In an article entitled 'Giving up Instincts in Psychology' 1 I attempted to repudiate the current conception of instinct and suggested a new hypothesis as a basis for an experimental genetic psychology. Since the publication of my paper there has been considerable discussion concerning my position. 2 The discussion seems to have concentrated more on my constructive view, namely, the reaction-unit hypothesis, than on the repudiation of instincts. While it seems encouraging to see that the anti-instinct movement has not been altogether unfavorably received, there is danger of misunderstanding the motive of the movement and my own position in particular. For example, Mr. Geiger, in quoting my article, has substituted the term ' reaction system' for 'action system.' 3 Such a substitution and, in fact, the whole argument of his paper, seem to indicate insufficient understanding of my central position. I feel it necessary, therefore, to restate the reaction-unit hypothesis more carefully and to give a tentative analysis of the process 1
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.