file :i* includes ! orig9al illu/rations4 ,see #ebide-;h4htm or #ebide-;h4zip3 7https3_/_/www4gut5b]g4org_/ca*e_/epub_/ #ebide_/pg#ebide-;images4html7 or 7https3_/_/www4gut5b]g4org_/files_/#ebid e_/ebide-;h4zip7 ,images ( ! orig9al pages are available ?r\gh ,int]net ,ar*ive4 ,see https3_/_/ar*ive4org_/details_/re=m$logi csys#jjmcl>i* ,transcrib]'s note3 ,text enclos$ by und]scores is 9 italics 7italics74 ,text enclos$ by equal signs is 9 bold face 7bold74 ,a c>at "* is us$ to d5ote sup]scription4 ,a s+le "* foll[+ ! c>at is sup]script$ 7example3 e#b74 's repres5ts l[] case s ) an acute acc5t4 n4 repres5ts l[] case n ) dot "u4 ,,re=m$ ,,logic ,ox=d ,horace ,h>t1 ,pr9t] to ! ,univ]sity ,,re=m$ ,,logic ,a ,sy/em ,bas$ on ,b]keley's ,philosophy ) an ,entirely ,new ,me?od ( ,dialectic by ,d4 ,b4 ,mc,l,a,c,h,l,a,n ',,spirits are active1 indivisible sub/ances2 ,,ideas objects are in]t1 fleet+1 dep5d5t ?+s1 :i* subsi/ n by !mselves1 b are support$ by1 or exi/ 9 m9ds or spiritual sub/ances4444 ,! cause ( ,ideas is an incorporeal active ,,sub/ance or ,_s4' --,b]keley4 ,london ,swan ,sonn5s*e9 ,co4 ,pat]no/] ,squ>e #ahib ,all rights res]v$ ',look+ to ! *aotic /ate ( logic text-books at ! pres5t "t1 "o w\ld be incl9$ to say t !re does n exi/ any:]e a recognis$1 curr5tly-receiv$ body ( speculation to :i* ! title ,logic c be unambigu\sly assign$1 & t we mu/ !re=e resign ! hope ( atta9+ by any empirical consid]ation ( ! receiv$ doctr9e1 a precise det]m9ation ( ! nature & limits ( logical !ory4' ,encyc4 ,brit41 ,art41 ,,logic4 ,,preface ,! object ( ! foll[+ treatise is to give an intelligible acc\nt ( ! pr9cipal facts ( ,m9d1 ) a me?od = ! "r expression & criticism ( ,reason+4 ,x is bas$ on pr9ciples n be=e appli$ to su* a purpose4 ,! curr5t sy/ems ( ,metaphysic are obscure & difficult simply because !y />t f false premises1 n because ! nature & op]ations ( ,m9d _c1 if prop]ly und]/ood1 be made z compreh5sible to beg9n]s z o!r bran*es ( k4 ,! rules ( ,dialectic are q )9 ! capacity ( any intellig5t s*oolboy1 & %\ld be an ess5tial "p ( e>ly education1 l ,ari?metic4 ,let n ! /ud5t be repell$ at f9d+ a philosophy reput$ to be "o ( ! mo/ difficult tak5 z ! basis ( ?is "w4 ,x is ,b]keleyism consid]ably modifi$4 ,also x is to be borne 9 m9d t a philosophy is n to be judg$ by its prim facie probability1 b by its p[] ( expla9+ _m facts 9 a coh]5t & lucid way4 ,a !ory t does ?is %\ld n be reject$ = a seem+ p>adox at ! outset4 ,mo/ ( ! !oretical & all ! dialectical p>ts ( ?is "w c be adapt$ to ,reali/ic ?9k+1 by treat+ ! judgm5ts ( ! two ,b]keleyan categories z intuitions in/ead ( inf]5ces4 ,,cont5ts ,,page ,,preface v ,,introduction ,,sect4 ,i ,division ( ,philosophies into ,ideal & ,sub/antial--,sub/antial subdivid$ into ,m5tal & ,mat]ial--,b]keley's philosophy a ,m5tal ,sub/antialism #a ,,ii ,ontological pr9ciples ess5tial to logical !ory--,m9d consi/s ( 7at lea/7 ,self & a ,pla/ic ,sub/ance--,functions ( ea*--,p]ception ( ,inorganic ?+s discuss$--,b]keley's view on ?is po9t reject$--,body to be consid]$ an app>atus ( ,p]ception #d ,,iii ,curr5t ,metaphysic is ,ideal & !re=e incoh]5t--,sub/antial alone has a connect+ pr9ciple--,importance ( ,categories 9 ,sub/antialism--,its doctr9e ( ,reason totally diff]5t f ! ,academic #h ,,intellect ,,iv ,orig9 ( ,intellect--,its use--,diff]5ce betwe5 ,s5tim5tal & ,intellectual consci\sness--,intellect n ! gov]n+ intellig5ce ( ,man--,moral education ! mo/ important #aa ,v ,tru?1 its v>i\s mean+s--,v]acity--,correct ,ideation--,correct ,inf]5ce--,no absolute /&>d ( ,tru?--,nisi utile e/1 quod novimus1 /ulta e/ ,sap5tia--,s*op5hau] on ! function ( ,intellect #ad ,,vi ,/&>d ( ,tru? relat+ to ,bodily welf>e diff]5t f t relat+ to ,m5tal welf>e--,realism ! !ory ( ,p]ception "u ! =m] /&>d--,its ma9 dogmas--,cause :y x is sup]s$$--,sup]/ition ( ,"o ,tru?--,realism & ,sub/antialism bo? true & yet contradictory #ah ,,p]ception ,,vii ,def9$1 accord+ to ,sub/antial pr9ciples--,n\m5on--,subject--,object--, s5tim5t n excit$ by ,objects1 b ,objects accompany ,s5tim5ts--,subject n passive 9 ,p]ception--,,att5tion--,kant's op9ion on ! inconceivability ( ,n\m5a refut$--,difficulty ( ov]com+ ,reali/ic prejudices--,sci5ce ( little use 9 ,philosophy #bc ,,ideas ,,viii ,h[ produc$--,hume's notion unt5able--,no innate ,ideas--b ,s5tim5t is innate--,division ( ,ideas into ,p>ticul>1 ,g5]al1 & ,imag9>y #bg ,,ix ,,memory--,,oblivion--,,recollection--,i mages1 h[ pres]v$ & h[ lo/--,good ,memory n necess>ily advantage\s--,recov]y ( ! app>5tly ,=gott5--,sudd5 ext9ction ( ,ideas--',decay ( ! m9d' 9 old age--,memory inexplicable on any !ory b ! ,sub/antial--,john ,/u>t ,mill's confession--,memory ! *ief fact ( ,m5tal ,sci5ce #bh ,x ,s5tim5ts may be rememb]$--,feel+s & ,emotions--,no detail$ analysis ( ,s5tim5ts possible or necess>y--,sp9oza's li/--,c s5tim5ts be n\m5ally excit$ )\t objects8 #cd ,,xi ,analysis ( ,comp>ison--,x is ! pr9ciple ( ,g5]alisation & ,imag9ation #cf ,,g5]alisation ,,xii ,purpose ( ,g5]alisation--,objects classifi$ mu/ be simil> & h simil> utilities--,inf]iority ( g5]al ideas acquir$ by def9ition--,names n ess5tial to g5]al ?\ght--,g5]alisation resembles composite photography--,classification on m]e objective resemblance--neat b sup]ficial--,conceptualism #ch ,,xiii ,,matt] ! mo/ g5]al notion d]iv$ f ,objects--,belief 9 ,real ,matt] a =m ( ,my/icism--,a mat]ial basis = ph5om5a unnecess>y #dc ,,xiv ,,nom9alism--,b]keley's ,nom9alism1 & objections !reto--,concrete ,?\ght express$ 9 g5]al t]ms #df ,,xv ,g5]alisation ! bane ( ,european philosophy--,plato's !ories on ,g5]al ,ideas--,ari/otle's ',ess5ce'--,classification a means1 n ! end ( ,reason--,! explanatory ,unity a unity ( s]vice--,evolution a concrete ,platonism #eh ,,imag9ation ,,xvi ,h[ di/+ui%$ f ,recollection & ,rev]ie--,imag9ation by ,simple ,comb9ation--,by ,transfusion--,arti/ic ,imag9ation--,rational ,imag9ation--,wrong views ( ,metaphysicians #fc ,,dialectic ,,xvii ,recapitulation ( ! g5ealogy ( ,reason--,x is ! art ( conceiv+ ! ,future & ,unkn[n--,dialectic ! sci5ce ( ,reason--,division ( !orems into ,argum5ts & ,fallacies--,me?od ( ,dialectic #fh ,,xviii ,! ,,rational ,,p>allel--,rational ,conclusions are nev] c]ta9--,ess5tial p>ts ( an ,argum5t--,rules ( ,p>allel--,false conclusions _c be de/roy$ b may be /igmatis$--,9 :at circum/ances we may reason conc]n+ a kn[n fact #gd ,,xix ,hypo!tical ,argum5ts--,curr5t errors ) respect to ^!--,dilemma #hj ,,xx ,,debate is extra-dialectic--,h[ a valid argum5t may be criticis$ #hg ,,categories ,,xxi ,natural--,reali/ic--,sci5tific--,philos ophical --,categories ( ,py?agoreans--( ,ari/otle--( ,kant1 etc4 #ib ,,xxii ,category ( ,inh]5ce--,x is a metaphysical analysis ( objects--,examples ( ,judgm5t & ,argum5t--,use ( ,/&>ds = ,m$iate ,comp>ison #ig ,,xxiii ,category ( ,association def9$--,position--,examples ( ,judgm5t & ,argum5t--,movem5t--,numb]--,flat ,space #ajc ,,xxiv ,p]spection or ,dep? 9 gr\ps--,p]spective degradation--,r$9tegration1 real & ideal--,?is gr\pm5t z a fix$ ,prec$5t--,/&>d ( ,dep?--,sky ,p]spection #ajh ,,xxv ,concretion ( ,cubic ideas f flat objects--,backs ( ?+s--,resi/ance--,dr4 ,johnson on ,idealism--,dang] ( trifl+ ) ,ideali/s1 illu/rat$ f ! ,dabi/n--,geographical ,concretion--,its sup]iority to m]e ,recollection--,sph]icity ( ! ,e>?1 :at x means #aah ,,xxvi ,mat]ial ,sequ5ce def9$1 ) examples--,,"t ! int]val betwe5 objects 9 ,sequ5ce--,et]nity--,sci5tific confusion ( ,sequ5ce ) ,causation #abf ,,xxvii ,,causation--,its peculi>ities--,h[ di/+ui%$ f ,sequ5ce--,effects are nev] causes--,cause consi/s ( ,motive1 ,plan1 & ,p[]--,g5]ation n causation--,atoms n causes--,sub-categories ( ,causation--',cons]vation' ( ,en]gy discuss$--,note on ,,dreams #acj ,,r$action ,,( ,,colloquial ,,argum5ts ,,xxviii ,language n naturally an in/rum5t ( ,argum5t--,h[ to adapt x to ?is purpose--,negative words--,p>titive words--,r$action does n ext5d to ! correction ( faulty obs]vation--,syllogi/ic ,conv]sion n necess>y on ! ,sub/antial me?od #aea ,,fallacies ,,xxix ,( ,equivocation--,( ,imp]fect ,obs]vation #aeg ,,xxx ,( ,p>allel ,arrangem5t--,suppress$ ,prec$5t--,inf]r+ a negative f ,contra/--,false ,analogy--,d\btful ,prec$5t--,( ,accid5t--,( ,division--,( ,composition--,dialectical ,tautology--,cross ,reason+--,fallacy ( ,no ,case--,( ,inv]sion--,suppress$ ,conclusion--,( ,no ,application--,( ,irrelevant ,conclusion #afa ,,academical ,,dialectic ,,xxxi ,v>i\s notions ( ,reason ent]ta9$ by ,syllogi/s--,"o only true1 ,analogy #age ,,xxxii ',imm$iate ,inf]5ce' is n ,argum5t1 b explicitness & emphasis 9 language #agf ,,xxxiii ,ari?metic1 :at x is--,! ,real & ! ,symbolic--,reason+ ent]s only into ! ,real--,! ,symbolic a k9d ( expression #agg ,,xxxiv ,geometrical ,demon/ration n a =m ( ,reason+--,! s-call$ 'd$uctive reason+' ( ,geometry a graduat$ s]ies ( lessons 9 p]ception #ahb ,,xxxv ,induction n a special k9d ( reason+1 b a d$uction ) suppress$ prec$5t--,o!r mean+s ( ! ^w #ahe ,,xxxvi ,ari/otle's ,dictum expla9$ & refut$ #ahg ,,xxxvii ,m$iate ,comp>ison n ,argum5t #ahi ,,xxxviii ,syllogism analys$--,x is n ,argum5t--,doctr9e ( ! ,pr$icate--,moods ( ! ,syllogism discuss$--,all moods r$ucible to ,"o #aia ,,/udies ,,9 ,,dialectic ,,xxxix ,additional examples to illu/rate ! ,dialectic ( ,sub/antialism #bje ,,introduction ,i--,,relation ,,( ,,b]keley',s ,,philosophy ,,to ,,o!r ,,sy/ems ,philosophies are ei!r ,ideal or ,sub/antial4 ,! ideal are ^? :i* resolve all ?+s1 actual & possible1 into ?\ght or consci\sness4 ,!y seek to f9d 9 consci\sness ! reason & mean+ ( itself1 or1 if ?is be impossible1 to acc\nt = ea* item 9 consci\sness by def9+ its relation to "s o!r item1 or to "s g5]al mass ( consci\sness4 ,?is type ( philosophy includes ,g]man transc5d5talism & idealism1 & "s species ( ,buddhi/ & ,p]sian metaphysic4 ,european ideali/s are seldom consi/5t1 = at ! basis ( _! philosophies 7or at ! apex7 !y place ,,god1 :o is n an item ( human consci\sness1 actual or pot5tial1 & :o !re=e occupies1 :e!r x be admitt$ or n1 ! relation ( sub/ance to human ?\ght4 ,sub/antial philosophies affirm t ?\ght inv>iably inh]es 9 "s sort ( ,sub/ance1 = ^: s]vice x exi/s4 ,x is incapable ( indep5d5t be+1 & _c be und]/ood ab/ract$ f its sub/ance4 ,x is int]mitt5t1 call$ up :5 want$1 & is liable to v>iation & ab]ration4 ,sub/antiali/s diff] h[ev] z to :at ! sub/ance ( human intellig5ce is4 ,"s hold t x is ! human body4 ,consci\sness exi/s1 !y argue1 = ! use ( ! body & v>ies ) its condition4 ,?is class ( philosoph]s may be subdivid$ into ,mat]iali/s & ,metaphysicians 7includ+ logicians74 ,mat]iali/s believe t consci\sness is a product ( ! physical body--has !re=e no exi/5ce be=e ! body is =m$ or aft] x is dissolv$4 ,x is really z physical z ! tee? or hair4 ,9 metaphysic ! intellig5ce is suppos$ to h a pr9ciple ( exi/5ce ap>t f ! body1 & does n1 or ne$ n1 %>e ! fate ( ! body4 ,! body is nev]!less reg>d$ z ! sub/ance or sup]ior fact dur+ ! union ( ! two4 ,?is is an em95tly inconsi/5t philosophy1 = if consci\sness has an exi/5ce ap>t f body x mu/ be 9 "s o!r sub/ance1 & if s its relations to t sub/ance are m important ?an its relations to ! body1 & %\ld be ! fir/ object ( inquiry4 ,metaphysic is 9 its developm5t an idealism1 s9ce ! connection admitt$ betwe5 body & ?\ght is too slight to af=d a suffici5t explanation ( intellig5ce1 & no o!r sub/antial relation is kn[n4 ,! notion t an invisible immat]ial sub/ance may und]lie consci\sness has occurr$ to "s philosoph]s1 among o!rs to ! illu/ri\s ,,b]keley4 ,8 !ory ( ,vision1 :i* has nev] be5 refut$ or ev5 weak5$1 is f\nd$ on ?is hypo!sis4 ,b]keleyan sub/antialism comb9es ! *>act]i/ic features ( ! o!r !ories1 & af=ds an easy solution ( _m difficult problems 9 philosophy4 ,x has 9 common ) idealism--:5ce x is sometimes1 b errone\sly1 call$ by t "n--t x reg>ds all mat]ial bodies & ?+s z facts or items ( consci\sness4 ,x agrees ) mat]ialism t a sub/ance is ess5tial to consci\sness1 & t ! consci\sness ( man s]ves ! ne$s ( 8 body1 ?\gh t is n ! highe/ use to :i* x c be put4 ,x confirms ! metaphysical view t intellig5ce is n1 9 its ab/ract or ess5tial "*1 dep5d5t on ! body1 & may !re=e survive ! body4 ,?is is ! !ory on :i* ! foll[+ logic is bas$3 ,i %all ref] to x briefly z ,sub/antialism4 ,,ii--,,ontological ,,notions ,sub/antialism has two ma9 divisions--,ontology1 :i* treats ( ! m5tal sub/ance 9 itself1 & ,logic or ,metaphysic1 :i* deals ) its consci\sness4 ,! pres5t essay is specially conc]n$ ) logic1 b c]ta9 ontological premises mu/ be assum$ to r5d] ! logic intelligible4 ,?is foll[s f ! subord9ate relation ( consci\sness to sub/ance4 ,! sub/antial m9d consi/s ( two pr9cipal p>ts--a ,,self & a ,,plasma--! ,atman & ,aka'sa ( ,sanscrit philosoph]s4 ,self is ! seat ( ,en]gy & ,consci\sness4 ,! plasma is in]t & unconsci\s2 x protects ! ,self & receives1 communicates1 & reta9s impressions ( exp]i5ce1 bo? ! ext]nal & ! int]nal#a4 ,! ,self w\ld be consci\s ?\gh isolat$ f o!r m9ds1 at lea/ f ^? ( its own grade ( be+4 ,x w\ld feel ! fluctuations ( its en]gy4 ,b ! exp]i5ce call$ 'ext]nal' dep5ds on ! mutual action ( m9ds4 ,x is ! =m into :i* _! consci\sness is ?r[n :5 !y come 9 contact4 ,x la/s no long] ?an ! contact1 & s has only a casual exi/5ce4 ,! con/itution ( ! m9d is n giv5 by ,b]keley1 & on o!r po9ts also we mu/ supplem5t & correct 8 philosophy4 ,he 0 wrong z reg>ds ! m5tal cause ( ! p]ception ( ! ,inorganic or ,dead4 ,s9ce ext]nal exp]i5ce implies t ano!r m9d is op]at+ ^u ours1 :at m9d is op]at+ :5 we p]ceive an object t is app>5tly m9dless8 ,b]keley replies t x is ! supreme m9d t is !n act+ ^u u4 ,_m objections c be urg$ aga9/ ?is view4 ,i w m5tion only "o1 :i* seems to me conclusive4 ,by e canon ( judgm5t we possess1 ! liv+ or organis$ is bett]--m important & significant--?an ! lifeless & elem5tal2 s if ,b]keley's reason+ be valid ! ph5om5a excit$ by f9ite & creat$ be+s are sup]ior to ^? excit$ by _! ,creator4 ,! movem5ts ( a liv+ man are ref]r$ to a human m9d--a putresc5t c>case is a vision imm$iately induc$ by ! ,deity4 ,! beauty ( ! />ry sky is irrelevant to ! "q4 ,ap>t f ! f9ite life & ?\ght t may be associat$ ) ! />s1 !y h no m philosophical importance ?an a spadeful ( s&4 ,a m reasonable acc\nt ( ! inorganic is f\nd 9 sev]al anci5t philosophies4 ,gno/ics & ,neo-,platoni/s ref]r$ ! elem5tal to a cosmic m9d 7,demiurgos7 int]m$iate betwe5 human be+s & ! ,supreme4 ,! demiurgic m9d is inconceivably great] & m p[]ful ?an ! human1 b is n necess>ily bett] 9 quality4 ,x is ! orig9 ( all natural =ces1 & its organic processes are :at we t]m 'physical laws4' ,?is is ! explanation ( inorganic consci\sness :i* ,i feel dispos$ to adopt1 b to discuss x fully w\ld c>ry u too f> f ! subject ( ?is "w4 ,! next po9t relates to ! body4 ,:at is its function 9 sub/antialism8 ,! bra91 says ,b]keley1 is an idea 9 ! m9d1 & he ridicules ! notion t "o idea %\ld g5]ate all o!r ideas4 ,?is is an argum5t aga9/ mat]ialism4 ,no d\bt he w\ld h admitt$1 ?\gh he does n say s1 t ! body-idea facilitates1 or at lea/ mu/ prec$e1 ! exp]i5ce ( o!r ideas4 ,he w\ld n h d5i$ t x is an in/rum5tal idea4 ,s9ce 8 "t an important discov]y has be5 made ) ref]5ce to ! con/itution ( ! body4 ,i allude to ! ,cell !ory4 ,x is no long] possible to reg>d ! body ei!r z a self-mov+ ma*9e 7if ?is is n a contradiction 9 t]ms71 or z a lump ( 'dead matt]' animat$ by ! m9d4 ,x is a society ( m9ute animals#b1 ea* hav+ a c]ta9 degree ( indep5d5t en]gy & lib]ty ( movem5t4 ,!y are organis$ & gov]n$ by ! human or animal m9d ) :i* !y are associat$4 ,9 %ort1 ! relation ( ! cell to ! man is analog\s to1 if n q ! same z1 ! relation ( ! man to ! cosmic be+4 ,?is discov]y complicates ! problem ( 'ext]nal' consci\sness1 )\t h[ev] affect+ ! pr9ciples on :i* a sub/antiali/ w\ld endeav\r to solve x4 ,in/ead ( conceiv+ human m9ds z com+ into imm$iate contact 9 p]ception1 we h to conceive ! cellul> sy/ems ( ea* z =m+ a m$ium betwe5 ! two4 ,we d n p]ceive ! o!r m9d imm$iately or intuitively2 :at we p]ceive intuitively is c]ta9 affections 9 our own organism1 :i* we mu/ fir/ ref] to ! o!r body1 & !n to ! m9d beh9d t body4 ,our k ( o!r human be+s is ?us altoge!r inf]5tial4 ,! cellul> m$ium expla9s :y we are n g5]ally aw>e ( ! sub/antial con/itution ( o!r m9ds2 x is veil$ by ! int]v5+ organisms4 ,! relation ( body to m9d1 ! reason ( embodim5t1 & s =?1 are que/ions ( prime importance 9 ontology1 b 9 logic we are conc]n$ only ) ! object 9 consci\sness1 )\t ref]5ce to ! app>atus ( p]ception4 ,! in/rum5t ( intellectual p]ception may 9 its prop] "* be ignor$4 ,,iii--,,diff]5ces ,,betwe5 ,,sub/antial ,,& ,,metaphysical ,,logic ,all ! curr5t academic metaphysic is ideal4 ,mat]iali/s1 :5 !y attempt to expla9 ?\ght1 fail to atta* x prop]ly to ! body1 or to acc\nt = t l>ge & important division ( m5tal activity :i* has no be>+1 direct or indirect1 on bodily welf>e4 ,!y drop _! mat]ialism at an e>ly /age ( _! enquiry & cont9ue on ! metaphysical me?od4 ,h5ce 9 none ( ! curr5t sy/ems is !re any true pr9ciple ( arrangem5t 9 ! treatm5t ( logical ph5om5a4 ,unless we "k ! use ( a ?+ we _c describe x1 let alone expla9 x4 ,we "k n ! relative importance ( its p>ts1 & we arrange !m accord+ to sup]ficial resemblances1 or on "s arbitr>y pr9ciple :i* conceals in/ead ( reveal+ _! mean+4 ,sub/antial philosophy alone possesses a pr9ciple ( coh]5ce4 ,! facts ( consci\sness are det]m9$ by ant]ior facts ( sub/ance1 & !re c be only "o true mode 9 :i* to pres5t !m--!y mu/ foll[ & reflect ! sub/antial ord]4 ,!y w ?us appe> z a consecutive & coh]5t sy/em ( ideas1 no "o ( :i* c\ld be o!rwise plac$ )\t damage to ! :ole4 ,?is is p]haps ! mo/ important respect 9 :i* sub/antial logic diff]s f o!rs4 ,! doctr9e ( ,categories has to receive full developm5t 9 ord] to elucidate ! g5esis ( ! 'mat]ial _w4' ,except to a sub/antiali/ ! categories h no p>ticul> value1 & s !y are b>ely m5tion$ 9 ! academic sy/ems4 ,! !ory ( ,reason+ or ,dialectic 7logic 9 ! n>r[] s5se7 giv5 9 ! foll[+ *apt]s1 w be f\nd totally diff]5t f ! academic4 ,x does n m]ely /ate 9 o!r words or metaphors ! doctr9es laid d[n 9 works ( ! ,ari/otelian type1--x decl>es t ! !ory ( reason+ taught 9 ^! works is altoge!r false4 ,our argum5tation is n conduct$ 9 syllogisms1 ei!r tacit or explicit4 ,?is has be5 suspect$ by sev]al critics ( logic1 b no attempt has be5 made to sub/itute a m correct !ory & me?od4 ,( c\rse logicians d n always reason wrongly1 & true argum5ts may be /at$ 9 ! syllogi/ic =m4 ,:at ,i mean is t logicians n[h]e tell u 9 :at "r reason+ ess5tially consi/s1 & = want ( a di/9ct notion on ! subject !y all ( !m occasionally admit z valid1 argum5ts t are n s4 ,! ma9 dogma ( sub/antialism %\ld be kept 9 view 9 read+ ! foll[+ pages4 ,x is m9d alone t is conceiv$ z hav+ solidity & en]gy3 mat]ial ?+s are tempor>y =ms ( our consci\sness2 !y h l5g? & bread? b no dep?1 & !y are )\t en]gy1 ev5 passive resi/ance4 ,if an object _c be remov$ at pleasure1 :at resi/s u is ! o!r m9d caus+ t object1 n ! object itself4 ,z f> z possible ,i h utilis$ ! exi/+ logical t]m9ology4 ,b sub/antialism has notions :i* require special te*nical words1 & ,i h n hesitat$ to inv5t su* :5 necess>y4 ,on ! o!r h&1 ,i h reject$ ! lat9isms ( curr5t logic1 :i* h nev] be5 assimilat$ by mod]n languages4 ,! ,engli% language is good en\gh = all ! purposes ( logic4 ,footnote #a3 ,! m5tal sub/ance is ! fif? ess5ce ( ! initiate ,greeks & ( ,al*emi/s4 ,!y also call$ x *aos & fir/ matt]4 ',man 0 made ( t v matt] & *aos :]e( all ! _w 0 made1 & all ! creatures 9 x3 :i* is a mo/ high my/]y to und]/&1 & mu/1 nay is altoge!r necess>y to be kn[n ( him t expecte? good f ?is art1 be+ ! gr\nd ( ! wisdom !re(4 ,fooli% m51 nay !y t ! _w holds = great doctors1 say & tell x = tru?1 t ,god made man ( a piece ( mud1 or clay1 or du/ ( ! e>?1 :i* is false2 x 0 no su* matt]1 b a ,qu9tess5tial ,matt] :i* is call$ e>?1 b is no e>?4'--,de ,manna ,b5$icto4 ,footnote #b3 ,see ,/rick]'s ,manual ( ,hi/ology2 ,bioplasm1 & o!r works1 by ,dr4 ,lionel ,s4 ,beale1 ,m4,b41 ,f4,r4,s42 & an article on ! ,new ,psy*ology1 by ,a4 ,f\ill1 9 ! ,revue des ,deux ,mondes = ,octob] #ae?1 #ahia4 ,,intellect ,,iv--,,its ,,orig9 ,,& ,,function ,! m9d has at physical bir? "o uni=m quality ( plasma & consci\sness4 ,by education & exp]i5ce a portion ( ! plasma is gradually *ang$1 & ! consci\sness excit$ by ?is portion is :at we call ,,intellect4 ,! ^w may also /& = ! plasma s diff]5tiat$4 ,! consci\sness p]ta9+ to ! plasma left 9 its primitive /ate is ,,s5tim5t1 :i* g5]ally corresponds to :at is t]m$ ! moral nature ( man4 ,intellect is a tempor>y condition aris+ out ( ! ne$ to pres]ve ! ,self f ho/ile & inh>moni\s surr\nd+s4 ,! adaptation is artificial1 & may !re=e be well-done1 or ill-done1 or ov]-done4 ,x is ov]-done :5 too mu* ( ! plasma & m5tal en]gy is devot$ to intellectual purposes--:5 ! individual has1 to use a common expression1 m head ?an he>t4 ,9 ?is case ! end is sacrific$ to ! means4 ,i conceive ! intellect z a h>d5+ ( ! plasma 9 its sup]ficies1 ! =mation ( a sort ( r9d capable ( receiv+ f9]1 %>p]1 & m endur+ impressions ?an ! plasma ( s5tim5t2 &1 be+ h>d]1 x is bett] able ?an ! latt] to resi/ enfeebl+ influ5ces4 ,its duty is to *all5ge & inspect vibrations be=e p]mitt+ !m to pass inw>ds to ! region ( s5tim5t4 ,yet ! intellectual consci\sness is itself a degree ( s5tim5t1 & 9 intellects n suffici5tly tra9$ x may be impossible to di/+ui% ?\ghts t are purely intellectual1 f ?\ghts t are also to "s ext5t s5tim5tal4 ,^u m9ds ( ?is sort ! be/-prep>$ argum5ts h no hold2 !y mu/ be mix$ ) oratory & poetry to receive any att5tion4 ,x ne$ n be said t a m9d :i* responds only to 'p]suasive' language is feeble ( intellect4 ,x lives 9 ! pres5t only1 & is incapable ( f>-rea*+ designs4 ,x is to ! intellect we owe ! p[] ( conceiv+ ! pa/ & future1 & ( lay+ plans = ! future4 ,a m9d prop]ly intellectualis$ is1 ( its k9d1 /rong & self-controll$4 ,) ! intellect defective ! man exhibits passion1 undue excitem5t & demon/rativ5ess4 ,he responds to ! lea/ /imulus1 l an expos$ n]ve2 8 en]gy is wa/$ 9 explosions4 ,s5tim5t is ! inmo/ n]ve ( man--intellect its protect+ %ea?4 ,! mo/ c>efully tra9$ intellect is liable at times to be c>ri$ by assault or /ratagem2 !n foll[s a feel+ ( empt9ess occasion$ by loss ( en]gy4 ,on ! o!r h& an appe>ance ( self-comm& may be really due to apa?y1--! m9d is ( a l[ type & call\s to influ5ces t usually affect its species4 ,if x is bad to be explosive1 x is p]haps worse to be incapable ( explod+4 ,intellect is n ! supreme or rul+ intellig5ce ( man4 ,x initiates no?