The Metaphysical Club at the Johns Hopkins University (1879–1885)

Home , Benjamin Ives Gilman, George Sylvester Morris, Joseph Jastrow, The Metaphysical Club

THE METAPHYSICAL CLUB AT THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY (1879–1885)

Peter J. Behrens The Pennsylvania State University

Of the earliest American universities, The Johns Hopkins in Baltimore holds a unique position for psychology. At Hopkins, many of America’s ﬁrst psychologists received their graduate training. Of special interest is the Hopkins Metaphysical Club, organized in 1879 by Charles Sanders Peirce. It provided a forum for research and scholarship by faculty and students. Papers related to topics of the “new” psychology began to appear in 1883, about the time G. Stanley Hall was given a 3-year appointment at Hopkins. When Peirce departed Hopkins in 1885, Hall was free to develop psychology in his image and disbanded the club. Nevertheless, the Metaphysical Club played an important role in the emergence of American scientiﬁc psychology.

Widely understood among historians of psychology is the fact that The Johns Hopkins University played a significant role in the development of American psychology. G. Stanley Hall held the position as the first full-time professor of psychology, when he was appointed professor of psychology and pedagogics at Hopkins in 1883; Hopkins’ graduates were among the first generation of psychologists in America, which included John Dewey, James McKeen Cattell, Christine Ladd, and Joseph Jastrow; and Hopkins was an inspiration to, if not a model for, other American universities for graduate education with its emphasis on laboratory research, the seminar, and academic freedom (Veysey, 1965). Largely overlooked, however, is the place of the Hopkins Metaphysical Club—its functioning, role, and impact—on the history of 19th-century American science and philosophy in general and the emergence of psychology as a distinct discipline in particular. The argument here is that the club was a supportive context for ideas, research, and scholarship during its existence and assumed an important role for the Hopkins community and the development of American psychology, distinct from philosophy and biology, in the last quarter of the 19th century. Original membership in the Metaphysical Club in 1879 was 26 faculty and

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Peter J. Behrens is assistant professor of psychology at the Lehigh Valley Campus of The

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. Pennsylvania State University. He teaches undergraduate courses in psychology and engages in research on American psychology prior to 1939. He also holds a Pennsylvania psychologist license and maintains an independent practice as a counseling psychologist in Bethlehem, PA. This research was supported by a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities (RY-20386-84) and grants from The College of the Liberal Arts and Commonwealth Education System of The Pennsylvania State University. A version of this paper was read at the 100th Annual Convention of the American Psycho- logical Association in Washington, DC, August 1992. I wish to express my appreciation for the cooperation of James Stinson, archivist, Eisenhower Library of The Johns Hopkins University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Peter J. Behrens, Penn State Lehigh Valley, 8380 Mohr Lane, Fogelsville, PA 18051. E-mail: [email protected]

331 332 BEHRENS students from biology, engineering, chemistry, the arts, and philosophy. Changes to the membership roll occurred but were infrequently noted in the minutes and then only in the early years. The minutes of each meeting identiﬁed presenters and those who made substantive contributions to the discussions. Typically, the club met monthly between October and May on Tuesday evenings during the fall and spring terms. Meetings took place over the years in various rooms set aside for instruction among the several inconspicuous buildings that comprised the university in the mid-1880s (French, 1946). Between 1879 and 1885 a total of 43 meetings were held. The club never received widespread recognition outside of the university, and, indeed, one is hard-pressed to ﬁnd any mention of it in the later writings of its former members (Brent, 1998). But the club’s proceedings over the years suggest it offers a unique perspective both on intellectual life at Hopkins and on the development of American psychology through the members who contributed their research and scholarship. There is even a link between several members of the Metaphysical Club and the American Psychological Association, established 7 years after the club ceased to exist.

Charles Peirce and the Founding of the Hopkins Metaphysical Club Rather than as a college, The Johns Hopkins was established as a graduate university by its trustees, who had studied the best institutions of the United States and Europe and were determined not to follow any precedent—German, French, or English. They sought to “devise from all sources such experience and recom- mendations as might be adapted to this country and lead in course of time to an American University based upon our own educational system, and ﬁtted to meet the needs and wants of our own scholars” (Annual Report, p. 8; Johns Hopkins University [JHU], 1878). Of particular importance were several initiatives unique to the landscape of American higher education at the time: the establishment of various methods of instruction, a large number of teachers in proportion to students, abandonment of the traditional class system, the participation of university fellows in laboratory activities, and the encouragement of teachers to publish. It also held the distinct position of a research university in the service of emerging technology and industry (Feldman & Desrochers, 2004). Within this context of university organization, Charles S. Peirce (1839– 1914), unsuccessful in several previous attempts to gain an academic position, was appointed part-time lecturer in logic for the fall 1879 term on the recom- mendation of his close friend and colleague at Harvard, William James, to Hopkins’ President Daniel Gilman (Menand, 2001; Murphy, 1961). Charles was

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. the son of Benjamin Peirce, who held a chair in astronomy and mathematics at

