as it does the parlor, dining-room, kitchen, bedroom, etc. Parlor is a part of the whole house. Hence this pair of words illustrates Inclusion by Whole & Part designated by In. W. & P., or merely by In. We may include in this class for convenience the material and the product as “Bureau, Oak;” “Tower, Brick;” “Harness, Leather.” Other cases: “Wagon, Wheel;” “Razor, Blade;” “Table, Legs;” “United States of North America, New York;” “State, County;” “City, Street;” “Bird, Feathers;” “Year, Month;” “Week, Sunday;” “Engine, Boiler;” “100, 50;” “10, 5,” &c.

PARlor. PARtridge. } In. by S. & s.

Here we see that there is nothing in common in the meaning of the words, but there is the syllable “Par” belonging to both alike. It is the same in spelling in both words, and virtually the same in pronunciation, the same by Sight and by sound, represented by In. by capital S for In. by sight, and In. by small s for In. by sound, or merely by In. Examples: “Nice, Gneiss;” “Pole, Polarity;” “Popular, Popgun;” “Jefferson, Madison.”

Partridge. Feathers. } In. by W. & P.

Partridge is the name of the bird and feathers constitute part of the Partridge. Other cases: “Coat, Buttons;” “Elephant,‌ Trunk;” “Bottle, Neck;” “Pen, Nib;” “South Africa, Cape Colony.”

Feathers. Light. } In. by A. & C.

Feathers are things perceived by touch and sight. They imply the quality of lightness, but say nothing about that quality. Light has several meanings. Here taken in connection with feathers, it means nearly destitute of weight, or the quality of lightness. It is an abstract term that describes an attribute, but feathers are things and therefore concrete. Hence the pair of words illustrate Inclusion by Abstract and Concrete, and is indicated by In. by A. and C., or merely by In. Other examples: “Sour, Vinegar;” “Sweet, Sugar;” “Coward, Fear;” “Swiftness, Express train,” &c.

LIGHT. LIGHTerman. } In. by S. & s.

As before remarked, “Light” has several meanings. Here it means that which enables us to see. “Lighterman” is the man who works upon a boat called a “Lighter.” There is nothing in common in the meaning of this pair of words, but the word or syllable “Light” belongs to both alike. It is In. by Sight and sound. Other cases: “Dark, Darkness;” “Starch, March;” “Rage, Forage;” “Barber, Barbarism,” &c.

LighterMAN. Lord MANsfield. } In. by S.

Here the word or syllable “man” appears in both cases. In the former it signifies the man that manages a Lighter, and in the latter it was primitively connected with Field, as “A Man’s Field.” After a time it became Mansfield. It is a perfect case of In. by S. and s. Other cases: “Tempest, Temperature;” “Antepenult, Antediluvians.”

Lord MansFIELD. FIELDhand. } In. by S. & s.

As “Field” belongs to both words, it is a case of perfect In. by S. and s. Other cases: “Regiment, Compliment;” “Sell, Selfish;” “Miniature, Mint,” &c.

Now let the pupil read over very thoughtfully the ten words just examined, and recall the relation which we found to exist between every pair of them.

‌Building.

Dwelling.

House.

Parlor.

Partridge.

Feathers.

Light.

Lighterman.

Lord Mansfield.

Fieldhand.

Having finished the reading, let the pupil close the lesson, or put it out of sight and endeavour to recall the ten words from Building to Fieldhand from memory. He will find no difficulty in doing so. He learned the series by heart without any suspicion that he was committing it to memory.

Now let him realise how he did this. It was because he made use of the cementing Laws of the Memory. He sought out and found the relations between the words. By thinking of those relations, he exercised his intellect on those words in a double way—the meaning and the sound of the words were considered and then the similarities of meaning and of sound were noticed. A vivid First Impression was thus received from the words themselves and from the relations between them and an easy and certain recall thereby assured.

Now recall the series in an inverse order, beginning with “Fieldhand,” and going back to “Building.” You do it easily, because each word was cemented to its predecessor and its successor, and hence it makes no difference whether you go forward or backward. When, however, you learn by rote you know the task as you learned it, and not in the reverse way. Before proceeding, repeat the ten words from memory, from “Building” to “Fieldhand,” and the reverse way, at least five times; each time, if possible, more rapidly than before. These repetitions are not to learn the series; for this has been done already, but it is to consolidate the effect of learning it in the right way.

‌SECOND LAW OF MEMORY.

Fieldhand. Millionnaire. } Ex.