+4 ,x is a light to direct our /eps1 b we d n walk :]e ! light happ5s to fall--we make x fall :]e we desire to walk4 ,h5ce ! div]sity ( occupation & intellectual accompli%m5ts 9 m54 ,ea* acquires ! sort ( intellect he ?9ks w be s5tim5tally mo/ s]viceable to him2 & on matt]s conc]n+ :i* he has n le>nt to reason he consults o!r m54 ,we are n born rational be+s2 we are 9 no s5se rational on all subjects2 we are rational only on ^? few :i* we h ma/]$4 ,m5 pret5d to act f reason only1 & p]haps !y d on matt]s to :i* !y are indiff]5t4 ,b 9 g5]al _! rationality consi/s 9 f9d+ pretexts = :at on s5tim5tal gr\nds !y h already resolv$ to d1 & 9 f9d+ ways & means to c>ry out _! resolves4 ,s5tim5t is ! mov+ spr+ ( conduct3 intellect is ! executive faculty4 ,^? hi/orical philosoph]s are mi/ak5 :o suppose ! progress ( mank9d results f intellectual discov]ies & inv5tions4 ,^! are effects1 n causes1 ( progress--effects ( s5tim5tal disagreem5t ) previ\s conditions4 ,intellect is little m ?an an ext5sion inw>ds ( our s5ses4 ,x is an epitome & re>rangem5t ( _! obs]vations1 & is z in/rum5tal z !y4 ,we are n necess>ily improv$ by a developm5t ( ! intellect =c$ ^u u f )\t4 ,education is sometimes a dagg] put into ! h&s ( an assass94 ,! be/ education is l>gely s5tim5tal 7moral71 = t is n conf9$ to pres]v+ ! m9d we h--x gives u ano!r & a bett] m9d1 & s indirectly improves ! intellect4 ,v--,,tru? ,?is ^w has sev]al mean+s :i* x may be well to notice4 ,z v]acity x means an agreem5t betwe5 our ?\ghts & our language4 ,x supposes t we take reasonable pa9s to le>n ! conv5tional laws ^u :i* language is f\nd$1 & !n endeav\r z f> z possible to br+ our spee* 9 con=mity ) ^! laws4 ,s9ce language is an art 7l music7 x may be acquir$ well or ill1 s t a mi/ake 9 ! use ( a phrase or t]m is n reg>d$ z untru?4 ,!re mu/ be delib]ate abuse ( language to con/itute a lie4 ,agreem5t betwe5 an idea ( memory & ! actual exp]i5ce--correct recollection--is ano!r mean+ ( tru?4 ,also tru? may signify agreem5t betwe5 an inf]5tial ?\ght & ! fact to :i* x ref]s1 al?\gh ! fact has n yet be5 obs]v$4 ,9 ?is s5se tru? mu/ be con/ru$ lib]ally4 ,we nev] =esee a future fact exactly z x w take place4 ,our anticipations are vague & our prep>ations = !m g5]al1 b t on ! :ole is en\gh = our purposes4 ,at lea/ x is all t reason af=ds u4 ,if we are absolutely c]ta9 ( a future fact & c figure x 9 ! m9d precisely z x w take place1 t means t x has already occurr$ s (t5 t we are virtually us+ our memory1 n our reason4 ,an inf]5ce may be consid]$ true if x is ! be/ we c draw f ! in=mation at our comm&1 ?\gh 9 po9t ( fact x may prove to be v incorrect4 ,!re is no mass ( speculative ,tru? :i* ev]ybody ought to possess on pa9 ( be+ consid]$ fooli% or miscreant4 ,?is notion1 =m]ly s preval5t1 betrays gross ignorance ( ! nature & function ( intellect4 ,x makes intellectual speculation an end 9 itself4 ,our ideas mu/ be su* z s]ve ! uses ( our s5tim5tal or inn] s\l1 & s9ce ! s5tim5ts 7ta/es7 ( m5 v>y widely1 s ought also _! intellectual ideas4 ,?\gh *ange ( s5tim5t modifies ideas1 *ange ( ideas does n modify s5tim5t4 ,!re is !re=e no sort ( good 9 uni=mity ( belief 9 itself4 ,x is cr$itable to mod]n times t m5 h %ak5 (f ! procru/ean beliefs ( ! ,middle ,ages1 & are free to adapt _! intellects to _! real s5tim5tal ne$s4 ,! num]\s sections into :i* speculative ?\ght is n[ brok5 up1 & ! frequ5t *anges ( !ory1 are signs ( heal?y & active s5tim5t4 ,9 matt]s ( social policy1 :]e l>ge bodies ( m5 h to c>ry out a s+le design1 uni=mity mu/ be atta9$ by p]suasion or compromise4 ,b su* matt]s relate only to physical well-be+1 into :i* philosophical tru? c h>dly be said to ent]4 ,?is relative &1 9 ! wide/ s5se1 utilit>ian view ( intellectual tru? applies bo? to quantity & quality ( ideas4 ,we %\ld n le>n :at we d n s5tim5tally require4 ,t is wa/e ( p[]4 ,useless k is folly1 said bo? ,plato & ,ari/otle4 ,to mi/ake k to be ! pursuit ( man is to confuse ! means ) ! end1 says ! au?or ( ! ,bhagavad ,gita4 ,! quality ( our ideas mu/ n be good beyond our necessities4 ,if !y are1 we %all suff] by act+ on !m4 ,!y w l& u 9 circum/ances = :i* our nature is n fully prep>$4 ,if !re 7 an ab/ract or /&>d tru?1 x w\ld be good = e species ( be+1 & no d\bt ! ?\ghts ( a man are ne>] to x ?an ! ?\ghts ( a horse4 ,!re=e a horse ought to be improv$ by receiv+ a human intellect4 ,b if we c\ld ins9uate into a horse's m9d ! k possess$ by an educat$ man1 we %\ld spoil :at may h be5 a good horse & produce a mon/r\s & horrible man4 ,s is x ) ourselves4 ,if we c\ld receive k f> 9 advance ( our requirem5ts or out ( relation to !m1 x w\ld drive u mad or be itself madness4 ,our con/itution & necessities det]m9e :at we c "k & :at we ought to "k4 ,n all possible k is good1 & :at is good = "s may be useless or bad = o!rs4 ,s*op5hau] says well#c3 ',! faculty ( ,kn[+ 444 has only aris5 = ! purpose ( self-pres]vation1 & !re=e /&s 9 a precise relation1 admitt+ ( c\ntless gradations1 to ! requirem5ts ( ea* animal species4' ,,vi--,,realism ,if our int]e/s 7 s+le & uni=m1 "o consi/5t s*eme ( intellectual k w\ld suffice4 ,we ne$ nev] be 9 fundam5tal contradiction ) ourselves4 ,e advance 9 k w\ld illu/rate & confirm :at we _h already le>n$4 ,b we are n ( ?is simple con/itution4 ,we are fir/ & ess5tially m9ds1 we are next & tempor>ily embodi$ m9ds1 & 9 ea* ( ^! *>act]s we h di/9ct &1 to a great ext5t1 conflict+ int]e/s4 ,h5ce we h to acquire diff]5t species ( k & admit diff]5t /&>ds ( tru?4 ,! ideas t s]ve ! int]e/s ( ! embodi$ man are false to ! same man consid]$ ap>t f 8 embodim5t1 & contr>iwise--false1 9 ! s5se ( be+ useless & p]haps mislead+4 ,h5ce ! exi/5ce ( ,common-s5se = ! embodi$ int]e/s1 & ,philosophy = ! purely m5tal int]e/s4 ,sci5ce is common k c>ri$ to its utmo/ p]fection1 b n p>tak+ 9 ! lea/ ( ! philosophical "*4 ,realism is ! notion ( p]ception t is acquir$ ) our common k4 ,x is seldom explicitly def9$ or def5d$1 = 9 ord] to ?is a comp>ison ) philosophic !ories w\ld h to be made1 & ! defects ( realism w\ld be app>5t4 ,! reali/ic view is s nam$ by philosoph]s to di/+ui% x f _! own views4 ,= corporeal purposes x is useful to believe1 & x is !re=e relatively true1 t !re is a real space :i* w\ld exi/ al?\gh all objects 7 remov$ f x4 ,objects are real solid ?+s /or$ 9 space l casks 9 a cell>4 ,!y h fix$ dim5sions not)/&+ t !y appe> to contract & dilate z we leave or approa* !m4 ,x is q 'natural' !y %\ld appe> small] at a di/ance4 ,di/ant p]ception is conceivable1 !re=e x is possible1 & s9ce calculations bas$ on ?is assumption are v]ifi$ by exp]i5ce1 x mu/ & does take place4 ,"t also is z real z space1 & w\ld exi/ by itself ?\gh space & its cont5ts 7 annihilat$4 ,x is a sort ( /ream4 ,all ^! propositions are true = c]ta9 necess>y purposes4 ,we beg9 to =m su* ideas f ! mom5t we are born1 & dur+ ! ye>s ( infancy we are do+ no?+ else intellectually b work+ out ! notions ( space1 "t1 magnitude1 di/ance4 ,mo/ ( our s*ool education is ( ! same k9d4 ,by ! "t we rea* maturity realism has become s root$ 9 our intellect t--z reg>ds ! majority ( m5--no sceptical consid]ations are /rong en\gh to unsettle !m4 ,= :y8 ,!y enable ! natural man to provide suffici5tly well = 8 bodily ne$s & o!r ne$s dep5d+ !refrom1 & he has !re=e no motive = d\bt+ 8 realism or = acquir+ any o!r sort ( ideas4 ,he is q "r to abide by ^? :i* h answ]$ 8 purposes4 ,x is n f )\t b f )9 t d\bts arise z to reali/ic tru?4 ,!y arise :5 ! m9d has acquir$ p[] ov] & above :at is ne$$ = bodily uses1 & beg9s to ?9k on its own acc\nt4 ,s5tim5ts are felt :i* d n dep5d on or ref] to bodily life1 & a new intellect has to be =m$ to expla9 & protect ^! s5tim5ts4 ,?is new intellect is ,philosophy4 ,x is ! sci5ce & practical conduct ( m9d consid]$ z ab/ract$ f body4 ,mu* ( ! obscurity ( philosophy is traceable to ! sup]/ition ( a fix$ /&>d ( tru? :i* mu/ be recognis$ univ]sally4 ,we are reluctant to accept philosophical h9ts & inf]5ces because !y conflict ) tru?s t h be5 physically v]ifi$4 ,or--:i* is m common--we take up a few philosophical propositions & tack on to !m all ! sci5ce we "k1 believ+ !y make a homog5e\s :ole1 because tru? mu/ be self-consi/5t4 ,"t & lab\r w\ld be sp>$ if we c\ld be told at ! "r mom5t t tru? is exp$i5ce#d1 & t !re is no ne$ to h>monise philosophy & sci5ce4 ,we are ea* ( u two m5 9 "o1 & ea* ( ^! m5 mu/ be all[$ to ?9k = himself4 ,!re is no reason :y !y %\ld qu>rel2 !re is no reason :y !y %\ld ev5 argue4 ,! sci5ce 9 our m9d %\ld n be ou/$ to make room = ! philosophy2 let !m exi/ toge!r & "w alt]nately4 ,:5 ! m>9] is at sea he mu/ m9d 8 %ip & /udy ! wea!r2 :5 he is on %ore he may neglect bo?4 ,s :5 we are navigat+ ! body we h to ?9k 9 categories prop] to its safety2 z philosoph]s we dismiss ! reali/ic categories & ?9k 9 o!r =ms1 b we ne$ n !n call ! realism false or fooli%4 ,9 its prop] place x is "r & true#e4 ,betwe5 realism & sub/antialism !re is !re=e no necess>y conflict or competition4 ,!y are ea* indisp5sable4 ,x is absurd to c>ry realism into philosophy1 & no less absurd to c>ry sub/antialism into common affairs1 or to reproa* a sub/antiali/ because he acts & speaks occasionally l o!r p4 ,x is probable h[ev] t 9 a community l>gely compos$ ( sub/antiali/s ! realism ( common action w\ld be less /r+5t ?an is n[ f\nd necess>y4 ,footnote #c3 ,w 9 ,nature1 ',physiology ( ,plants4' ,footnote #d3 ,?is does n apply to tru? 9 ! s5se ( v]acity4 ,footnote #e3 ,greek philosoph]s nev] und]/ood ! dual /&>d ( ,tru?1 & insi/$ t philosophy 0 ! be/ prep>ation = e sort ( employm5t4 ,! p1 ?\gh g5]ally unwise 9 political matt]s1 _h s5se en\gh n to entru/ ! c>e ( _! temporal int]e/s to philosoph]s1 & s ! univ]sal utility ( philosophy _h few opportunities ( be+ te/$4 ,a ,mac$onian k+ committ$ ! cu/ody ( ,cor9? & its citadel to a philosoph]1 ,p]saeus1 :o 0 promptly expell$ by ,aratus--a m]e soldi]4 ,p]saeus frequ5t$ ! s*ools aga91 & on ! well-worn !me t 'none b a wise man is fit to be a g5]al' be+ br\ght up = discussion1 he said1 ',x is true1 & ! gods "k x1 t ?is maxim ( ,z5o once pleas$ me m ?an all ! re/2 b ,i h *ang$ my op9ion s9ce ,i 0 taught bett] by ! "y ,sicyonian4'--,plut>*'s ,life ( ,aratus4 ,,p]ception ,,vii ,p]ception has already be5 p>tially def9$4 ,s-call$ 'ext]nal objects' are =ms excit$ 9 our consci\sness by pressure ( o!r m9ds4 ,! great p]man5t '_w' is due to ! action ( a cosmic m9d ) :i* we are intimately associat$ ?r\gh\t our physical life4 ,objects h a totally diff]5t sort ( exi/5ce f m9ds1 = :]eas ! latt] are--at lea/ relative to objects--self-exi/5t1 ! =m] h no exi/5ce except dur+ ! act ( p]ception4 ,if m9ds c\ld be all mov$ asund] f ea* o!r ! :ole objective _w w\ld disappe>1 yet ! univ]se w\ld be z full z be=e1 = s5sation occupies no room4 ,! appe>ances we int]pret z di/ance are due to v>iations 9 ! pressure or /imulus produc+ ! object4 ,x w be conv5i5t to call ! m active m9d ,n\m5on1 ! p]ceiv+ m9d ,subject4 ,! m9d t is subject on "o occasion may be n\m5on at ano!r1 & conv]sely4 ,! true anti!sis to subject is n object1 b n\m5on4 ,object has no anti!sis1 unless x be non5tity4 ,x is specially to be notic$ t an object is n ! cause ( a s5tim5t4 ,! knife we see or h&le is n ! cause ( ! pa9 x may inflict if driv5 into our fle%4 ,pa9s & pleasures signify t ! n\m5al action is p[]ful en\gh n only to excite objects 9 ! intellect1 b to p5etrate inw>ds & excite s5tim5ts also4 ,x is ! n\m5on t causes bo? object & s5tim5t1 z f> z ! en]gy ex]t$ is conc]n$1 b ! v>iation ( plasma 9 ! subject is also ess5tial to ! di/9ction ( object & s5tim5t4 ,! subject is n q passive 9 p]ception4 ,no consci\sness takes place unless ! subject is *>g$ ) en]gy4 ,fur!r1 s9ce consci\sness is conf9$ to ! ,self & n inh]5t 9 ! plasma1 we p]ceive only su* vibrations z rea* ! ,self4 ,if ! ,self is absorb$ 9 "o "p ( ! m9d1 vibrations may take place 9 o!r p>ts )\t be+ notic$4 ,! m en]gy we conc5trate at ! po9t or surface ( contact 7,att5tion71 or o!rwise br+ to be> on ! plasmic vibration1 ! m vivid is ! object4 ,! fix+ or circumscrib+ ( att5tion s z to break up our exp]i5ce into di/9ct ?+s or objects is an acquir$ art1 :5ce we may inf] t ! intellectual exp]i5ce ( infancy is a vague :iti% surface1 n cle>ly di/+ui%$ by col\r or movem5t4 ,kant & o!r philosoph]s admit t objects are caus$ by n\m5a1 b insi/ t we c nev] "k or conceive :at a n\m5on is4 ,:y n8 ,ea* ( u kn[s himself to be ! n\m5on ( _m ph5om5a2 he has no d\bt t _m o!r ph5om5a are caus$ by m9ds l himself1 & x is easy to ext5d ?is pr9ciple to all ph5om5a :atev]4 ,!y are all caus$ by m9ds m or less l human m9ds4 ,?is is a useful conclusion1 al?\gh we are n able to imag9e v accurately ! m9d ( an insect or ( a be+ ( cosmic dim5sions4 ,x is n necess>y we %\ld1 b ! mo/ g5]al inf]5ce ( ?is sort is bett] ?an none at all1 & bett] ?an ! notion t ph5om5a are self-exi/5t & self-mov+4 ,al?\gh simple & intelligible :5 /at$ 9 ! ab/ract1 p]ception is difficult to "w out 9 detail4 ,objections />t up on e side1 & x requires ! utmo/ pati5ce to r$uce !m to :at !y are--inf]5ces f ! realism we are suppos$ to h disc>d$4 ,x is only :5 we try to dislodge realism :olly & consi/5tly t we f9d h[ fa/ its hold ^u our intellect is4 ,critics :o pr(ess to treat ,b]keley's sub/antialism s]i\sly & sympa!tically1 con/antly br+ up aga9/ x argum5ts ( ! mo/ naively reali/ic k9d4 ,!y h no adequate conception h[ enorm\s is ! revolution 9 ?\ght involv$ 9 sub/itut+ sub/antialism = realism4 ,x is a complete dissolution ( ! natural ?\ght & belief2 x means ! con/ruction ( a new heav5 & a new e>? ) laws to :i* we h be5 hi!rto unaccu/om$4 ,! old sci5ce is ( little or no use to u z sub/antiali/s4 ,philosophy is n an advance or correction ( sci5ce4 ,9 s f> z ! latt] claims to be absolutely or philosophically true1 sub/antialism aboli%es x 9 disp5s+ ) ! notions ( real matt] & real space4 ,h5ce x is q irrelevant to po9t out t sub/antialism is inconsi/5t ) 7say7 ! doctr9e ( physical evolution4 ,?is !ory1 ?\gh s new1 is n[ (t5 ref]r$ to z axiomatically true1 :]eas x is an inf]5ce1 ! evid5ce = :i*1 ev5 to _m reali/s1 is f> f conclusive4 ,:e!r x be consid]$ true or n 9 sci5ce1 physical evolution is q untrue 9 philosophy4 ,,ideas ,,viii--,,h[ ,,produc$ ,an impr9t or m\ld ( ! object is g5]ally left 9 ! plasma ( ! subject4 ,! impr9t is deep1 cle> & la/+ 9 proportion to ! /r5g? ( ! excit+ cause & ! degree ( en]gy assign$ to ! p]ception4 ,:5 ! n\m5on )draws ! object does n at once disappe>1 = if ! en]gy ( att5tion rema9 ! m\ld left by ! n\m5on s]ves to excite a consci\sness simil> to ! object1 & ?is is :at we call an ,,idea4 ,:at ,hume says z to an object diff]+ f an idea 9 no?+ b vividness is evid5tly incorrect4 ,objects are g5]ally1 b n always1 m vivid ?an ideas1 & :5 an object is pres5t we h an indefeasible conviction ( be+ act$ on by some?+ n ourselves1 :i* conviction is n pres5t 9 recollection4 ,we may n be able to give a satisfactory reason = ! conviction--if we are argu+ ideali/ically we c]ta9ly %all n--b ! fact t x is !re s]ves to m>k (f objects z a class ( consci\sness di/9ct f ideas1 irrespective ( _! vividness4 ,if an object 7 once se5 cle>ly & s rememb]$1 & 7 aft]w>ds se5 indi/9ctly ?r\gh a mi/1 ! latt] consci\sness w\ld 7accord+ to ,hume7 be ! idea & ! =m] ! object4 ,su* an application ( words w\ld be an abuse ( language4 ,!re are ( c\rse no innate ideas ( objects4 ,!re is innate consci\sness--! s5tim5tal4 ,ideas are ( ?ree k9ds--,p>ticul> ,ideas1 ,g5]al ,ideas1 ,imag9>y ,ideas--correspond+ to ! s-call$ faculties ( ,memory1 ,g5]alisation or ,classification1 & ,imag9ation4 ,,ix--,,memory ,,( ,,objects ,:5 ! en]gy ( att5tion is exhau/$ or )drawn ! idea also disappe>s1 b x may be reviv$ by br++ ! en]gis$ ,self 9 contact ) ! impr9t aga91 & ?is op]ation c be repeat$ indef9itely4 ,! p[] ( excit+ ideas ( pa/ exp]i5ce is ,memory2 any p>ticul> ex]cise ( memory is ,recollection4 ,! impr9t ( an object is n absolutely p]man5t & is probably nev] q true4 ,x beg9s to lose %>pness at once1 b if ! object be frequ5tly obs]v$ & mu* rememb]$1 x w reta9 its g5]al "* = ye>s4 ,! ex]cise ( memory1 in/ead ( we>+ out ! impr9t z w\ld be ! case ) a mat]ial negative or engrav$ plate1 keeps ! *annels op5#f4 ,p]sons ( little exp]i5ce rememb] well1 = _! en]gy ( att5tion is n di/ribut$ ov] _m diff]5t ideas2 x travels cont9u\sly r\nd a small circuit4 ,"o he>s ignorant p]sons rec\nt+ ev5ts t happ5$ ye>s ago1 ) z mu* detail & ) almo/ z mu* s5tim5t z if !y _h tak5 place ! day be=e4 ,a 'good memory' is no pro( t ! quality ( m9d or ?\ght is good4 ,all exp]i5ce is n wor? rememb]+4 ,"o ( ! mo/ difficult ?+s 9 moral culture is to get rid ( ! impr9ts ( ideas t are out ( h>mony ) our improv$ s5tim5t4 ,al?\gh ! impr9ts 9 our m9d may close up & leave sc>ce a cicatrice1 ! "p t has be5 once di/urb$ is nev] ! same z ! virg9 plasm4 ,x rema9s a little m t5d]4 ,x may n reop5 to ord9>y /imuli1 b an extra agitation ( ! plasm w rip up ! clos$ furr[s1 & give u back sc5es 9 our life t _h long ceas$ to be recollect$4 ,a great agitation 9 all p>ts ( ! m9d may revive :at appe>s to be ! :ole ( our pa/ exp]i5ce 9 a simultane\s recollection4 ,s ,i expla9 ! extraord9>y lucidity t sometimes occurs 9 fev]s & 9 mom5ts ( extreme t]ror4 ,x is also conceivable t ! egoi/ic en]gy may be s /rong z to de/roy outright ! m\lds ( ?\ght1 z a flood sweeps away ! banks ( a riv]4 ',we sometimes f9d a disease q /rip ! m9d ( all its ideas1 & ! flames ( a fev] 9 a few days calc9e all ^? images to du/ & confusion :i* seem$ to be z la/+ z if grav$ 9 m>ble'#g4 ,:at is call$ 'decay ( ! m9d' 9 old age is m]ely ! loss ( ! plasmic images4 ,s9ce intellect w\ld n h be5 =m$ 9 ! fir/ in/ance if x _h n be5 want$1 x is to be expect$ t x w fade out ( ! m9d :5 x is no long] want$4 ,s f> z ! reali/ic intellect is conc]n$1 we return to 'second *ildhood' & ! uni=m s5sibility we _h at bir?4 ,no philosophy b ! sub/antial expla9s memory4 ,ideali/s & metaphysicians1 :o recognise only consci\sness1 are utt]ly unable to acc\nt = ! revival ( a %ad[y sort ( objects 9 ! abs5ce ( _! orig9al causes4 ,"h is ! melan*oly confession ( ,john ,/u>t ,mill on ! subject3-- ',if we speak ( ! ,m9d z a s]ies ( feel+s1 we are oblig$ to complete ! /atem5t by call+ x a s]ies ( feel+s :i* is aw>e ( itself z pa/ & future3 & we are r$uc$ to ! alt]native ( believ+ t ! ,m9d1 or ,ego1 is some?+ diff]5t f any s]ies ( feel+s1 or possibilities ( !m1 or ( accept+ ! p>adox t some?+ :i* ex hypo!si is b a s]ies ( feel+s1 c be aw>e ( itself z a s]ies4 ',! tru? is t we are "h face to face ) t f9al inexplicability at :i*1 z ,sir ,w4 ,hamilton obs]ves1 we inevitably arrive :5 we rea* ultimate facts2 & 9 g5]al "o mode ( /at+ x only appe>s m incompreh5sible ?an ano!r1 because ! :ole ( human language is accommodat$ to ! "o1 & is s incongru\s ) ! o!r1 t x _c be express$ 9 any t]ms :i* d n d5y its tru?4 ,! real /umbl+-block is p]haps n 9 any !ory ( ! fact1 b 9 ! fact itself4 ,! true incompreh5sibility p]haps is1 t some?+ :i* has ceas$1 or is n yet 9 exi/5ce1 c /ill be1 9 a mann]1 pres5t3 t a s]ies ( feel+s1 ! inf9itely great] "p ( :i* is pa/ or future1 c be ga!r$ up z x 7 into a s+le pres5t conception1 accompani$ by a belief ( reality4 ,i ?9k1 by f> ! wise/ ?+ we c d is to accept ! inexplicable fact1 )\t any !ory ( h[ x takes place2 & :5 we are oblig$ to speak ( x 9 t]ms :i* assume a !ory1 to use !m ) a res]vation z to _! mean+#h4' ,memory an ultimate fact6 ,x is ! fir/ t />es u 9 ! face on beg9n+ to philosophise1 & x haunts u ?r\gh all our subsequ5t speculations4 ,x is ! 'dwell] on ! ?re%old' ( philosophy1 :i* unless we ov]come w ov]come u1 & fru/rate our magic4 ,! passage quot$ does n %[ ,mill's usual c&\r & consi/5cy4 ,8 philosophy has brok5 d[n on an ess5tial po9t1 & he is reluctant to admit x4 ,he tries to ?r[ ! blame on o!r ?+s1 & recomm5ds t ^? :o ?9k ) him %\ld ma9ta9 a discreet sil5ce on ! subject ( memory1 or if oblig$ to speak ( x d s 9 ambigu\s language4 ,t is h>dly hone/1 & is bad philosophical practice4 ,:at we "k or ?9k we "k we may leave alone--x w n run away2 x is :at we are consci\s ( n kn[+ t %\ld receive our p]si/5t att5tion4 ,mat]ialism pres5ts at fir/ sight ! data out ( :i* to con/ruct a !ory ( memory1 = x recognises ! dep5d5t "* ( consci\sness & takes body to be its sub/ance4 ,does ! body %[ any m>ks or traces ( ?\ght t may s]ve to revive ideas 9 ! abs5ce ( objects8 ,none h yet be5 discov]$4 ,n]ves are us$ 9 objective obs]vation1 b !y d n appe> to be ess5tial ei!r to recollection 9 g5]al or to any ( ! m elaborate =ms ( int]nal ?\ght4 ,! bra9 is us$ only :5 giv+ expression to ?\ght4 ,memory is notic$ by ev]yone1 ev5 ! lea/ metaphysical4 ,p]sons :o are incapable ( und]/&+ ! diff]5ce betwe5 object & subject or g5]al & p>ticul>1 are yet p]fectly well aw>e ( ! diff]5ce betwe5 rememb]+ & =gett+4 ,! phrases relat+ to ?is di/9ction are ! commone/ 9 e language4 ,memory is conspicu\s--notori\s--palpable4 ,x is ! pivot on :i* ! :ole m5tal sy/em revolves4 ,x _c be ga9said or ignor$4 ,!re is no pr(it 9 boycott+ x 9 ! mann] recomm5d$ by ,mill--x mu/ be fac$ & expla9$4 ',h[ d y acc\nt = memory8' %\ld be ! fir/ "q address$ to "o :o pret5ds to h a sci5ce ( m9d4 ,if he has no plausible answ] to give1 8 sy/em is n wor? discussion4 ,a philosophy )\t a !ory ( memory is l an a/ronomy )\t gravitation4 ,x--,,memory ,,( ,,s5tim5ts ,s5tim5ts are rememb]$ & recollect$ l objects4 ,= in/ance1 a boy is puni%$ = do+ wrong & has pa92 he does wrong aga9 & is haunt$ ) ! fe> ( be+ puni%$ aga91 :i* is ! recollect$ & anticipat$ pa94 ,we h ?us two species ( s5tim5t correspond+ exactly to object & idea4 ,! ^w 'feel+' is appropriate to ! fir/1 'emotion' to ! second4 ',passion' is a /rong degree ( ei!r4 ,objects t are associat$ ) feel+s are bett] rememb]$ ?an ^? t m]ely affect ! intellect1 = !re is a d\ble memory at "w--"o 9 ! core & "o on ! surface ( our m9d4 ,s5tim5ts are n susceptible ( ! same degree ( analysis z objects4 ,! inn] matrix is m fluid & does n keep details4 ,ap>t f ! objects associat$ ) feel+s1 !re is n mu* opportunity or ne$ = classify+ !m4 ,we are happy1 wret*$1 or indiff]5t--t sums up ! s5tim5tal exp]i5ce4 ,no two moral philosoph]s give ! same li/ ( s5tim5ts4 ,"s are satisfi$ ) two--pa9 & pleasure4 ,sp9oza gives a li/ ( =ty-sev5#i s5tim5ts1 :i* includes luxury & drunk5ness4 ,x is evid5t t luxury is a g5]al t]m :i* cov]s _m diff]5t =ms ( feel+1 & if ! feel+ ( intoxication by alcohol is wor? m5tion+1 s also mu/ be ! intoxications by opium & tobacco2 & if ^! are includ$ we mu/ admit ! feel+ ( nausea1 :i* br+s u to ! s5tim5ts associat$ ) all diseas$ conditions ( body or m9d4 ,su* di/9ctions are sup]flu\s1 = if ! s5tim5t is purely p]sonal & n associat$ ) an ext]nal object1 x is n ( any g5]al int]e/2 if associat$ ) an object & common to _m p]sons x is be/ def9$ by ref]5ce to ! object--z ! pleasure ( smell+ a rose4 ,we h sometimes feel+s ( elation & depression = :i* we _c f9d an int]nal reason nor yet an objective sign4 ,_m ( ! s-call$ religi\s exp]i5ces are ( ?is sort4 ,s also are ! sudd5 sympa?ies & av]sions we feel t[>ds c]ta9 p & places4 ,"h !re is an object1 b we _c f9d any?+ 9 ! object t c be tak5 z specially significant ( ! feel+4 ,we are said n to be able to 'analyse' our feel+1 t is1 assign x an object z cause4 ,^! abnormal feel+s may be expla9$ by suppos+ t "s ext]nal influ5ces succe$ 9 rea*+ our s5tim5t )\t excit+ our intellect4 ,consid]+ t intellect is artificial & may be v imp]fect1 & also t its effici5cy dep5ds to "s ext5t on its be+ less s5sitive ?an ! orig9al m5tal nature1 x is reasonable to conclude t subtle emanations f our surr\nd+s may occasionally affect u )\t excit+ ! intellectual consci\sness4 ,panic1 inspiration1 mesm]ism1 & o!r 'occult' influ5ces are probably due to ?is cause4 ,if we fur!r assume t s5tim5ts s excit$ may !n1 by association1 excite appropriate ideas 9 ! intellect ( ! recipi5t1 we h a likely explanation ( :at is call$ '?