Conversion

CONVERSION, a general term for the operation of convert ing, changing or transposing; used technically in special senses in logic, theology and law. (Lat. conversio, from convertere, to turn or change.) In logic, conversion is one of three chief methods of immediate inference by which a conclusion is obtained directly from a single premise without the intervention of another premise or middle term. A proposition is said to be "converted" when the subject and the predicate change places ; the original proposition is the "convertend," the new one the "converse." The chief rule gov erning conversion is that no term which was not distributed in the convertend may be distributed in the converse; nor may the quality of the proposition (affirmative or negative) be changed. A term is said to be "distributed" when it is taken universally; in the proposition "men are mort il" (meaning "all men") the term "men" is "distributed" while "mortal" is undistributed, be cause there are mortal beings which are not men. It follows that of the four possible forms of propositions A, E, I and 0 (see ar• ticle A), E and I can be converted simply. No S is P implies No P is S; and Some S is P implies Some P is S. This form of conversion is called Simple Conversion ; E propositions convert into E, and I into I. On the other hand, A cannot be converted simply. If all men are mortal, the most that can follow by con version is that some mortals are men. This is called Conversion by Limitation or Per Accidens. Only if it be known otherwise that the predicate also is distributed can there be simple conversion of a universal affirmative. Neither of these forms of conversion can be applied to the particular negative proposition 0, which has to be dealt with under a secondary system of conversion, as follows. The terminology by which these secondary processes are de scribed is not altogether satisfactory, and logicians are not agreed as to the application of the terms. The following system is per haps the most commonly used. We have seen that the converse of All S is P is Some P is S; we can, in addition, derive from it another, though purely formal, proposition No S is non-P, i.e., an E proposition. This process is called Obversion, Permutation or Immediate Inference by Privative Conception ; it is applicable to every proposition including O. A further process known as Contraposition or Conversion by Negation, consists of conversion following on obversion. Thus from All S is P we get No non-P is S. In the case of the 0 proposition we get (by obversion) Some S is non-P and then (by conversion) Some non-P is S (i.e., an I proposition). In the case of the I proposition the contrapositive is impossible, as infringing the main rule of conversion. Another term, Inversion, has been used by some logicians for a still more complicated process by the alternative use of conversion and ob version, which is applicable to A and E, and results in obtaining a proposition concerning the contradictory of the original subject; thus All S is P becomes Some non-S is not P.

Considerable discussion has centred on the problem as to whether the process of conversion can properly be regarded as in ference. The essence of inference is that the conclusion should embody knowledge which is not in the premise or premises, and many logicians have contended that no fact is stated in the con verse which was not in the convertend, or, in other words, that conversion is merely a transformation or verbal change of the same statement. Hence the term Eductions and Equivalent Prop ositional Forms have been given to converse propositions. It is clear, for instance, that if the universal affirmative is taken con notatively as a scientific law, and not historically, no real infer ence is achieved by stating as another scientific fact its converse, the particular affirmative. Moreover, even if the convertend is stated as an historic fact, though there is acquired a certain new significance, it may well be argued that the inference is not imme diate but syllogistic.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.

See J. S. Mill, Logic (1874) etc.; H. W. B. Bibliography. See J. S. Mill, Logic (1874) etc.; H. W. B. Joseph, Introduction to Logic (1916) ; J. N. Keynes, Formal Logic (191o) ; A. Wolf, Essentials of Logic (1926) and article LOGIC.

Religious conversion is, in English, a convenient label for describing a considerable group of human experiences which have in common the one general feature that they involve a change from an unorganized life to a life organized around a central idea. Medical psychology has given its considered opinion that such organization is not only normal but necessary to the general well-being of the individual. Those persons who demur to the interpretation of life in any sense in terms of religion declare that conversion is merely a psychological phenomenon, though still a fact to be studied. Those, however, who accept the religious interpretation of life in its widest sense are universally agreed that whatever form conversion may take it is the most momentous event in the life of every individual and is indispen sable to the task of making the best use of that life.