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. Harvard. By some accounts he was the first “world-class” American mathematician (Menand, 2001). Upon his arrival in Baltimore in the fall of 1879, Peirce undertook the process of organizing a Metaphysical Club at Hopkins, which joined the short list of other “learned societies” (French, 1946). As recalled by Christine Ladd, a student of Peirce and later a distinguished psychologist in her own right, he used a class session in his logic course to announce the formation of the club (Fisch & Cope, 1952). Peirce was no stranger to intellectual societies. He had considerable connection to and influence on the famous Cambridge Metaphysical Club, about HOPKINS METAPHYSICAL CLUB 333 which much has been written (Brent, 1998; Fisch, 1981; Menand, 2001). The Cambridge club existed informally from about 1871–1874 and counted Charles Peirce, William James, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., John Fiske, Henry Bowen, and Chauncy Wright, among others, as members. Unfortunately, there were no minutes kept, no records of attendance, and meetings were at the mercy of competing schedules and professional responsibilities of its members. In the end, the club unraveled for a variety of reasons, including the untimely death of Wright and reforming efforts of Harvard President Charles Eliot (Menand, 2001). Recent scholarly attention to the Cambridge Metaphysical Club is in connection with the origin of Peirce’s pragmatism. In forming the Hopkins Metaphysical Club, Peirce based it, in part, on the Cambridge model of shared scholarship and intellectual expression, although the informal organization of the Cambridge club lent Peirce little help for a structure of the Hopkins club. Nevertheless, Peirce, no doubt, was eager to put his mark on the development of Hopkins and impress the administration, particularly President Gilman, given the circumstances that President Eliot had banned him from the Harvard campus and that he was hired only as a part-time instructor on a year-to-year contract at Hopkins (Brent, 1998; Menand, 2001). Peirce’s interest in and dedication to the pursuit of scientific knowledge, expanding at an unprecedented pace during the last quarter of the 19th century, cannot be underestimated. He was, after all, a scientist, and the intellectual environment fostered by the Hopkins administration in the service of science and the practical arts must have given him great hope. Peirce had been engaged in such pursuits with the Coast Geodetic Survey from 1870, when he took part in the expedition to Europe authorized by Congress to study the solar eclipse (Fisch, 1981). Between 1871 and 1878, the Coast Survey had made Peirce responsible for two fields of astronomical research. In addition, his scientific interests prior to Hopkins were in chemistry, in which he took his bachelor of science from the Lawrence Scientific School in 1861. Spectroscopy, metrology, and physics also occupied his career before Hopkins. The new university, only in its second full year of operation when he was engaged, was possibly Peirce’s realization of the dream of a community of scholars, a community that counted him as a member, in the service of a rapidly expanding industrial society (Murphy, 1961). At the encouragement of President Gilman and the board of trustees, various scholarly associations were started at Hopkins in support of the goals of the institution. The associations, societies, or clubs, as they were called, were of considerable importance in creating interdisciplinary communication, faculty- student collegiality, and a forum for visitors with special topics. In some respects,

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. the clubs served as seminal societies that could aid the development and revision

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. of the Hopkins curriculum. Older disciplines could be tested, and new disciplines, like psychology, could be given a platform for research, scholarship, and intellectual exchange (Hawkins, 1960). The original societies at Hopkins numbered five: the Scientific Society, Philological Association, Historical and Political Science Association, Biological Society, and the Metaphysical Club. Additional societies were added over the years to meet the needs of faculty and students as forums for scientific and intellectual interests (1878 Annual Report; Johns Hop- kins University [JHU], 1878–1886). By 1884, seven societies were meeting regularly. All societies were open to all members of the university community, 334 BEHRENS faculty and students alike. The implications of this policy were not trivial. One was that the various departments of the university were given equal status and support by the Hopkins administration and trustees. Indeed, President Gilman attended meetings of various societies and even hosted one Metaphysical Club meeting at his home on January 16, 1883. A second implication was that there was considerable opportunity for cross-disciplinary exchange of ideas, especially in an intellectual environment that saw only general, and sometimes arbitrary, distinc- tions among departments. The contributions to the Metaphysical Club meetings attest to this.

The Metaphysical Club in Organization and Scholarship The first meeting of the Hopkins Metaphysical Club was held on the evening of October 28, 1879, in the Logic room of the university at 187 North Howard Street, the room in which Peirce conducted his regular classes. Sixteen persons were in attendance. Peirce was elected president, and Allan Marquand, a “fellow by courtesy” at Hopkins in philosophy, was elected secretary. That Peirce had properly laid the necessary foundation for the organization and activities of the club is evidenced by the fact that at this first meeting six scholarly papers by six students from his logic course were read. Charles Nichols read a paper titled “On the Metaphysical Fallacy”; Benjamin Ives Gilman (no relation to Hopkins Pres- ident Daniel Gilman) read a paper on the doctrine of limits; Henry Gantt read a paper on the distinction between Leibnitzean and Newtonian calculus; Waldo Pratt’s paper was on Zeno’s four arguments against motion; and Christine Ladd’s paper, read by Peirce, was on non-Euclidean space. Finally, a refutation of the doctrine of limits was read by Alan Marquand. “The readings of the papers prompted questions, suggestions and discussions,” wrote Marquand in his secre- tarial summary (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). At the same meeting, a committee of three, consisting of Peirce, Marquand, and Pratt, was appointed to draw up a constitution and bylaws for the use of the club, so that it could conduct regular monthly meetings during the academic year. A formal structure, required by the Hopkins administration of all of the clubs, was probably advantageous to Peirce. After all, the Cambridge Metaphysical Club, with which Peirce had been associated for many years, had no formal structure, and Peirce, known for his unorthodoxy and eccentricities, would likely realize a benefit from the stability that a common university-sanctioned structure offered. The constitution and bylaws for the club were presented to the assembled membership for ratification at the second meeting of the club on November 11,

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. again held in Peirce’s Logic room. The constitution deﬁned the club’s objective

