the name belongs also to the theory of personality.  This theory of personality is exactly that second kind of ‘psychology’ which does not describe and does not explain but which interprets the inner teleological connections of the real man.  It is ‘voluntaristic psychology’ or, as others call it who see correctly the relation of this science to history, ’historical psychology.’  It is practically ‘apperceptionistic psychology.’  The special activities of the historical man divide themselves again into volitions, thoughts, appreciations and beliefs, with their realization in the state, law, economical systems, knowledge, art and religion.  Each of these special realizations must allow the same manifoldness in treatment which we found with the special physical or psychical objects; we can ask as to structure, relation to the general view and development.  But in accordance with the teleological material the study of the structure here means ‘interpretation,’ the study of the general relations here means study of the relation to civilization, and the study of the development here means the real history.  We have, thus, for the state or law or economy or knowledge or art or religion always one science which interprets the historical systems of state, etc., in a systematic and philological way, one science which deals with its function in the historical world and one which studies biographically and nationally the history of state, law, economical life, science, art or religion.

In the sphere of the practical sciences the divisions of the theoretical sciences must repeat themselves.  We have thus applied physical, applied psychological, applied normative and applied historical sciences, and it is again the antithesis of psychological and of historical sciences which is of utmost importance and yet too often neglected.  The application of physical sciences, as in engineering, medicine, etc., or the application of normative knowledge in the sciences of criticism do not offer logical difficulty, but the application of psychological and historical knowledge does.  Let us take the case of pedagogy or of penology, merely as illustrations.  Is the application of phenomenalistic psychology or the application of teleological voluntarism in question?  Considering the child, the criminal, any man, as psychophysical apparatus which must be objectively changed and treated, we have applied psychology; considering him as subject with purposes, as bearer of an historical civilization whose personalities must be interpreted and understood and appreciated, then we need applied historical knowledge.  In the first case the science of pedagogy is a psycho-technical discipline which makes education mechanical and deprives the teacher of the teleological attitude of inner understanding; in the second case it is a science of real education far removed from psychology.  All the sciences which deal with service in the system of civilization, service as teacher, as judge, as social helper, as artist, as minister, are sciences which apply the teleological historical knowledge, and their meaning is lost if they are considered as psycho-technical sciences only.