\ght-transf]5ce4' ,s9ce ideas excite emotions1 x is reasonable to suppose t feel+s may excite ideas1 or ev5 ! illusion t objects are be+ p]ceiv$4 ,,xi--,,comp>ison ,mo/ ideas1 except ! p>ticul> 7:i* are copies ( s+le objects71 are associat$ ) a consci\sness ( resemblance & diff]5ce :i* arises 9 ! foll[+ mann]4 ,:5 new exp]i5ce simply revives ! impr9t ( a =m] exp]i5ce we call x ! same object or objects1 ?\gh x is n num]ically ! same1 be+ diff]5t at lea/ 9 "t4 ,if a totally new impr9t is made 9 ! m9d ! exp]i5ce is q novel or /range1 b we d n call x diff]5t4 ,exp]i5ce is usually nei!r q ! same z be=e nor q /range1 :i* means t ! pres5t n\m5on has p>tially reviv$ an old impr9t & made a p>tially new "o4 ,9 ?is case we h a quadruple consci\sness4 ,!re is fir/ ! pres5t object2 next ! recollection ( ! object orig9ally associat$ ) ! same impr9t2 ?irdly1 a consci\sness ( resemblance betwe5 ! new & ! old 7! pres5t object & ! recollect$ idea7 9 s f> z ! impr9ts co9cide1 & 7f\r?ly7 a s5se ( diff]5ce 9 s f> z !y disagree4 ,! limitation ( resemblance gives rise to ! s5se ( diff]5ce--a negative consci\sness--& ! %ock ( diff]5ce emphasises ! resemblance4 ,?is is ,comp>ison1 ! common basis ( ,g5]alisation & ,imag9ation4 ,footnote #f3 ,z if ! image _h ! =m ( a /5cil4 ,footnote #g3 ,locke1 ,essay on ! ,und]/&+1 ii4 x4 #e4 ,footnote #h3 ,exam4 ( ,hamilton's ,philosophy1 p4 #bab-c4 ,footnote #i3 ,i app5d ,sp9oza's li/1 & pr9t 9 italics ! s5tim5ts t appe> to me to be emotions z di/+ui%$ f feel+s4 ,desire--,pleasure--,pa9--,wond]--,conte mpt--,love--,hate-- ,incl9ation--,av]sion--,devotion--,d]isi on--,hope--,fe>-- ,confid5ce--,despair--,joy--,grief--,pit y--,approval--,indignation-- ,ov]e/eem--,disp>agem5t--,envy--,m]cy 7or goodwill7--,self-cont5tm5t--,humility--, rep5tance--,pride-- ,dejection--,hon\r--,%ame--,regret--,emu lation--,?ankfulness-- ,b5evol5ce--,ang]--,rev5ge--,cruelty--,d >+--,c[>dice-- ,con/]nation--,civility 7or def]5ce7--,ambition--,luxury--,drunk5nes s--,av>ice--,lu/4 ,pollock's ,sp9oza1 *4 vii4 ,,g5]alisation ,,xii--,,nature ,,& ,,function ,g5]al ,ideas are =m$ by ! co9cid5t impr9t ( sev]al objects 9 "s respects diff]5t1 b :i* h all a resemblance z objects1 & are besides ! signs ( ! same s5tim5tal effect4 ,if ! effects are diff]5t ! confusion ( ! objects occasions practical error1 z :5 we mi/ake "o man = ano!r :om he closely resembles4 ,?\gh ! s5tim5tal utilities %\ld be ! same1 ! object _c be r$uc$ to a common idea if !y are q dissimil>3 = example1 a s&-glass & a wat* h simil> uses1 b !y _c be g5]aliz$4 ,! value ( g5]alisation to a ?9k] is t x economises memory & recollection by mak+ "o common or av]age idea d duty = _m p>ticul> ideas4 ,let u foll[ ! process 9 detail4 ,! fir/ p]ception ( an object leaves an impr9t 9 ! sub/ance ( ! intellect4 ,a second p]ception p>tially resembl+ ! fir/ revives ! fir/ to ! ext5t at lea/ ( ! resemblance4 ,suppos+ ?is is done by a hundr$ simil> objects x is pla9 t ! resembl+ prop]ties w h be5 exp]i5c$ a hundr$ times1 :]eas ! di/+ui%+ attributes may h be5 felt a few times only1 9 "s cases only once4 ,unless we h special reasons = obs]v+ ! diff]5ces & s deep5+ ! impressions ( !m1 !y w fade f our memory at a rate correspond+ to ! paucity ( exp]i5ces4 ,! mo/ g5]al idea w la/ longe/ because !re ! impression has be5 v deep4 ,our idea ( ,man or ,animal w on ?is pr9ciple1 z x is f\nd to d 9 fact1 outla/ our memory ( _m concrete m5 & animals4 ,! objects t contribute to =m a g5]al idea or ,class are commonly said to 'belong to1' or to 'inh]e 91' or to be 'br\ght "u' ! idea or class4 ,all ^! metaphors are wrong & occasion mi/akes4 ,g5]alisation is no?+ b cond5s$ or epitomis$ recollection2 x is practis$ by ourselves = our own conv5i5ce1 & does n imply any ess5tial or extra-p]sonal relation betwe5 ! objects4 ,we are free to classify ?+s 9 any ord] we f9d useful4 ,a f>m]'s classification ( "s animals into cattle1 game1 f[ls1 birds1 & v]m91 is p]fectly legitimate1 = ea* species is bas$ on a diff]5t utility = him4 ,we %\ld di/+ui% g5]al ideas :i* we ourselves h drawn f our prim>y exp]i5ce1 f ! ideas sugge/$ by v]bal def9itions ( g5]al ideas =m$ by o!r m9ds4 ,suppos+ ! objects 9 "q to be q unkn[n to u1 ! def9itional idea is m l a p>ticul> or imag9>y idea ?an a g5]al idea4 ,x is a s+le ?9 rigid idea1 utt]ly unlike ! flexible sugge/ive ?\ght evolv$ f a l>ge mass ( p]sonal exp]i5ce4 ,def9itional g5]al ideas are z unsatisfactory z describ$ objects1 b we are sometimes compell$ to use bo? :5 p]sonal exp]i5ce is totally want+4 ,x is a common error to suppose t g5]al ideas _c exi/ 9 ! intellect )\t words by :i* to "n !m4 ,words & o!r modes ( m>k+ ideas are useful 9 all dep>tm5ts ( ?\ght1 b n m necess>y 9 g5]al ?\ght ?an 9 any o!r4 ,an active intellect makes ?\s&s ( obs]vations & scores ( g5]al ideas :i* x may h no means or wi% to express 9 language4 ,g5]alisation is v l ! op]ation call$ composite photography4 ,a numb] ( p]sons are pos$ 9 ! same attitude & p>tially photograph$ on ! same plate4 ,! result is an av]age or mean lik5ess ( ! :ole gr\p1 b n an exact portrait ( any individual4 ,s g5]al ideas are 'means' or 'av]ages' ( _m resembl+ b slightly diff]+ objects4 ,!re are o!r ?+s 9 ! photographic art rem>kably simil> to intellectual ?9k+4 ,! gelat9e film behaves v l ! m5tal plasma3 only "o o!r physical object 7s f> z ,i am aw>e7 is a bett] image ( ! plasm4 ,9 !ory ! object or ph5om5on has no importance4 ,ev5 :5 x has ! quality we call 'beauty1' t is n a prop]ty ( ! b>e object1 = x is n se5 by e p]son or animal ) good eyesight2 x is a s5tim5tal effect associat$ ) ! object4 ,h5ce we might1 if x 7 possible1 ignore all objects except ^? :i* h value to u z signs ( s5tim5tal effects4 ,b 9 practice we _c d ?is4 ,objects are ?ru/ ^u our notice :i* we _c avoid1 & :i* h no s5tim5tal int]e/ = u4 ,^! objects are necess>ily classifi$ accord+ to _! ph5om5al appe>ance only1 & su* ideas lack an ess5tial *>act]i/ic ( true g5]al ideas4 ,b we _c prev5t _! =mation 9 ! m9d1 = g5]alisation is m]ely a k9d ( abbreviat$ memory1 &1 objects be+ once p]ceiv$1 _! recollection is to a great ext5t beyond our control4 ,artificial & adv5titi\s utilities produce ! same k9d ( "o-sid$ g5]alisation4 ,if society pays a man 9 fame or money to obs]ve & describe c]ta9 ?+s1 8 classification ( !m w be purely ph5om5al4 ,he w classify dogs ) wolves & night%ade ) potato1 & w lump toge!r ! :ole population ( a c\ntry 9 "o class1 al?\gh x consi/s ( ! mo/ div]s elem5ts--fools & philosoph]s1 rogues & righte\s1 sa9ts & s9n]s1 patricians & plebeians4 ,^! are diff]5ces mu* m important ?an sam5ess ( nationality1 col\r1 race1 or language4 ,?is practice1 no d\bt1 gives symmetrical classifications4 ,! great] classes are subdivid$ into subord9ate classes1 & ^! aga9 into l[] classes 9 a _m-/epp$ s]ies4 ,gradation occurs also 9 true g5]alisation1 b n to ! same ext5t4 ,if we conf9e our obs]vation to ?+s t are mu* l ea* o!r1 ! av]age idea w n be greatly diff]5t f a p>ticul> idea3 ?is is call$ l[ness 9 g5]ality4 ,if we run toge!r quadrup$s1 bip$s & fi%es1 we %all h a mu* high] g5]al idea3 ! av]age w be v unlike any concrete animal4 ,! high] we g5]alise ! small] becomes ! cont5t ( ! idea1 b ! wid] its ext5sion1 t is1 ! realm ( objects f :i* x has be5 drawn1 or :i* x is consid]$ to repres5t4 ,! usual practice is to g5]alise by f9e gradations4 ,get ! g5]al idea ( %eep1 !n ( c[1 !n ( horse2 !n av]age ! av]ages4 ,! result is mu* ! same if we run all ! objects toge!r & av]age !m 9 "o op]ation1 b ! sl[] process gives ! neat] results4 ,! gradations ( g5]ality are di/+ui%$ by names su* z 7beg9n+ f bel[7 v>iety1 species1 g5us1 class1 family1 k+dom4 ',conceptualism' is ! metaphysical doctr9e n[ preval5t ) respect to g5]al ideas4 ,!y are reg>d$ n z objects nor z ess5ces1 b z =ms ( consci\sness dep5d+ m or less on our own m5tal activity4 ,?is is true en\gh s f> z x goes1 b )\t a sub/antial plasm to hold ! 'concept' its =mation & endurance are q inexplicable4 ,,xiii--,,matt] ,matt] is ! "n giv5 to ! mo/ g5]al idea we c =m ( objects4 ,x is suppos$ to cov] all ( !m4 ,9 o!r words1 ! cont5t or 'ess5ce' ( ! idea is ! attribute or attributes common to all objects )\t exception4 ,x is ! univ]sal objective m9imum--! lea/ objective exp]i5ce consi/5t ) ! exp]i5ce be+ objective4 ,"s h attempt$ to def9e ?is g5]al idea m precisely by id5tify+ x ) "s ab/ract prop]ty su* z ext5sion1 resi/ance1 etc4 ,an object may be mat]ial )\t (f]+ any resi/ance to human en]gy1 z a beam ( light4 ,a mat]ial object may also be )\t ext5sion1 z a s\nd or smell4 ,! only quality left to matt] is b>e objectivity1 namely1 t x is a =m ( consci\sness excit$ 9 a m9d by "s o!r m9d1 n occurr+ spontane\sly4 ,?is seems to me ! only true connotation ( matt]4 ,matt] is n ! anti!sis ( m9d2 x is a m]e affection ( m9d4 ,! two are n 9 any prop] s5se co-ord9ate or equipoll5t4 ,!y are to ea* o!r some:at 9 ! relation ( a mirror to an image reflect$ f x4 ,m9d is to ea* ( u a concrete prim>y exp]i5ce--! feel+ ( p]sonal p[] & id5tity4 ,matt] is a g5]al idea aris+ f ! comp>ison ( objects 9 consci\sness4 ,no two ?+s c\ld well be m div]se4 ,s9ce g5]al ideas are products ( our own m5tal en]gy1 & matt] ! mo/ g5]al ( all1 x is ! f>!/ remov$ f ! concrete objective condition1 & s x is lit]ally true t we nev] objectively p]ceive matt] ?\gh we con/antly p]ceive mat]ial objects4 ,x is z impossible to see1 t\*1 or ta/e matt] z x is to ride ! g5]al idea ,equus or d9e (f ! g5]al idea n\ri%m5t4 ,9 d5y+ ! objectivity ( matt] we d n d5y ! objective reality ( ?+s3 we m]ely decl9e to conf\nd a g5]al idea ) ! objects t h contribut$ to =m x4 ,we decl9e to be my/ics1 9 ! s5se def9$ by ,j4 ,s4 ,mill#aj4 ,! belief 9 ! ext]nal exi/5ce ( matt] is a =m ( my/icism2 ! ,h9dus call x maya1 mean+ illusion4 ,"s metaphysicians argue t s9ce ph5om5a appe> only 9 conjunction1 we are compell$ by ! con/itution ( our nature to ?9k ( !m conjo9$ 9 & by some?+1 & ?is imag9>y f\ndation & cem5t is ano!r mean+ ( ! ^w 'matt]4' ,= myself ,i feel no su* compulsion4 ,:5 ?+s are complex ,i recollect ! sev]al prop]ties z coh]+ toge!r1 & :5 ,i ab/ract "o or "s = special consid]ation1 ,i sometimes ?9k ( ! o!rs z =m+ a 'sub/ance' 9 :i* ! ab/ract$ prop]ties inh]e4 ,b ,i _c discov] any inh]5ce or coh]5ce except ! mutual1 & ! notion ( an invisible mat]ial sett+ :i* holds all ! p>ts ( a ?+ toge!r seems to me sup]flu\s & unw>rant$4 ,if x exi/$ x w\ld n be1 z logicians argue1 some?+ sup]ior & anti!tical to ph5om5a2 x w\ld be simply an inf]r$ or lat5t ph5om5on l ! lum9if]\s e!r ( sci5ce4 ,! mat]ial sub/ance is evid5tly a grop+ ( ! m9d aft] ! n\m5al 7m5tal7 sub/ance :i* causes ! appe>ance ( objects4 ,,xiv--,,nom9alism ,nom9ali/s d5y ! exi/5ce ( g5]al ideas z di/9ct f p>ticul> ideas4 ,mo/ ( !m affirm t we employ g5]al or common words to signify ! common prop]ties ( simil> ?+s1 b t we are incapable ( ?9k+ ( ^! common prop]ties ap>t f ! o!r prop]ties t accompany !m4 ,:y we %\ld wi% to use signs ( ?+s we _c ?9k ab\t1 or h[ a ^w c be a 'sign' :5 we are incapable ( atta*+ a def9ite mean+ to x1 are po9ts n satisfactorily cle>$ up by nom9ali/s4 ,consid]+ h[ well ,b]keley's pr9ciple1 comb9$ ) ! plasmic !ory1 acc\nts = g5]alisation1 & h[ inevitable x is t !re %\ld be g5]al ideas di/+ui%able f p>ticul> ideas by sup]ior brilliancy & endurance1 x is surpris+ to f9d 9 ,b]keley "o ( ! mo/ conv9c$ & eloqu5t ( nom9ali/s4 ,8 views on ! subject h s mu* weight ) philosoph]s t ,i mu/ exam9e !m at l5g?4 ',x is agre$ on all h&s1' he writes 9 ! ,introduction to 8 ,pr9ciples1 't ! qualities or modes ( ?+s d nev] really exi/ ea* ( !m ap>t by itself1 & sep>at$ f all o!rs1 b are mix$1 z x 71 & bl5d$ toge!r1 sev]al 9 ! same object4 ,b1 we are told1 ! m9d be+ able to consid] ea* quality s+ly1 or ab/ract$ f ^? o!r qualities ) :i* x is unit$1 does by t means frame to itself ab/ract ideas4 ,= example1 !re is p]ceiv$ by sight an object ext5d$1 col\r$1 & mov$3 ?is mix$ or comp\nd idea ! m9d resolv+ into its simple con/itu5t p>ts1 & view+ ea* by itself1 exclusive ( ! re/1 does frame ! ab/ract ideas ( ext5sion1 col\r1 & motion4 ,n t x is possible = col\r or motion to exi/ )\t ext5sion2 b only t ! m9d c frame to itself by ab/raction ! idea ( col\r exclusive ( ext5sion1 & ( motion exclusive ( bo? col\r & ext5sion4' ,ab/ract ideas d n =m a f\r? class ( ideas b are fractions ( p>ticul>1 g5]al1 or imag9>y ideas1 & may 7z ,b]keley1 report+ ! metaphysical doctr9e1 says7 be s+le or p>tial prop]ties m5tally deta*$ f ! collective prop]ties =m+ an object4 ,9 ?is case !y are ab/ract$ prop]ties1 n ideas4 ,s9ce g5]al ideas are less complete ?an ! p>ticul> ideas f :i* !y 7 drawn1 !y are ab/ract ideas 9 s f> z !y are p>tial ideas2 b all ab/ract ideas are n g5]al ideas4 ,b]keley's nom9alism is bas$ on ! suppos$ impossibility ( =m+ any sort ( p>tial idea1 & he n[ proce$s to reproduce ! metaphysical acc\nt ( ! g5]al ab/ract idea4 ',& z ! m9d frames to itself ab/ract ideas ( qualities or modes1 s does x1 by ! same precision or m5tal sep>ation1 atta9 ab/ract ideas g5]al ideas ( ! m comp\nd$ be+s :i* include sev]al co-exi/5t qualities4 ,= example1 ! m9d hav+ obs]v$ t ,pet]1 ,james1 & ,john resemble ea* o!r 9 c]ta9 common agreem5ts ( %ape & o!r qualities1 leaves out ( ! complex or comp\nd$ idea x has ( ,pet]1 ,james1 & any o!r p>ticul> man1 t :i* is peculi> to ea*1 reta9+ only :at is common to all1 & s makes an ab/ract g5]al idea :]e9 all ! p>ticul>s equally p>take--ab/ract+ entirely f & cutt+ (f ^? circum/ances & diff]5ces :i* might det]m9e x to any p>ticul> exi/5ce4 ,& aft] ?is mann] x is said we come by ! ab/ract g5]al idea ( man1 or1 if y please1 humanity or human nature2 :]e9 x is true !re is includ$ col\r1 because !re is no man b has "s col\r1 b !n x c be nei!r :ite1 nor black1 nor any p>ticul> col\r1 because !re is no "o p>ticul> col\r :]e9 all m5 p>take4 ,s likewise !re is includ$ /ature1 b !n x is nei!r tall /ature1 nor l[ /ature1 nor yet middle /ature1 b some?+ ab/ract$ f all ^!4 ,& s ( ! re/4 ,moreov]1 !re be+ a great v>iety ( o!r creatures t p>take ( "s p>ts1 b n all1 ( ! complex idea ( man1 ! m9d1 leav+ out ^? p>ts :i* are peculi> to m51 & reta9+ ^? only :i* are common to all ! liv+ creatures1 frames ! idea ( animal1 :i* ab/racts n only f all p>ticul> m51 b also all birds1 bea/s1 fi%es & insects4 ,! con/itu5t p>ts ( ! ab/ract idea ( animal are body1 life1 s5se1 & spontane\s motion4 ,by body is meant body )\t any p>ticul> %ape or figure1 !re be+ no "o %ape or figure common to all animals1 )\t cov]+ ei!r ( hair1 or fea!rs1 or scales1 c41 nor yet nak$3 hair1 fea!rs1 scales1 & nak$ness be+ ! di/+ui%+ prop]ties ( p>ticul> animals1 & = t reason left out ( ! ab/ract g5]al idea4 ,^u ! same acc\nt ! spontane\s motion mu/ be nei!r walk+1 nor fly+1 nor creep+2 x is nev]!less a motion1 b :at t motion is x is n easy to conceive4' ,?is is a fair p>aphrase ( ! acc\nts giv5 by metaphysicians ( ! mann] ( =m+ g5]al ideas4 ,x is also 9 itself a p]fectly correct acc\nt ( ! process1 consid]$ simply z a manife/ation ( consci\sness or a succession ( /ates ( consci\sness1 t is1 ap>t f ! sub/antial plasmic op]ation ( :i* x is m]ely ! symptom4 ,b]keley h[ev] d5ies t x is a true /atem5t ( :at takes place 9 ! m9d ( consci\sness4 ',:e!r o!rs h ?is wond]ful faculty ( ab/ract+ _! ideas1 !y be/ c tell2 = myself1 ,i f9d inde$ ,i h a faculty ( imag9+ or repres5t+ to myself1 ! ideas ( ^? p>ticul> ?+s ,i h p]ceiv$1 & ( v>i\sly comp\nd+ & divid+ !m4 ,i c imag9e a man ) two heads1 or ! upp] p>ts ( a man jo9$ to ! body ( a horse4 ,i c consid] ! h&1 ! eye1 ! nose ea* by itself ab/ract$ or sep>at$ f ! re/ ( ! body4 ,b !n1 :atev] h& or eye ,i imag9e1 x mu/ h "s p>ticul> %ape or col\r4 ,likewise ! idea ( man t ,i frame to myself mu/ be ei!r ( a :ite1 or a black1 or a tawny1 a /raight1 or a crook$1 a tall1 or a l[1 or a middle-siz$ man4 ,i _c by any ef=t ( ?\ght conceive ! ab/ract idea above describ$4 ,& x is equally impossible = me to =m ! ab/ract idea ( motion di/9ct f ! body mov+1 & :i* is nei!r swift nor sl[1 curvil9e> nor rectil9e>2 & ! l may be said ( all o!r ab/ract g5]al ideas :atsoev]4 ,to be pla91 ,i own myself able to ab/ract 9 "o s5se1 z :5 ,i consid] "s p>ticul> p>ts or qualities sep>at$ f o!rs1 & :i*1 ?\gh !y are unit$ 9 "s object1 yet x is possible !y may really exi/ )\t !m4 ,b ,i d5y t ,i c ab/ract f "o ano!r1 or conceive sep>ately1 ^? qualities :i* x is impossible %\ld exi/ s sep>at$2 or t ,i c =m a g5]al notion1 by ab/ract+ f p>ticul>s 9 ! mann] a=esaid--:i* la/ are ! two prop] acceptations ( ab/raction4 ,& !re is gr\nd to ?9k mo/ m5 w ackn[l$ge !mselves to be 9 my case4 ,! g5]ality ( m5 :i* are simple & illit]ate nev] pret5d to ab/ract notions g5]al ideas4 ,x is said !y are difficult & n to be atta9$ )\t pa9s & /udy2 we may !re=e reasonably conclude t1 if su* !re be1 !y are conf9$ only to ! le>n$4' ,x is q true t '! simple & illit]ate nev] pret5d to ab/ract notions1' = ! suffici5t reason t !y d n "k ! names ( _! m5tal op]ations1 ev5 if !y are capable ( discrim9at+ !m4 ,= ! same reason !y d n pret5d to talk prose or to be reali/s4 ,! practice ( e pr(ession & craft1 ev5 ! humble/1 involves ab/raction & g5]alisation4 ,! objective prop]ties associat$ ) a giv5 utility h to be ab/ract$ f ^? :i* are indiff]5t1 & ?is is :at enables m5 ( exp]i5ce 9 any bran* ( indu/ry or art to =m a spe$y judgm5t on matt]s t\*+ _! special affairs4 ,x is 9 "p :at di/+ui%es ! 'pr(essional' f ! 'amateur4' ,b]keley's disclaim] ( any p[] 9 himself to =m g5]al ideas is no d\bt s9c]e1 & he is ju/ifi$ 9 reason+ f himself to o!rs4 ,b ! po9t at issue is1 :e!r ,b]keley 9 ?is in/ance correctly analys$ 8 own m5tal processes4 ,! fact t he 0 correct 9 "s po9ts ( great importance does n preclude u f surmis+ t he may h be5 wrong 9 o!rs ( less importance4 ,9 comp>ison ) 8 discov]y ( ! sub/antiality ( m9d1 8 ov]sight on ! subject ( ab/raction is a bagatelle4 ,he expla9s ! exi/5ce ( g5]al words on ! !ory t !y are names ( p>ticul> ideas :i* we use to repres5t all simil> ideas4 '444 an idea :i*1 consid]$ 9 itself1 is p>ticul>1 becomes g5]al by be+ made to repres5t or /& = all o!r p>ticul> ideas ( ! same sort4 ,to make ?is pla9 by an example1 suppose a geometrician is demon/rat+ ! me?od ( cutt+ a l9e 9 two equal p>ts4 ,he draws1 = in/ance1 a black l9e ( "o in* 9 l5g?3 ?is1 :i* 9 itself is a p>ticul> l9e1 is nev]!less ) reg>d to its signification g5]al1 s9ce1 z x is !re us$1 x repres5ts all p>ticul> l9es :atsoev]2 s t :at is demon/rat$ ( x is demon/rat$ ( all l9es1 or1 9 o!r words1 ( a l9e 9 g5]al4 ,&1 z t p>ticul> l9e becomes g5]al by be+ made a sign1 s ! "n l9e1 :i* tak5 absolutely is p>ticul>1 by be+ a sign is made g5]al4 ,& z ! =m] owes its g5]ality n to its be+ ! sign ( an ab/ract or g5]al l9e1 b ( all p>ticul> "r l9es t may possibly exi/1 s ! latt] mu/ be ?\ght to d]ive its g5]ality f ! same cause1 namely1 ! v>i\s p>ticul> l9es :i* x indiff]5tly d5otes4' ,^! extracts w suffice to %[ :at 0 ,b]keley's doctr9e on ! subject ( g5]al ideas4 ,) respect to ! analogy suppos$ to exi/ betwe5 ! g5]ality ( a "n & ! g5]ality ( a g5]al idea1 x has to be obs]v$ t a "n owes its g5]ality solely to its be+ ! sign ( a g5]al idea4 ,x is an imput$ or conv5tional g5]ality1--9 its prop] "* a g5]al "n is concrete & individual4 ,also x does n resemble ! ?+ x signifies 7! g5]al idea71 nor ! concrete ?+s f :i* t has be5 d]iv$4 ,! g5]ality ( a g5]al idea1 on ! o!r h&1 dep5ds altoge!r on its resemblance to _m p>ticul> ?+s4 ,x is indep5d5t ( conv5tion4 ,h5ce !re is no real analogy betwe5 ! two g5]alities4 ,consid]+ t ,b]keley pr(esses himself unable to imag9e ab/ract prop]ties1 x is surpris+ h[ easily & naturally he writes ab\t geometrical l9es--:i* are ab/ract prop]ties4 ,probably he means concrete /rokes4 ,:at sort ( repres5tation c subsi/ betwe5 "o concrete /roke & e o!r concrete /roke8 ,if x is /raight x w n correctly repres5t a curve2 if x is curv$ x w n repres5t a /raight /roke4 ,a /roke an in* long _c /& = a /roke a hundr$ miles long2 a black /roke does n prop]ly repres5t a r$ /roke4 ,s x is incorrect to say t ':at is demon/rat$ ( x is demon/rat$ ( all /rokes1 or1 9 o!r words1 ( a /roke 9 g5]al4' ,a p>ticul> object c /& only = itself1 & if g5]al words /& = _m ?+s x is n by direct repres5tation1 b because !y fir/ sugge/ g5]al ideas1 :i* are ! true sub/itutes ( _m p>ticul> ?+s4 ,a ref]5ce to geometrical objects1 !mselves s ab/ract1 is a d\btful mode ( %[+ h[ well "o concrete ?+ c repres5t o!rs4 ,_h ,b]keley tak5 a m complex object z 8 g5]al repres5tative he w\ld h se5 ! weakness ( 8 argum5t4 ,suppose a biologi/ has to disc\rse on a prov9ce ( animal life compris+ _m species1 & takes an individual ( "o species z a repres5tative ( ! :ole4 ,8 sample is p]haps a h>e1 b he has to treat ( birds & fi%es4 ,:at is to prev5t 8 he>]s f conclud+ t birds are furr$ animals & fi%es quadrup$s8 ,are !y to be expect$ to see 9 ! h>e only ! prop]ties common to all ! animals review$8 ,if s !y h ! p[] d5i$ !m by nom9ali/s ( =m+ a pure g5]al idea1 & ! h>e is sup]flu\s4 ,! common prop]ties c\ld h be5 def9$ & imag9$ )\t a concrete specim51 ) irrelevant attributes1 be+ br\ght into ! disc\rse4 ,all nom9ali/s insi/ t if we ?9k long on a g5]al idea x becomes p>ticul>1 & f ?is !y argue t x is n1 & nev] has be51 a g5]al idea#aa4 ,! exp]im5ts ( ?is sort propos$ by logicians are mislead+1 because we are )\t ! ord9>y motives = ?9k+ g5]ally4 ,9 practical ?\ght we h "s suffici5t reason = att5d+ to a fraction ( consci\sness & exclud+ ! re/1 & ! irrelevant qualities are di/9ctly less *>g$ ) att5tion ?an ! pr9cipal quality4 ,! p[] ( ab/ract+ ?\ght is a matt] ( education4 ,x is t rul+ ( ! _s :i* is m difficult ?an ! capture ( a city4 ,we h to ma/] ! re/less en]gic ,self & fix x d[n on a p>ticul> plasmic figure1 or a m]e po9t or edge ( "o1 prev5t+ ! en]gy f spread+ to adjac5t images4 ,t is irksome & fatigu+1 b x is only a high degree ( ! faculty ev]yone possesses ( di/+ui%+ p>ticul> objects f ea* o!r4 ,"s m9ds are s flaccid t y _c hold !m to "o subject1 ev5 ! mo/ p>ticul> & obvi\s1 = five m9utes at a "t4 ,tra9+ enables u to br+ into ! focus ( att5tion j :at we wi% to obs]ve or ?9k ab\t1 & leave ! re/ 9 ! backgr\nd1 h[ev] closely x may be connect$ ) ! matt] t imm$iately int]e/s u4 ,b = ?is p[] mu* ( our en]gy w\ld be exp5d$ to no purpose4 ,ab/raction is simply att5tion ( a m9ute & conc5trat$ k9d--a br++ ( our en]gy ( obs]vation or recollection to a f9e po9t4 ,:5 ab/raction ne$ n be prolong$--:5 we are free to pass rapidly f "o g5]al or ab/ract idea to ano!r--!re is no difficulty 9 p>tial ?9k+4 ,we skim ov] ! plasmic impr9ts1 lightly bru%+ ! surface ( ea* :]e x is mo/ prom95t & !re=e mo/ g5]al1 b n paus+ to recollect p>ticul>s4 ,x is ?is rapid delicate t\* we (t5e/ use 9 actual ?\ght2 b :5 = purposes ( exp]im5t we come d[n heavily on an impr9t1 !n ! ,self ov]fl[s to adjac5t *annels & p>ticul> memories are /irr$ up1 9 spite ( e ef=t to limit our att5tion4 ,s common & easy is rapid g5]al ?