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. as the “preparation and discussion of papers relating to logic, psychology, ethics and the ﬁrst principles of things.” The bylaws called for an order of business to include reading of the minutes, reading and discussion of the principal paper (of no longer than 45 min in length), papers deferred from previous meetings, reading and discussion of minor communications (no longer than 20 min), reviews of books and magazines, and the transaction of other business as necessary. The role of the executive committee was to “arrange programs of the meeting, assigning subjects for investigation, accepting or rejecting contributed articles, and serving due notice of its requisitions and decisions through the secretary.” The bylaws HOPKINS METAPHYSICAL CLUB 335 also directed that all papers presented to the club were to be preserved in its archives (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). Besides Peirce, the Hopkins faculty members of the club that fall term included President Gilman, Prof. C. D. Morris (from the Greek faculty), H. Newell (instructor in drawing), and Prof. George S. Morris, who shared the instruction in philosophy with Peirce as a part-time lecturer for one course each year. Morris’ principal responsibility was in the history of philosophy and ethics (September 1879 Circular; JHU, 1879–1886). Seventeen of Peirce’s students are listed on the 1879–1880 club roll, and many later achieved national eminence, including Marquand (art history) and Pratt (music), both previously mentioned. Others were Henry Gantt (engineering), E. M. Hartwell (physiology), and W. T. Sedgwick (biology). Benjamin Ives Gilman, also previously mentioned, is of particular note. He received his BA from Williams College in 1872 and was a graduate student at Hopkins from 1878 to 1883. He also studied at Berlin (1882), Harvard (1883–1885), and Paris (1886). He was appointed by G. Stanley Hall as instructor in psychology at Clark in 1892, published an experimental report on musical expression in the American Journal of Psychology (Gilman, 1892), was a founding member of the American Psycho- logical Association, and held the position of secretary of the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston for 30 years (Brown, 1926). Table 1 lists the names of the 26 original members of the club from the minutes of the second meeting of November 11, 1879. The dates of these early members (where known) and academic afﬁliations to Hopkins’ departments are also listed (Brown, 1926; JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). Over the years of its existence, more than 50 Hopkins faculty and students contributed to the club through presentation of original papers, literature reviews, and translations of scholarly works. Papers read at the meetings were on such topics as induction, causation, epistemology, the history of philosophy, and, of course, psychology. Some of the papers read were published as abstracts in the university Circulars. Others, like those of Peirce, appeared subsequently as major publications, such as his Studies in Logic (Peirce, 1883). One paper by Peirce, “Design and Chance,” read on January 17, 1884, served as the seminal work for his later cosmology (Menand, 2001). An exhaustive documentation of the contributions that comprised the Meta- physical Club meetings and subsequently were published is not within the scope of this work, although Fisch and Cope (1952) have provided a list of the principal papers read at each of the meetings. Nevertheless, a few examples of papers read on psychology topics and eventually published will be illustrative of the Meta-

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. physical Club as a forum for research and scholarship to the emerging science of

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. psychology. Among the contributions of John Dewey to the Metaphysical Club were papers that related closely to his early published work. “Knowledge and the Relativity of Feeling” was a paper read by Dewey at the 26th meeting of the club and also published in Mind (Dewey, 1883). Other of his papers read at meetings between 1882 and 1884 were possibly either early drafts or similar papers to his publications, such as “Psychology of Consciousness,” his principal paper of November 13, 1883, and “The New Psychology” of March 11, 1884 (Dewey, 1884, 1886a, 1886b). Allan Marquand’s paper on logical machines, read at the 17th meeting, described several such machines, including Cunningham’s syllo- 336 BEHRENS Table 1 Metaphysical Club Membership Roll and Johns Hopkins Afﬁliation 1879–1880 Academic afﬁliation at Name Dates Johns Hopkins B. C. Burt 1852–1915 Fellow in philosophy J. Core ?–1922 Arts W. Cumming ? Arts H. L. Gantt 1861–1919 Natural sciences and mechanics G. F. Gebhart ?–1891 Arts B. I. Gilman 1852–1933 Philosophy D. C. Gilman 1831–1908 University president J. M. Glenn 1858–1950 Greek E. Goodman ? History E. M. Hartwell 1850–1922 Fellow in physiology G. F. Hussey ?–1894 Arts E. A. Jarvis ?–1880 Arts A. Marquand 1853–1924 Fellow in philosophy W. S. Marston ? Mathematics O. H. Mitchell ?–1889 Fellow in mathematics C. D. Morris 1833–1886 Collegiate professor of Greek G. S. Morris 1840–1889 Lecturer in philosophy H. Newell ? Instructor in drawing C. W. Nichols 1854–1923 Arts C. S. Peirce 1854–1914 Lecturer in philosophy W. S. Pratt 1857–1939 Fellow in philosophy A. J. Robinson ?–1904 Philosophy W. T. Sedgwick 1855–1921 Fellow in physiology D. Stewart 1856–? Philosophy W. I. Stringham 1847–1909 Fellow in mathematics M. I. Swift 1856–? Philosophy

gistic cylinder, Stanhope’s demonstrator, and Venn’s diagram machine. Mar- quand also described his own, improved version of a logical machine (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). The paper was published in Mind under the same title (Marquand, 1881). H. H. Donaldson and Joseph Jastrow also deserve mention for their Meta- physical Club papers in the context of empirical psychology at Hopkins. They were not only contributing members of the Metaphysical Club, but, like Cattell, Dewey, B. I. Gilman, Ladd, and Noyes, were founding members of the American Psychological Association. Donaldson enrolled at Hopkins as a fellow in 1881.