A fieldhand is a labourer who lives by the sweat of his brow, and eats not what he does not earn. A Millionnaire is at the opposite pole, and can have a superabundance of all things. It is a case of opposition. Where two ideas pertain to one and the same idea, but occupy opposite relations in regard to it, it is a case of Exclusion. The means of subsistence is the common idea and Fieldhand and Millionnaire occupy opposite positions in respect to that idea. Other examples: “Upper, Under;” “Above, Beneath;” “Before, After;” “Entrance, Exit;” “Appear, Vanish;” “Cheap, Dear;” “Empty, Full;” “Col. Ingersoll, Talmage;” “Washington, Arnold;” “Minnehaha, Minneboohoo.”

Millionnaire. Pauper. } Ex.

Here is opposition between millionnaire and pauper. It is a case of Ex. Other examples: “Superfluity, Scarcity;” “Fertile, Barren;” “Sorrow, Happiness;” “Straight, Crooked;” “Irregular, Circle;” “Prompt, Tardy;” “Liberal, Stingy;” “Wide, Narrow;” “Open, Shut;” “Inclusion, Exclusion;” “Beginning, End;” “Industry, Idleness;” “Addition, Subtraction;” “Infernal, Celestial;” “Cellar, Garret;” “Miser, Spend-thrift;” “Assimilation, Learning by rote,” &c.

Pauper. Wealth. } Ex.

Here is the extreme of opposition. The state or condition of destitution of the pauper is contrasted with the state or condition of being over supplied. Other examples: “Insufficient, Enough;” “Work, Play;” “Crying, Laughing;” “Awkward, Graceful;” “In, Out;” “East, West;” “North, South;” “Saint, Sinner;” “Fast, Slow,” &c.

WEALTH. CommonWEALTH. } In. by S. & s.

If “Wealth” is taken as “Private” or individual, and “Commonwealth” be taken in its derivative sense, as “wealth in common,” or, the “public wealth,”‌ then this would be a case of Exclusion. If “Wealth” is taken as the condition of great abundance, and “Commonwealth” as the political body, known as a State, then this is a case of Inclusion by sight, or by sound, the word “wealth” belonging to both alike.

COMMONwealth. UNcommon. } Ex.

Considering “Common” in relation with “Uncommon” we have Exclusion. In the previous pair, we used wealth of commonwealth to make a relation with the simple word wealth. Here we use the first two syllables of the word to contrast with uncommon.

Uncommon. Rare. } Syn. Inclusion.

These words are nearly alike in meaning. Other examples: “Choice, Preference;” “Resolute, Determined;” “Economical, Frugal;” “Ugly, Ill-looking;” “Insane, Mad;” “Lie, Untruth;” “Reliable, Trustworthy;” “Air, Atmosphere;” “Resident, Dweller,” etc.

Rare. Well done. } Ex.

This pair requires careful notice. “Rare” with reference to “Uncommon” means unusual, seldom met, or unfrequent; but considered in reference to “well done,” it means partially cooked or underdone. This, then, is a clear case of Exclusion. Other examples: “Men whose heads do grow beneath their shoulders, and men whose shoulders do grow beneath their heads;” “Cushion, Mule’s Hoof;” “Ungoverned, Henpecked;” “Bed of Ease, Hornet’s Nest;” “Waltz, Breakdown.”

Well done. Badly done. } Ex.

A clear case of Exclusion. They are both “done,” but one is done “well,” and the other “badly done,” or the opposite of well.

Badly done. Good. } Ex.

A relation is sometimes found between one word and a part of another word or phrase. Here “Bad” is the opposite of “Good.”

Good. Good Princess. } In. by G. & S.

“Good” covers all cases, whatsoever, of its kind, but “Good Princess” is a particular kind of species of good things or‌ persons. Examples: “Snake, Copperhead;” “Spider, Tarantula;” “Horse, Dray horse,” etc.

Now carefully read over the eleven words, and recall or ascertain the relations between them:

Fieldhand.

Millionnaire.

Pauper.

Wealth.

Commonwealth.

Uncommon.

Rare.

Well done.

Badly done.

Good.

Good Princess.

When you have carefully realised the relations between these words, lay aside the lesson and recall the entire series from memory, proceeding from Fieldhand to Good Princess, and back from Good Princess to Fieldhand. Do this five times—each time from memory and more rapidly than before.

Again, repeat from memory, at least five times, the series from Building to Good Princess, and back from Good Princess to Building, reciting as fast as possible each time.

THIRD AND LAST LAW OF MEMORY.

Good Princess. Pocahontas. } In. & Con.

