match as equivalents proverbs of the most diverse meaning, for proverbs are generalized experience expressed in highly figurative language. K's moral life will never be integrated by principles of action derived from experience. It is more likely to consist of rule-of-thumb behavior. And if he can not generalize his own experiences he is not likely to read much meaning into the behavior of others. He is not likely to develop that intuitive appreciation of the motives and attitudes of others which are necessary for the exercise of leadership. He will make as little headway in understanding the universe of personalities around him as in understanding the laws of gravity, the properties of the atom, the theory of evolution, or the canons of poetry.
Striking examples of the poverty of K's intellectual resources are seen in the various tests of association. Of the dozens of words in his vocabularly which rhyme with spring he could not think of one. During the last minute of the sixty-word test he was able to name words only at the rate of 7 in a half minute. Analogies involving concrete objects he can sometimes complete correctly, more often not; but his response is not often wholly irrelevant. Arm is to elbow as leg is to—he completes with "abdomen"; a part of the human body, but not the part called for by the logical relationships given. In naming opposites he sometimes loses sight of the goal and responds with a synonym, as in weary—"tired"; stale—"old." In other cases he responds with a word which is frequently associated with the stimulus word in everyday phraseology, as cheap—"goods"; never—"will." Still other responses are either slightly inexact, at best—"poor," or else almost but not quite irrelevant, as top—"tail"; horrid—"mild." Both the low "frequency" of the Kent-Rosanoff response words, and the slowness with which they are given, indicate a lack of variety in concept interconnections, with consequent poverty of verbal associations. As Binet might put it, K's ideas lack direction, are not fruitful, and do not multiply. They are inert and lack valence. The result is intellectual sluggishness and haziness. Our subject will never draw hair-splitting distinctions; he is even incapable of quibbling or making puns.
An essential aspect of the higher thought processes is the ability to associate ideas on the basis of similarities or differences. This ability is involved in such diverse mental acts as the understanding of simple figures of speech, the appreciation of poetry, the scientific classification of natural phenomena, and the origination of hypotheses of science or philosophy. Intellectual superiority is especially evidenced in the ability to note essential likenesses and differences, as contrasted with those which are superficial, trivial or accidental. It is here that K displays one of his most characteristic weaknesses. An apple and a peach are alike because they have a skin; iron and silver, because they are heavy: an animal and a plant, because they have hearts; a snake, a cow and a