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. He served as assistant in biology (1883–1884), then as an instructor in psychology

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. (1885–1886) following his 1885 PhD in physiology (Brown, 1926). His paper, “On the Newly Discovered Organs of the Heat Sense,” was a report of his research at the December 1885 meeting of the club and later published in Mind (Donaldson, 1885). A second publication on this research appeared in the same year with Hall’s name added (Donaldson & Hall, 1885). Joseph Jastrow was a student of both Peirce and Hall during his graduate years at Hopkins. But whereas Donaldson represents a link between biology and psychology, Jastrow distinguished himself through both his empirical research in psychology and philosophical work in the tradition of Peirce. He was first a HOPKINS METAPHYSICAL CLUB 337 student in Peirce’s logic course when he entered Hopkins in 1882 and then became Peirce’s first assistant for psychological research (Cadwallader, 1992). With Peirce, he conducted psychological experiments in the room set aside for such work and coauthored a major study with him on psychophysical limits (Peirce & Jastrow, 1884), a study identified as the first American psychological experiment (Cadwallader, 1974). Although Jastrow also collaborated with Hall, his Metaphysical Club papers were closer to Peirce’s philosophical interests than to Hall’s empirical psychology, addressing logic, logical machines, human fac- ulties, and materialism and spiritualism (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879– 1885). Jastrow’s philosophical, as opposed to empirical, topics in his Metaphys- ical Club papers extended to his publication record as well, both at this time and over the long course of his academic and professional career (Jastrow, 1885, 1886a, 1886b, 1888, 1910).

Events at Hopkins Impact the Metaphysical Club Beginning in 1883, a shift in the themes of the papers presented at Meta- physical Club meetings began to occur. Philosophical topics gave way to papers and discussions that addressed problems related to the “new” psychology. Papers on logic, the history of philosophy, Kant, and Hegel gave way to papers on the physiology of the senses, reaction time, hypnosis, intelligence, insanity, and psychophysical measurement. This shift, albeit subtle, coincided with three events at Hopkins that had major consequences for the Metaphysical Club and for the departmental organization of the university. One was the appointment of G. Stanley Hall for the spring of 1883 as a half-time lecturer (Cadwallader, 1992; 1882 Annual Report; JHU, 1878–1886). The first official connection between Hall and Hopkins had occurred in January of 1882, when he gave 10 lectures on psychology at the invitation of President Gilman (Ross, 1972). Hall attended the 19th meeting of the club on January 17, 1882, and read the principal paper on Edward von Hartmann, an influential German philosopher. Hall gave a critical review of von Hartmann’s writings, particularly his views on the unconscious that von Hartmann shared with con- temporary German philosophers (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). In the next academic year, in which Hall began a 3-year appointment at Hopkins as professor of psychology and pedagogics, he read the principal paper at the Metaphysical Club meeting held on February 13, 1883. This article, in contrast to his January 1892 paper, was decidedly empirical in content, entitled “Study of Reaction Time and Retention in the Hypnotic State,” and was later

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. published in Mind (Hall, 1883). Also at this meeting, Hall was elected president

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. of the club for the first time, succeeding George Morris. It may be mentioned here that this change in leadership was an accepted practice of rotation that occurred from time to time at the convenience of Peirce and Morris. On several occasions, in the absence of either, other members of the club were called upon to serve in the position of chair to conduct meetings, such as Hartwell, B. I. Gilman, and O. H. Mitchell. The ability to appoint acting chairs at meetings ensured continuity of club proceedings and intellectual activity connected with research and scholarship when either Peirce or Morris was otherwise unavailable. With his ascen- dancy to president of the club in February 1883, however, Hall began a nearly 338 BEHRENS uninterrupted tenure as president and presided over 11 of the last 16 meetings between February 1883 and March 1885. Thus, Hall’s influence on the Meta- physical Club commenced with his full-time appointment on two levels: leadership and scholarship. The second major event at Hopkins that determined the viability of the Metaphysical Club was the unfortunate turn in the professional career of Charles Peirce. He commanded considerable respect from President Gilman for his intellectual genius and was largely responsible for research projects in psychology by graduate students, such as Joseph Jastrow, Christine Ladd, and John Dewey (Kent, 1987). In fact, in addition to logic, Peirce was considered to be in charge of psychology (Cadwallader, 1992), and his major study of psychophysical limits with Jastrow (Peirce & Jastrow, 1884) was the first psychological research conducted at Hopkins (Cadwallader, 1974). Yet Peirce’s unorthodox and often unstable personality ran afoul of President Gilman and the Hopkins Board of Trustees. Late in December of 1883, Gilman received “derogatory” information about Peirce in a letter from Simon Newcomb, then head of the Naval Observatory in Washington. Newcomb held Charles’ father, Benjamin Peirce, in high regard but did not have the same respect for the younger Peirce or his attempts to secure a permanent academic position. The “facts” about Charles Peirce to which Newcomb referred in his letter to Gilman concerned the circumstances of Peirce’s divorce from his first wife, Melusina Fay, and his marriage to Juliette Froissey, with whom Peirce had taken up residence before his divorce was final (Stuhr, 1987). Peirce had, in fact, informed Gilman of his marriage to Juliette in April 1883 before returning to Hopkins for the 1883–1884 academic year. Gilman was so confident of Peirce’s position with Hopkins that he had assured Peirce he could take a 2-year lease on a house in Baltimore (Fisch & Cope, 1952). Newcomb’s letter, however, could not be taken lightly and may have rekindled Gilman’s uneasiness about a contract with the difficult Peirce beyond the second semester of 1884 (Brent, 1998). When Gilman brought Newcomb’s letter to the attention of the executive committee of Hopkins’ Board of Trustees, a change in university policy for part-time appoint- ments to the university ensued. All part-time teaching contracts were to be terminated at the end of the academic year. The fact that this was a covert and deliberate attempt to remove Peirce is validated by the subsequent action by the board to renew all of the lectureships for 1884–1885 except his (Brent, 1998). In spite of the professional embarrassment to Peirce that must have accom- panied these events, he continued to fulfill his professional responsibilities and contribute to the Metaphysical Club during the spring term of 1884. For example,