A proper name as such has little meaning. It is usually a mere sound to which the person that bears it answers as the dog responds to the name “Carlo.” It is a sound which we call a name, and which we apply to one person to distinguish that person from all others, as in this case Pocahontas is used to distinguish the daughter of Powhattan from all other Indian women. She knew who was meant when that name was applied to her. But the name Pocahontas does not indicate that she was wise or unwise, learned or unlearned, tall or short, old or young. In saving the life of Capt. John Smith she became entitled to be called a “Good Princess.”‌ In this case it would be In. by G. & S. We have heard of all this, and now when we think of Pocahontas, we are apt to remember that she was a good Princess for saving Smith’s life. The connection between these words I call Concurrence. We have thought of these words together, and the mind by its own operation has cemented them together, so that when we think of one it is apt to make us remember the other. Concurrence means that which has been accidentally, or as cause and effect, conjoined in our experience. Between the words or ideas thus conjoined, there is, strictly speaking, neither Inclusion or Exclusion. Whenever there are unrelated things which the mind holds together simply because it has occupied itself with them, then we have a case of concurrence to be represented by Con. Other examples: “Harrison, Tippecanoe;” “Columbus, America;” “Washington, Cherry Tree;” “Andrew Jackson, To the Victors belong the Spoils;” “Newton, Gravitation;” “Garfield, Guiteau;” “Gladstone, Home Rule,” &c.

Pocahontas. Capt. John Smith. } Con.

We have read the story of the rescue of Smith by Pocahontas. We have thought of these names together and they have united in our memories by the Law of Concurrence. When we recall the name of Pocahontas, we are apt to revive also the name of Capt. John Smith and vice versa. Another case:—A gentleman was present at Ford’s Theatre in Washington when John Wilkes Booth shot Abraham Lincoln. Just a moment before, he recognised the odour of a hyacinth held by a lady in front of him. The next moment he heard the fatal shot, and turning whence the report came, he saw the murderous result. After the lapse of a quarter of a century, he could not smell, see, or think of hyacinth without at once thinking of that scene, nor could Lincoln’s assassination be mentioned in his presence without his instantly thinking of hyacinth. Nothing could have been more purely accidental than the quick succession of the sensation of the odour and the murder of the President. But they were experienced together or nearly together. They became cemented together, so that the revival of one is apt to call up the other, and this is concurrence.

‌ Capt. John Smith. Anvil. } Con.

A proper name may be also used in other relations. The word, sound, or name Smith may also be a general term applicable to many classes of persons, as coppersmith, goldsmith, silversmith, &c. When we think of Capt. John Smith we use the word as a proper name. But when we think of Smith and Anvil we use the word Smith in its general sense. In either case it is an act of Concurrence. Smiths use anvils. We have thought of these words together, and that mental act has had a tendency to unite them together.

Anvil. Heavy. } In. by A. & C.

Anvil is a concrete thing that possesses the attribute heaviness; and heavy is an abstract term that applies to heavy things, but does not state what they are. The idea or thought of heaviness is common to both words, and therefore it is a case of In., and as one term is concrete and the other abstract, it is a case of In. by A. & C.

Heavy. Gravitation. } Con.

Things are heavy that press toward the earth, in consequence of the action of gravity in their case. Gravitation, whatever that is, is what makes them tend toward the earth. We may say it is a Cause, and as we think of Cause producing Effect, and Effect as produced by Cause, such cases are thought of together, or almost simultaneously, and hence we have a case of Concurrence.

Gravitation. Sir Isaac Newton. } Con.

There is no In. or Ex. here, but Con. We have read or heard that Newton discovered the Law of Gravitation. We have exercised our minds in regard to these two words, in thinking of them together, and that is concurrence.

Sir Isaac Newton. “Diamond.” } Con.

Newton went out of his library on one occasion, leaving his pet dog “Diamond” in the room. The dog jumped up on to the table, overturned the light, which set fire to most valuable manuscripts. They burned up. When Newton returned and discovered what his pet had done, he exclaimed, “O! Diamond, Diamond, thou little knowest what thou hast done.” The‌ name Diamond becomes thus vividly associated in our minds with the forbearance of the great Newton. We cannot forget it. We hold them together hereafter by Con.

Diamond. Dying. } In. by s.

A plain case of Inclusion by sound.

Dying. Cholera. } Con.

We know that cholera causes numerous deaths; that people die in great numbers wherever it prevails.

Cholera. Terror. } Con.

Concurrence includes all cases of Cause and Effect, Instrument or Means to End, Person by whom or Thing by which, &c. Cholera causes terror. Terror is the effect of the existence of the cholera. Now carefully read over the eleven words just considered, and think out the relations between them.

