A Generalized Hedonic Theory of the Ego

[This MS. and the one following it in this issue of the JOURNAL were sent by the Editors to an assessor who is acquainted with psycho-analysis and with mathematics. He passed them on for opinion to Dr. X who is a professional statistician and a pure mathematician, and to Dr. Y. Their

reports are given below. In his report, Dr. X refers to Mr. Baggally's paper published in this JOURNAL, Vol. XXII, 1941.

I agree with your comment about this paper being too long, but nevertheless I do think there is something worth while in it. The trouble seems to be that Mr. Baggally is aware that any attempt to treat psycho-analysis mathematically is pretty certain to meet with a good deal of mathematical ignorance. Consequently a large portion of the paper is devoted to defence against possible criticism (sugaring the pill) and to enligtening the ignorance. I was not impressed by the first part of the article in the I.J.P.-A., as I thought he was using the mathematics like an amateur, but as I read on I realized that the author had seen the possibilities and the dangers of the method and I became converted. I would be sorry to see these two MSS. miss publication for these reasons:

• 1They do embody an original idea.

• 2The theory is ingenious and is used quite plausibly to explain the examples given.

• 3There may not be anything fruitful in these ideas—it may be a blind alley—but it ought at least to see the light of day first before being condemned.

• 4Any attempt to use mathematics in psychology (and especially psycho-analysis) commands my interest since I feel it will lead to a more scientific approach in the long run.

Comment by Dr. Y.

I am very pleased to agree with Dr. X's conclusions (above).

I think it would be a pity not to publish so ingenious a theory even though I feel that the assumptions are not very sound in places and the possibility of quantitative measurement seems remote at present. Possibly someone else will have the inspiration to improve on it if it