Essential Features.—The essential feature of conversion is the unification of character. Nevertheless, a distinction is to be drawn between true conversion and other kindred phenomena, which are described respectively as counter-conversion, reversion, recognition, return, development and crises of conscience. In the case of an ardent Roman Catholic priest who became a free thinker what happened may be described as "counter-conversion." The return of a lapsed individual to the faith of his earlier days may be more correctly termed "reversion." "Recognition" is the vital realization of a truth to which hitherto only verbal assent has been given. "Return" is either a conscious reversion to the faith and habits of childhood or an unconscious transference from systems which have weakened (because they have become un serviceable) to older objects of consciousness. "Development" may be distinguished from gradual conversion in that it involves no overturning of values. "Crisis of conscience" involves a change less searching than conversion, such, for example, as when a poli tician changes from one party to another. On the other hand, true moral conversion is an actual overturning of values and involves a species of new creation. It has been defined as "a mutation of life occurring under the impulse of an ultra-terrestrial ideal" (De Sanctis). Or again as "a reaction taking the form of a psy chological surrender to an ideal and issuing in moral development" (Underwood). It has been further subdivided into gradual and sudden, or, as De Sanctis calls it, fulminant and progressive, and Starbuck, impulsive and volitional. There are those who shrink from admitting that any conversion is really sudden or fulminant, and will only allow that a gradual process extending over a con siderable time may culminate in a crisis. In some cases a real change occurs, but the crisis is apparently absent ; it would seem that these are not true conversions but merely instances of de velopment, since the term "mutation" in zoology is applied only to sudden or saltatory changes. It must be admitted that those who have been brought up to expect a crisis often tend to experi ence one, or, at any rate, to think that they do. This may be due either to auto-suggestion or to inherited temperament. It is further to be noted that the so-called turning-point at which the con sciousness of the absolute ideal, hitherto marginal and vague, be comes focal and clearly defined, not infrequently occurs at the be ginning rather than at the end of the process. Thus it has been pointed out that not all the early Buddhist converts were unified and made happy as soon as they accepted the rule of life pre scribed by the Buddha, and that John Bunyan was accustomed to date his conversion from the time when he gave up lying and profanity, although unification and happiness did not come to him until some years later. Among Christians the necessity of "con version" has in particular always been strongly urged by the Methodists, as it was by their founder, John Wesley, and it is specially characterized by them as the "new birth." Re-birth from sin has certainly been a constant feature connected with Chris tian discipleship from the first, and among adult converts, es pecially in the mission-field, it is an indisputable fact. Revival preachers, and especially Salvationists, insist on the importance of instantaneous conversion.

Age When Experienced.

The main features of conversion have been traced, however, in the life-stories of adherents of most of the great religions of the world. It is said that the phenomena belong almost exclusively to the years between the ages of Io and and that the number of instances outside that range appear few and scattered; in other words, that conversion belongs dis tinctively to the years of adolescence. The American psychologist, Starbuck, holds that the event comes earlier in general among females than among males, and most frequently at the ages of 13 and 16, while among males it occurs most frequently at the age of 17 or immediately before or after. The difficulty about accept ing these conclusions is tiat Starbuck, like his fellow-countryman, William James, has drawn nearly all his evidence from protestant evangelical circles, and seems to have overlooked the fact that outside these circles and even sometimes inside them conversion may take place at much later periods of life. The American school in general seems, in fact, to confine conversion to the moral and religious crisis of adolescence. But this, however important, is only one type of conversion, and it is by no means certain that many of the recorded instances of it are not the result of strong suggestion. The most that can be said is that the period between the ages of 15 and 25 is the time when the greatest changes occur in human personality, and that therefore this is the most propi tious epoch for the occurrence of decisive events in the history of individuals. Adolescence is only an extrinsic or indirect cause, a provocative stimulus to an intellectual and ethical trans formation which requires for its completion the additional pres ence of a psychic factor. Indeed, the physiological causes of conversion can be greatly exaggerated.

Accompanying Phenomena.

Certain features commonly accompany the change, and they so greatly resemble the phe nomena belonging to eroticism that conversion has actually sometimes been defined as "falling in love with God." In less picturesque language it has been described as a concentration of affective energy on the object of faith, a practical revision and a new economy of love. It is marked by an ecstasy of joy, a sensa tion of heat or fire in the breast, or the consciousness of a bright light (technically called a photism), great buoyancy and light heartedness, a feeling of peace and release from perplexity, a sense of newness of life extending even to the external world surrounding the converted individual, voices or auditions which appear to be sensorial automatisms produced by the excited physical and mental condition of the subject, and above all (except, perhaps, in Buddhism) a sense of being under divine control so that the conversion seems something given rather than something achieved and is, in fact, felt to be the product of divine grace, not of human energy. Considerable difference of opinion has always existed as to the relation of individual free will to such a bestowal of grace. Some have held that man is merely the passive recipient, while others declare that a preliminary act of free will is necessary. Autobiographical accounts of many con versions exist, and have been collected in recent years. Two of the most striking are those relating to St. Augustine of Hippo and to Blaise Pascal. It is necessary, however, to bear in mind that converted subjects tend to indulge in autobiography, and that many devout persons whose religious development has been tranquil and unruffled have no such tales to tell.

The important question has further been raised whether the sense of "givenness" or grace is an illusion and whether conversion is not a predictable phenomenon due entirely to natural causes. The antithesis is a dangerous one, and involves our whole concep tion of the nature of divine activity. If a predictable mutation is to be excluded from the sphere of divine activity, the operation of the divine is then limited to the abnormal and (at present) unexplained. Such a limitation is now less in favour among religious thinkers than formerly. Nevertheless, it is admitted by many psychologists on both sides of the Atlantic that conver sion, even if it be a normal phenomenon, can only be systematized and predicted to a limited extent, since the object studied by psychology, i.e., the way in which personal beings usually think and act, is in its nature essentially different from the object of the physical sciences.

Favouring Conditions.