\ght t x is con/antly us$ z a sub/itute = concrete ?\ght1 :5 a sket*y treatm5t ( ?+s is all t is want$4 ',a bird has alight$ on ! f5ce4' ,! speak] saw a p>ticul> concrete bird1 & might h tri$ to describe x 9 ! concrete4 ,b ! attributes t r5d]$ x concrete are suppos$ n to be ( pres5t importance1 & ! he>] is consequ5tly invit$ to ?9k only ( bird 9 g5]al4 ,w\ld a nom9ali/ affirm t 9 su* a case ! words are mean+less unless ! idea is concret$--unless ! g5]al sket* is fill$ out 9 detail8 ,take ano!r example4 ',! man sat by ! w9d[ ov]look+ ! riv] t fl[$ t[>ds ! city4' ,"h all ! n\ns are g5]al1 b ! picture is individual & concrete4 ,x is also q intelligible1 z a sket*4 ,we c ?9k ( a man )\t assign+ to him any p>ticul> type ( face1 or col\r ( hair1 or /ature1 or age1 or clo?+4 ,our idea is ! g5]al idea man us$ z a sket* ( a p>ticul> man4 ,he is 9 a h\se because he is look+ ?r\gh a w9d[1 b we d n /ay to imag9e ! h\se z cottage1 inn1 or mansion4 ,we call up ! g5]al idea h\se1 :i* is def9ite en\gh = our purpose1 & we _c d\bt = a mom5t t we h su* a g5]al idea4 ,! riv] may be wide or n>r[1 /raight or crook$1 navigable or n1 b we ?9k only ( ! g5]al idea riv]1 :i* is wat] fl[+ betwe5 banks4 ,& surely we c imag9e a g5]al city )\t giv+ x any def9ite size1 or =m1 or nationality1 or numb] ( inhabitants6 ,^! consid]ations cle>ly demon/rate t we h g5]al ideas1 :i* are n m]ely concrete ideas us$ z examples1 & if we c employ !m 9 ! mann] j indicat$1 :]e a light sup]ficial recollection is all t is necess>y1 we c equally well use !m 9 _! m legitimate "*1 z signs ( c]ta9 g5]al utilities4 ,,xv--,,errors ,,) ,,respect ,,to ,,g5]alisation ,g5]alisation has be5 ! bane ( ,european philosophy4 ,x has monopolis$ well-nigh ! :ole metaphysical att5tion4 ,x has be5 consid]$ ! radical fact ( m9d f :i* all o!rs h gr[n1 :]eas x is no m ?an a me?od = abbreviat+ recollection4 ,x nei!r reveals to u new ?+s1 nor r$uces ! multiplicity ( ?+s actually exi/+4 ,plato insi/$ on ! importance ( g5]al ?\ght z aga9/ ! fluctional idealism ( ,h]aclitus1 b he 0 :olly mi/ak5 z to ! nature ( g5]al ideas4 ,he ?\ght !y 7 ext]nal objects--also types & causes ( prim>y objects4 ,b patt]ns are n causes1 & g5]al ideas are q obvi\sly sugge/$ by ?+s1 n ?+s d]iv$ f g5]al ideas4 ,! notion t ! g5]al idea is ei!r ! cause1 or an image & revelation ( ! cause1 ( ?+s is an error ( p]5nial recurr5ce4 ,9 "s =m or o!r x is always ) u4 ,plato also taught t g5]al ideas are recollections ( k acquir$ 9 ! condition prior to embodim5t1 :i* ! objective exp]i5ce ( ?is life s]ves to revive4 ,^! sev]al doctr9es are some:at inconsi/5t ) ea* o!r4 ,! la/ is int]e/+ b lacks confirmation4 ,ari/otle admitt$ ! sup]iority ( g5]al ov] p>ticul> ideas1 & ?\ght t ! =m] correspond$ to "s specially important "p ( objects call$ ! 'ess5ce4' ,?is is ne>] ! tru?4 ,! ess5ce ( an object is t "p ( x1 :i* be+ pres5t1 a giv5 s5tim5tal result foll[s1 or may be expect$ to foll[1 or may be made to foll[4 ,a c]ta9 exp]i5ce ( ?+s is necess>y be=e we c "k :at is ! objective m9imum consi/5t ) "s s5tim5tal utility4 ,if ?+s are classifi$ ) due reg>d to _! utilities1 ! ess5ce w be ! same z ! g5]al idea4 ,x is h[ev] n true t ! ess5ce or any o!r "p ( ! object causes ! s5tim5tal effect 7,,vii74 ,a common =m ( ! g5]ali/ic sup]/ition is to suppose t a ?+ is expla9$ or suffici5tly acc\nt$ = by classify+ x4 ,9 all philosophies ( ,greek d]ivation--! ,asiatic seem to be free f ?is defect--reason is consid]$ to be '! br++ ( a ?+ "u a class-notion1' & :5 ?is is done we are suppos$ to "k ! ?+ completely4 ,an elaborate & utt]ly false dialectic has be5 erect$ on ?is f\ndation4 ,no d\bt our fir/ attempt at expla9+ a ?+ is to ref] x to a g5]al idea--to classify x4 ,?is usually sugge/s some?+ to add to ! b>e ph5om5on by way ( explanation or hypo!sis4 ,b only if we h a prior k ( ! g5]al idea1 d]iv$ f ?+s bett] kn[n ?an ! pres5t ph5om5on4 ,! g5]al idea is simply a %ort =mula ( t prior k4 ,suppose we ?or\ghly "k a body ( simil> ?+s a1 b1 c1 & also r$uce !m to ! g5]al image ,x2 !n on see+ d & notic+ t x is l a1 b1 c1 we briefly ?9k1 ',oh1 x is ,x1' :i* excuses u f /udy+ x fur!r4 ,we at once transf] to d our :ole k ( a1 b1 c1 & 9 ?is ideal transf] ! explanation consi/s--n 9 ! classification4 ,! transf] is (t5 tacit--if explicit x is an 'argum5t4' ,if !re has be5 no bett] kn[n a1 b1 c1 x is evid5t t ! m]e g5]alisation ( new facts d1 e1 f1 w n add any?+ to our k ( !m4 ,9 d$uction we %\ld only return to !m ! k j extract$ f !m4 ,we %\ld be expla9+ ?+s by !mselves--reason+ 9 a circle#ab4 ,! unity1 :i* expla9s is n ! g5]al idea4 ,x is a unity ( function or s]vice1 & may include ?+s utt]ly het]og5e\s1 & !re=e incapable ( be+ r$uc$ to a common idea4 ,! p5 9 my h& consi/s ( wood & metal2 if ,i g5]alise !m into ,matt]--! ne>e/ class t includes bo?--,i d n !reby expla9 ! p54 ,b x is expla9$ by ! unity ( s]vice3 ! wood & metal contribute to =m "o in/rum5t = writ+4 ,! be/ results ( mod]n sci5ce are discov]ies ( utilities 7inv5tions72 discov]ies ( ! relations ( sequ5ce among objects1 :i* enable u to pr$ict _! arrival ye>s 9 advance2 ( coexi/5ces on ! great cosmic scale 7geographical & /ell> exploration72 ( co-inh]5ce ( prop]ties 9 individual objects 7*emi/ry74 ,yet sci5ce is /ill too g5]ali/ic4 ,x runs too mu* to classification & nom5clature1 :i* is no?+ b memoria te*nica4 ,mod]n biology pres5ts a curi\s return ( ,platonism4 ,! g5]al idea is n inde$ put =w>d z ! cause ( individuals1 b a p>ticul> concrete animal is f\nd :o closely resembles ! g5]al idea1 & x is imag9$ t an animal l him 0 ! orig9al cause ( all animals ( 8 species4 ,:5 x happ5s--z x occasionally mu/ 9 a ?or\gh-go+ sy/em ( ph5om5al classification--t ! av]age or g5]al idea falls betwe5 two species1 no individual c be f\nd to repres5t x ) ! desir$ exactness4 ,9 ?is case x is suppos$ by evolutioni/s t ! int]m$iate animal has exi/$ b is n[ ext9ct4 ,^! are ! 'miss+ l9ks' s badly want$ to complete ! evolution>y s*eme4 ,footnote #aj3 ',my/icism is nei!r m nor less ?an ascrib+ objective exi/5ce to ! subjective creations ( our own faculties1 to ideas or feel+s ( ! m9d4'--,logic1 *apt] on ',fallacies4' ,footnote #aa3 ,) equal plausibility x might be argu$ t we h no p>ticul> ideas1 because x is difficult if n impossible to obs]ve & rememb] all ! details ( any object4 ,our mo/ p>ticul> ideas are slightly ab/ract1 & 9 ! process ( =gett+ !y become m & m ab/ract1 until !y disappe> altoge!r4 ,footnote #ab3 ,mill's nom9ali/ic t5d5cies l$ him to ! same conclusion3 ',our g5]al ideas conta9 no?+ b :at has be5 put into !m1 ei!r by our passive exp]i5ce1 or by our active habits ( ?\ght2 & ! metaphysicians 9 all ages1 :o h attempt$ to con/ruct ! laws ( ! univ]se by reason+ f our suppos$ necessities ( ?\ght1 h always proce$$1 & only c\ld proce$1 by labori\sly f9d+ 9 _! own m9ds :at !y !mselves _h =m]ly put !re1 & evolv+ f _! ideas ( ?+s :at !y _h fir/ involv$ 9 ^? ideas4'--,logic1 ,bk4 ,v4 c4 #c4 #c4 ,,imag9ation ,,xvi ,?is faculty or habit consi/s ess5tially 9 comb9+ ideas 7p>ticul> or g5]al71 or objects & ideas1 s z to =m sy/ems diff]5t f ^? occurr+ 9 actual exp]i5ce4 ,! :ole has nev] be5 p]ceiv$1 ?\gh all its elem5ts h be5 p]ceiv$4 ,any association ( ideas may be call$ imag9>y if x occurs 9 an ord] diff]5t f ! ord] ( exp]i5ce4 ,b ! t]m ,imag9ation is prop]ly conf9$ to novel comb9ations delib]ately & consci\sly =m$ to s]ve "s utility4 ,x is ?us di/+ui%$ f ,rev]ie1 9 :i* no *oice or control ent]s into ! recollection4 ,we control our ideal associations by means ( comp>ison1 :i* is !re=e :at di/+ui%es imag9ation f rev]ie4 ,= in/ance1 if ,i see a vase f :i* ! h&le has be5 brok5 (f1 ,i c imag9e ! h&le re/or$1 b to d ?is ,i mu/ be able to comp>e ! brok5 vase ) a simil> :ole vase1 or ) ! g5]al idea ':ole vase4' ,! comb9ation ,i =m is novel1 = ,i h nev] se5 ?is p>ticul> vase 9 a :ole /ate2 if ,i _h ,i %\ld n be imag9+ x b recollect+ x4 ,!re are two pr9cipal di/9ctions to be notic$ 9 imag9ation2 "o relates to ! mode ( =m+ ! imag9>y idea1 ! o!r to its use4 ,9 ! above case we =m ! :ole by me*anical ext5sion or addition4 ,! process is z simple z nail+ "o piece ( wood to ano!r4 ,b suppose ! brok5 vase is ( porcela9 & ! :ole "o ( bronze1 ! re/oration c /ill be made1 b x is no me*anical junction ( two previ\s ideas4 ,x is a fusion ( ! mat]ial suppli$ by "o idea ) a =m suppli$ by ano!r4 ,on ! same pr9ciple a vase may be :olly design$ f h9ts suppli$ by a score or m ( vases1 diff]+ 9 mat]ial1 9 size1 col\r1 decoration1 & s =?4 ,9 ^! cases ! new idea may be said to be totally diff]5t ?r\gh\t its l5g? f any o!r & f any object4 ,yet x is a comb9ation ( previ\s ideas4 ,we d n create any absolutely new idea4 ,?is may be call$ imag9ation by transfusion4 ,! elem5ts may be s well mix$ t x is impossible to trace ea* back to its orig94 ,transfusion may be fur!r complicat$ by recomp\nd+ ideas already comp\nd4 ,?is occurs1 z we %all see1 9 =m+ ! 'ext]nal _w' ( mat]iali/s & reali/s4 ,! two uses to :i* imag9>y ideas are put are ! ,arti/ic & ! ,rational4 ,we h se5 7,x7 t emotions may be excit$ by objects or ideas4 ,h5ce1 agreeable emotions may be excit$ by sugge/+ ! objects associat$ ) ! orig9al agreeable feel+s2 & novel emotions may be excit$ by novel comb9ations ( ! ideas ( exp]i5c$ objects t h be5 signs ( feel+s4 ,f ?is possibility has aris5 t ext5sive prov9ce ( activity call$ ,,art1 :i* consi/s 9 imag9+ novel comb9ations ( ?+s capable ( excit+ novel & pleasurable emotions 7n feel+s71 & 9 f9d+ means ( sugge/+ su* ideas to o!rs4 ,"s ( ^! comb9ations are s subtle1 & ! emotions !y excite s exquisite1 t we value ! arti/ic "w at a great price1 & rank ! man :o imag9$ x among ! b5efactors ( 8 species4 ,,reason1 or ! ,rational ,imag9ation1 does n appeal directly to ! emotions4 ,x s]ves ! uses ( life by enabl+ u to imag9e :at we h n yet exp]i5c$ b may h to exp]i5ce1 & ! quality aim$ at is accuracy ( intellectual ideation1 n emotional pleasure4 ,x is f\nd by exp]i5ce t an intellect well furni%$ ) ideas may le>n to comb9e !m into pictures or preconceptions ( ! future1 & ! indirect utility ( ?is accompli%m5t is v great4 ,if x does n1 l art1 give imm$iate s5tim5tal pleasure1 x (t5 enables u s to control ev5ts t we are br\ght into conditions af=d+ m la/+ satisfaction ?an _m exp5sive works ( art4 ,reason1 !n1 is ! imag9ative faculty appli$ to ! purpose ( acquir+ ideas ( exp]i5ce t has n yet tak5 place1 & x is good 9 proportion to ! simil>ity ( ! idea to ! anticipat$ or unkn[n exp]i5ce4 ,al?\gh imag9ation is m important ?an g5]alisation1 x has receiv$ little att5tion f metaphysicians4 ,_! treatm5t ( x is n uni=m1 b x g5]ally exhibits two fundam5tal defects4 ,!y consid] x an indep5d5t or ultimate faculty1 t is1 "o incapable ( resolution into any?+ m simple4 ,we h se5 t x is an application ( comp>ison1 & comp>ison dep5ds on ! co9cid5ce ( p>ticul> ideas4 ,!n !y reg>d imag9ation only 9 its arti/ic uses1 n p]ceiv+ t x is also ! basis ( reason4 ,reason !y treat z g5]alisation--a vice t p]vades all _! sy/ems4 ,!y put reason & art 9 ess5tial opposition1 :]eas ! diff]5ce betwe5 !m is only specific--a diff]5ce ( use4 ,"s metaphysicians conf\nd imag9ation ) m]e recollection4 ',x is1' says "o ( !m1 '! faculty repres5tative ( ! ph5om5a bo? ( ! ext]nal & int]nal worlds4' ,b !re is a great diff]5ce betwe5 ! repres5tation ( :at we h exp]i5c$ actually1 & ! repres5tation ( a future & p]haps impossible ev5t3 ! latt] only is imag9ative4 ',!re is no tra9 ( ideas1' says ano!r1 'to :i* ! t]m imag9ation may n be appli$4' ,if a man at ! end ( ! day calls to m9d all ! ev5ts ( ! day 9 a tra9 ( ideas1 t is recollection1 & w\ld be v inappropriately t]m$ imag9ation4 ,accord+ to a ?ird1 imag9ation has = its object ! concrete z oppos$ to ab/ractions & g5]alities4 ,?is also is inexact4 ,a travell] may describe 9 g5]al ! qualities ( a =eign c\ntry or tribe ( m51 & we %all imag9e t g5]ality )\t a concrete picture4 ,! p[] ( imag9+ g5]alities & ab/ractions necess>ily foll[s f ! p[] ( =m+ !m 9 ! fir/ in/ance4 ,,dialectic ,,xvii--,,its ,,scope ,! d]ivation ( ,reason z giv5 9 ! prec$+ sections may be summ$ up ?us3--! meet+ ( ,m9ds gives ,p]ception or prim>y exp]i5ce2 ,att5tion selects !refrom objects ( special int]e/ to ! obs]v]2 ,memory reta9s impressions ( ^! 9 ! m5tal plasma1 by :i* ideas ( !m are recollect$ ?\gh ! orig9at+ m9d be n pres5t2 community ) div]g5ce ( impr9t gives rise to ,comp>ison2 f ?is are d]iv$ ,imag9ation & ,g5]alisation2 f imag9ation em]ge ,reason & ,art4 ,g5]alisation is ?us only a collat]al relation ( reason1 n its imm$iate p>5t nor 9 ! direct l9e ( desc5t4 ,x is n ess5tial to reason1 b may ent] z a subsidi>y process into an argum5t4 ,if ! ?+s we argue ab\t are num]\s x w be m correct to g5]alise !m & !n argue f ! g5]al idea1 ?an to argue f "o concrete object to ano!r4 ,b innum]able inf]5ces are drawn f "o p>ticul> ?+ to ano!r1 & ^! involve no g5]alisation4 ,reason is *iefly ! art ( pr$ict+ by means ( ! intellect :at w occur to u 9 ! future4 ,its use is to enable u to prep>e = future ev5ts 9 s f> z our res\rces p]mit4 ,we nev] pr$ict q accurately1 b g5]al preconceptions are bett] ?an none at all4 ,! same process by :i* we preconceive ! future c be appli$ to ! conception ( :at is actually tak+ place b n )9 our k5--z at ! antipodes--& c be appli$ also to ev5ts t took place 9 ! pa/ & w nev] be exp]i5c$ by u4 ,x might be object$ t z reg>ds ! pa/ we c h no motive 9 imag9+ x1 see+ we c nev] exp]i5ce x4 ,b a conception ( ! pa/ is (t5 a necess>y condition ( our conceiv+ ! future1 & is arti/ically int]e/+4 ,x awak5s pleas+ emotions to be able to picture to ourselves1 ev5 imp]fectly1 /ates ( ! _w & ( society t h long be5 obsolete4 ,an inve/igation ( ! mann] 9 :i* reason supplies u ) ideas ( ! unkn[n1 involves ! consid]ation & arrangem5t ( s _m details t x may be reg>d$ z a small sci5ce 9 itself--,,dialectic4 ,a dialectician 7logician 9 ! n>r[] s5se7 is nei!r a gramm>ian nor an encyclop$ia ( ! be/ in=mation on e subject4 ,8 (fice consi/s 9 decid+ :e!r c]ta9 !orems are argum5ts or n4 ,an ,,argum5t is an act or product ( rational imag9ation4 ,!orems :i* purport to be argum5ts1 b are n1 are ,,fallacies4 ,a fallacy is n m]ely a bad argum5t--x is no argum5t at all4 ,q ap>t f fallacy !re is a goodness & badness 9 argum5ts1 b ) ?is discrim9ation ! dialectician 7z su*7 has no?+ to d4 ,only p]sons exp]i5c$ 9 ! matt] are compet5t to decide betwe5 good & bad argum5ts4 ,h5ce :5 ! quality ( an argum5t is 9 "q ! dialectician takes no "p 9 ! debate3 he is nei!r combatant nor umpire4 ,he is at mo/ an imp>tial presid5t ^: *ief duty is to see t p d n debate ab\t m]e words & =egone conclusions4 ,grant+ t a !orem has ! qualities ( an argum5t1 ! dialectician is n compet5t to say t x is improp] or too trivial to be discuss$4 ,he is n a judge ( :at p ought to be int]e/$ 94 ,f 8 bett] k ( :at con/itutes rational pr$iction1 a dialectician may (f] 8 s]vices to dis5tangle & r5d] explicit involv$ & p>tial argum5ts4 ,_m p reason well :o are yet unable to express !mselves coh]5tly4 ,a dialectician %\ld be able to recon/ruct an argum5t f ! slighte/ h9t1 z a naturali/ imag9es an animal f a s+le bone4 ,9 ord9>y reason+ ! argum5ts are seldom fully express$1 & ! reason]s !mselves are n always q consci\s ( ! premises f :i* !y argue4 ,all su* suppress$ & ov]look$ assumptions %\ld be br\ght to light by dialectic1 ! aim ( :i* is to r5d] reason z self-consci\s z possible4 ,?\gh a dialectician ne$ n be an exp]t 9 any dep>tm5t ( k1 he mu/ "k ! facts on :i* an argum5t is built1 o!rwise he may be deceiv$ by equivocal language4 ,rev]t+ to ! in/ance ( ! vase--! dialectician mu/ h se5 bo? ! :ole vase & ! brok5 vase1 b he ne$ n h any op9ion z to :e!r ! propos$ h&le is ! mo/ suitable1 or n4 ,t mu/ be left to ^? :o are famili> ) vases & :o are int]e/$ 9 ! re/oration ( ! "o 9 "q4 ,! def9ition "h giv5 ( ! scope & (fice ( dialectic may appe> to "s too mode/4 ,b 9 reality !re is a great deal involv$ 9 x4 ,philosoph]s h be5 discuss+ ,reason = tw5ty c5turies or m1 & h n produc$ a satisfactory def9ition ( x4 ,consequ5tly !y _c decide ) any confid5ce :e!r a !orem is an argum5t or a fallacy4 ,! clev]e/ ( !m give _! sanction to !orems t are demon/rably fallacies4 ,!y are evid5tly judg+ m by e> ?an by rule4 ,all ?is causes confusion ( m9d & wa/e ( en]gy4 ,dialectic takes its g5]al idea ( reason f ! high] analysis ( logic1 & br+s ! g5]al idea to be> on concrete argum5ts4 ,a dialectician makes a collection ( !orems = /udy j z a botani/ makes a collection ( plants4 ,he sorts !m out into conv5i5t classes1 sep>ates ! valid or useful f ! errone\s & mislead+1 /udies ! relation ( language to argum5t & ! influ5ce = good or ill t words h ^u rational ?\ght4 ,f ! example ( ! vase cit$ above x w be se5 t 9 e act ( reason two pr9cipal ?+s are requisite4 ,!re mu/ be some?+ :olly kn[n 7or comp>atively well kn[n7 & some?+ less well kn[n1 & ! reason+ or argum5t consi/s 9 ideally complet+ ! latt] on ! model ( ! =m]4 ,if we w\ld pr$ict ! com+ ( a future season ( ! ye> we mu/ h a picture 9 ! m9d ( all ! seasons 9 ! ord] 9 :i* !y occur4 ,if we w\ld g /raight to a place on ! surface ( ! e>? we mu/ h a plan ( ! way 9 our imag9ation4 ,if we w\ld pr$ict ! effect ( a drug on an animal body we mu/ h previ\sly notic$ ! effect x has produc$--& s on4 ,nei!r ! m9d nor intellect supplies spontane\sly any ( ^! models2 !y are all =m$ out ( actual exp]i5ce rememb]$ & recollect$4 ,:5 !y h be5 ref9$ into extremely g5]al ideas !y are apt to be tak5 = innate t5d5cies ( ! intellect1 z ,kant errone\sly ?\ght4 ,!y are n s2 all we "k ( ! intellect is consi/5t ) ! belief t x beg9s ) pure plasm )\t a trace ( idea1 & is absolutely indiff]5t to ! impr9ts x may receive4 ,doctr9es ( innate ideas--innate =ms ( ?\ght or categories--innate 'pr9ciples' ( v>i\s k9ds--are devices ( metaphysicians to cov] ! weakness ( _! !ories4 ,! two ma9 p>ts ( an argum5t divide naturally into f\r subdivisions4 ,!re is ! ?+ argu$ ab\t 7correspond+ to ! brok5 vase72 !re is ! ideal ext5sion or re/oration2 9 ! model we reason f !re are ! p>ts correspond+ to ea* ( ^!4 ,i propose to take t]ms = ^! f\r p>ts f "o ( ! mo/ important1 =mal & correct modes ( reason+--! application ( a prec$5t or /atute to a case 9 ,law4 ,,xviii--,,! ,,rational ,,p>allel ,e argum5t1 :atev] be ! matt] ( x1 consi/s 9 br++ a ,case "u a ,prec$5t1 & apply+ to ! case ideally ! bett] k possess$ ( ! prec$5t4 ,! ,conclusion 7also call$ ,inf]5ce or ,d$uction7 is ! result ( ?is application1 & is always an addition to our /ock ( ideas4 ,a conclusion has nev] ! same reality z actual exp]i5ce4 ,x is n 'true' 9 t s5se1 ?\gh x may be 'morally' true1 t is1 we are ready to act ^u x )\t hesitation--to /ake our life or =tune on x4 ,z reg>ds actual or exp]i5c$ fact !re c be no argum5t1 s9ce x is useless to 'pr$ict' :at we already "k4 ,academical logicians h a doctr9e ! rev]se ( ?is4 ,!y ass]t t _! syllogisms yield conclusions t are always z c]ta9 z ! premises4 ,grant _! premises & y are oblig$ to accept _! conclusions4 ,?is is s1 because a regul> syllogi/ic conclusion is simply a re/at+ 9 o!r words ( ! in=mation1 or "p ( ! in=mation1 already conta9$ 9 ! premises4 ,if ! syllogism has any use at all1 x is m]ely z an aid to recollection2 no new idea is g5]at$ by x4 ,x is ne$less to insi/ on a fact s notori\s z t ord9>y rational conclusions--^? t =m ! /aple ( our daily ?\ght--are n by any means s c]ta9 z ! data f :i* !y are drawn4 ,= example1 ! sky is r$ & l[]+ ?is ev5+1 & we conclude !refrom t ! wea!r w be bad to-morr[4 ,!re is no d\bt ab\t ! pres5t aspect ( ! sky1 b mu* d\bt ab\t ! inf]5ce4 ,! =m ( an act ( reason+ or argum5tation may be r5d]$ pla9] by a diagram4 ,s ,a --- --- ,c ,i --- --- ,s ,a repres5ts ! prec$5t4 ,s is ! ,subject or body ( ! prec$5t2 ,a 7! ,applicate7 is "o prop]ty1 or a "p1 or a relation ( ,s ab/ract$ f ! re/ to illu/rate a case4 ,c is ! case2 ,i is ! conclusion 7or inf]5ce74 ,i results f imag9+ ,c to be associat$ ) a prop]ty or relation simil> to ,a4 ,! sum ( our ,i's con/itutes :at we "k ( ! _w & man be=e we 7 born1 ( :at is tak+ place 9 o!r p>ts ( ! _w or univ]se1 ( :at may take place 9 ! future1 & ( ! conceal$ & inaccessible p>ts ( pres5t objects4 ,?is is true n only ( ! results ( our own reason+ b ( :at we h le>n$ z v]ifi$ k f o!rs1 = ! int]pretation ( language is1 9 ! la/ analysis1 a rational conclusion4 ,all ! p>ts ( an argum5t exi/ 9 ! m9d1 b !y are n always express$ 9 language4 ,:5 treat$ dialectically ! implicit memb]s are express$1 & ! t]ms arrang$ s z to %[ z cle>ly z possible ! nature ( ! argum5t4 ,! foll[+ are ! po9ts mo/ necess>y to be obs]v$ 9 con/ruct+ or analys+ an argum5t4 7#a7 ,c mu/ resemble ,s1 = t is ! basis ( ! argum5t4 ,if ,c is n felt to be l ,s1 or 7z sometimes happ5s7 is explicitly decl>$ to be unlike ,s1 !re c be no conclusion4 ,! prec$5t is n applicable to ! case4 ,a may1 or may n1 be associat$ ) ,s2 t is to say1 a v]bal negation may appe> 9 ! /atem5t ( ! relation ( ,s to ,a1 b !re mu/ be no negation ) respect to ! relation ( ,c to ,s4 ,! resemblance ( ,c to ,s may1 h[ev]1 v>y 9 degree f ! fa9te/ analogy to community ( species4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 !m may f> outweigh _! resemblance4 ,!re may ev5 be no mat]ial lik5ess1 b only a simil>ity ( function1 or position1 or ( any ! mo/ trivial attribute4 ,only x is to be obs]v$ t ! k9d & degree ( resemblance betwe5 ,s & ,c det]m9e ! k9d & degree ( resemblance betwe5 ,a & ,i4 ,we mu/ n inf] specifically unless ! case is specifically l ! prec$5t4 ,9 all o!r in/ances we c only inf] proportionally or by transfusion4 7#b7 ,none ( ! antec$5ts mu/ be a v]bal or id5tical proposition1 t is1 a proposition :i* m]ely sub/itutes "o "n or nom9al phrase = ano!r2 nor mu/ ! case be m]ely ! prec$5t express$ 9 o!r words1 or ! prec$5t a p>aphrase ( ! case4 ,9 any ( ^! circum/ances "o ( ! elem5ts ( ! argum5t is want+2 we h two names = "o ?