Good Princess.

Pocahontas.

Capt. John Smith.

Anvil.

Heavy.

Gravitation.

Sir Isaac Newton.

“Diamond.”

Dying.

Cholera.

Terror.

Now recite them from memory at least five times forward and backward, and then recite the entire thirty words from Building to Terror, and from Terror to Building, the same number of times.

For further training, let each pupil recite the foregoing series of thirty words forward and backward two or three times per day for an entire month. He need not stop further study, but whatever else he learns let him at least practise this daily recital for one month.

REMARKS ON THE THREE LAWS.

1. Since words have different meanings, we may sometimes find that a pair of words exemplify all three Laws, as plough and sword. The relation between them may be In.,‌ since both of them are cutting instruments; one cuts and hacks human beings and the other cuts and turns over the soil. It may be Ex., in a metaphorical sense, as one is the emblem of peace and the other of war, and it may be Con., as we have often thought of them together as we read in the Bible of beating swords into ploughshares.

2. Learning a series of words by heart by thinking of the Relations between them is wholly unlike learning it by rote. In the latter case, three or five words at a time or all ten words are read over from 10 to 20 times. This reading secures scarcely anything more than a succession of sights to the eye or sounds to the ear. No study of the words is required. The action of the intellect is not invoked. It is the mere sensuous impression of Eye or Ear or both together that holds the words together, and thus many or endless repetitions are required to memorise a series which a conscious thoughtful use of those Laws enables us to learn by one painstaking perusal.

Another way of learning such a series by rote, is to limit the extent of the repetitions. Instead of reading over the entire series or a large part of it many times, the series is slowly read over once or several times by pairs, only two words at a time, but the method of acquirement is precisely the same as in the former rote process. Let us look at this last proceeding in detail. (1) It is usually applied only where there is a natural suggestiveness between each pair of words. (2) But no previous study is prescribed in regard to what constitutes this suggestiveness, nor are the varieties of it set forth and required to be mastered. (3) But above all, no study of the pairs of words themselves is insisted upon. On the contrary, all such study is emphatically deprecated. The mind is not allowed to be directed to anything in particular in reading over the pairs. It must be left without a rudder or guide to float wherever it listeth. It is not to be “interfered with” by our will. What is this but intellectual dawdling? A method of Vacuity pure and simple—the exact opposite of Mental Assimilation. (4) If in reading over many times an entire series, only the ear and eye are mainly affected and the intellect is left to wander, much more must it wander here. In running over many words, the intellect might be arrested by chance. But here the‌ series consisting of two words only and all attempt to occupy or engage the intellect being purposely avoided, and nothing being done to enchain the attention to the consideration of the meaning or sounds of the two words, or the relation between them, the intellect wanders away from want of occupation. If when we wish to retain in our memories a paragraph of fine sentiment or lucid reasoning, we find our attention wanders, so it must wander here where only a pair of words is before it, and we are not only not furnished with any tests or guides or stimulus or motive for examining the words or for finding the relation between them, but on the contrary we are forbidden to interfere with the spontaneous action of the mind. The intellect might be abolished so far as its participation in such an operation is concerned. What is absorbed in such a case is absorbed intuitively and blindly. Hence we see that what is accomplished by these two processes of rote learning is weak impressions upon the memory and a distinct cultivation of mind wandering.

This method of rote learning by pairs was invented and first taught by Thomas Hallworth in New York in 1822. His method was adopted without acknowledgment by Carl Otto in Germany and Austria, and his followers in England and America. Footnote [A]

3. The opposite of these two methods of rote learning is my method, which injects an active process between each pair of words. Each pair of words is appraised and dovetailed by the Laws of Memory. And hence the reader can notice the fundamental difference between all other methods and mine. My method is to keep the mind in an assimilating, absorbing condition when trying to learn by making the Intellect stay with the Senses. In the process of endless repetition or learning by rote as evinced in the two methods above given, the mind is in a passive state. But when learning the above series by my method, it was kept in an active state. The intellect was directed by the will into certain‌ channels and kept there. It was searching for what was in common or different between the pairs of words. It was noting points of likeness and classifying them. This is thinking. And the most vivid First Impressions always result from the action of the intellect upon the sensuous stimuli from ear and eye. Intellectual Assimilation is a proper name for my methods.

4. The Three Laws are Forms or Modes of Mental Assimilation. But when used consciously for any length of time, they operate much more efficaciously than formerly—and they greatly increase the Impressionability and Revivability—as any student can affirm who faithfully carries out my instructions, and then his General Memory becomes largely improved without a conscious use of my method.