The situations favourable for the occurrence of religious conversion in an individual may be briefly summarized as follows: (I) The presence of general religious tendencies deriving either from heredity, from the family or from early impressions.

(2) An habitual tendency of the intellect towards absolute convictions.

(3) A tendency of the individual spontaneously to fix the attention beyond and above the realities of the senses.

(4) A richness of affective potential or psychic energy held in suspension by the individual.

(5) The tendency of the individual to transfer his chief interests to questions of origin, purpose, destiny, and so forth.

(6) The recurrence of painful experiences.

In a narrower sense "conversion" is used to denote the accept ance of Christianity by non-Christians or the acceptance of Catholicism by non-Catholics. The problem is often debated in Christian circles as to the relation of the sacraments to conversion, the general Catholic view being that sacraments convey grace and confer character, while the general Protestant view is that they declare in symbolic form a change which has already taken place as the result of an act of faith on the part of the individual.

Modern Views.

The modern critical study of the Old Testa ment, coupled with the conclusions of science as to man's ancestry, status and prospects, have greatly modified the belief in the relation of man to grace and conversion. The view stated in the tenth article of the Church of England was as follows: "The condition of man after the fall of Adam is such that he cannot turn and prepare himself by his own natural strength and good works to faith and calling upon God: wherefore we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God, with out the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will, and working with us when we have that good will"; but this is no longer literally held by many persons who would still insist that they were believing Christians. The results of the science of anthropology show no indication of a primeval fall, but rather of a struggle upward marred by acts and periods of retro gression. Man may in consequence be hindered and hampered in his response to the love of God, but although it might still be held that the Divine approach to man preceded man's response, man's feeble responsiveness would no longer be regarded as due to a single primeval catastrophe, but rather to the vestiges in his nature of a sub-human ancestry—the unwilling dross which checks the flight of the soul to its Creator—or at most to the wounds and disease produced by the failures and acts of rebellion committed in the course of human history.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--E.

D. Starbuck, Psychology of Religion (1889) ; Bibliography.--E. D. Starbuck, Psychology of Religion (1889) ; William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience (Gifford Lectures, 1901-02) ; R. H. Thouless, Introduction to the Psychology of Religion, chaps. xiii. and xiv. (1923) ; J. B. Pratt, The Religious Consciousness, chaps. vi.—ix. (1924) ; Underwood, Conversion (1926) ; S. De Sanctis, Religious Conversion (1927). (A. C. B.) In English and American Law, conversion is the unauthor ized exercise of dominion by one person over the property (other than money or chattels real) of another, in a manner inconsistent with his rights of possession. The history and exact definition of this form of actionable wrong have occupied the attention of many learned writers, and the incidents of actions to assert the rights of the true owner form a considerable part of treatises on the rules and forms of civil pleading. There are many ways in which the wrong may be committed. In some cases the exercise of the dominion may amount to an act of trespass or to a crime, e.g., where the taking amounts to larceny or fraudulent appropriation by a person entrusted with the property of another. In such cases, except where money is taken, the civil remedy of the owner is by action for conversion or detention of the property. The remedy in use in these cases used to be by what was called an action on the case for trover and conversion, the plaintiff putting aside all suggestions of trespass and of crime, and resting his case on the fiction that the defendant had found and used goods not his own. The fictitious averment of loss, never required in the United States, was abolished in England by the Common Law Proceaure Act 1852. Under the present procedure, in which the old forms of action are not in use, the remedy is by a claim (usually called conversion) for wrongfully depriving the true owner of personal property of its use and possession by some specified act inconsistent with his dominion over it, usually by dealing with the property in a manner inconsistent with the owner's rights. Originally, the action of trover and conversion was limited to goods and chattels, but it is now accepted as applying to valuable securities, such as cheques and bills of exchange.

Refusal to deliver up to the owner is sufficient to prove con version, though it is often made the ground of an action for detinue, if the plaintiff desires to have the property returned in specie. The knowledge, motive or good faith of the person wrongfully dealing with the property of another is for civil purposes immaterial, and the action is often brought to try the title of two claimants to the same goods. Merely carrying or warehousing goods does not render the carrier or warehouseman liable for conversion, as they do not purport to change the property in the goods and exercise no dominion.

The exact measure of compensation due to a plaintiff whose goods have been wrongfully converted may be merely nominal if the wrong is technical and the defendant can return the goods; it may be limited to the actual damage where the goods can be returned, but the wrong is substantial; but in ordinary cases it is the full value to the owner of the goods of which he has been deprived. In fact the measure of damages is the loss actually sustained. Fraudulent conversion by any person to his own use (or that of persons other than the owner) of property entnisted to him was larceny at common law and under modern statutes (Larceny Act, 1916).

The term "conversion" is also used with reference to the rule of courts of equity which, in certain cases (following the maxim of treating as done what ought to have been done), treats as converted into personalty land which has been directed so to be converted by a will, contract, or settlement, or as con verted into land personalty which has been by such instrument directed to be applied for purchase of realty. The rule is also applied Where a vendor of land dies between the making of the contract of sale and its completion by conveyance of the land.