+ or two propositions giv+ ! same in=mation4 7#c7 ,! prec$5t may 7z has be5 already rem>k$7 be a g5]al idea1 or may be an individual idea or object4 ,if ,s ,a has occurr$ frequ5tly x is c]ta9 to be g5]alis$1 & s may =m a maxim1 a law1 a rule1 an induction1 c4 ,b "o well-obs]v$ prec$5t is en\gh to sugge/ a conclusion1 if !re has be5 no exp]i5ce to ! contr>y4 ,!re is !re=e no dialectical diff]5ce betwe5 argu+ f a g5]al idea 7class notion7 to an individual or subord9ate idea1 & argu+ f "o individual to ano!r4 ,comp>ison & inf]5ce occur 9 bo?4 7#d7 ,aft] sep>at+ ,a f ,s c>e %\ld be tak5 t x is ,a & n ,s t is us$ to g5]ate ,i4 ,examples are pl5tiful ( !orems 9 :i* ,s & ,a *ange p>ts1 :i* invalidates ! conclusion4 ,o!r errors 9 /at+ !orems int5d$ to be argum5ts w be notic$ "u ! head ( ',fallacies4' ,! foll[+ is an argum5t con=mable to ! above rules4 ,tyrants des]ve dea? ---------------------------------------- --------- ,caes> 0 a tyrant no d\bt he des]v$ dea? ,?is squ>e mode ( /at+ ! argum5t is adapt$ f ! g5]al type1 & br+s out ! mutual relations ( ! comp>$ p>ts bett] ?an ! ?ree-l9$ arrangem5t4 ,! ^w '!re=e1' :i* usually introduces a logical conclusion1 is ambigu\s4 ,x may mean t ! antec$5ts are ! causes ( ! fact m5tion$ 9 ! conclusion1 or m]ely t ! antec$5ts are ! reasons :y we believe ! conclusion4 ,! =m] is ! sci5tific '!re=e1' ! latt] is ! purely dialectical4 ,i %all g5]ally omit ! illative ^w1 & pr9t conclusions 9 italics1 besides ent]+ !m inv>iably 9 ! f\r? comp>tm5t ( ! p>allel :5 ?is arrangem5t is adopt$4 ,an idea once g5]at$ 9 ! intellect is n to be eras$ at pleasure4 ,x c be oblit]at$ only by ! process ( =gett+4 ,if aft] we h =m$ a dialectical conclusion we meet ) evid5ce t contradicts x1 ! only result ( t evid5ce is to affix a m>k ( falsity to ! conclusion1 s t z (t5 z x is recollect$ ! /igma is recollect$ too1 & neutralises ! effect ( ! idea4 ,a negative or de/ructive argum5t is ?us1 plasmically speak+1 a positive addition to ! idea x seeks to efface4 ,= ! "t be+ x r5d]s ! idea m conspicu\s1 z ! ^w ,,cancell$ /amp$ 9 l>ge lett]s across a docum5t makes x m evid5t ?an x 0 be=e2 b no d\bt ! /igmatis+ ( an idea ha/5s ! process ( oblivion1 = we !nce=? be/[ less att5tion ^u x4 ,/igmatic argum5ts are n ano!r species1 b m]ely ! ord9>y con/ructive argum5ts us$ = a p>ticul> purpose4 ,suppose we h inf]r$ f ! g5]al resemblance ( ! e>? to ! moon t ! latt] is inhabit$1 we /igmatise ?is belief by su* an argum5t z-- ,)\t air animals _c live ---------------------------------------- ----------------------- ,!re is no air 9 ! moon !re c be no life 9 ! moon ,!re is an exception to ! rule t argum5t is sup]flu\s :5 ! speak] has already v]ifi$ ! conclusion4 ,x is :5 he is address+ a p]son :o has n _h ! same exp]i5ce z himself & :o d\bts 8 ^w4 ,! speak] may !n resort to argum5ts drawn f antec$5ts recognis$ by ! he>]1 if any su* are applicable to ! subject4 ,b a fact may be truly report$ ?\gh nei!r ! witness nor a sceptical he>] c f9d dialectical antec$5ts to prove x1 = !re may be no relation betwe5 ! fact 9 "q & any prior k !y possess1 or !y may n be able to f9d ! relation4 ,?is br+s u aga9 to t view ( ! intellect :i* repres5ts x z artificial & limit$ by exp]i5ce4 ,man is rational only on matt]s famili> to him2 9 utt]ly novel circum/ances he is irrational1 & mu/ fall back = guidance on 8 g5]al m5tal s5tim5t1 or ! advice ( p]sons m exp]i5c$ ?an himself4 ,,xix--,,hypo!tical ,,argum5ts ,x is all[able to imag9e ourselves plac$ 9 circum/ances n yet realis$1 or 9 possession ( in=mation n yet acquir$1 & to anticipate or rehe>se ! reason+ we %\ld employ "u ! suppos$ conditions4 ,su* argum5ts take 9 language a conditional or hypo!tical phraseology4 ,! case may be entirely fictiti\s1 b ,i _c f9d a valid in/ance ( a :ole prec$5t be+ fictiti\s4 ,its dubiety turns on our k or ignorance ( ! applicate4 ,has a subject su* or su* an attribute8 ,!n x may be appli$ to illu/rate a c]ta9 case4 ',if x is true t ,damon & ,py?ias are insep>able1 !n ,py?ias mu/ be 9 t[n1 = ,i h j se5 ,damon4' ,x is m (t5 ! case t is dubi\s4 ',if ,caius is a ,european he is :ite1 = all ,europeans are :ite4' ',if ,damon is 9 t[n ,py?ias is 9 t[n1 = !y are insep>able4' ',if ,i 7 y ,i %\ld def] ! voyage to ! summ] season1 z ,i h always f\nd w9t] travell+ disagreeable4' ,b ! ^w 'if' does n always m>k a hypo!tical ?\ght4 ,9 ! proposition1 'if *ildr5 are neglect$ !y w gr[ up ignorant1' we h a dogmatic or ass]torial judgm5t--'neglect$ *ildr5 gr[ up ignorant4' 7,ba947 ,! prec$5t may be suppress$ 9 hypo!tical z 9 dogmatic argum5t4 ',if ! crops are good1 corn w be *eap' implies ! unspok5 prec$5t1 'good crops h be5 inv>iably foll[$ by *eap corn4' ',if logic is useless x des]ves to be neglect$1' c>ries ! m9d to ! m g5]al !sis1 'all useless /udies des]ve to be neglect$4' ',if ,great ,brita9 %\ld be invad$ ! volunte]s w be call$ out1' re/s on ! prec$5t judgm5t1 'x is ! duty ( ! volunte] army to repel invad]s4' ,argum5ts 9 :i* bo? applicate & case are hypo!tical are s v dubi\s t !y _c be consid]$ ( any practical use4 ',if opium is poison\s1 & if ?is sub/ance is opium1 y w be poison$ by tak+ ?is sub/ance4' ,! ,ari/otelian hypo!tical is almo/ inv>iably a fallacy1 sometimes on m ?an "o acc\nt4 ,x usually consi/s (--fir/1 a conditional or d\btful /atem5t2 next1 a solution ( ! d\bt by means ( positive in=mation2 f9ally & by way ( inf]5ce ! fir/ /atem5t is giv5 )\t ! d\bt4 ,"h is an example f ,jevons3 ',if ! b>omet] is fall+1 bad wea!r is com+2 b ! b>omet] is fall+2 !re=e bad wea!r is com+4' ,:]e did ! in=mation t ! b>omet] is fall+ come f8 ,if we knew x be=e utt]+ ! fir/ proposition1 we 7 affect+ an ignorance t did n exi/4 ,! second proposition takes away all occasion = argum5t2 x is an am5dm5t ( ! fir/ proposition1 & :at we get f ! !orem z a :ole is a case1 foll[$ by a pr$iction = :i* !re is no prec$5t ju/ification4 ,we are argu+ 9 a circle4 ',if ,ari/otle is "r1 slav]y is a prop] =m ( society2 b slav]y is n a prop] =m ( society2 !re=e ,ari/otle is n "r4' ,if we knew = c]ta9 7z ! second proposition indicates7 t slav]y is n a prop] =m ( society1 :at is ! use or mean+ ( treat+ ! "q z hypo!tical 7z is done 9 ! fir/78 ,if we acquir$ ! in=mation aft] utt]+ ! fir/ proposition1 !re 0 no occasion to g on ) ! argum5t2 we %\ld h said simply1 ',slav]y is n a prop] =m ( society1 ?\gh ,ari/otle said x 04' ,x is ne$less1 except = v]bal complet5ess1 to say 'he 0 n "r'--we h logically said s4 ,:5 two or m alt]native data are pres5t$1 ( :i* only "o is valid or relevant to a propos$ argum5t1 b we "k n at fir/ :i* ! valid datum is1 we h ! dilemma 7trilemma1 tetralemma1 c47 ( logicians4 ,9 su* conditions we h a d\ble process to g ?r\gh2 we mu/ fir/ settle by obs]vation or by an auxili>y argum5t :i* ( ! alt]native data to select1 & !n "w out ! pr9cipal argum5t 9 ! regul> dogmatic =m4 ,suppose we h to det]m9e dialectically ! specific gravity ( a piece ( metal1 b d n "k :e!r x is gold or gun-metal4 ,x is evid5t we mu/ fir/ someh[ make up our m9d z to its id5tity1 & !n proce$ on ! usual me?od ( argum5tation4 ,! 'mak+ up our m9d' is probably itself an argum5t1 & might be ( ?is "*--',a piece ( yell[ metal /amp$ ) :at appe>s to be a hall-m>k1 is m likely to be gold ?an gun-metal2 ?is piece ( metal has traces ( su* a /amp2 s ,i conclude x is gold4' ,!n we proce$ to ! pr9cipal "q--',! specific gravity ( gold is #aibf2 ,i h conclud$ t ?is object is gold2 ,i conclude fur!r t x has a specific gravity ( #aibf4' ,we may "w out all ! alt]native conclusions fir/ & fix on a datum aft]w>ds1 z 9 decid+ h[ we %all inve/ our money4 ',if ,i put my money 9 ,consols ,i %all h a small return ) good security2 if ,i buy ,patagonian bonds ,i may h a l>ge int]e/ = a "t1 b ! security is bad4' ,! next ?+ to settle is :e!r 9 our exp]i5ce or on accept$ pr9ciples small pr(it ) good security is1 or is n1 to be pref]r$ to l>ge pr(it & bad security3 hav+ decid$ 9 fav\r ( ! =m] alt]native1 we n[ *oose our inve/m5t dogmatically--',a good security ) small pr(it is to be pref]r$2 ,consols are ( ?is "*2 !y are a suitable inve/m5t = me4' ,we may be unable to decide = any ( ! alt]native data1 b we "w out all ! possible argum5ts z hypo!ses1 & s are prep>$ 9 a degree = all ! possible ev5ts4 ,a p]son is se5 approa*+ our resid5ce1 b we _c disc]n :e!r x is ,a4 ,b41 :o is a bore1 or ,c4 ,d41 :o is an ent]ta9+ companion4 ,we argue rapidly--',if x is ,a4 ,b4 ,i %all h a bad half-h\r1 = he always we>ies me2 if x is ,c4 ,d4 ,i %all h an agreeable di/raction1 = he is v amus+4' ,accord+ to ! syllogi/s1 ! dilemmatic premises are a /atem5t ( alt]native data & ! *oice ( "o ( !m1 & ! inf]5ce is ! rejection ( ! rema9d]3 or ! rejection may be giv5 z matt] ( fact & ! selection z conclusion4 ,9 nei!r case h we argum5t4 ,f ! mom5t we select a datum ! rema9+ data are ( no import to u1 & !y ne$ n be m5tion$4 ,! selection ( "o datum is logically id5tical ) ! rejection ( ! re/1 & ?is is !re=e n a conclusion f t4--',d y take tea or c(fee8'--',tea1 please4'--',!n ,i conclude y d n take c(fee4'--,a p]son :o w\ld 'conclude' 9 ?is fa%ion w\ld be ju/ly deem$ irrational4 ,! *oice ( ! tea is a fact1 & ! rejection ( ! c(fee is ! same fact o!rwise express$1 s t ! rejection _c be a rational conclusion4--',my doctor s5ds me (f e w9t] to ,nice1 ,algi]s1 or ,egypt2 b ,i nev] g to ,algi]s or ,egypt4'--,!re is no occasion to say1 '!re=e y g to ,nice'2 t has be5 already ann\nc$ z a matt] ( fact & is n susceptible ( inf]5ce4 ,= ! sake ( v]bal emphasis we might rem>k1 ',s x is to ,nice y g'1 b ?is is n logically requisite4 ,:ately's examples ( ?is k9d ( !orem are exactly ( ! model j giv54--',ei!r ! e>? is et]nal1 or ! "w ( *ance1 or ! "w ( an intellig5t ,be+2 x is n et]nal1 nor ! "w ( *ance1 !re=e x is ! "w ( an intellig5t ,be+4' ,?is is put =w>d 9 all gravity z a specim5 ( reason+4 ,x is pla9 t if we "k ! premises z matt]s ( fact1 we also "k ! propos$ conclusion z a matt] ( fact4 ,!re is no occasion to reason ab\t x4 ,! ,ari/otelian hypo!tical c be r$uc$ to ari?metical subtraction4 ,suppose we put five balls into a bag & aft]w>ds take out ?ree )\t see+ ! rema9d]3 is ! judgm5t t two balls rema9 9 ! bag a logical inf]5ce8 ,no--x is matt] ( fact4 ,s9ce we la/ p]ceiv$ ! objects !y h und]gone dim9ution1 b t does n conf] on :at is left ( !m ! imag9>y "* prop] to a rational conclusion4 ,:at rema9s is z mu* fact--recollect$ b n imag9>y fact--z be=e ! subtraction4 ,:ately's next example is--',x is ei!r spr+1 summ]1 autumn1 or w9t]2 b x is nei!r spr+ nor summ]2 !re=e x is ei!r autumn or w9t]4' ,?is is aggravat$ fallacy4 ,n only is x m]e subtraction1 b ! rema9d] is p]ceiv$--n recollect$1 z 9 ! prec$+ case4 ,! actual season ( ! ye> is a kn[n fact1 & is n r5d]$ m c]ta9 by an inf]5ce drawn f ! abs5ce ( "s o!r season4 ,argum5ts h no validity z aga9/ matt]s ( fact1 & add no?+ to _! au?ority4 ,fact is above1 & indep5d5t (1 argum5t4 ,! example j cit$ may be p>allel$ ?us--',! c>ds 9 my h& are ei!r spades1 he>ts1 clubs1 or diamonds2 b !y are nei!r spades nor he>ts2 !re=e !y are ei!r clubs or diamonds'4--,i see t !y are ei!r clubs or diamonds3 ! p]ceptual judgm5t r5d]s ! rational--imag9>y--judgm5t sup]flu\s4 ,reason is int5d$ to supplem5t exp]i5ce--n to sup]s$e x4 ,,xx--,,debate ,! purpose ( debate is to det]m9e ! goodness or badness ( an argum5t by g5]al logical criticism & k ( ! matt]4 ,?is is n dialectic1 b takes place aft] ! dialectician has decl>$ t a giv5 !orem is valid argum5t4 ,if !n its conclusion is repugnant to u we may seek to /igmatise x--or remove a /igma z ! case may be--by go+ beh9d ! argum5t to ! composition ( ! judgm5ts t ent] into x4 ,let u take ! case ( ,caes> be+ prov$ to be a tyrant 9 a society t puni%es tyranny ) dea?4 ,!re are two ways 9 :i* he may be sav$ or 8 puni%m5t mitigat$4 ,we are n b\nd to take ! fir/ prec$5t t is (f]$ f :i* to g5]ate a conclusion4 ,we grant t ,caes> resembles ! g5]al notion 'tyrant1' b we ask if he does n resemble 9 an equal or great] degree "s o!r p]son or class 9 reg>d to :om capital puni%m5t is no j treatm5t4 ,does he resemble a 'successful & patriotic g5]al'--a 'b5evol5t mon>*'--a 'wise legislator'--a 'virtu\s man'8 ,all ^! resemblances are compatible ) 8 be+ a tyrant 9 "s s5ses ( ! ^w4 ,let u n condemn ,caes> = :at may be a m]ely te*nical (f5ce--! usurpation ( au?ority--if 9 o!r respects he is an admirable man4 ,s an opportunity mu/ be giv5 to ,caes> or 8 advocate to sugge/ o!r prec$5ts1 yield+ a diff]5t conclusion1 by :i* to complete our imp]fect k ( ! case4 ,socrates1 :5 he 0 br\ght "u ! class 'p]v]t]s ( y\?'--:i* also yield$ ! conclusion 'dea?'--sugge/$ z an am5dm5t t he %\ld be class$ "u 'national b5efactors1' ) ! conclusion 'ma9t5ance = life at ! public exp5se4' ,x is n en\gh t we c say ( a case t x 'is' ?is or t1 & s proce$ to draw ! conclusion b\nd up 9 t classification4 ',is' 9 ! case means lik5ess to ! prec$5t1 & "o 'is' is good only :5 no bett] c be f\nd4 ,if aft] hav+ weigh$ ! alt]native prec$5ts x appe>s cle> t ,caes> resembles tyrants m ?an any o!r class ( p]sons1 ! prospect looks bad = him4 ,b !re is /ill a *ance ( escap+ ! wor/ p5alty4 ,x turns on ! mean+ ( ! ^w 'all1' :i* 9 logic g5]ally introduces a proposition to :i* no exception has be5 f\nd--! misnam$ & mislead+ 'univ]sal4' ,logicians d n hesitate to say t 9 ?is connection x means 'all possible1 kn[n or unkn[n1 pa/ or future individuals ( ! class4' ,!y suppose1 or talk z if !y suppos$1 t at "s fix$ date 9 our life we ent] into possession ( our g5]al ideas1 & t no subsequ5t exp]i5ce c modify !m4 ,h5ce ! mom5t x is admitt$ t ,caes> is a tyrant1 he is suppos$ to come "u ! rule ( a /]eotyp$ g5]al idea ) inflexible consequ5ces4 ,?is is n q s4 ',all' does n mean 'all possible' b 'all kn[n up to ! pres5t "t1 exclusive ( ! case "u discussion4' ,our g5]al or av]age ideas are ! plasmic product ( ! individuals we h actually kn[n--n a unit m4 ,& z t idea is liable to be modifi$ by e new individual exam9$1 x is possible t on exam9+ ,caes> we may f9d reason to *ange our g5]al idea1 to ! ext5t at lea/ ( divid+ x into two species1 ! tyrants :o des]ve dea? & ! tyrants :o des]ve "s mild] puni%m5t1 & t we %all resolve to br+ ,caes> "u ! latt] species4 ,?us if ! idea ?reat5s to hang ,caes>1 on ! o!r h& ,caes> may bur/ ! idea1 & 8 case e/abli% itself z a new prec$5t4 ,t is h[ g5]al ideas multiply--by a sort ( fission4 ,9 ! proposition 'tyrants des]ve dea?' z fir/ propos$1 we are deal+ ) ! old g5]al idea1 &--z reg>ds all individuals except ^? f :i* x 0 drawn--! proposition is little m ?an a hypo!sis4 ,! idea is itself on trial4 ,until ,caes> is exam9$ we d n fully "k h[ ! g5]al tyrant is 9 future to be def9$4 ,our exam9ation ( ,caes> is a "p ( our education on ! subject ( tyrants4 ,9 judg+ we le>n1 & ! g5]al idea :i* rema9s aft] ,caes> is exam9$ is t by :i* he is to be judg$4 ,if our idea ( tyrant rema9s un%ak5 aft] ! trial ( ,caes>1 & if he is f\nd to resemble t class m ?an any o!r1 !n--& n till !n--are we compell$ to pass on him ! judgm5t associat$ ) ! def9ition ( tyrant4 ,an argum5t bas$ on a p>ticul> or solit>y prec$5t is criticis$ on ! same pr9ciples4 ,we seek to prove ei!r t ! case is n suffici5tly l ! prec$5t to ju/ify ! application1 or t ! applicate is n a prop]ty ( ! prec$5t4 ,if we make good ei!r ( ^! propositions1 we prev5t ! sugge/$ conclusion f be+ fa/5$ on ! case4 ,! syllogi/ic dialecticians d n admit alt]native prec$5ts or recon/ruction ( g5]al ideas3 _! t]ms & figures are n adapt$ to express su* notions4 ,h5ce !y _c evade a conclusion ^: premises are correctly giv54 ,!y h an axiom to ! effect t a judgm5t mu/ be absolutely true or absolutely false--a door mu/ be op5 or %ut1 x _c be aj>2 e col\r is :ite or black1 x _c be gre5 or grey1 & s on4 ,n[ 9 practical reason+ we may & con/antly d admit premises & reject ! conclusions !y dialectically involve4 ,we look at ! "q 'f ano!r po9t ( view4' ,?is means t :ile admitt+ !re is "s gr\nd = br++ a case "u a c]ta9 prec$5t1 we cont5d t on ! :ole x is pref]able to br+ x "u ano!r prec$5t ) a diff]5t conclusion4 ,! propos$ h&le may fit ! vase someh[1 b we ?9k ano!r sort ( h&le w suit x bett]4 ,or--r ?an accept an objectionable conclusion--we w divide our idea4 ,?is is degree 9 tru?4 ,& t is ! ela/ic me?od on :i* we reason 9 actual affairs4 ,logicians give a false acc\nt ( reason1 & s _! sy/ems are neglect$ & _! au?ority is nev] recognis$ 9 real debates4 ,,categories ,,xxi--,,categories ,,( ,,sub/antialism1 ,,& ,,o!rs ,a ,category is prim>ily a class ( ,judgm5ts4 ,s9ce argum5ts are compos$ ( judgm5ts1 a category is also a class ( argum5ts2 t is to say1 ! argum5t foll[s ! classification ( ! judgm5t4 ,?is is n ! practice ( syllogi/s1 :o h categories = judgm5ts only1 ! argum5ts be+ classifi$ accord+ to v]bal expression4 ,i di/+ui% six categories--two ,natural & f\r ,artificial4 ,! judgm5ts ( a natural category conc]n exp]i5ce pres5t$ 9 a syn!sis ^: composition is due to ! n\m5al m9d2 ! categories correspond+ to ?is def9ition are-- ,inh]5ce-- ,association4 ,an artificial category is s call$ because ! syn!sis is =m$ by ! subjective m9d4 ,! fir/ category ( ?is k9d is ,p]spection-- :i* is an artificial arrangem5t ( objects accord+ to a figurative int]pretation ( c]ta9 appe>ances !y pres5t4 ,! second artificial category ,i w call ,concretion-- z x is an ideal cohesion ( exp]i5ces nev] :olly p]ceiv$ at once4 ,^! two categories are ^? *iefly responsible = ! reali/ic mode ( ?\ght4 ,! ?ird artificial category is t :i* is call$ 9 sci5ce causation1 b x is only ,sequ5ce1-- t is1 a s]ies ( ph5om5a suffici5tly coh]5t to af=d a basis = inf]5ce1 b n necess>ily or en]gically connect$4 ,hume & o!rs h conclusively prov$ t su* ph5om5a are n causally relat$4 ,f9ally !re is ,causation-- 9 ! prop] s5se ( ! ^w1 t is1 ! relation betwe5 en]gic m9d & its effects4 ,?is is ! category ( human affairs g5]ally1 & ( all ! ,cosmic t we expla9 by analogy ) ! ,human4 ,x is ! only exhau/ive explanation ( ph5om5a1 & s is ! category :i* philosophy w\ld sub/itute = ! re/4 ,:5 we c truly resolve ?+s into effects analog\s to human actions1 we h rea*$ ! highe/ /&po9t f :i* !y c be view$4 ,reali/ic an?ropomorphism is ! fir/ & rude/ explanation ( ?+s3 ideali/ic an?ropomorphism is ! la/ & mo/ ref9$4 ,! artificial categories are all =m$ on analogies suppli$ by ! natural1 s9ce ! intellect is incapable ( imag9+ any?+ absolutely orig9al4 ,ea* category may include judgm5ts ( o!r categories 9 a subord9ate relation4 ,inh]5ce & concretion ent] to "s ext5t z auxili>ies into all ! o!rs4 ,a gr\p category may be treat$ z an individual object = c]ta9 purposes1 & an individual z a gr\p ( prop]ties4 ,9 ! "o case a fictiti\s unity is creat$1 9 ! o!r a real unity is imag9atively dissolv$4 ,b 9 g5]al ! categories are suffici5tly di/9ct & may be consid]$ z mutually exclusive4 ,!y w be sep>ately analys$ & exemplifi$4 ,! t]m category is us$ 9 common logic to signify ! f9al classes into :i* judgm5ts c be arrang$4 ,to ?is m9or use only is ! category appli$4 ,x does n ei!r d5ote a classification ( argum5ts or a di/9ct prov9ce ( ideas ^: orig9 & validity %\ld be a matt] ( inve/igation4 ,9 ,greek & mod]n logic argum5ts are di/+ui%$ solely by _! v]bal expression--nev] by ! "* ( ! judgm5t t ent]s into !m4 ,treat$ 9 ?is sup]ficial & haphaz>d way1 ! categories necess>ily play a q insignificant "p 9 philosophy4 ,! olde/ kn[n set ( categories is t quot$ by ,ari/otle 9 8 ,metaphysic z be+ held by a sect ( ,py?agoreans4 ,x consi/s ( ! foll[+ s]ies ( contr>ies-- ,b\nd4 ,inf9ity4 ,odd4 ,ev54 ,unity4 ,plurality4 ,"r4 ,left4 ,male4 ,female4 ,re/4 ,motion4 ,/raight4 ,crook$4 ,light4 ,d>kness4 ,good4 ,bad4 ,squ>e4 ,oblong4 ,ari/otle's own categories are ! foll[+3-- 7#a7 ,ess5ce or ,sub/ance1 z man1 horse3 7#b7 ,quantity1 z two cubits long3 7#c7 ,quality1 z :ite1 erudite3 7#d7 ,relation1 z d\ble1 half1 great]3 7#e7 ,place1 z 9 ! ,agora3 7#f7 ,"t1 z ye/]day3 7#g7 ,po/ure1 z /&+1 sitt+3 7#h7 ,hav+ 7,condition871 z to be %od1 arm$3 7#i7 ,action1 z he is cutt+1 burn+3 7#aj7 ,passion1 z he is be+ cut4 ,?is li/ c be r$uc$ to "o half ! numb]4 ,quantity1 ,quality1 ,po/ure1 ,condition are k9ds ( ,attribute or ,prop]ty ( ! ,sub/ance4 ,place & ,"t are valid4 ,action & ,passion are bo? ref]able to causation4 ,non-causal sequ5ce or consecution 7z day foll[+ night7--"o ( ! commone/ judgm5ts--is n m5tion$4 ,! ,/oics r$uc$ ,ari/otle's t5 categories to f\r--,sub/ratum or ,sub/ance1 ! ,ess5tial ,quality1 ,mann] ( be+1 & ,relation4 ,kan4da1 a ,h9du philosoph]1 has six categories--,sub/ance1 ,quality1 ,action1 ,g5us1 ,individuality1 & ,concretion or ,co-inh]5ce4 ,plot9us 0 acqua9t$ ) ! ,ari/otelian & ,/oic li/s & (f]s z 8 own3--7#a7 ,fundam5tal =ms ( ! ,ideal--,be+1 ,re/1 ,motion1 ,id5tity1 ,diff]5ce2 7#b7 ,categories ( ! ,s5sible--,sub/ance1 ,relation1 ,quality1 ,quantity1 ,motion4 ,desc>tes recognis$ b two f9al categories1 ! ,absolute & ! ,relative4 ,kant has an elaborate s*eme ( categories1 :i* he consid]$ to be1 n m]ely classes ( judgm5ts1 b innate p[] ( ! m9d by :i* we are mov$ to =m ! judgm5ts4 ,!y are ! foll[+3-- ,i4 ,( ,quantity4 ,unity1 ,plurality1 ,totality4 ,,ii4 ,( ,quality4 ,reality1 ,negation1 ,limitation4 ,,iii4 ,( ,relation4 ,( ,inh]5ce & ,subsi/5ce 7sub/antia et accid5s74 ,( ,causality & ,dep5d5ce 7cause & effect74 ,( ,community 7reciprocity betwe5 ! active & ! passive74 ,,iv4 ,( ,modality4 ,possibility1 ,impossibility1 ,exi/5ce1 ,non-exi/5ce1 ,necessity1 ,cont+5cy4 ,sir ,william ,hamilton's categories 7 ,be+1 ,be+ by itself1 & ,be+ by accid5t4 ,categories h also be5 propos$ by ,sp9oza1 ,locke1 ,wolff1 ,leibnitz1 ,h]b>t1 ,mill1 & o!rs4 ,no two ( !m are alike4 ,!y are n =m$ on any def9ite pr9ciple1 b are individual op9ions z to ! mo/ conv5i5t way to classify judgm5ts#ac4 ,,xxii--,,inh]5ce ,an object be+ giv5 by p]ception we develop our k ( x1 fir/ by n>r[+ our focus ( att5tion s z to p]ceive p>ts & s+le attributes ( ! object2 next by wid5+ our att5tion s z to include sev]al objects 9 "o view4 ,! fir/ process is ,analysis or ,ab/raction2 x in=ms u :at attributes co-inh]e to con/itute ! object4 ,! second is ,syn!sis or ,gr\p+1 by :i* we le>n ! relations ( "o ?+ to o!rs4 ,^! op]ations comprise all we "k ab\t a ?+1 = x c h no attributes :i* are n ei!r int]nal or ext]nal4 ,practical analysis means cutt+ a ?+ to pieces or dissolv+ x1 & ?is has a c]ta9 value because x multiplies objects4 ,b x does n increase our k ( ! fir/ ?+4 ,on ! contr>y1 by de/roy+ a ?+ we r5d] a k ( x impossible4 ,! analysis :i* gives k is ,metaphysical ,ab/raction--an att5tion conc5trat$ on ! p>ts ( a ?+ )\t de/roy+ _! connection ) ! o!r inh]5t p>ts4 ,! metaphysical elem5ts may be q diff]5t f ! me*anically divisible p>ts4 ,!y are g5]ally a species ( ?+s :i* c\ld n exi/ alone1 su* z r$1 blue1 /raight1 curv$1 squ>e1 r\nd1 acid1 sweet1 insipid1 fragrant1 %>p1 hot1 heavy1 dull1 l\d1 bright1 & a multitude ( prop]ties ( t ab/ract k9d4 ,= _m ( ^!--at lea/ = ! description ( !m--a comp>ison ( two or m ?+s is ess5tial4 ,a s\nd is he>d to be l\d by comp>ison ) ano!r :i* is l[ or s(t2 a knife is kn[n to be blunt by exp]i5ce ( ano!r m %>p1 or ! same knife 9 a %>p] condition4 ,b comp>ison does n alt] ! ess5tial "* ( ab/ract att5tion--x s]ves m]ely z an incitem5t to x4 ,diff]5ce betwe5 qualities o!rwise alike :ets our att5tion to a f9] discrim9ation4 ,! prop]ties recognis$ by ea* s5se are easily di/+ui%$ 9 ! bulk f ^? ( ano!r s5se4 ,col\r is di/9ct f ,figure 9 a m m>k$ degree ?an r$ f blue or squ>e f circul>4 ,f9e degrees ( ,s\nd may be difficult to discrim9ate1 b n ! diff]5ce betwe5 a s\nd & a smell or a ta/e4 ,/ill broad] contra/s give rise to an artificial b sometimes useful k9d ( attribution--! negative4 ,:5 we d n "k mu* conc]n+ ! positive *>act]i/ics ( a ?+1 x is some?+ to "k t x has n ?is or t prop]ty4 ,:at ,?\ght is1 positively1 few p "k1 b !y are able to say 7) a little prompt+7 t x is un-ext5d$1 im-mat]ial1 im-pond]able1 & s =?4 ,?is comp>ison re-acts on ! ?+ bett] kn[n1 & s we call visual objects 'ext5d$' f _! dissimil>ity to ?\ghts4 ,b = t !re w\ld h be5 no occasion to notice ! ab/ract ext5sion ( visual objects4 ,! t]m 'visual object' w\ld h tacitly includ$ ext5sion4 ,!re mu/ be great & g5]al ignorance ( a ?+ to excuse ! negative attribution3 x is n all[able to speak ( plants z non-metals1 or %eep z non-horses1 b a l>ge class ( animals is call$ 9-v]tebrate4 ,9 ?is case ! negative prop]ty s]ves to b> a possible inf]5ce t all animals are v]tebrate1 s9ce ^? we "k be/ are s4 ,! judgm5t 9 ?is category is a consci\sness ( ! attributes mak+ up a ?