A TRAINING EXERCISE IN ATTENTION.

Whoever wishes to increase his permanent Memory power and his power of Attention must not omit to learn and practise the following exercise precisely as I prescribe. He will experience great satisfaction in carrying out my directions to the letter, because his conformity in this and in other respects will bring the reward of a new memory power almost immediately. And if he were to disregard my directions, he will have no one to blame but himself.

He must write down the first two words, “Ice” and “Slippery,” the latter word under the former. Let him ascertain the exact relation between these words. He will find that “Ice” is a concrete word, and “Slippery” indicates a quality of “Ice” and of other things. He places opposite the abbreviation In., by A. and C. In a similar way he proceeds to write down one word at a time, and at once ascertaining its relation to the previous word, and indicating that relation by the appropriate abbreviation. When he has analysed ten words in this painstaking manner he must recall them backward and forward from memory at least five times, and each time faster than the other.

Let him deal with the next ten in a similar manner in all respects, and then let him repeat the twenty words both ways at least five times, and so on till he has analysed,‌ learned and recited the entire one hundred words; and, finally, let him recite the one hundred words both ways at least once a day for thirty days, in connection with the Building Series and the Presidential Series and Series of English Sovereigns hereafter given.

As the result of this Analysis and recitals, the pupil will make these Laws of In., Ex., and Con. operate hereafter in an unconscious manner, with a power a hundred-fold greater than before practising this method.

Ice. Slippery. Smooth. Rough. Ruffian. Prison. Crime. Crimea. War. Army. Navy. Ship. Sail. Auction. Bid. Competition. Petition. Signatures. Cygnet. Net. Ensnare. Capture. Cap. Gun. Hunter. Hounds. Bark. Tree. Woods. Prairie. Air. Wind. Hurricane. Reign. Governor. Steam-engine. Newspaper. Ream. Quire. Inquire. Inquest. Jury. Decide. Cider. Apple. Orchard. Charred. Burned. Stove. Fire. Hose. Rose. Bush. Guerilla. Rill. Water-power. Manufacture. Man. Manager. Conductor. Cars. Track. Trotting. Fair. Foul. Chanticleer. Chandelier. Gas. Coal. Mine. Shaft. Arrow. Quiver. Indian. Black-Hawk. Chicken. Feathers. Down. Up. Upstart. Begin. Bee. Honey. Hives. Wives. Mormon. Brigham Young. Old. Cold. Winter. Summer. Ft. Sumter. Stone. Mason. Maize. Fodder. Cattle. Catalogue. Log. Saw-mill.

I occasionally find that a bright, highly-gifted person makes a poor learner of my system, because he acts on hasty inferences of his own instead of attending to my long-tried and never-failing methods. To illustrate: Instead of analysing the above series in pairs, and discovering and noting the relation between each pair as I require, he reads over the entire series. His previous study of the Memory Laws has, however, so impressed his mind with their influence that he is able to retain this series after only two or three perusals. Or, instead of reading over the entire series, he may even slowly read the series in pairs,‌ but without analysis, without trying to ascertain and realise the exact relation between the words. This is the method of Vacuity or Dawdling formerly mentioned. But his study of the three Laws in learning the Building Series has so sharpened and quickened his appreciation of In., Ex., and Con., that he learned the one hundred words in this wrong way very readily.

But why should he not follow my directions? Why not pursue my plan and thereby acquire the full power of my system instead of the small portion of that power gained by disregarding my direction? On the other hand, pupils of only average natural ability are very apt to follow my directions to the letter and thereby acquire an amount of Memory Improvement which the above gifted, but non-complying pupil, seems unable to understand.

If a person is afflicted with a very bad memory in any or all respects, and particularly if this memory weakness is traceable to mind-wandering, or if it co-exist with the latter infirmity, such a person may find it best to make a series of from one hundred to five hundred words on the model of the foregoing series, and learn the same and recite it daily both ways for a month or more in addition to the prescribed exercises, and if any trace of mind-wandering remain after that, let him make and memorise another series of the same extent and practise it for the same period. The worst cases of mind-wandering and of weak memories always yield to this training treatment.

In like manner, but in much inferior degree, the recital of what has just been heard, such as anecdotes, narratives, contents of plays, lectures, &c., not only tends to fix the recited matter in the memory, but also to strengthen the memory generally, provided the recital takes place shortly after the listening, as that is like a continuation of the original experience. ←ToC