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. at the 35th meeting on January 17, 1884, Peirce read the principal paper, titled

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. “Chance and Design,” with Morris in the position of chair. At the meeting of May 13, Peirce was acting chair in Hall’s absence and read “Logic of Religion.” At the end of the academic year, he returned to his work with the Coast Survey in Washington, DC, a position he had held continuously since 1870. Tenaciously, however, he stayed on in residence in Baltimore until the expiration of his contract in October. In part, this was because he was unable to sublet his house. But by maintaining residency in Baltimore, Peirce also was able to remain connected to Hopkins. He could meet with students, supervise research, and contribute to the Metaphysical Club. So at the first meeting of the club for the academic year HOPKINS METAPHYSICAL CLUB 339 1884–1885, Peirce was in attendance. Held on November 18, 1884, Hall was in the position of chair and Peirce was recorded as contributing to the discussion of methods of psychical research along with Hall, Franklin, H. Carroll Lewis of Philadelphia, and Noyes. With the close of this meeting, however, Peirce’s last and informal connection to Hopkins also came to a close (Brent, 1998; Fisch, 1981; French, 1946). But this was a pivotal meeting for the Metaphysical Club in other ways, as will be introduced shortly. Peirce’s departure left George Morris as the sole senior philosopher of the Metaphysical Club for the spring term of 1885. Although Hall was in the chair as president for the 1884–1885 academic year, Morris had served as president of the club for 4 meetings between October 1883 and January 1884 after Hall’s full-time appointment. Morris was a Hegelian by persuasion and viewed as the apologist for philosophical idealism at the meetings of the club, most emphatically by his oral presentations and arguments. His penchant was to assail British philosophy, particularly empiricism. For example, at the 18th meeting of the club on Novem- ber 15, 1881, his paper, “English Deism and the Philosophy of Religion,” developed the argument that a philosophy of religion is possible as an objective science of knowledge, given that all knowledge is spiritual. On the other hand, he was also widely respected for his erudite treatises on the history of philosophy from Kant to Hegel, philosophy in Greek literature, and Greek philosophy, in general. His brand of idealism and his negative view of the philosophy of science no doubt brought him into a philosophical conflict with both Hall and President Gilman and probably led to his departure from Hopkins to the University of Michigan for the 1885–1886 academic year (Jones, 1968; Menand, 2001). Thus, as the club entered the spring term of 1885, Hall alone held the reins of leadership as president, as first Peirce, then Morris, relinquished, however unwillingly, responsibility, control, and influence.

Hall Moves for Reorganization of the Hopkins Clubs The question remains, however, why the club under Hall’s leadership did not survive beyond the 1884–1885 academic year. The answer lies principally with Hall’s own personal agenda for psychology at Hopkins and his strong will in achieving his aims in consort with Gilman. His plan for deﬁning psychology as empirical science at Hopkins could not be realized so long as it remained under the long shadow of philosophy. Indeed, in his inaugural lecture as full-time professor delivered in October 1884 and titled “The New Psychology,” Hall

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. outlined his vision for restructuring psychology at Hopkins according to the tenets

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. of empirical science (Ross, 1972). The Metaphysical Club, at the very least, was a clear symbol, if not an annoying reminder, to Hall of the historical link between philosophy and psychology at Hopkins. To what extent that link may also have conjured undesirable associations with Charles Peirce is a question deserving of exploration. However, although during his tenure as president of the club Hall was successful in attracting a respectable representation of faculty and students to the meetings, he had to confront by way of the club’s constitution and bylaws the “old order.” He had little latitude in promoting a truly psychological society so long as the 340 BEHRENS Metaphysical Club functioned under a constitution and bylaws that were, after all, primarily the design of Charles Peirce. On March 11, 1884 (the 37th meeting), during Peirce’s last term at Hopkins, Hall, in the chair as club president, proposed that a committee be formed to consider reorganizing all of the clubs at Hopkins, with the object of better representing the various “philosophical interests” then current in the university. This committee was to have representation from all of the clubs, not just the Metaphysical Club. The motion presented by Joseph Jastrow passed, and Hall undertook the appointment of a committee consisting of at least one member from each club “to consider the matter” (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879– 1885). The minutes of the April meeting noted the progress of the committee composed to effect the reorganization plan. The ﬁrst meeting of the Metaphysical Club in the next academic year was held on November 18, 1884. It was a watershed meeting from several perspectives. As noted earlier, it was the last meeting attended by Peirce, whose contract with Hopkins expired with the new academic year. In addition, and not coincidentally, the meeting was held at 106 West Monument Street, in the Biological Laboratory building that housed Hall’s rooms for psychological research. This ﬁrmly placed empirical research within the scope of club activities. Most important, however, the meeting represented the beginning of the end of the Metaphysical Club when Hall spoke on behalf of the reorganization committee. He commented on “a very general interest in Psychology now present” and suggested that the interests of students would be best served by “disorganizing the Metaphysical Club” (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). He supported his position that the club no longer served the purposes of the university in its present form by reference to the activities of those in the philosophical department. By this he meant himself and several graduate students who were engaged in empirical research related to topics in psychology. “This interest is made evident,” Hall said, “by the new methods and results constantly appearing from the hands of those specially devoted to the work, and from the many demands made by colleges and high schools for instructors competent of giving good representations of these new movements” (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). Hall’s position was all the more validated by his connection to the new Biological Laboratory, erected in 1883, in which he was engaged in “observation and experiment” with four advanced students, each of whom was also a regular contributing member of the Metaphysical Club: Jastrow, Cattell, Dewey, and Hartwell (March 1884 Circular; JHU, 1883–1884; Ross, 1972). On motion of Joseph Jastrow, himself a former student of Peirce, the sug-