+1 or s mu* ( x z int]e/s u4 ',cleopatra's ,ne$le is an obelisk ( granite1 ab\t sixty-eight feet high1 & is c>v$ ) hi]oglyphics4' ,if we g on to say t x /&s on ! ,?ames ,embankm5t1 we %ift into ! category ( association4 ,! relation ( an object to its place is diff]5t f t ( "o inh]5t attribute ( ! object to ano!r1 or to ! :ole4 ,! prop]ties ( a g5]al idea are def9$ 9 ?is category4 ,! syn!sis is natural or n\m5al1 ! artificiality ( ! idea consi/+ m]ely 9 ! omission ( "s ( ! concrete prop]ties4 ',g>d5 rhub>b 9 g5]al has broadly cordate leaves1 /rongly ve9$ b5ea?2 ! foot/alks are long1 ?ick1 & fle%y1 ) a *annel above2 its gr[? is exce$+ly rapid4' ,^! are prop]ties inh]5t 9 a unity n ( our mak+4 ,! botani/ *anges into ! category ( sequ5ce :5 he says1 '! /alks are us$ = t>ts & made into jam4' ,9 a complicat$ object or g5]al idea "s ( ! judgm5ts we treat z inh]5t may be inf]5ces 9 o!r categories us$ subord9ately4 ',! anci5t ,p]sians _h rem>kably ?9 & weak skulls4 ,!y 7 good horsem5 & ar*]s1 c\rage\s & spirit$ 9 battle4 ,!y wore a tunic & tr\s]s ( lea!r4444 ,!y 7 quick & lively1 ke5-witt$1 capable ( rep>tee1 +5i\s1 &--= ,ori5tals--f>-sight$4 ,!y _h fancy & imag9ation1 a reli% = poetry & art1 & !y 7 n )\t a c]ta9 p[] ( political comb9ation4' ,"s ( ^! prop]ties might h be5 p]ceiv$ objectively1 b n ! possession ( fancy & imag9ation1 :i* c\ld only be kn[n by inf]5ce 9 causation--"h us$ to complete a coh]5t unity4 ,! hi/orian employs causation z a pr9cipal category :5 he tells u t '_! b>ds did n t\* ! *ords :i* r\se :at is noble/ & highe/ 9 our nature4' ,! ?\ght impli$ 9 t\*+ *ords--! notion ( w direct+ action--is a diff]5t judgm5t f ! p]ception ( an inh]5t p]man5t attribute4 ,! argum5t 9 ?is category consi/s 9 ideally complet+ an imp]fect object by comp>ison ) a simil> object1 or ! idea ( a simil> object4 ,suppose we h /udi$ ?or\ghly "o or m rhub>b plants1 & !n see a plant ) broadly cordate leaves1 foot/alks long1 ?ick1 & fle%y1 & hav+ a *annel above4 ,9 ! "t at our disposal we _c asc]ta9 if its gr[? is exce$+ly rapid1 b we are ju/ifi$ 9 inf]r+ t x is1 & t ! plant we are exam9+ is 9 all o!r respects rhub>b4 ,if ! ,egyptian obelisks we h se5 7 sculptur$ ) hi]oglyphics ?r\gh\t _! l5g?1 & we see an obelisk "p ( :i* is und]gr\nd1 x is a rational inf]5ce t t "p also is sculptur$4 ,we h prov$ t c]ta9 samples ( alum9ium h a specific gravity ( #bf1 & !n see a metal--( specific gravity unkn[n--:i* has all ! o!r prop]ties ( alum9ium3 we may confid5tly inf] t ?is metal also w\ld1 if te/$1 %[ a specific gravity ( #bf4 ,= purposes ( reason x may be necess>y to comp>e ?+s t _c be br\ght physically toge!r4 ,:5 ?is happ5s we g5]ally comp>e !m 9 idea1 or ! idea ( "o ) ! o!r z object4 ,:5 great accuracy is requir$ & ! idea--:i* is always r vague--_c be reli$ on1 we h rec\rse to m$iate comp>ison4 ,/&>ds are employ$4 ,^! are manageable or portable objects ) :i* pr9cipal ?+s are sep>ately comp>$ by way ( effect+ indirectly a comp>ison betwe5 !m4 ,/&>ds c only m$iate comp>isons betwe5 ab/ract prop]ties1 = if !y conta9$ all ! concrete prop]ties ( ! comp>$ objects !y w\ld1 by supposition1 be z unmanageable z ! latt]4 ,we h /&>ds = l5g? 9 rules1 scales1 tapes1 *a9s2 ! balance is a /&>d = weight4 ,!re are also scales = pit* ( s\nd1 v>ieties ( col\r1 degree ( light1 heat1 atmosph]ic pressure1 & probably "s o!rs = special purposes4 ,indirect comp>ison is n 9 itself inf]5ce2 or if inf]5ce x is subord9ate & prep>atory to "s m important conclusion4 ,a co9 is weigh$ & conclud$ to be light1 b ?is is only a datum 9 det]m9+ ! m important "q :e!r x is a =g$ co9 or n4 ,,xxiii--,,association ,9 ?is category we wid5 ! att5tion s z to include sev]al objects 9 "o act ( p]ception4 ,! fir/ result ( ?is diffusion ( att5tion is to less5 ! brilliancy ( objects4 ,our att5tion is a light :i* is int5sifi$ :5 n>r[$ & conc5trat$--enfeebl$ :5 disp]s$ ov] sev]al objects4 ,! obs]vation ( a gr\p am\nts practically to obs]v+ ! objects 9 rapid succession4 ,at a giv5 mom5t we p]ceive only "o ?+ well1 or x may be only a small "p ( a ?+1 b we h a dull s5se ( o!r ?+s adjac5t1 :i* we h j se5 & may imm$iately see aga9 9 any ord] we please4 ,t is all t is meant by p]ception ( a gr\p4 ,to di/+ui% ?is category prop]ly f ! next we mu/ consid] ! gr\p ( objects z dive/$ ( dep? or di/ance outw>ds4 ,x is to be reg>d$ z a flat surface /&+ a few feet f u1 ! objects 9 x hav+ absolutely ! dim5sions !y appe> to h4 ,?is is 9 fact _! real magnitude1 = ! suppos$ real magnitude is a matt] ( !ory1 & means ! p]ceptual magnitude tak5 "u c]ta9 conditions ( obs]vation4 ,! real magnitude is con/antly *ang+1 s = practical conv5i5ce 9 det]m9+ size1 etc41 we ref] all objects to "o condition ( obs]vation--t 9 :i* !y c be t\*$ z well z se54 ,9 metaphysic we are n oblig$ to recognise ?is conv5tion4 ,if an object a mile (f appe>s to be an in* high1 x is an in* high z really z if x 7 9 a photograph or picture & mat]ially repres5t$ ( t height4 ,! my/]y ( ! *ange ( size 9 objects is n expla9$ or reason$ away by any device = ov]com+ "s ( its practical inconv5i5ces4 ,x dep5ds on ! degree ( en]gy ) :i* m9ds affect ea* o!r4 ,a gr\p has prop]ties :i* an object has n2 or1 if ?is be n /rictly ! case1 we may say t ! prop]ties we look = 9 a gr\p are n ^? we di/+ui% 9 a s+le object4 ,! special prop]ties ( a gr\p are positions4 ,x is unnecess>y to say 'relative' positions1 = position _c be o!rwise ?an relative4 ,position _c be def9$ by ref]5ce to any?+ m simple4 ,:at is meant is intuitively kn[n to ev]ybody4 ,b let u take a concrete example--a man ) a horse & c>t /&+ on a bridge4 ,ea* object 9 ?is gr\p has a position t[>ds ! o!r objects4 ,! bridge is ov] ! riv] & "u ! c>t2 ! c>t is ^u ! bridge & beh9d ! horse2 ! man is 9 ! c>t2 ! horse is be=e & outside ( ! c>t1 x is ne> "o end ( ! bridge1 f> f ! o!r1 & betwe5 ! two extremities4 ,^! are ! pr9cipal positions 9 a natural gr\p or association1 by :i* is meant ! objects we c see 7or are suppos$ to see7 simultane\sly1 & ^: mutual positions we are consid]+4 ,! use ( obs]v+ positions is ! same z t :i* moves u to all rational /udy1 namely1 its value 9 pr$iction4 ,we c reason f "o object to ano!r 9 a gr\p j z we reason f "o prop]ty to ano!r 9 an object4 ,suppose our p]ception ( a l&scape is int]rupt$ = a mom5t1 & :5 we next endeav\r to p]ceive x we f9d we only p]ceive a portion ( x1 ! re/ be+ 'hidd5' by an int]v5+ object4 ,z f> z we are conc]n$ ! hidd5 "p has be5 annihilat$4 ,we only rememb] :at 0 !re4 ,b ?is recollection is also a preconception ( :at we may be able to cause to appe> aga91 ei!r by remov+ ! ob/ruct+ object1 by wait+ till x has be5 remov$1 or by walk+ r\nd & /&+ betwe5 x & ! l&scape4 ,if ?is be too close to m]e recollection1 we h pure reason+ :5 f ! g5]al appe>ance ( a gr\p we imag9e g5]ally "s conceal$ "p ( x n be=e se54 ,a procession ( p dress$ 9 m\rn+ is usually accompani$ by a he>se3 f p]ceiv+ ! p only on a c]ta9 occasion we pr$ict ! he>se4 ,! s\nd ( a /eam-:i/le enables u to imag9e a tra9 9 a c]ta9 locality1 ?\gh fog or o!r ob/ruction may prev5t our see+ x4 ,! sc5t ( fl[]s prep>es u = f9d+ !m some:]e ne> u4 ,f smoke we pr$ict ! ne>ness ( a *imney4 ,! trail ( an animal is a clue to 8 position4 ,! judgm5t 9 ?is category is !re=e a consci\sness ( position1 su* z ^? m5tion$ above4 ,! argum5t is a completion ( "o association by comp>ison ) ano!r--! expectation ( simil>ity 9 gr\ps4 ,movem5t4 ,all judgm5ts z to *ange ( position 9 objects come "u ?is category4 ,x takes at lea/ two ?+s arrang$ 9 a gr\p to produce ! p]ception ( movem5t4 ,if !re 7 b "o ?+ 9 our field ( obs]vation we c\ld n say :e!r x mov$ or n1 = !re w\ld be no?+ :i* x w\ld pass1 or leave1 or approa*4 ,x w\ld appe> to /& /ill4 ,!re is1 h[ev]1 m 9 movem5t ?an dep5ds on m]e p]ception4 ,all movem5t is due to en]gy ei!r 9 ! obs]v] or 9 ! o!r m9d act+ ^u 84 ,en]gy is n a g5]alisation ( mov+ ?+s1 nor a prop]ty1 nor a relation1 ?\gh all ^! may be signs ( en]gy4 ,! mo/ ab/ract idea ( movem5t is ,motion4 ,x may be def9$ z a s]ies ( positions4 ,numb]4 ,if we treat a gr\p z a l>ge loose object we %all p]ceive 9 x c]ta9 prop]ties n /rictly positional4 ,numb] is "o ( ^!4 ,a gr\p ( ?ree co9s has n ! same practical value z a gr\p ( six or sixty1 & we are ?us oblig$ to notice ! diff]5ce & di/+ui% degrees ( ?is prop]ty by names--h5ce ,ari?metic4 ,flat ,space or space ( two dim5sions is ano!r prop]ty ( a gr\p4 ,gr\p$ objects h frequ5tly int]vals betwe5 !m4 ,su* int]vals are negations ( p]ception--int]ruptions or discont9uities ( exp]i5ce4 ,b by ab/raction we c r$uce ! objects b\nd+ an int]val to a geometrical l9e1 & s give a sort ( positive exi/5ce to ! int]val4 ,?us we talk ( a hole or ( d>kness z if !y 7 true objects1 & measure !m by /&>ds ( l5g?4 ,if we ab/ract ! b\nd>y l9es f a space we get ! idea 'int]valness1' :i* is ! "r "n = two-dim5sion$ space4 ,?is ab/ract idea is ne>ly ! same z ab/ract size4 ,space is int]val )\t b\nds--size is object )\t cont5ts4 ,space & size are equally no?+ intr9sically or 9 _! own "r1 b !y h be5 rea*$ by diff]5t modes ( ref9+ away ! positive qualities associat$ ) !m1 & ?is diff]5ce ( orig9 is slightly sugge/$ by _! names4 ,spaces h a use 9 p]ception simil> to re/s 9 music--!y relieve ! att5tion & give contra/ & vig\r to ! next positive object4 ,,xxiv--,,p]spection ,?is is ! fir/ ( ! artificial categories4 ,x is an ideal treatm5t ( an associat$ gr\p to facilitate a c]ta9 k9d ( reason+4 ,reason--let me repeat--is ! imag9>y ext5sion ( exp]i5ce by comp>ison ) m complete exp]i5ce ( a simil> k9d4 ,by reason+ 9 inh]5ce we complete s+le objects2 by inf]5ce 9 association we complete gr\ps4 ,^! two categories demon/rate t a natural gr\p consi/s ( fragm5ts ( objects1 & fragm5ts ( o!r natural gr\ps :i* are possible b n yet develop$4 ,a hill is p>tly conceal$ by a h\se1 ! h\se p>tly conceal$ by a tree1 ! tree by a /one f5ce1 ! f5ce by a gr[? ( ivy4 ,a riv] disappe>s at a curve & is lo/ to view2 we "k f exp]i5ce ( o!r riv]s t "u c]ta9 conditions we might p]ceive ! riv] fur!r on z a feature 9 sev]al m l&scapes4 ,z we gaze at an association ( objects ^! possible completions occur to u--n fully or def9itely b suffici5tly to conv9ce u t ! gr\p might be develop$ into _m o!r gr\ps1 & into a multitude ( objects ( =ms diff]5t f ^? we actually p]ceive4 ,by our hypo!sis ! obs]v] has always be5 /ation>y1 ! objects h mov$ to & fro b n f ne> to f>4 ,_! real dim5sions h rema9$ unalt]$1 & no?+ has occurr$ to sugge/ t !y ev] appe> ( o!r dim5sions4 ,9 %ort we are gaz+ on a piece ( /age-sc5]y4 ,b !re is ano!r elem5t 9 p]ception4 ,we & all o!r real 7m5tal7 be+s are "p ( ! cosmic =ce4 ,we are co-creators ( :at we p]ceive--limit$ gods1 n ma*9e-m5 z ! sci5tific p w\ld h u believe4 ,b = our p[] ( affect+ ea* o!r & our read9ess to receive impressions f o!r m9ds1 !re w\ld be no p]ception--no mat]ial objects4 ,we 7t is1 all s5ti5t be+s7 c\ld1 by unanim\s resolution1 annul ! mat]ial creation--blot out ! univ]se ( objective ?+s 9 a mom5t4 ,unit$ to & impli$ 9 ?is g5]al p[] is ! p>ticul> p[] ( modify+ our _w )\t de/roy+ x4 ,we c r$i/ribute ! active & passive =ces s z to produce o!r p]ceptual effects ?an ^? pres5t at a giv5 mom5t4 ,& we habitually d ?is to "s ext5t4 ,)9 a limit$ scope our _w is pla/ic z d\gh1 & we knead x to any =m we please4 ,= example1 we ex]t en]gy to *ange our place1 & imm$iately ! gr\p be=e u breaks up & und]goes metamorphosis4 ,"s objects disappe> altoge!r1 & entirely new objects pres5t !mselves4 ,"s become small]1 o!rs l>g]2 "s fractional =ms fill out to completion1 "s integ]s und]go curtailm5t1 o!rs sep>ate into sev]al di/9ct objects4 ,9 a few m9utes ! fir/ gr\p has dissolv$ into a second1 :i* may m]ge into a ?ird1 & s on indef9itely4 ,9 contemplat+ ^! ph5om5a we disc]n a ?ird =m ( complet5ess & incomplet5ess1 di/9ct f ^? t ent] into inh]5ce & association4 ,h5ce a new type ( reason+--ano!r category3 ! ,p]spective4 ,x w be conv5i5t to suppose t ! modifications to :i* x ref]s are solely due to ! obs]v+ m9d1 z ! mo/ conspicu\s & compreh5sive really are1 b "s ( ! m9or p]spective *anges are due to ! n\m5on ( ! object4 ,we h fir/ to get a crit]ion ( p]spective p]fection4 ,:at ?is %all be is to "s ext5t a matt] ( conv5tion4 ,! /&>d ,i %all adopt is1 t an object ( a nature to be p]ceptible to all ! s5ses w\ld be mo/ p]fect if )9 rea* ( t\*4 ,if x c be he>d x is !n he>d at its l\de/--?is is correct en\gh = our purpose1--if x c be se5 x is !n se5 at its l>ge/ & brighte/4 ,?is is ,p]spective ,complet5ess at ! ,tactual ,range4 ,x means ! close/ contact ( n\m5on & subject1 compatible ) cle> def9ition 9 p]ception4 ,n[ let u ex]t en]gy & dis>range a gr\p4 ,^? ?+s t 7 or might h be5 tangible 9 ! =m] position1 are no long] s1 b !y may /ill be se51 he>d1 or ev5 smelt4 ,! bright col\rs h h[ev] some:at fad$1 ! size has %runk1 "s ( ! details are lo/4 ,"h is a lapse f p]spective complet5ess4 ,x is indicat$1 n z 9 ! fir/ two categories by me*anical cutt+ away ( mass & circum/ance1 b by det]ioration all ov] ! object4 ,we seem to be ?r[n out ( focus 9 relation to x1 & ! p]spective degradation may increase until ! object has dw9dl$ to a speck & f9ally disappe>s altoge!r4 ,! judgm5t 9 ?is category consi/s 9 obs]v+ ! k9d & degree ( degradation to :i* ?+s are liable 9 p]spection4 ,9 addition to *ange 9 size1 brightness1 detail & l\dness1 :i* h be5 already m5tion$1 occultation z 9 ! second category c be us$ z an indirect datum4 ,an object :i* eclipses ano!r is inv>iably m p]fect p]spectively ?an ! object eclips$4 ,! motion ( objects has also to be tak5 into acc\nt4 ,z objects degrade _! movem5ts slack51 & recov] p[] z ! objects are re/or$4 ,by att5d+ to all ^! indications & *eck+ ea* by ! re/1 we h ! elem5ts ( a fairly accurate inf]5ce z to comp>ative p]spective condition4 ,we h con/ant practice 9 ?is sort ( ?\ght ) frequ5t opportunities ( v]ify+ our conclusions2 p5alties are annex$ to failure & rew>ds to success4 ,x is no wond] !n t 9 ! c\rse ( ye>s we become exp]t 9 judg+ ( p]spective condition1 s t :5 confront$ ) a natural gr\p we c e/imate almo/ in/antly ! degree 9 :i* ea* object falls %ort ( p]spective integrity4 ,! result ( ?is practice is t on p]ceiv+ a natural gr\p ( _m objects1 we graduate !m accord+ to ! p]spective det]ioration :i* ea* exhibits1 & = great] precision we figure ! p]spective diff]5ce z an int]val betwe5 ! objects--an imag9>y int]val modell$ on ! true int]val ( association4 ,! object on a di/ant horizon is visually z ne> z ! gr\nd we c t\* by /oop+1 b 9 ?is imag9>y gr\p ! =m] is plac$ at ! f> end ( ! l9e & ! latt] at ! ne> end1 & betwe5 !m are rang$ ! o!r objects ea* at a po9t correspond+ to :at we suppose to be its p]spective di/ance4 ,t is h[ a l&scape acquires dep?4 ,space outw>ds is an ideal imitation ( real lat]al int]val4 ,x is ! measure & expression ( p]spective defacem5t4 ,f :at has be5 said x foll[s t ! ne> objects w be relatively l>ge1 cle>1 & lively 9 motion1 :ile ! f> w be small1 dull1 & sl[1 b ?is rule is liable to _m exceptions :i* c only be le>nt by exp]i5ce4 ,on ! analogy ( ! o!r =ms ( inf]5ce--:i* consi/ 9 complet+ imp]fect ?+s by ref]5ce to o!rs m p]fect--! ess5ce ( an argum5t 9 p]spection is ! p[] to imag9e an object :i* is p]spectively defective1 br\ght up to ! tactual range & display+ all ! qualities x w\ld possess 9 t position4 ,?is is done by comp>+ x ) ! idea ( ! same or a simil> object exp]i5c$ at ! tactual range2 & is done = an ult]ior purpose1 l all o!r intellectual op]ations4 ,a great "p ( our mat]ial happ9ess consi/s 9 ! ex]cise ( ! %ort s5ses 7ta/e1 t\* & smell71 & ! *ief use ( p]spective reason+ is to enable u to judge ( ! en]gy requir$ to br+ a di/ant object ne> = close p]ception4 ,we h !re=e to obs]ve our en]gic fluctuations 9 conjunction ) p]spective *ange1 if we w\ld extract ! utmo/ practical b5efit f ?is category4 ,! p]spective inf]5ces are none ! less useful aft] we discov] t !y are n intuitions1 & t ! complet5ess we imag9atively assign to di/ant objects has no exi/5ce until we ex]t ! correspond+ en]gy4 ,a l&scape be+ r5d]$ p]spective we c det]m9e ! p]spective /ate ( any new object t may ent] x1 by ref]5ce to ! objects adjo9+ x1 & ?is ?\gh ! object be ( a species q unkn[n to u & :i* !re=e1 by itself1 w\ld af=d no clue to its p]spective di/ance4 ,! imag9>y int]val we place betwe5 objects ( diff]5t p]spective effacem5t1 c be express$ 9 t]ms ( exact lat]al measurem5t4 ,?is is done by develop+ & measur+ ! associative gr\ps repres5t$ 9 ! p]spective gr\p4 ,suppos+ we wi% to get an exact def9ition ( ! p]spective condition ( a m\nta9 relative to a c]ta9 /ation1 we c1 f t /ation1 develop all ! natural gr\ps up to ! m\nta9 7walk ov] ! gr\nd7 & measure ! lat]al int]vals & masses disclos$4 ,! total measurem5ts w be a def9ition ( ! m\nta9's p]spective di/ance 9 t]ms ( true associative di/ance4 ,t is :at we mean by say+ a m\nta9 is t5 miles (f4 ,x is n really t5 miles (f--x is n an in* (f4 ,b to r5d] x tactually p]fect we %\ld h to exp5d an am\nt ( en]gy equal to #ag1fjj times ! en]gy requir$ to move f "o associative object to ano!r a y>d ap>t f x lat]ally4 ,if we practise ! mileage scale 9 conjunction ) ! p]spective indications1 we may acquire ! art ( express+ 9 miles1 ?\gh n measur$1 ! di/ance ( objects e/imat$ f purely p]spective data1 b few c d ?is ) any ne> approa* to exactness#ad4 ,! reali/ic ?ree-dim5sion$ space is a comb9ation ( ! true int]val ( association & ! false int]val ( p]spection4 ,?is g5]ates an idea resembl+ ! capacity or vacancy 9 a room or vessel1 & ?us x is suppos$ t objects occupy a sort ( univ]sal room )\t walls1 floor1 or ceil+4 ,x is h[ev] ! enclos+ objects :i* make a room1 & :5 !y are ab/ract$ !re rema9s no?+4 ,! univ]sal room is !re=e no?+--a my?4 ,x is a useful work+ !ory = common purposes1 b 9 philosophy x is sup]flu\s & ob/ructive4 ,9 ! def9itions ( geometry no diff]5ce is made betwe5 ! dep? ( a l&scape & ! '?ird dim5sion' ( any small cubic object4 ,!y are bo? call$ '?ird dim5sion' or 'cubic dim5sion4' ,yet !y are inf]5ces ( diff]5t categories1 & nei!r is real4 ,! =m]1 z we h j se51 is ! imag9$ r$9tegration ( objects p]spectively %runk & defac$4 ,! latt] is ! imag9>y completion ( a ?+ hav+ _m surfaces or facets1 only "o ( :i* c be %[n at a "t4 ,sky ,p]spection4 ,! effect produc$ on our m9d by ! obs]vation ( cele/ial objects1 reveals at once ! artificiality ( cubic space4 ,cl\ds 9 _! =m & movem5ts are some:at l e>?ly ?+s--vap\r or m\nta9s1--& s we conceive !m p>tially graduat$ 9 di/ance & float+ 9 a concavity4 ,b :e!r !y are a mile (f1 or tw5ty miles (f1 few ( u c tell4 ,:5 we contemplate ! sun1 moon & />s1 our realism is completely at fault4 ,^! we _c modify at w1 & !y move too sl[ly & pres5t too uni=m an aspect to cause ! p]spective effect4 ,s9ce we h nev] se5 !m at ! tactual range we "k n to :at degree !y are p]spectively incomplete2 h5ce !y appe> )\t relative di/ance--di/ance be+ simply a metaphor ( p]spective effacem5t4 ,if 'cubic space' is real1 let ! reali/s tell u :y we d n see x 9 ! sky--:y we d n arrange ! />s beh9d ea* o!r accord+ to _! calculat$ di/ances4 ,?is "q is unansw]able reali/ically1 b ideali/ically x pres5ts no difficulty4 ,! sky is n spac$1 because ! conditions are want+ "u :i* ! illusion ( t]re/rial space is =m$ 9 ! intellect4 ,by close in/rum5tal att5tion to ! moon & planets a slight p>allax is obs]vable1 & on ! analogy ( t]re/rial p>allax a/ronom]s are able to calculate :at !y call ! di/ance ( ^! bodies4 ,p]haps _! calculations are "r1 b ! magnitudes are n conceivable z associative di/ance1 be+ s mu* great] ?an we h any exp]i5ce (4 ,we take !m to mean t ! heav5ly bodies are extremely degrad$1 p]spectively speak+4 ,_! n\m5a are 9 contact ) our m9ds1 = ?is is ess5tial to p]ception1 b if a/ronomical calculations are correct ! contact is inf9itely slight1 comp>$ ) :at x w\ld be1 suppos+--to speak reali/ically--we c\ld g to ! />s or !y c\ld be br\ght to u4 ,b]keley's ,!ory ( ,vision & ,dialogues are occupi$ ) ! analysis ( p]spection4 ,! argum5ts he uses to %[ t di/ance outw>ds is n real are 9 ! ma9 ^? giv5 9 ?is section4 ,,xxv--,,concretion ,if we take a cricket-ball 9 ! h& & turn x r\nd we %all p]ceive a s]ies ( discs4 ,only "o ( ^! c be se5 at a "t1 b if we p]ceive & rememb] ! :ole s]ies we %all be able to inf] all f ! p]ception ( "o 9 a simil> object4 ,! same occurs ) o!r cubical or solid objects4 ,?is is a =m ( ideal con/ruction diff]5t f any we h yet consid]$4 ,x diff]s f inh]5ce 9 t ! object :i* we conceptually put toge!r is nev] objectively p]ceiv$ z a :ole4 ,x is an imag9>y :ole con/ruct$ 9 ! intellect out ( fragm5t>y exp]i5ce4 ,x diff]s f association on ! same gr\nds2 ! latt] c be all p]ceiv$ at once 9 =m+ ! judgm5t4 ,x diff]s f p]spection 9 t ! imp]fection ( exp]i5ce is due to curtailm5t1 n to g5]al det]ioration4 ,:at we actually see may be p]spectively p]fect4 ,x diff]s also f ! next category 9 t ! s]ies ( p]ceptions c occur 9 v>i\s ord]s ( succession4 ,! 'backs' ( ,?+s4 ,we talk ( ! back ( a ?+1 b nobody has ev] se5 a back4 ,?+s h no backs 9 ! popul> s5se ( ! ^w4 ,:5 we turn r\nd a back to p]ceive x1 x is !n a front4 ,ev]y?+ is a flat upright surface1 & its appe>ance ( solidity c be imitat$ on a surface kn[n to be flat1 & ) ne>ly ! same illusive complet5ess z 9 ! orig9al object4 ,9 turn+ ?+s r\nd we m]ely *ange ! surface2 we are ex]cis+ our p[] to alt] prim>y consci\sness4 ,:5 two p]sons p]ceive ! 'same' object f contr>y directions1 ! sam5ess means t ! two objects proce$ f ! same cause1 or c be r$uc$ to ! same g5]al idea4 ,b ! objects are num]ically di/9ct4 ,by a simil> turn ( spee* we say t ,a & a are ! same lett]1 b !y are evid5tly di/9ct & dissimil> objects4 ,if we hold a ?+ be=e a mirror & see :at is t]m$ its back1 we produce a new object resembl+ ! fir/ 9 "s respects b )\t its resi/ance4 ,resi/ance is a negative t]m signify+ ! limit ( our p[] to alt] prim>y exp]i5ce4 ,:]e our p[] ceases resi/ance is said to beg91 & we meet ) resi/ance :5 we apply a p[] inadequate to ! desir$ effect4 ,dr4 ,johnson's solit>y exp]im5t 9 ideali/ic philosophy has be5 (t5 relat$4 ,he /ruck a po/1 & because x did n disappe> he ?\ght he _h disprov$ ,b]keley's /atem5t t mat]ial objects exi/ only 9 ! p]ceiv+ m9d4 ,! exp]im5t m]ely %[$ t all means are n adequate to *ange all prim>y exp]i5ce4 ,_h he %ut 8 eyes1 or turn$ a corn]1 or occupi$ 8 att5tion ) o!r matt]s1 ! po/ w\ld h vani%$4 ,he *ose improp] means & !re=e met ) 'resi/ance4' ,no ideali/ believes we c *ange our prim>y exp]i5ce by any caprici\s & frivol\s means#ae4 ,geographical ,concretion4 ,! k ( l>ge geographical areas is an artificial con/ruction )\t objective reality4 ,our exp]i5ce is1 lit]ally & exactly1 a s]ies or sequ5ce--a flux or /ream4 ,x is compos$ ( objects or ( gr\ps1 accord+ to ! wid? ( our att5tion4 ,if we travel ov] a l>ge tract ( c\ntry ! exp]i5ce is a tra9 ( objects or views1 :i* foll[ ea* o!r cont9u\sly b = int]ruptions 9 att5tion4 ,if we 7 b\nd to ?9k ( ?