Apperception

James defines apperception as “the act of taking a thing into the mind” (p. 77). Essentially, apperception refers to the way in which we categorize and digest information. James’ take on this idea is that students are eager to take information and categorize it using that which they already know. “We hate anything absolutely new, anything without any name, and for which a new name must be forced. So we take the nearest name, even though it be inappropriate” (p. 78). Humans are always desperate to categorize things in a way that is personally meaningful to us; that can be related in some way to that which we already know. Learning new information that cannot be categorized is much more difficult to acquire. Once again, James’ conception of cognition appears to be very similar to Piaget’s ideas of assimilation and accommodation, where new ideas are either assimilated into existing constructs, or the construct is modified in order to accommodate the conflicting information.

The concept of apperception can be linked to James’ previous talk on memory. James likened memory to plowing channels of connections between different ideas. Similarly, apperception seeks to link new ideas with these preexisting channels. James notes that these categorical ruts that we dig ourselves into (what James refers to as old-fogyism) become prevalent as early as age twenty-five (p. 79). This is due in part to the fact that we have built up enough experience with a given thought process that it becomes second nature to retrieve it in this way. This idea can be linked to the ways in which cognition changes over time. While adults typically have slower reaction times than children, they can make up for this speed in areas where they are knowledgeable, because they are so familiar with the pathways used to retrieve that knowledge. Apperception is also similar to stereotyping. While stereotyping is often thought of and discussed in the negative sense (such as gender and race stereotypes), in its broadest sense, stereotyping is simply an expedited manner of categorizing things. The brain places people and ideas into categories, and people become more apt to make snap judgments based upon previous experiences with the same situation.

James makes a rather disturbing point towards the end of his talk; “The conceptions acquired by thirty remain usually the only ones we ever gain” (p. 82). This is a depressing sentiment for adult learners hoping to continue their education and further their understanding beyond the traditional college years. Research on aging has shown that people can continue to experience cognitive growth as they age, even though some aspects (such as retrieval speed and reaction time) may decline. I would argue that we can carve out new conceptions, though it may be difficult to dig ourselves out of the ruts that we have dug ourselves into. If apperception does not in fact stop as we reach our thirties, how does it change?