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. gestion to disorganize the Metaphysical Club and begin a new organization was

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. “put to a vote,” and it carried (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). According to Hall, the “demands” could best be met by a new society at Hopkins that represented those interested in psychology, speciﬁcally, and a way of learning to think and act scientiﬁcally, in general (Pauley, 1986). The proposed structure of the new society as conceived by Hall and recorded in the minutes by Jastrow is presented in Table 2. The record is clear on the disorganization motion that won approval. The Metaphysical Club was disorganized after three additional meetings were held under Hall’s presidency during the remainder of the academic term (December, HOPKINS METAPHYSICAL CLUB 341 Table 2 G. Stanley Hall’s Topics for a Psychological Society at Hopkins Presented at the 40th Meeting of the Metaphysical Club (November 18, 1884) Topic 1. Experimental methods and apparatus 2. Psychophyics and the dermal sense 3. Brain functions and anatomy 4. Anthropology 5. Anthropometry 6. Other topics a. The Kant literature and theory of knowledge b. Psychogenesis c. Philogical psychology d. Physiological optics and acoustics e. Education f. Morbid states g. History of philosophy h. Philosophy of religion and philosophy of the state i. Instinct j. Logic k. Teleology

January, and March in the Biological Laboratory). Most likely this was to facilitate a graceful completion of the academic year and beneﬁt faculty and students who were cooperatively engaged in research activities already in progress. The last meeting of the club occurred on March 3, 1885, which conveniently coincided with Morris’ departure to Michigan to take a full-time appointment. Of some interest, however, is the historical curiosity that while the Meta- physical Club minutes of March 11, 1884, had recorded that Hall proposed uniting all of the clubs, the committee formed to effect a reorganization only recom- mended the disorganization of the Metaphysical Club (at the meeting of Novem- ber 18, 1884). That the other clubs, six in number, were unaffected by the disorganization of the Metaphysical Club at the end of the 1884–1885 academic year is documented in the University Circulars. The Circular of July 1885, for example, reported on the proceedings of the six remaining clubs (July 1886 Circular; JHU, 1879–1886, p. 136). Because no minutes of the reorganization committee are extant, it can only be speculated that Hall’s plan to disband the

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. Metaphysical Club needed to be accomplished with a broad consensus of the

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. Hopkins administration, faculty, and students. Yet although the Metaphysical Club was the first society at Hopkins to “disorganize,” the role of the seminaries and clubs overlapped in function, and it was not easy for both to flourish (French, 1946). With Hall working under the good graces and support of President Gilman, several options were open to him to conduct his psychological program. With regard to the second of Hall’s proposals, namely the founding of a new society for psychology, there is no evidence of such a society in the years Hall headed psychology at Hopkins. At best, and perhaps expeditiously, the function of a learned society for psychology was accomplished by his Psychological 342 BEHRENS Seminary, which he began in the 1885–1886 academic year. These were weekly conferences held on Saturday mornings devoted to psychophysics, brain anatomy, Greek philosophy and psychology, and “educational lectures by various members of the Academic Faculty” (JHU Circular, July 1886, p. 136). Hall’s Psychological Seminary appears to bear some relationship to the terms of the “plan” of his full-time appointment, namely to hold weekly conferences during a part of the year (JHU Circular, June 1884). So, by the 1885–1886 year, it may well have been both pedagogically sound and logistically convenient for Hall to conduct a formal seminary, a distinguishing component of graduate education at Hopkins, and disregard the idea of a society or club. Under Hall’s leadership, Hopkins, by 1887, was the only department in the United States specifically devoted to psychology, complete with four laboratory rooms in the new Physics Building for research and six graduate students conducting psychological experiments (Ross, 1972). The Metaphysical Club had run its course as a contributory society for the “new” psychology.

The Legacy of the Metaphysical Club If the roots of American psychology—and of other disciplines, it may be added —can be found in the soil of Hopkins, then the Metaphysical Club provided much needed nourishment. First, its meetings served as a theater of sorts for the free expression of ideas and lively discussion on significant topics of philosophical and scientific interest, many of which were international—albeit often German—in origin. This was accomplished, in part, through the presentation of original work by the Hopkins faculty and students, examples of which have been introduced. Peirce, Gildersleeve, and Morris, among the philosophical faculty, and Remsen, Sedgwick, Martin, and Franklin, among the science faculty, introduced or promoted work that was central to the 19th-century academy. Topics of their principal papers included “The Inhibition of Mental Action” (Sedgwick), “The Development of Sight in the Lower Organisms” (Martin), “Rhythm in the Classical Languages” (Gildersleeve), and “Wundt’s Logic of Chemistry” (Rem- sen). And Peirce, himself, used the Metaphysical Club to develop his philosophical and mathematical ideas (Deledalle, 2000). What Peirce began as largely a forum for his logic students evolved into a venue for the presentation and exchange of significant interdisciplinary ideas and scholarship. But the Metaphysical Club, like the other societies at Hopkins, was also the forum for the voices of 19th-century scholars beyond The Johns Hopkins. By invitation or correspondence, participation by many prominent American philos-