+s 9 ! ord] 9 :i* !y 7 exp]i5c$1 we %\ld h to imag9e our topographical consci\sness z a long ribbon ( views1 l ! pictures ( a panorama4 ,suppos+ we travell$ hi!r & ?i!r ov] "o c\nty1 x w\ld appe> to u z a /raight /rip ( l& :i* might be sev]al hundr$ miles long4 ,if we aga9 trav]s$ ! gr\nd1 b 9 ano!r ord]1 we %\ld h ano!r /rip resembl+ ! fir/1 b also diff]+ f x1 & x w\ld be necess>y to keep ! two f be+ confus$ 9 our m9d4 ,if sev]al p]sons trav]s$ ! same gr\nd b 9 div]s directions1 !y w\ld ea* reta9 a diff]5t recollection ( x1 & x w\ld be extremely h>d = any two ( !m to agree z to ! ord] 9 succession ( any portion ( ! gr\nd trav]s$4 ,our exp]i5ce ( ! natural gr\p sugge/s a mode ( treat+ our geographical exp]i5ce :i* ov]comes _m ( ^! inconv5i5ces4 ,we f9d t we c trav]se 7ei!r bodily or by ! eye7 a s+le l&scape 9 a ?\s& directions1 & reta9 a memory ( x )\t any ref]5ce to ^! directions4 ,:at we rememb] is ! mutual positions ( ! objects1 n ! ord] 9 :i* !y 7 obs]v$4 ,z ?is greatly facilitates ! memory ( "o gr\p1 we apply ! same pr9ciple ( syn!sis to ! succession ( gr\ps compos+ our geographical exp]i5ce4 ,we dismiss f our m9ds ! ord] ( obs]vation1 & con/ruct in/ead an imag9>y gr\p ( associat$ objects or places hav+ mutual positions4 ,x is imag9>y1 = no "o has ev] se5 z a co-exi/5t syn!sis ! objects ( a c\nty1 n to speak ( a c\ntry or cont95t4 ,sub/itut+ = memory ( succession1 a memory ( position1 !re gr[s up 9 our m9d a l>ge co-exi/5t image ( a c\ntry on ! model ( a s+le gr\p1 :i* af=ds all ! advantages z reg>ds economy ( en]gy :i* we enjoy by virtue ( compreh5d+ a natural gr\p 9 "o act ( consci\sness4 ,take an in/ance ( ?is economy4 ,suppose a man travell$ f ,london to ,ox=d1 !n to ,exet]1 !n to ,portsm\?1 !n to ,brighton1 & aft]w>ds desir$ to return to ,london4 ,if he1 act+ on a mi/ak5 conception ( tru? & disda9+ in/ruction f o!rs1 p]si/$ 9 rememb]+ ! objects p]ceiv$ on 8 j\rney z--:at !y no d\bt lit]ally 7--a cont9u\s s]ies1 he w\ld be unable to imag9e any way ( return+ to ,london except by rev]s+ ! ord] ( 8 j\rney4 ,if on ! o!r h& he c>ri$ 9 8 m9d an image ( ! gr\nd 9 "q1 ) ! mutual position ( ! places1 x w\ld enable him to =esee t ,london 0 to be rea*$ by j\rney+ nor?w>d f ,brighton1 9 f> less "t & at f> less co/ ?an by return+ ! way he came4 ,?us does conceptual position1 :5 x is correctly imag9$1 prove its sup]iority to ! ord] ( exp]i5ce4 ,& we say t ! ideal picture is tru] ?an ! crude memory1--n t x is really s if natural ord] is a te/ ( tru?1 b because x is ! lea/ on]\s1 :i* is our practical /&>d ( tru?4 ,! only object ( k be+ ! wise managem5t ( en]gy1 t sort ( k mu/ be consid]$ true/ t enables u to h ! feel+s we desire at ! lea/ co/4 ,9 "o s5se tru? means ! quicke/ & easie/ way ( pass+ f "o /ate ( consci\sness to ano!r preconceiv$ /ate4 ,x may be object$ to ! above example z a valid d$uction f an imag9>y syn!sis1 t ! relation ( ,london to ,brighton is n[ a c]ta9ty1 :]eas an inf]5ce c be no m ?an a probability4 ,! reply is1 t if a man has already trav]s$ ! r\te 9 "q1 x is to him an actual exp]i5ce & 8 idea ( x is ev] aft]w>ds a memory1 n an inf]5ce4 ,b until x is actually p]ceiv$ x mu/ be imag9>y1 & !re=e slightly problematical4 ,al?\gh a man is conv9c$ t o!rs are n deceiv+ him 9 say+ a place is to be rea*$ 9 a c]ta9 way1 he _c be absolutely sure t he fully und]/&s ! directions giv51 9 o!r words1 t 8 image ( ! r\te corresponds to _! p]ception ( x4 ,!re probably nev] is exact simil>ity betwe5 "o man's prim>y exp]i5ce & ano!r man's idea ( x4 ,x may ev5 be d\bt$ :e!r !re is ev] exact simil>ity betwe5 a man's own prim>y exp]i5ce & 8 subsequ5t idea ( x4 ,! geographical syn!sis is f\nd$ on actual exploration supplem5t$ by inf]5ce4 ,! mutual position ( "s important places are det]m9$ & s]ve z prec$5ts = a multitude ( m9or positional d$uctions4 ,a is tw5ty miles nor? ( ,london1 ,b is t5 miles s\? ( ,london1 h5ce ,a is ?irty miles nor? ( ,b4 ,! mileage is det]m9$ by imag9+ ! syn!sis develop$ into natural gr\ps & measur$ lat]ally4 ,o!r scales are ! "t sp5t 9 travell+ betwe5 ! places1 or ! money x co/s1 or ! di/ance del9eat$ on a map4 ,?\gh ! geographical concretion may be modell$ on ! association1 we _c treat x p]spectively1 = ! places be+ purely ideal 7except ! "o we are at71 ! ideal image is n liable to det]ioration by weak5$ p]ception4 ,x may suff] degradation by =getfulness1 b t has no?+ to d ) p]spection4 ,sph]icity ( ! ,e>?4 ,! geographical syn!sis is n always =m$ on ! patt]n ( a natural association4 ,t is ! fir/ & mo/ obvi\s %ape to give x1 & = ?\s&s ( ye>s x appe>s to h answ]$ ! topographical ne$s ( mank9d4 ,b z exploration ext5d$ x 0 f\nd t ! associative !ory did n 9 "s cases af=d true preconception4 ,if we travel f> en\gh 9 any fix$ direction we %all return to ! po9t f :i* we />t$4 ,?is c\ld n h be5 pr$ict$ f a syn!sis =m$ on ! model ( a l&scape4 ,su* a return h[ev] takes place 9 ! objects d5om9at$ sph]es1 & s ! sph]ical in/ead ( ! flat =m has be5 conceptually giv5 to ! geographical concretion4 ,t is all t is meant by say+ t ! _w is r\nd4 ,!re is no _w1 z ! my/ical reali/--project+ outw>ds 8 m5tal syn!sis--imag9es4 ,!re is only a s*eme ( sph]ical positions 9 ! intellect1 :i* facilitates ! recollection ( places & enables u to =esee ! %orte/ & easie/ way ( rea*+--i4e4 exp]i5c+ places4 ,! concretion is true inasmu* z ! pr$iction is f\nd to co9cide ) real exp]i5ce4 ,b t by no means implies t ! places exi/ except :5 p]ceiv$ 9 m9ds4 ,,xxvi--,,sequ5ce ,sequ5ce is a s]ies mo/ resembl+ a procession ( objects 9 a natural gr\p 7second category74 ,x diff]s !refrom 9 t ! objects _c be se5 toge!r4 ,x diff]s f concretion 9 t ! ord] 9 :i* ! objects appe> _c be alt]$1 or if !y are human & alt]able we cease to treat !m z a sequ5ce4 ,!y no long] h ! pr$ictive value :i* moves u to =m artificial gr\ps ( objects4 ,satisfactory examples ( reason+ 9 sequ5ce are less num]\s ?an might be suppos$4 ,x is a poor category = argum5t4 ,s]ies ei!r occur ) p]fect regul>ity1 l ! seasons ( ! ye>1 phases ( ! moon1 c41 & !n !y rapidly become m]e recollections & lose ! problematical "* ess5tial to a true inf]5ce1 or ! connection betwe5 ! objects is too casual = argum5tative purposes4 ,d>w9's !ory ( ! =mation ( coral atolls is a f9e argum5t 9 sequ5ce1 b ! application ( ?is !ory to reefs n exam9$ by him is h>dly unc]ta9 en\gh to be an argum5t4 ,x is ! fir/ sequ5tial inf]5ce t is valid--! re/ are =egone conclusions4 ,geology supplies "s good sequ5ces4 ,x has be5 notic$1 = in/ance1 t ! sea leaves ripple-m>ks on s&y bea*es1 & /ones ) simil> m>ks h be5 f\nd at a di/ance f ! sea2 x is a valid sequ5tial inf]5ce t ! m>ks 9 ! latt] case h also be5 =m$ by ! action ( ! waves4 ,"h ! diff]5ce 9 locality betwe5 ! two comp>$ s]ies--! mod]n complete & ! anci5t incomplete--supplies t slight elem5t ( d\bt ess5tial to an argum5t4 ,s z reg>ds ! mode ( mak+ anci5t fl9t tools3 x has be5 f\nd t tools exactly simil> to ! anci5t c n[ be made ) ! simple/ possible means1 & x is a true argum5t to inf] t ! anci5t implem5ts 7 made by ^! means4 ,! conclusion is highly probable )\t be+ infallibly c]ta91 & t is :at a dialectical conclusion ought to be4 ,we may admit t "s ( ! a/ronomical sequ5ces are =ms ( reason+1 = !y 7 su* to _! fir/ discov]]s1 & to m9ds n ?or\ghly conv]sant ) !m !y are /ill 9 ! nature ( pr$ictions t might fail ( accompli%m5t4 ,political1 f9ancial1 & sport+ =eca/s are sequ5tial argum5ts1 & we may also include speculations on ! future /ates ( all gr[+ organisms & develop+ in/itutions4 ,"t4 ,! int]vals betwe5 ! objects ( a sequ5ce are imag9$ aft] ! model ( lat]al int]vals 9 association4 ,?is is ,"t4 ,l space x is m]e blanks 9 exp]i5ce1 ?\gh treat$ by reali/s z ext]nal & self-subsi/+4 ,x c be measur$ by ref]5ce to objects on ^: sequ5tial recurr5ce we h ! mo/ reliance1 su* z ! phases ( ! moon1 ! positions ( ! sun 9 ! ecliptic1 ! movem5ts ( ! h&s ( a clock or ! *im+ ( its bells4 ,ab/ract or unb\nd$ "t is call$ 'et]nity'2 l ab/ract space x is a ref9$ =m ( no?+4 ,"t & space are usually c\pl$ toge!r z if co-ord9ate1 b et]nity is ! co-ord9ate ( space4 ,"t is divid$ sequ5ce & w\ld correspond to mat]ially divid$ space1 t is1 space ) objects 9 x at regul> int]vals4 ,matt]1 space1 & "t are ! ?ree pill>s ( ! reali/ic _w4 ,we h n[ se5 :at !y are made (4 ,matt] is a g5]al idea compil$ by ourselves f ph5om5al consci\sness4 ,x is no sub/ance--only an av]age4 ,space has ev5 less reality4 ,x is fir/ ! int]val betwe5 two objects 9 association2 !n ?is int]val is us$ metaphorically z an expression & measure ( p]spective decad5ce4 ,"t is an application ( ! same associative int]val to express ! blanks betwe5 objects 9 sequ5ce4 ,space & "t are ?us pure nullities--negatives ) positive names4 ,^! ?ree notions be+ explod$ z entities1 !re rema9 z a residuum ( true fact & ! />t+-po9t ( philosophy--m9ds1 _! en]gies1 & _! consci\sness4 ,?is is a v anci5t triad4 ,sci5ce con/antly conf\nds sequ5ce & causation4 ,we are told t ! moon causes eclipses ( ! sun1 t heat causes objects to exp&1 t a seal causes an impr9t4 ,?is is a metaphor f human causation1 & ! expression is n[ s root$ 9 language t x w\ld h>dly be possible to introduce a m correct phraseology4 ,yet x is z incorrect z to say t "o o'clock causes two o'clock1 or t daylight causes d>kness4 ,! confusion has aris5 f ! fact t bo? sequ5ce & causation deal ) fix$ inconv]tible s]ies1 b only 9 ! latt] is !re real p[] ex]t$ to produce ! effect4 ,mat]ial ?+s & _! app>5t effects are due to a cause ly+ beh9d bo?4 ,,xxvii--,,causation ,causation diff]s f all o!r categories 9 t "o ( its elem5ts is m5tal4 ,x is a s]ies beg9n+ 9 ! m9d--9 ?is relation d5om9at$ cause--& develop+ into objective ph5om5a call$ effects or an effect4 ,! s]ies be+ kn[n by judgm5t we c inf] simil> causes f p]ception ( simil> effects4 ,! commone/ causation is ! use & int]pretation ( language4 ,because we utt] words f a c]ta9 motive we inf] t all :o utt] ! same words d s f ! same motive4 ,t is ! reason ( ! intelligibility ( words4 ,?is category is peculi> f ! extremely n>r[ range ( ! exp]i5ce :i* supplies ! judgm5ts4 ,we nev] p]ceive any m9d b "o--our own--& ?is has to supply all ! judgm5ts by :i* we reason conc]n+ o!r m9ds4 ,!re is !re=e no category 9 :i* correct reason+ is s difficult & s r>e4 ,no am\nt ( exp]i5ce entirely ov]comes ?is defect1 = if we are ignorant we _c und]/& ! wise1 & if we are wise we _c conceive ! motives ( ! ignorant & vici\s4 ,only ^? p]sons :o are m5tally v l ea* o!r are mutually compreh5sible4 ,?is category has a fur!r peculi>ity4 ,9 all ! re/ ! inf]5ce relates to objective exp]i5ce1 & ?is be+ due to int]action ( m9ds we are ju/ifi$ 9 say+ t until x is p]ceiv$ x has no exi/5ce4 ,b 9 causation we are inf]r+ some?+ ) ref]5ce to a m9d1 & ?is exi/s ?\gh we nev] c p]ceive x4 ,we "k t m9ds exi/ )\t p]ception because we "k t our own exi/s ?\gh no "o p]ceives u--?\gh we are 9 total d>kness & sil5ce & _c ourselves p]ceive our bodies4 ,z already /at$1 ,exi/5ce has n ! same mean+ :5 appli$ to objects & to m9ds1 objects be+ m]ely tempor>y conditions ( m9ds4 ,! non-exi/5ce ( inf]r$ b unp]ceiv$ objects does n foll[ f any defect 9 ! faculty ( inf]5ce1 b dep5ds on ! ess5tial "* ( objects4 ,!y are creat$ by mutual contact ( m9ds & _c exi/ )\t t condition1 h[ev] cle>ly !y may be inf]r$ & h[ev] correctly _! appe>ance may be pr$ict$4 ,causation is conf\nd$ ) sequ5ce because bo? are s]ies4 ,let me illu/rate ! diff]5ce betwe5 !m by an example4 ,i turn ! /op-cock ( a pipe1 & wat] fl[s f ! op5 end ( ! pipe4 ,9 popul> & ev5 sci5tific language x w\ld be said t ,i caus$ ! wat] to fl[4 ,b ?is is incorrect4 ,all ,i caus$ 0 ! turn+ ( ! tap2 t alone 0 :olly due to my en]gy & intellig5ce4 ,!re foll[$ z a sequ5ce ! outfl[ ( wat]1 b t 0 due p>tly to cosmic =ce & p>tly to ! previ\s human causation 7n m9e7 impli$ 9 mak+ & lay+ d[n ! pipe s z to utilise ! cosmic =ce4 ,i m]ely remov$ an ob/acle t prev5t$ ! fur!r developm5t ( ! =ce 9 a p>ticul> direction4 ,my relation to ! outfl[ 0 sequ5ce1 n causation4 ,9 obs]vation sequ5ce regi/]s fix$ or probable s]ies ( objects )\t reg>d to _! causes4 ,x is suffici5t if !y occur regul>ly en\gh to ju/ify pr$iction4 ,causation1 on ! o!r h&1 pays no reg>d to physical connection ( any sort1 b seeks out ! be+ or be+s :o suppli$ ! en]gy produc+ an effect or s]ies ( effects4 ,! speculations 9 causation pass q beyond ! doma9 ( objectivity1 ov] into ! realm ( true creation4 ,:5 we read t '! succession ( ev5ts is an endless *a9 ( effects :i* are 9 _! turn causes ( new effects1' :at is meant is sequ5ce1 & = 'cause' & 'effect' ! t]ms 'antec$5t' & 'consequ5t' %\ld h be5 employ$4 ,sequ5ces may be '*a9s' & may be long1 b if s _! l9ks h be5 =g$ by indep5d5t causes act+ across ! *a92 z :5 a l9e ( soldi]s fire 9 succession at regul> int]vals1 or z 9 ! case ( ! moon's qu>t]s4 ,9 ^! in/ances ! objects1 al?\gh =m+ a s]ies1 has ea* a cause ( its own4 ,c]ta9ly a causation is a s]ies1 = ! cause prec$es ! effect4 ,b an effect is nev] ! cause ( a succe$+ effect4 ,:5 ?is appe>s to be ! case ! explanation is t ! en]gy 0 n exhau/$ 9 produc+ ! imm$iate simple effect1 b has produc$ a complicat$ effect 9 :i* a s]ies may be discov]$4 ,an objective effect1 be+ a m]e fla% ( consci\sness--a %ad[ on a w9d[-bl9d--is incapable ( caus+ any?+4 ,analysis ( ,cause4 ,cause is m9d 9 action4 ,x consi/s ( at lea/ en]gy & a s5tim5tal motive--en]gy ex]t$ to gratify s5tim5t4 ,if ! m9d is intellectualis$ !re w probably be an ideal elem5t 9 ! cause--9 ?is connection call$ plan or design--= ! bett] direction ( ! en]gy4 ,normal human causation consi/s ( an ef=t ( m9d direct$ t[>ds ! objective realisation ( a plan1 = ! gratification ( a s5tim5t4 ,?is is ! same z ,,w4 ,all ?ree elem5ts ( cause may be furni%$ by ! same individual--or any two ( !m--or only "o4 ,= in/ance1 ! man :o wants a h\se supplies ! motive1 ! ar*itect provides ! design1 ! build] f9ds ! en]gy4 ,"o plan may use up an indef9ite numb] ( sep>ate /ores ( en]gy4 ,ev5 9 an individual ! realisation ( a plan exhau/s ! p[]s ( millions ( organic cells4 ,a milit>y campaign illu/rates ! relation ( plan to p[]4 ,! design may h be5 =m$ by "o man1 & !n communicat$ :olly or p>tially to a hundr$ ?\s&1 & ! en]gies ( ^! may be devot$ to its realisation4 ,! soldi] fights ) 8 own en]gy1 b he is direct$ by 8 comm&]'s idea1 or s mu* ( x z has be5 confid$ to him4 ,! design may /ret* f ! comm&] to ! soldi]1 b n ! en]gy4 ,9 ord] t ! comm&] %\ld be t]m$ ! 'cause' ( 8 private's activity1 x w\ld be necess>y to elim9ate ! notion ( ex]t$ en]gy f causation1 & r$uce x to b>e communication ( design1 :i* w\ld be absurd4 ,! /ret*+ ( "o design ov] _m relays ( en]gy has no d\bt help$ to confirm ! notion t causation is a long *a9 ( alt]nate causes & effects4 ,! tru? is t en]gy c act only at %ort range1 & has to be incessantly r5ew$4 ,! _w is 9 a con/ant /ate ( creation & dissolution1 say ! ,kabbali/s4 ,x is absurd to speak ( any?+ t exi/$ a ?\s& or ev5 a hundr$ ye>s ago z ! cause ( any?+ exi/+ to-day4 ,! design may intellectually survive1 b ! en]gy is long s9ce dissipat$4 ,we h nev] m ?an ab\t a day's supply ( en]gy 9 /ore at once4 ,if s5tim5t1 p[]1 & design are suppli$ by diff]5t individuals1 no s+le "o ( !m c be call$ ! cause ( ! effect4 ,! relation ( ea* to ! result is sequ5ce4 ,:5 we h trac$ an effect to ! m9d or m9ds t suppli$ ! ?ree or ! two necess>y elem5ts--suppos+ ! design is sometimes omitt$ & ! act :at we call in/9ctive--we h obta9$ a complete explanation ( ! effect4 ,our curiosity is !n absolutely satisfi$4 ,we h rea*$ a true beg9n+4 ,x is ! want ( ?is ?or\gh explanation t r5d]s mat]ial sci5ce s disappo9t+4 ,we are put (f ) a m]e physical antec$5t1 :i* itself ne$s explanation z mu* z its consequ5t4 ,x does n make ! antec$5t m significant to place x f> back 9 "t1 = "t by itself is n a cause--x is m]ely a "n giv5 to int]vals ( exp]i5ce4 ,a ?+ is nev] truly expla9$ until we see t its production ei!r caus$ pleasure to some?+ else1 or 0 expect$ to cause pleasure4 ,beh9d ev]y?+ mu/ be ,s5tim5t4 ,"o g5]ation ( be+s is n ! cause ( ! foll[+ g5]ation1 else ! =m] w\ld h p]i%$ 9 begett+ ! latt]4 ,m p>ticul>ly1 a man is n ! effect ( 8 p>5ts or remot] ance/ors1 ?\gh !y /ood to him 9 an antec$5t relation4 ,! se$ ( 8 body 0 tak5 f !irs1 b 8 en]gy is 8 own1 drawn direct f ! univ]sal s\rce4 ,if he resembles !m corporeally x is because he previ\sly resembl$ !m m5tally1 n because ! cells ( 8 body h h]$it>y t5d5cies to take p>ticul> =ms4 ,h5ce ! ,d>w9ian g5ealogy ( m5 & animals--suppos+ x 7 correct--does n expla9 !m4 ,x is a ph5om5al s*ematism bas$ on or imply+ an errone\s assumption--t g5]ation is causation4 ,atomism--! !ory ( ,democritus--is f\nd$ on ano!r false view ( causation4 ,! physical p>ts ( a ?+ are conceiv$ to be ! causes ( ! ?+1 & s ! lea/ conceivable p>ticles ( 'matt]' are consid]$ ! fir/ causes & true explanation ( all ?+s4 ,?is notion appe>s to be useful 9 *emi/ry1 b x _c be accept$ z philosophy4 ,if our s5ses 7 %>p5$ to p]ceive atoms ^! w\ld simply be small ph5om5a1 & x w\ld /ill be necess>y to inquire :at motive & p[] produc$ !m4 ,x has be5 sugge/$ t atoms may be inh]5tly s5ti5t & dynamic3 if s !y are m9ute animals or cells1 & we are /ill )\t an explanation ( _! occurr5ce 9 organis$ masses4 ,x is inconceivable t !y %\ld spontane\sly ent] into intricate comb9ations1 ^: evid5t purpose has only an indirect & p>tial be>+ on _! welf>e4 ,?\gh advocat$ by m5 ( und\bt$ ability1 ,atomism & ,evolution are no?+ m ?an =ms ( ! ord9>y reali/ic belief1 t ?+s are caus$ by _! physical antec$5ts4 ,! two !ories are suppos$ to be complem5t>y1 b 9 reality !y are contradictory4 ,if an animal body is caus$ by its p>5ts x _c be caus$ by its own atoms1 & vice v]s4 ,v>ieties ( ,causation4 ,ab/ract causation--! category--consi/s ( a cause & an effect4 ,! =m]1 z we h se51 is complicat$1 ! latt] may comprise sev]al objects4 ,ignor+ ! complications involv$ 9 ! use ( an organism--:i* comes betwe5 ! m9d & ! f9al effect--we di/+ui% f\r or five v>ieties ( causation4 ,c--e#a--;e#b--;e#c--;e#d ,! cause ,c produces f its own en]gy ! s]ies ( effects e#a--;e#d1 l ! reb\nd+ ( a missile f ! surface ( gr\nd or wat]4 ,?is may be call$ 'rico*et4' ,effects1 ea* hav+ an indep5d5t cause1 sometimes =m a s]ies l a ladd]3 e#a e#b e#c e#d e#e ,c ,c ,c ,c ,c ,?is is ! species illu/rat$ by a successive dis*>ge ( musketry4 ,! causation ( sci5ce consi/s ( ! effects 9 ?is species consid]$ ap>t f ! causes4 ,9 ! 'gamut' ! effects are 9 sequ5ce1 b !y h all ! same physical antec$5t4 e#a e#b e#c e#d e#e ------------------------ ,c ,! successive acts ( ! same man or animal are ( ?is k9d4 ,9 ea* ( ^! species ! effects are 9 s]ies & may be treat$ z a sequ5ce1 b ! cause or causes lie outside ! sequ5ce4 ,f> f m]e regul>ity ( succession be+ a pro( ( causation betwe5 ! objects1 x may v easily be itself a "p ( ! causal design4 ,9 ! 'cap/an' sev]al p>tial causes contribute to produce "o effect1 z :5 a gang ( m5 manipulate "o eng9e4 ,c ,c _/ ,c--e--,c _/ ,c ,c ,! '/>' or 'f\nta9' is ! conv]se ( ! la/4 ,a s+le cause produces sev]al simultane\s p>tial e e _/ e--,c--e _/ e e effects1 z :5 we /rike our op5 h& sm>tly on ! surface ( wat]4 ,^! sub-categories enable u1 if we s wi%1 to def9e an en]gic s]ies some:at m precisely ?an by call+ x a causation 9 ! mo/ ab/ract s5se4 ,possibly also ! figures del9eat$ repres5t ! primitive =ms :i* en]gy takes :5 em]g+ into ! ph5om5al4 ,! '/>' is a mo/ *>act]i/ic =m4 ,! d5dritic %ape s frequ5tly met ) 9 objects is a /> spr++ f a ray ( a prec$+ />4 ,p]haps ea* vegetable bud has an indep5d5t cause2 if n !y are 'rico*ets' f ! g5]al plant life4 ,9 ! comb9ations ( ^! elem5t>y effects we h a likely explanation ( plant & cry/al =mation4 ',cons]vation' ( ,en]gy4 ,en]gy is annihilat$ 9 ! us+4 ,x emanates f a great univ]sal c5tre1 & at a %ort di/ance f t c5tre is completely & irrecov]ably dissipat$4 ,! app>5t fixity ( ?+s is purely =mal--l ! fixity ( a wat]-fall1 :i* r5ews its sub/ance e few seconds4 ,t is ! mean+ ( say+ t ! _w is 9 a con/ant /ate ( =mation & dissolution4 ,physical !ori/s repres5t en]gy "u ! figure ( sub/ance1 b !y suppose x is fix$ 9 quantity ?\gh con/antly und]go+ *ange ( =m--! sci5tific view1 "h z else:]e1 be+ j ! opposite ( ! philosophical4 ,obs]ve--say ! cons]vationi/s--! case ( a man rais+ a heavy /one f ! e>?4 ,he fatigues himself b he does n de/roy en]gy2 he acquires comm& ov] ! en]gy-9-position ( ! /one1 & 9 us+ x to crack a cocoa-nut or drive a po/ he receives back 8 own en]gy undim9i%$ 9 quantity4 ,t seems reasonable at fir/ sight4 ,a quantity ( en]gy is tak5 f ! man & put into ! /one2 x is tak5 f ! /one & put into ! driv5 po/4 ,to be sure1 if ! man undrives ! po/ he does n !reby disfatigue himself1 z ! !ory w\ld lead u to expect--he fatigues himself ! m4 ,! same 'law1' we are told1 holds good 9 build+ a dam across a /ream & utilis+ ! =ce ( wat] to drive a mill4 ,! en]gy app>5tly lo/ 9 ! con/ruction is recov]$ 9 ! sup]ior ease ) :i* we gr9d our corn or saw our timb]4 ,!re is a confusion 9 ! t]m9ology "h3 to save en]gy t w\ld o!rwise be lo/ is n id5tical ) recov]+ en]gy t has once be5 us$4 ,we make a gun1 load x1 & dis*>ge a bullet aga9/ a t>get4 ,:at has become ( ! =ce exp5d$8 ,x has be5 trans=m$ into heat1 say ! cons]vationi/s4 ,& :5 ! t>get & flatt5$ bullet h cool$ d[n8 ,! en]gy has gone to raise ! g5]al temp]ature ( ! univ]se6 ,t is a conclusion h>d to believe & impossible to v]ify4 ,b--grant+ t ! individual explosions ( a gun may be ! 'cons]vation' ( "s antec$5t p[]--h[ d we recov] ! initial exp5se ( ! in/rum5t8 ,& if n recov]able1 :]e at lea/ & 9 :at =m does x exi/8 ,prior to ! explosions t are repres5t$ by heat$ t>gets & ! l1 en]gy 0 sp5t 9 inv5t+ & mak+ ! gun1 mak+ ! ammunition1 load+ & aim+ ! piece4 ,all ^! 7 ess5tial to ! effect--& :at has become ( !m8 ,h !y also gone to w>m ! univ]se8 ,in/ead ( rais+ a /one to a height1 let u c>ry x along horizontally till we feel ! same degree ( fatigue4 ,if en]gy 9 ! us+ is m]ely trans=m$ b n lo/1 we %\ld n[ be 9 possession ( "s p[] equival5t to ! en]gy exp5d$4 ,b we are n--we h no?+ to %[ = our tr\ble4 ,if we con/ruct a wat]-mill & fix x high & dry 9 ! middle ( a pla91 in/ead ( "u a fall ( wat]1 we get no return = ! en]gy exp5d$4 ,by su* a law z ! cons]vation ( en]gy1 & ) ! usefulness ( a prop]ly plac$ mill z ! measure ( comp5sation1 we %\ld receive an equival5t return no matt] :]e ! mill is plac$4 ,:at has place to d ) ! action ( a univ]sal law8 ,in/ead ( rais+ ! /one or c>ry+ x horizontally1 let u f9d x ne> ! edge ( a precipice & roll x ov]4 ,!re is no proportion betwe5 ! pu% t laun*$ ! /one1 & ! =ce x exhibits on rea*+ ! foot ( ! precipice4 ,h[ is ! equival5ce ( en]gy ma9ta9$ 9 ?is case8 ,x w be repli$ t ! =ce n[ at "w is gravitation4 ,if s1 x 0 gravitation t br\ght d[n ! fir/ /one on ! po/--n any en]gy transf]r$ f u to ! /one4 ,! rais+ ( ! /one put u 9 a position to use ! =ce ( gravity1 j z climb+ ! precipice put u 9 a position to roll ! /one ov] ! edge ( x4 ,su* consid]ations z ^! make ?is 'law' incr$ible to me4 ,b :5 ,i pass f ! explanation to ! concrete facts1 ,i h no difficulty 9 und]/&+ !m4 ,x is ! law t is obscure--n ! facts4 ,!re exi/s no?