University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
 
 

 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
THE EVOLUTIONARY, PHYLOGENETIC STANDPOINT
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 
 
 
 
 
collapse section
 
 

THE EVOLUTIONARY, PHYLOGENETIC STANDPOINT

A year or more before Clark's paper appeared, I had


342

arrived at certain general conclusions regarding the subject of tics.

G. Stanley Hall has arrived at similar conclusions in his inspiring Synthetic Genetic Study of Fear[11] and I wish here to acknowledge my indebtedness to his paper for making my own ideas clearer to me, for having given me broader standpoints and for clearly presenting a theory which shall form the basis of the remainder of this paper.

Let us first take up the tic movements and see whether we can arrive at a rational explanation for their appearance.

The different varieties of tic movements embrace the entire field or range of systematic, physiologically co-ordinated voluntary muscular activities.

The main types of tics may be enumerated at this point: facial tics, which are the most frequent and which may be tonic or clonic, are tics of mimicry and express emotions; tics of the ear or auditory tics; nictitation and vision tics, particularly of the eyelids; tics of sniffing; tics of sucking; tics of licking; tics of biting and of mastication, and mental trismus; tics of nodding, tossing, affirmation, negation, salutation and mental torticollis; trunk, arm and shoulder tics; snatching tics; the professional or occupational spasms, which are really a special atypical form of tics; walking and leaping tics; tics of spitting, swallowing, vomiting, eructation and wind sucking (aerophagia); tics of snoring, sniffing, blowing, whistling, coughing, sobbing, hiccoughing; tics of speech, including all sorts of sounds, stammering (in some cases), habit expressions, echolalia and echopraxia.

It is thus seen that we have here physiological and biological acts of different manifestations and purposes.

The tic movements have a certain significance at the time of their performance. The physiological functions are definite.

The Magnan school insisted that tics are not morbid entities but episodic syndromes of mental degeneration. Charcot referred to tic as a sort of hereditary aberration, which, I may add, is surely true when we view it from the


343

phylogenetic standpoint, as representing a resurrection of what was at one time a normal tendency or reaction. Noir has called attention to the fact that the movements found in the tics correspond to the infant's spontaneous muscular play, which means the muscular play of all mankind.

These authors were directing their efforts in the right direction. To appreciate this we need but remember that the mechanisms or the potentialities for the movements are inherited and have a phylogenetic significance. At a lower psychic level, far back in our phylogenetic racial history, all of these movements, perhaps then in a rudimentary form, had a single, original meaning. This meaning was self-preservation, and it was because of its value as a means of adaptation or reaction to the environment, with the consequent maintenance of self-preservation; that the movements or the mechanisms of the movements were selected for survival and for hereditary transmission as inherent, unconscious, organic mechanisms, processes or engrams. The original, phylogenetic significance attained at a low cultural or psychic level, relatively unconscious, may or may not later be consciously associated or dominate its subsequent functioning. But its primary, biological significance, its real raison d'etre is to be found in the phylogenetic, racial history of man. The present life history with its varied experiences do but act as stimuli or as exciting factors to bring once more into activity functions which have been preserved in the organic structure of the nervous system.

In our return to phylogenetic, ontogenetic, rudimentary, unconscious, organic reactions, to atavistic, prehistoric, performed, embryonic, immature methods of response, the vestigial remnants, revivals of long ago, which have been submerged but which now reappear due to our reversionary tendencies—uprooted by dissociation, disintegration or regression, with its lapse or descent to low cultural or psychic levels—these old components which reappear or rather fall apart and appear as independent activities, are exaggerated, inflated, caricatured or excessively performed. In our devolutionary tendency toward ancestral methods of reaction, the individual, resolved, so to speak, into his proximate elements, permits or is compelled by biological determinism


344

to permit these split off tendencies to break forth once more, albeit in exaggerated fashion, as if let loose from the leash of control by the higher nervous centres, and reanimified, intensified, and magnified, our infantile, archaic, instinctive, inherited, hidden, phylogenetic tendencies or activities held sway.

It seems to me that it is well worth while to quote at some length from G. Stanley Hall, that great exponent of genetic psychology and all that it stands for. His very stimulating and inspiring paper on fear, to which I have already referred, is freely quoted in the following paragraphs.

According to geneticism, Stanley Hall tells us, all responses to shock are vestiges of once useful reactions. In fact, the shock neuroses and shock psychoses, if analyzable psychogenetically, "would be found to be reversions to, and also perhaps more often than we suspect, magnifications of acts and psychic states that were at one time the fittest of which our forebears were capable.[12] However, all the pathological phenomena of today are not mere revivals of the acts and states of primitive man and his ancestors, but "they are often, on the other hand, grotesque variants and intensifications of phylogenetic originals that were more sane and simple if also more generic. Shock symptoms may thus be symbols of long past racial experiences which when we have learned to interpret them more fully will tell us much of the early history of our phylum."[13] It is the outbreaks of emotion which "mark the incursions of the race into the narrow life of the individual."[14]

Furthermore, "the central nervous system differs from all others in that it is par excellence the organ of registration and of physiological memory. It is there that the traces of ancestral experience are stored so that almost nothing that was ever essential in the development of the phylum is ever entirely lost. Hence suggestive as are many physical traits of our racial history, the intangible psychophysic traits


345

must be assumed to be both far more numerous and more indelible.

"While these faint tendencies often crop out in a behavioristic way, by far the most of them need some stimulus of individual experiences to awaken them, and still more exist only in the slight facilitization of impulses or permeability of nervous centres, lability of molecular or neural tensions, or as preferential re-enforcements, in one rather than in another direction or manner."[15]

It is obvious that motor expressions of shock or motor methods of adaptation or reaction are much older and far more prominent than psychic. But although a changed environment made the old types of defense obsolete, they still persist, "in a sthenic if somewhat now inco-ordinated way, and when they are called into action now they evoke a faint phosphorescence of the old primordial feeling."[16]

In brief it should be said that no matter how refined and how highly cultured we are, we still fear and react to emotions "in the same terms of the same old gross organs and functions as do the brutes."[17]