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. ophers and scientists occurred. For example, Harvard philosopher Josiah Royce

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. submitted a paper entitled “Purpose in Thought” that was read by Joseph Jastrow at the 9th meeting of the club on May 20, 1880. In the paper, Royce proposed three possible ways to study human thought, including a psychological analysis, but he focused rather on a teleological analysis. “On Purpose in Thought” was later published in a collection of essays (Royce, 1920). A paper by E. M. Mitchell, of the St. Louis Hegel Club, was read by C. W. Nichols at the 7th meeting on April 13, 1880. The paper gave an account of the Hegelian movement in America, which Mitchell dated from the founding of the St. Louis Philosophical Associa- tion in 1865. The object of the society, he said, was to encourage the study of HOPKINS METAPHYSICAL CLUB 343 speculative philosophy, and from the society, The Journal of Speculative Philos- ophy owes its origin (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). As another example, Lester Ward, author of the first American sociology textbook, Dynamic Sociology, attended the April 1884 meeting of the club and read his paper, “Mind as a Social Force.” Both his text, published in 1885, and his paper emphasized the importance of the role of intelligence in human evolution (Menand, 2001). In addition, psychological studies and reports related to the “new” psychology gained greater representation with Hall in the leadership position of the club during its last months of existence. Reports on psychophysical methods, clinical studies, and psychological theory dominated the meetings held between January 1884 and March 1885 (the 35th to the 43rd meetings). For example, clinical psychology was represented in papers on writings of the insane (by H. Steiner at the 39th meeting), ultralongevity (by Jastrow at the 40th meeting), and “conta- gious frenzy” in Kentucky in 1820 (by J. C. C. Newton at the 41st meeting). Papers on pedagogy by A. H. Gross (“Various Methods of Teaching Reading”) and intellectual development by C. Levermore were read at the 41st meeting. H. H. Donaldson read papers on the measurement of heat sensation and the localization of vision in the brain of the dog at the 41st and 42nd meetings, respectively (JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). Reports such as these informed, if not inspired, students and faculty in their professional interests and goals related to empirical psychology. Finally, the Metaphysical Club holds a unique position by virtue of its connection to the establishment of American scholarly and professional associations. Although always an adjunct to academic life at Hopkins, the club had the character of the scholarly association, some of which were formed in this period, such as the American Chemical Society (1876), the American Philological Soci- ety (1869), and the American Historical Association (1884) (Cadwallader, 1992). The period of the 1880s saw a rapid expansion of research-oriented societies, some based in universities and some affiliated with federal agencies (Sokal, 1992). Broadly conceived, the Metaphysical Club served the interests of all of the departments at Hopkins, but it was very much a professional society in function, if not name, serving the interests of American science, in general, and American psychology, in particular. Under the leadership of both Peirce and Hall, the Metaphysical Club modeled an American community of scholars that was to repeat itself many years later in the American Psychological Association (APA). Of the 26 charter members of the APA, 8 had previous affiliation with the Metaphysical Club by principal contributions (APA, 1892). The number of contributions by these original APA members to Metaphysical Club meetings is

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. presented in Table 3.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. Of interest also is the parallel between the Metaphysical Club proceedings in the last months of its existence under Hall and that of the APA as represented at its first annual meeting in December 1892 in Philadelphia (following a prelimi- nary meeting in July 1892 in Worcester, MA). Between February 1884 and March 1885, Hall presided over all of the Metaphysical Club meetings with the exception of one, for a total of 7 meetings. As indicated earlier, the majority of the papers read and discussed in this period were on empirical, applied, and theoretical topics of the “new” psychology. Specifically, at the last meeting of the club, held on March 3, 1885, Hall presided, Jastrow recorded the minutes, and 14 members 344 BEHRENS Table 3 American Psychological Association (APA) Charter Members (1892) and Their Contributions to the Metaphysical Club by Paper Presentations (1879–1885) APA charter Metaphysical club Metaphysical club member affiliation paper(s) J. M. Cattell Member, secretary 2 J. Dewey Member 6 B. I. Gilman Member 10 G. S. Hall Member, president 9 J. Jastrow Member, secretary 6 C. Ladd Member 2 W. Noyes Member 1 J. Royce Correspondent 1

were present. Five papers were read. One paper addressed a philosophical topic and was read by Morrison Swift, a fellow by courtesy, whose later career was as a sociologist. His paper was titled “Final Cause.” Four papers were related to psychology and pedagogy. These included Hall’s report on two psychophysical studies, one by Dietz on the extent of consciousness, published in Wundt’s Philosophische Studien, and one by Ebbinghaus on his experimental studies of memory. The other psychological papers were by William Noyes (“Clinical Studies of Mental Diseases”) and Charles Levermore (“The Boy in Education”; JHU Metaphysical Club Minutes, 1879–1885). The report in Science of the ﬁrst annual meeting of the APA noted that G. Stanley Hall presided and Joseph Jastrow recorded minutes. Papers read included one by James Cattell that began the meeting, titled “Errors of Observation in Physics and Psychology.” Four papers addressed problems in psychophysics; other papers addressed experimental methods and apparatus, anthropology, and physiology; and still others addressed topics “of a somewhat philosophical nature” (APA, 1893, p. 34). The legitimization of psychology as a community of scholars became a reality with the formation of an American professional association. Yet evidence here presented supports the view that the Metaphysical Club, much earlier, was an active society that served as a forum for important empirical, experimental, and theoretical science related to psychology under the leadership of Peirce and Hall, directly, and President Gilman, indirectly. Furthermore, the Metaphysical Club facilitated the emergence of an American psychology by its success in stimulating

