take its revenge. The historical current of experience to which we belong has no doubt included objects like this, but they have disappeared from our own system of experience. Mythological objects have been eliminated to a very great extent, and new objects, or new characters of objects, are brought into the system and described as the objects of a scientific knowledge of nature.
All experience shows the psychophysical aspect; therefore experience as a social system must show the same aspect. It is becoming more and more plausible that consciousness depends upon processes in brain-tissue, and therefore the system of experience must be regarded as depending upon an elaborate system of nervous substance. This physiological system has been represented by the symbol ΣC And if the changes in the 'Erkenntnissmenge' of a system of experience are the effects of processes in ΣC the history of experience must depend upon a parallel history of ΣC.
The psychophysical aspect, however, is an aspect with which only the psychologist need be especially concerned. But to the extent that the psychophysical aspect of experience comes under consideration, actual experience must be regarded as depending upon ΣC in its relations with outer stimuli.
The evolution of experience still continues. What lies ahead may be expected to render the concept of nature more complete and definite and to further the elimination of mythological objects.
This concept of experience is an instrument for conceptual synthesis. Other concepts are equally possible. The one which I suggest proceeds from the standpoint of the natural view of the world, and accepts its data from all sources whence information can be obtained. The concept is suggested in the interest of the study of history. The author of this concept is Richard Avenarius.
