when both eyes are used as with only one. The experiment may indeed as
well be carried on with both eyes.

Some objections must be answered. It may be said that the image of _h_
happens to fall on the blind-spot, _e_ and _e_ being above and below
the same. This is impossible, since the entire image and its halo as
well may lie within the blind-spot. If now _h_ is to be on the
blind-spot, at least one of the end-circles _e_, _e_ will be there
also, whereas shape 4 shows both end-circles of the dumb-bell with
perfect distinctness.

Again, it cannot properly be urged that during the movement the
attention was distracted so as not to 'notice' the handle. The shape
of a dumb-bell was specially chosen for the image so that the weaker
part of the stimulation should lie between two points which should be
clearly noticed. Indeed, if anything, one might expect this central,
connecting link in the image to be apperceptively filled in, even when
it did not come to consciousness as immediate sensation. And it
remains to ask what it is which should distract the attention.

In this connection the appearance under reflex eye-movement compares
interestingly with that under voluntary. If the wall _WONW_ (Fig. 5)
is taken from before the pendulum, and the eye allowed to move
reflexly with the swinging dumb-bell, the entire image is seen at each
exposure, the handle seeming no less bright than the end-circles.
Moreover, as the dumb-bell opening swings past the place of exposure
and the image fades, although the handle must fade more quickly than
the ends, yet this is not discernible, and the entire image disappears
without having at any time presented the handleless appearance.