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. discussion on research and scholarship among individuals from within and be-

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. yond Hopkins. Particularly, contributions from faculty, such as Charles Peirce, George Morris, Fabian Franklin, and G. Stanley Hall, and students, among them O. H. Mitchell, James Cattell, John Dewey, H. H. Donaldson, and Joseph Jastrow, illustrate how the Metaphysical Club takes its place among the significant ante- cedents of American psychology. References American Psychological Association. (1892). Science, 20, 104. American Psychological Association. (1893). Science, 21, 34–35. HOPKINS METAPHYSICAL CLUB 345 Brent, J. (1998). Charles Sanders Peirce: A life. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Brown, W. N. (Ed.). (1926). Johns Hopkins half-century directory. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Cadwallader, T. (1974). Charles S. Peirce (1839–1914). The first American experimental psychologist. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 10, 291–298. Cadwallader, T. (1992). The historical roots of the American Psychological Association. In R. B. Evans, V. S. Sexton, & T. C. Cadwallader (Eds.), One hundred years of the American Psychological Association (pp. 3–41). Washington, DC: American Psy- chological Association. Deledalle, G. (2000). Charles S. Peirce’s philosophy of signs. Essays in comparative semiotics. Bloomington and Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University Press. Dewey, J. (1883). Knowledge and the relativity of feeling. Journal of Speculative Philosophy, 17, 56–70. Dewey, J. (1884). The new psychology. Andover Review, 2, 278–289. Dewey, J. (1886a). The psychological standpoint. Mind, 11, 1–19. Dewey, J. (1886b). Psychology as philosophic method. Mind, 11, 153–173. Donaldson, H. H. (1885). On the temperature sense. Mind, 10, 399–416. Donaldson, H. H., & Hall, G. S. (1885). Motor sensations on the skin. Mind, 10, 557–572. Feldman, M. P., & Desrochers, P. (2004). Truth for its own sake: Academic culture and technology transfer at Johns Hopkins University. Minerva, 42, 105–126. Fisch, M. H. (1981). Peirce as scientist, mathematician, historian, logician, and philosopher. In K. L. Ketner, J. M. Ransdell, C. Eisele, M. H. Fisch, & C. S. Hardwick (Eds.), Proceedings of the C. S. Peirce Bicentennial International Congress (pp. 13–34). Lubbock: Texas Tech University Press. Fisch, M. H., & Cope, J. I. (1952). Peirce at The Johns Hopkins University. In P. P. Wiener & F. H. Young (Eds.), Studies in the philosophy of Charles Sanders Peirce (pp. 277–311). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. French, J. C. (1946). A history of the university founded by Johns Hopkins. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Gilman, B. I. (1892). Report on an experimental test of musical expressiveness. American Journal of Psychology, 4, 558–576. Hall, G. S. (1883). Reaction-time and attention in the hypnotic state. Mind, 8, 170–182. Hawkins, H. (1960). Pioneer: A history of The Johns Hopkins University. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Jastrow, J. (1885). Some peculiarities in the age statistics of the United States. Science, 5, 461–464. Jastrow, J. (1886a). Elementary science teaching. Science, 7, 145–115. Jastrow, J. (1886b). The longevity of great men. Science, 8, 294–296. Jastrow, J. (1888). The psychology of deception. Popular Science Monthly, 34, 145–157. Jastrow, J. (1910). The qualities of men. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Johns Hopkins University. (1879–1886). Circulars. Baltimore: John Murphy. This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly. Johns Hopkins University. (1878–1886). Annual reports. Baltimore: Wm. K. Boyle & Son. Johns Hopkins University Metaphysical Club minutes (1879–1885). Johns Hopkins University Archives, Baltimore, Maryland. Jones, M. E. (1968). George Sylvester Morris: His philosophical career and theistic idealism. New York: Greenwood. Kent, B. (1987). Charles Sanders Peirce: Logic and the classiﬁcation of the sciences. Kingston, Ontario: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Marquand, A. (1881). Logical machines. Philosophical Magazine, 178, 266–270. Menand, L. (2001). The metaphysical club. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux. 346 BEHRENS Murphy, M. S. (1961). The development of Peirce’s philosophy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Pauley, P. J. (1986). G. Stanley Hall and his successors: A history of the ﬁrst half-century of psychology at Johns Hopkins. In S. H. Hulse & B. F. Green, Jr. (Eds.), One hundred years of psychological research in America (pp. 21–57). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. Peirce, C. S. (1883). Studies in logic. Boston: Little, Brown. Peirce, C. S., & Jastrow, J. (1884). On small differences of sensation. Memoirs of the National Academy of Sciences, 3, 73–83. Ross, D. (1972). G. Stanley Hall: The psychologist as prophet. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Royce, J. (1920). On purpose in thought. In J. Royce (Ed.), Fugitive essays (pp. 219–260). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Sokal, M. (1992). Origins and early years of the American Psychological Association: 1890–1906. In R. B. Evans, V. S. Sexton, & T. C. Cadwallader (Eds.), One hundred years of the American Psychological Association (pp. 3–41). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Stuhr, J. J. (1987). Classical American philosophy: Essential readings and interpretive essays. New York: Oxford University Press. Veysey, L. R. (1965). The emergence of the American university. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Received September 4, 2002 Revision received December 22, 2004 Accepted January 7, 2005 y This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of individual user and not to be disseminated broadly.