+ b liv+ m9ds ( diff]5t degrees ( en]gy4 ,we m5 are small be+s associat$ ) a cosmical creature ^: =ce is immeasurably great] ?an ours1 & we h intellig5ce en\gh to utilise "p ( ?is =ce to supplem5t our own4 ,t is ! mean+ ( me*anism4 ,"s ef=ts to control ! cosmic =ces are pr(itable1 b !re is no transmutation ( our en]gy into ! result1 nor any necess>y equival5ce betwe5 ! lab\r & ! result4 ,we may /umble ^u an available cosmic =ce almo/ by accid5t--we may wa/e a life-"t ov] a me*anical problem & fail to solve x4 ,! utilisation ( cosmic =ce by man is be/ expla9$ by comp>+ x ) animal slav]y4 ,trap a wild elephant & tra9 him to draw & c>ry--y h con/ruct$ an eng9e4 ,!re are ( c\rse important diff]5ces betwe5 ! two k9ds ( in/rum5t1 due to ! enorm\s disproportion betwe5 ! magnitude & p[] ( ! respective entities4 ,9 ! case ( ! animal ! :ole life comes "u our control3 9 ! case ( ! cosmos we c utilise only a m9ute fraction ( x1 & t r by putt+ ourselves 9 its way ?an by mak+ x obey u4 ,! animal we h to fe$3 ! cosmic be+ does n draw ^u u = its n\ri%m5t4 ,we c direct ! animal ?r\gh 8 s5sibility3 ! cosmic s5sibility appe>s to be beyond our p[] ( irritation4 ,ap>t f ^! diff]5ces ! g5]al laws ( ! "o k9d ( tool are ^? ( ! o!r also4 ,we h n transf]r$ p[] to ! rais$ /one1 or ! coil$ spr+1 or ! load$ gun1 or ! embank$ riv]--any m ?an to ! tam$ & h>ness$ horse4 ,!re is no fix$ ratio betwe5 ! fatigue ( cat*+ & tra9+ an animal1 & ! en]gy sav$ by mak+ him "w = u4 ,! animal's "w is n our own en]gy giv5 back to u--nei!r is ! ma*9e's4 ,a pl\gh is useless )\t cattle to draw x--s is a turb9e )\t wat] to drive x4 ,:5 coal is burn$ to 'g5]ate' electricity1 t is ! cosmic equival5t ( exhau/+ or kill+ "o animal to ov]p[] or to fe$ ano!r3 ! en]gy ( combu/ion is utt]ly de/roy$--n trans=m$ into ! electricity4 ,! "q c be m accurately /at$ & br\ght to a pla9 issue if we use ! t]ms & =ms ( dialectic4 ,a !ory is an argum5t--:5 x is n a fallacy--& an argum5t1 we h se51 consi/s ( two p>ts4 ,!re is ! matt] ( fact requir+ explanation1 & ! antec$5t k :i* is us$ to illu/rate x4 ,( ^! ! prec$5t is ! m important1 & x is no valid objection to a criticism t ! p]son :o (f]s x kn[s less ab\t ! case ?an ! !ori/4 ,! critic may be 9 possession ( a bett] prec$5t1 :i* ! !ori/ has fail$ to notice1 p]haps f a too exclusive att5tion to ! case4 ,9 ! "q be=e u ! case is ,me*anical or ,inorganic ,en]gy4 ,x is n an object1 b an inf]5ce f ! k ( our p]sonal m5tal en]gy4 ,?is latt] is ! only en]gy we really p]ceive4 ,b we f9d 9 objects1 or associat$ ) ! p]ception ( !m1 a p[] capable ( assi/+ or ( oppos+ our ef=ts--h5ce we conclude x is some?+ ( ! same nature z our own p[]4 ,we _c well avoid t inf]5ce1 & !re is no app>5t reason :y we %\ld try to avoid x4 ,s f> sci5ce & philosophy are at "o1 b "h !y "p company4 ,philosophy consi/5tly end[s ,nature ) s5ti5cy also1 = we nev]--to our c]ta9 k--meet ) en]gy )\t s5ti5cy1 & we h no "r to transf] "o attribute )\t ! o!r4 ,al?\gh sci5ce is indebt$ to ! assimilation ( organic & inorganic--,nature expla9$ by ,man--= ! fir/ notion ( ext]nal en]gy1 no soon] is ! notion =m$ ?an ! argum5t is disc>d$1 & ext]nal en]gy is decl>$ to be entirely de/itute ( an organic & m5tal "*4 ,h[ !n is x to be fur!r expla9$8 ,to :at %all x n[ be lik5$8 ,9 ! mat]iali/ic s*eme all ?+s are suppos$ to be resolv$ into matt] & =ce4 ,matt] is conceiv$ z a self-exi/5t sub/ance1 inde/ructible1 c4 ,x is bett] kn[n ?an =ce1 = mat]ial ?+s c be directly p]ceiv$ :]eas =ce is imag9>y all ! "t4 ,"u ^! circum/ances x is natural ?\gh illogical to treat =ce z a species ( matt]4 ,) only two ?+s left 9 ! univ]se1 ! bett] kn[n ( ! two w be us$ to expla9 ! less kn[n1 if an explanation is consid]$ indisp5sable4 ,=ce is accord+ly br\ght z a 'case' "u matt] z a 'prec$5t1' & is conclud$ to be inde/ructible because matt] is believ$ to be inde/ructible2 & :5 en]gy appe>s to be wa/$ ! inf]5ce is t x has simply )drawn f view1 l an object t has ceas$ to be p]ceiv$ & may be p]ceiv$ aga94 ,t seems to be ! evolution ( ! sci5tific notion ( inorganic en]gy4 ,?is !orem is fallaci\s 9 two respects4 ,!re is no su* matt] z sci5ce imag9es4 ,matt] is a g5]al idea =m$ by ! /udy ( mat]ial objects1 :i* are /ates ( consci\sness excit$ by n\m5al contact4 ,x is ! av]age object--a m]e affection or =mation ( ! obs]v+ m9d4 ,we are ! mak]s ( matt]4 ,su* an idea _c be said to be inde/ructible3 9 a s5se x is de/roy$ 9 an individual :5 x is =gott5 or inactive2 x w\ld c]ta9ly be de/roy$ if all m9ds ceas$ to =m x4 ,?us ! prec$5t 9 ! sci5tific !ory ( =ce is itself false4 ,!n en]gy is n 9 ! lea/ l matt]--ei!r ! matt] ( sci5ce or t ( philosophy4 ,! en]gy we really "k is a unique exp]i5ce--n a g5]al idea1 nor any?+ analog\s to a ph5om5al object2 s t ev5 if ! propos$ prec$5t 7 true 9 itself1 x is n applicable to ! case4 ,to complete our k ( ext]nal en]gy we mu/ g back to t comp>ison :i* fir/ sugge/$ to u t !re is ext]nal en]gy1 namely1 ! comp>ison ( liv+ man ) liv+ nature4 ,if ?is is n a correct acc\nt ( ! d]ivation ( ! notion t cosmic en]gy is inde/ructible1 let cons]vationi/s tell u :at is ! p>allel on :i* !y are argu+4 ,"h is a blank !orem = completion-- x is inde/ructible ---------------------------------------- --------- ,cosmic en]gy is a x mu/ !re=e be consid]$ sort ( x inde/ructible ,matt]1 z we h se51 is n x4 ,human en]gy is n x4 ,our individual p[]--s f> z exp]i5ce in=ms u--is de/roy$ 9 ! us+4 ,a day's "w exhau/s u1 & we h to pass into ! condition call$ sleep to be refill$4 ,x is sleep1 n food1 t refre%es ! m9d4 ,food re/ores ! bodily tool we h be5 work+ )--puts a fre% edge on ! *isel1--b x does n recup]ate ! p[] t wields ! tool4 ,:at !n is x8 ,,note ,,on ,,dreams ,if dreams c\ld be /udi$ ) our wak+ consci\sness !y w\ld ?r[ mu* light on our m5tal nature4 ,be+ a poor dream] myself ,i am n compet5t to discuss ?is phase ( psy*ology z x des]ves4 ,i ?9k h[ev] ! bulk ( our dreams c be r$uc$ to two pr9ciples4 ,!re is fir/ ! simple l[]+ ( ! m5tal en]gy1 :i* weak5s ! att5tion & dissolves ! artificial categories1 ?us mak+ ord9>y reason impossible4 ,!re is j en\gh en]gy left to revive a few scatt]$ ideas1 :i* bl5d toge!r )\t control or reg>d to prec$5t4 ,h5ce ! s+ul> comb9ations !y sometimes =m4 ,9 ! wak+ /ate ! objective & intellectual exp]i5ce are g5]ally m vivid & engross+ ?an ! s5tim5tal--at lea/ 9 mascul9e p]sons4 7,i delib]ately avoid ! phrase 'mascul9e m9d1' because !re is manife/ly no sex 9 m9d47 ,9 dreams ! conv]se ( ?is is ! case4 ,! objects we appe> to see are dull & indi/9ct1 be+ ideas mi/ak5 = objects1 :il/ ! feel+s are evid5tly g5u9e & sometimes ( great int5sity4 ,?is may be expla9$ on ! occult pr9ciple allud$ to 9 section ,x4 ,:at ,i und]/& by occult influ5ce is ?is4 ,9 ord9>y exp]i5ce ! object is fir/ p]ceiv$1 !n a s5tim5t may be excit$ ei!r by ! same n\m5on or by recollection4 ,9 ! occult proc$ure ?is ord] is rev]s$4 ,! s5tim5t is fir/ secretly rea*$ ?r\gh ! *9ks ( our intellectual arm\r1 & ! intellect is n excit$ at all or only by association4 ,dur+ sleep1 :5 ! ,self is ne>ly exhau/$ ( p[]1 x is likely we are m expos$ ?an usual to su* influ5ces4 ,!y invade our m9d & excite our s5tim5t )\t awak+ ! intellect4 ,:atev] ideas accompany ! s5tim5ts are g5]ally inadequate to expla9 !m1 ! /ock ( available ideas be+ n[ r$uc$4 ,! conv]sations we hold 9 dreams1 & ! app>5t communication ( k t takes place1 are ref]r$ by ,du ,prel to a division ( ! ego into two or m individuals :o talk toge!r4 ,?is notion appe>s to me =c$ & un?9kable4 ,"u :at image is ! ego figur$ t x %\ld be capable ( division8 ,9 ! wak+ /ate we sometimes ask ourselves que/ions1 & on consid]ation f9d answ]s to !m4 ,we _c recall a "n1 a ^w1 or date1 ?\gh we "k x is some:]e 9 our memory1 & we pause & se>* till we succe$ 9 excit+ ! lat5t image4 ,:5 ?is takes place 9 a dream ! in=mation is assum$ to come f ano!r individual by an easy dramatisation4 ,a di/urbance 9 ! body dur+ sleep may con/itute--l all bodily suff]+--a dra9 ^u our m5tal en]gy1 :i* w be felt z a s5tim5t & may excite ideas by sympa?y4 ,no d\bt _m dreams are caus$ 9 ?is mann]4 ,s9ce our wak+ consci\sness is highly artificial & imag9>y1 we may inf] t :il/ dream+ we are ne>] to ! natural1 primitive /ate ( ! m9d1 b 9 a weak5$ condition4 ,footnote #ac3 ,ueb]weg's ,logic1 ,flem+'s ,vocabul>y1 & ,dick5son's ,dict4 ( ,philosophy4 ,footnote #ad3 ,:5 ! p]spective object is accurately measur$ by in/rum5t at a kn[n di/ance f ! eye1 & ! tactual size ( ! object is also kn[n1 ! associative di/ance c be calculat$ by simple proportion4 ,multiply ! measur+ di/ance by ! tactual size & divide ! product by ! p]spective size--! quoti5t is ! di/ance4 ,! p]spective size ( objects is greatly exagg]at$ 9 realism4 ,mo/ p ?9k !y see a man at 8 full /ature = a di/ance ( fifty y>ds or s4 ,at t di/ance ! talle/ man does n measure half an in* 9 height4 ,at tw5ty feet a six-foot man measures #cf in*es--at t5 feet #gb in*es4 ,! p assembl$ 9 a room =ty feet long range 9 real--p]spective--height f sev5 in*es to two in*es4 ,:5 a man is ne>] ?an t5 feet we d n p]ceive him 9 "o op]ation--we obs]ve him 9 p>ts :i* we put toge!r 9 ! m9d4 ,footnote #ae3 ,probably ,dr4 ,johnson meant to be humor\s 9 8 way4 ,! pr9ciples ( ,idealism are apt to excite mir? 9 ! unphilosophical1 b ! laugh is n always on ! side ( ! sc(f]4 ,a memb] ( ! ,p]sian philosophical sect call$ ,samradians once said to 8 /ew>d3 ',! _w & its inhabitants h no actual exi/5ce2 !y h m]ely an ideal be+4' ,! s]vant on he>+ ?is took ! fir/ fav\rable opportunity to conceal 8 ma/]'s horse1 & :5 he 0 ab\t to ride br\ght him an ass ) ! horse's saddle4 ,:5 ! ,samradian ask$1 ',:]e is ! horse8'--! s]vant repli$1 ',?\ ha/ be5 ?9k+ ( an idea2 !re 0 no horse 9 be+4' ,! ma/] answ]$1 ',x is true'2 he !n m\nt$ ! ass1 & aft] rid+ = "s "t he sudd5ly dism\nt$ & tak+ ! saddle (f ! ass's back plac$ x on ! s]vant's1 draw+ ! gir?s tightly2 & hav+ =c$ ! bridle into 8 m\?1 he m\nt$ him & flogg$ him along vigor\sly4 ,! s]vant 9 pite\s acc5ts exclaim$1 ',:at is ! mean+ ( ?is treatm5t8'--to :i* ! ,samradian repli$1 ',!re is no su* ?+ z a :ip2 x is m]ely ideal2 ?\ art only ?9k+ ( "s illusion4' ,aft] :i* ! /ew>d rep5t$ & re/or$ ! horse4 ,ano!r ,samradian--or p]haps ! same individual--hav+ m>ri$ ! daught] ( a ri* man1 %e1 on f9d+ out h] husb&'s cre$1 propos$ to h "s amusem5t at 8 exp5se4 ,"o day ! ,samradian br\ght 9 a bottle ( pure w9e1 :i* dur+ 8 abs5ce %e empti$ ( its cont5ts & fill$ ) wat]4 ,:5 ! "t = tak+ w9e arriv$ %e p\r$ out wat] in/ead ( w9e1 into a gold cup :i* 0 h] own prop]ty4 ,! ,samradian hav+ obs]v$1 ',?\ ha/ giv5 me wat] in/ead ( w9e1'--%e answ]$1 ',x is only ideal2 !re 0 no w9e 9 exi/5ce4' ,! husb& !n said1 ',?\ ha/ spok5 well2 h& me ! cup t ,i may g to a neighb\r's h\se & br+ x back full ( w9e4' ,he !reupon took out ! gold cup1 :i* he sold1 & in/ead ( x br\ght back an e>!n vessel full ( w9e4 ,! wife on see+ ?is said1 ',:at ha/ ?\ done ) ! gold5 cup8' ,he repli$1 ',?\ art surely ?9k+ ( "s ideal gold5 cup'--on :i* ! woman greatly regrett$ h] witticism4--,dabi/n1 v4 i4 p4 #aii-bjj4 ,,r$action ,,( ,,colloquial ,,argum5ts ,,xxviii ,a clev] man has said t ! use ( language is to conceal ?\ght4 ,its prim>y use is c]ta9ly n to reveal ?\ght1 b to enable "o p]son to produce an effect on ! m9d ( ano!r or ( o!rs1 ei!r = _! or 8 own advantage4 ,9 ! c\rse ( us+ spee* z an in/rum5t ( comm&1 entreaty1 p]suasion1 m5ace1 or fu/igation1 x may happ5 t ! movem5ts ( ! speak]'s m9d are reveal$ to "s ext5t1 b ?is is a m]e incid5t1 n ! ma9 purpose ( ! spee*4 ,gramm> is ! sy/em ( rules :i* gov]n ! use ( language 9 its prim>y & ord9>y capacity4 ,x foll[s f ?is t language is 9 no s5se a revelation ( ! reason+ processes1 nor d ! rules ( gramm> co9cide ) ! laws ( intellect4 ,x is j z reasonable to expect to f9d ! metaphysic ( ?\ght reveal$ 9 any ( ! indu/rial & f9e arts1 z to look = x 9 ! /ructure ( spee*4 ,ari/otle drew 8 logic f ! composition ( ! ,greek s5t5ce--he might z well h s\ght = logic 9 ! con/itution ( ! ,greek busk94#af ,ev5 :5 m5 beg9 to reason al\d & seek to r5d] _! logical movem5ts z evid5t z possible1 !y are s hamp]$ by ! ord9>y habits & rules ( spee* t _! mean+ is (t5 difficult or impossible ( compreh5sion4 ,:5ce arises ! necessity1 if we w\ld reason al\d to any purpose1 ( r$act+ or translat+ language f ! v]nacul> into a dialect m indicative ( ! logical processes t take place :5 we reason4 ,?is r$action consi/s ma9ly 9 di/+ui%+ cle>ly ! f\r p>ts compos+ an argum5t1 namely1 ! ,subject ( ! ,prec$5t2 ! ,case :i* is br\ght "u x = judgm5t2 ! ,applicate or "p ( ! prec$5t be>+ on ! case2 ! ,conclusion1 :i* is ! ideal judgm5t conc]n+ ! case4 ,:5 ^! f\r p>ts are express$ & cle>ly und]/ood we h a p]fect argum5t1 s f> z argum5tation dep5ds on language4 ,b probably we h spoil$ ! language f ! grammatical & rhetorical po9t ( view4 ,we may h _h to supply mu* t w\ld be r$undant & unsightly 9 ord9>y conv]sation or writ+1 & to take away mu* t is appropriate to colloquial disc\rse4 ,we are div]t+ language to a use = :i* x 0 n design$1 & we ne$ n be surpris$ if ! result is ungraceful4 ,?is _c be help$ s9ce !re exi/s no o!r means ?an language by :i* to express our concrete reason+4 ,i h already %[n practically h[ an argum5t c be arrang$ s z to indicate ! logical relations subsi/+ betwe5 its p>ts4 ,a ,greek cross is drawn1 & 9 ! f\r angles ?us made ! f\r p>ts ( ! argum5t are writt51 or ! pr9cipal words ( ea*4 ,beg9 ) ! conclusion1 = t is g5]ally ! mo/ explicitly giv52 !n f9d or supply ! "p ( ! prec$5t t agrees or logically rhymes ) x2 next place ! subject 9 ! fir/ comp>tm5t1 & ! case "u x4 ,^! relative positions %\ld n be v>i$4 ,:5 ?is has be5 practic$ = a :ile x enables "o to dismemb] ! mo/ intricate argum5t ) ease & exactness4 ,! r$action or re-writ+ ( ! language c be abbreviat$ by reg>d+ ! horizontal l9e z equival5t to a decl>ation ( resemblance betwe5 case & prec$5t-subject1 & 7by application7 betwe5 ! illu/rative ab/raction & conclusion4 ,if !re is an argum5t at all !re mu/ be ?is resemblance1 & ! "r-h& p>ts mu/ h "o ( ! six categorical relations to ! left-h& p>ts4 ,! cont5ts ( ! angles may be cut d[n to a ^w or two1 z-- ,i4 ,tyrants dea? ---------------- ,caes> dea? ,if ! category be fur!r indicat$ by a num]al ov] ! upright l9e1 we h ! ess5tial p>ts ( ! argum5t 9 a v compact =m4 ,! cross & categorical num]al may be reg>d$ z a suffici5t sub/itute = grammatical syntax & punctuation4 ,! negative ^w t g5]ally occurs 9 /igmatic argum5ts requires special att5tion4 ,x %\ld always be put 9 ! second angle1 & :5 x may read s z to negative ! subject x %\ld be hyph5$ to ! pr$icate1 ?us giv+ x ! value ( non1 un1 im1 or o!r negative prefix4 ,to say colloquially t 'all ,russians are n angels' leaves room to believe t "s ,russians are angels1 ! 'n' apply+ to 'all' in/ead ( to 'angels4' ,by l9k+ 'n' to 'angels' we get a t]m equival5t to non-angelic1 :i* expresses ! mean+ int5d$--t no ,russians are angels4 ,caution %\ld be obs]v$ ) p>titive words l '"s1' '_m1' 'a few1' c4 ,!re is little dang] ( ambiguity :5 !y occur 9 ! case1 = t means t we br+ only a portion ( a gr\p ( ?+s to judgm5t1 :i* we are manife/ly entitl$ to d4 ,! conclusion h[ev] applies only to ! portion 9 "q1 n to ! re/ ( ! gr\p4 ',hone/ m5 des]ve respect2 "s ,negroes are hone/ m52 ^! p>ticul> ,negroes des]ve respect4' ,9 ! prec$5t1 p>titive words imply t only "s ( ! subject h ! applicate4 ,if t portion is a dialectical 'all'--t is1 if !re has be5 no exception 9 ! c\rse ( our exp]i5ce--we may1 ?\gh t exp]i5ce has be5 limit$1 v5ture to treat ! applicate z univ]sal & gr\nd a conclusion ^u x4 ,if ! subject is really p>titive--if we "k = c]ta9 t "s subjects h ! applicate & o!rs h x n--! conclusion mu/ foll[ ! great] probability4 ,if ! numb] & "* ( ! obs]v$ cases is kn[n we c express ! probability ari?metically2 x is ! numb] ( occurr5ces ( a giv5 "* divid$ by ! total numb]4 ,r$action mu/ n be us$ to correct orig9al errors ( obs]vation2 its purpose is to r5d] explicit 9 language :at is implicit 9 ?\ght1 n :at might h be5 ?\ght suppos+ ! ?9k] _h be5 m intellig5t or indu/ri\s ?an he 04 ',conv]sion' is a process admitt$ or requir$ 9 ! artificial me?ods ( syllogi/ic dialectic4 ,x consi/s ma9ly 9 transpos+ ! subject & pr$icate ( a proposition1 z '"s ,europeans are ,mohamm$ans'--'"s ,mohamm$ans are ,europeans1' ,?is op]ation nev] takes place 9 real argum5t1 or is m]ely ! em5dation ( a proposition at fir/ awkw>dly express$4 ,conv]sion c take place only :5 ! pr$icate is a class1 h5ce ! categorical propositions _c be conv]t$4 ,footnote #af3 ,?\gh evid5tly sugge/$ by language1 ! =m :i* ! syllogi/ic logic f9ally assum$ is s unlike any?+ grammatical1 t x is easily conv]tible into symbols hav+ no resemblance to language4 ,x has be5 put into lit]al symbols ) algebraic values1 & into geometrical diagrams4 ,a logical ma*9e has ev5 be5 inv5t$ by ,pr(essor ,jevons1 'work$ by keys l a pian(orte1' :i* returns 'infallible answ]s'--( ! ,ari/otelian sort--to e k9d ( "q4 ,t is suffici5tly unlike bo? reason & language4 ,,fallacies ,,xxix--,,( ,,equivocation ,,& ,,mal-,,obs]vation ,fallacies are c\nt]feit or %am argum5ts4 ,!y may fail to be argum5ts--7#a7 because _! antec$5ts are false2 7#b7 because ! antec$5ts ?\gh true are n arrang$ dialectically1 & d n sugge/ ! "r conclusion2 7#c7 because ! language is equivocal4 ,to take ! la/ fir/4 ,s _m ?+s are call$ by ! same "n1 & s _m diff]5t names may be appli$ to ! same ?+1 t if we attempt to argue f words alone1 )\t any p]sonal k ( ! ?+s or judgm5ts t are 9 "q1 we %all c]ta9ly make mi/akes4 ,! only security aga9/ ?is sort ( fallacy is mu* exp]i5ce1 & ! self-d5ial necess>y to rel9qui% argum5t & ! criticism ( argum5ts1 :5 we h no suffici5t k ( ! data4 ,! degree ( imp]fection 9 obs]vation :i* %\ld be consid]$ to r5d] ! !orem fallaci\s1 is no easy matt] to det]m9e4 ,"o class ( logicians 7! ,=mal7 get ov] ! difficulty by decl>+ t dialectic is n conc]n$ ) concrete k at all1#ag b only ) its g5]al prop]ties 7z conceiv$ by ,ari/otle71 & !y h set up z a /&>d ( logical tru? ! capability ( be+ imag9$4 ,a c5taur is to !m z true a fact z a horse1 & !y w\ld accept z valid su* a !orem z ?is3 ',all c5taurs object to be %od ) iron2 ,gryneus is a c5taur2 !re=e we may conclude t he w\ld resi/ be+ %od ) iron4' ,no am\nt ( conceivability or =mal coh]5ce c make ?is o!r ?an nons5se4 ,j4 ,s4 ,mill & 8 foll[]s g to ! opposite extreme4 ,!y /udy all ! sci5ces & endeav\r to ma/] _! me?ods ( reason+--:i* is well2 b !y d s ) ! prepossession t !re exi/s "s absolute /&>d ( k to fail 9 atta9+ :i* involves fallacy4 ,!y ?us condemn z false all !orems bas$ on sup]s$$ notions ( nature & man4 ,only mod]n ?9k]s c argue rationally--! anci5ts 7 all & habitually victims ( fallacy1--& ( ! mod]ns only ! few are rational :o h ma/]$ ! late/ !ories on e subject4 ,?is is ! pr9ciple ( ,mill's doctr9e on ! fallacies ( obs]vation2 we c see t he reg>d$ all beliefs z fallaci\s :i* he _h himself outgr[n or did n feel a ne$ (4 ',tru?' 0 simply ! facts & judgm5ts t happ5$ to suit ,mill's m5tal con/itution4 ,f ! ,sub/antial po9t ( view ?is is an unt5able position4 ,no degree ( obs]vation is intr9sically defective if x s]ve ! purpose ( intellect1 :i* is to protect ! m9d4 ,!re is no intellectual tru? z a ?+ 9 itself4 ,! ?\ghts ( a sp>r[ or a *ild are z p]fect z ^? ( a man1 if !y af=d ! necess>y def5ce to ! individual's s5tim5t4 ,z we *ange our inn] m5tal "*1 new intellectual ideas h to be acquir$ & ! old are disc>d$1 p]haps completely =gott54 ,!y appe> n[ to be ignorances & fallacies--mal-obs]vation & bad reason+4 ,! new seem to be s mu* tru]--p]haps infallibly true4 ,all t is illusion4 ,we make ano!r advance1 & ! ?\ghts t a week be=e 7 z /able z rocks are n[ ca/ aside z absurd4 ,p]haps ! belief 9 ! c]ta9ty ( pres5t judgm5ts is a condition ( our mak+ ! be/ use ( !m2 if s !y %\ld n be %ak5 until we are ready to ent] on ! next /age ( k4 ,x is q true t "o man may "k m ?an ano!r1 b ! gr\nd on :i* ! m intellectual is g5]ally consid]$ to be sup]ior to ! latt] is n ! "r "o4 ,he is n bett] = 8 intellectual acquirem5ts1 b he is bett] if 8 m9d1 be+ ( a f9] sort1 requir$ a sup]ior intellect to def5d x4 ,at bottom1 !n1 ! g5]al cause ( mal-obs]vation--!re are p>ticul> causes :i* int]f]e ) ! g5]al rule--is inf]iority ( s5tim5tal "*4 ,we d n see :at we d n ne$ to see1 & we see imp]fectly :at is n ess5tial to our well-be+4 ,t we %\ld be ignorant or reason badly ab\t :at does n conc]n u is n 9 itself a defect4 ,x is inconsi/5t ) ^! views on ! function ( intellect to admit t any sort ( non-obs]vation or mal-obs]vation c be always & = all alike fallaci\s4 ,if !re are ?+s :i* we habitually ignore1 ! presumption is t !y d n conc]n u--t ! k !y w\ld conf] is n ess5tial to our welf>e & w\ld be intellectual lumb]4 ,i %\ld !re=e ab/a9 f condemn+ z fallacies !orems drawn 9 good fai? f facts believ$ to be true1 & :i* s]ve z motives ( conduct4 ,!y are sophisms only :5 ! reason]s h n tak5 ord9>y pa9s to v]ify _! data1 or1 kn[+ ! antec$5ts to be false1 pret5d to believe !m = "s immoral purpose4 ,,xxx--,,( ,,p>allel ,,arrangem5t ,!re is no fault ( p]v]sion1 mutilation1 or entanglem5t 9 ! /atem5t ( an argum5t t we d n meet ) 9 actual reason+4 ,ev5 9 ! writ+s ( educat$ & hone/ ?9k]s x is r>e to meet ) an argum5t ! p>ts ( :i* are cle>ly di/+ui%$ by ! au?or himself1 & express$ s z to %[ ! precise degree ( =ce !y ought to c>ry4 ,reason+ is /ill only a semi-consci\s process direct$ by rule-(-?umb4 ,we make c]ta9 /atem5ts & f9d !y h a p[] ( mov+ o!rs1 s we cont9ue to make !m4 ,b :e!r ! result is due to ! rationality ( ! disc\rse or m]ely to ! docility ( ! he>]s1 we d n "k1 &--s long z ! desir$ result foll[s--we d n c>e to inquire4 ,= ?is /ate ( ?+s logicians are to a great ext5t responsible4 ,!y are uncritical imitators ( ! ,greek philosoph]s1 ^: notions on dialectic 7 q wrong4 ,! ,greeks & _! m$ieval & mod]n foll[]s h squ&]$ att5tion on a m5tal process :i* is n reason1 mi/ak+ x = reason1 s t practically !re has nev] be5 a sci5ce ( dialectic4 ,h[ev] mu* reason]s may h wi%$ to pres5t _! ?\ghts coh]5tly1 !y h n be5 provid$ ) a me?od or notation adapt$ to ! purpose4 ,) an in/9ctive s5se ( ! futility ( ! ,syllogism1 !y h ignor$ x completely4 ,i _c call to m9d a s+le controv]sial "w t has be5 pres5t$ 9 syllogi/ic =m1 nor d ev5 tra9$ logicians use x ov]tly 9 argum5t4#ah ,yet if x 7 :at x pr(esses to be1 x w\ld be z natural & conv5i5t to express our argum5ts 9 syllogism z x is to put d[n on pap] a sum 9 ari?metic4 ,we are1 z reg>ds ! expression ( reason+1 9 ! position ( num]ical ?9k]s be=e ! inv5tion ( figures & ! elaboration ( ari?metical rules4 ,we h to d all our argum5ts '9 our head1' & s we d !m badly4 ,we c seldom be sure ( ! correctness ( our own reason+s1 & we are con/antly be+ misl$ by sophi/ry4 ,no?+ inde$ w enable u to reason well or to detect false reason+ on a subject ( :i* we are entirely ignorant1 b a l>ge measure ( protection w\ld be af=d$ by ! adoption ( a uni=m sy/em ( pres5t+ argum5ts1 by :i* all ! assumptions !y involve are r5d]$ explicit4 ,"o ( ! commone/ omissions 9 argum5tation is to take ! prec$5t = grant$4 ,?is is all[able :5 x is a fact univ]sally kn[n or believ$4 ',if y let ! glass fall x w be brok51'--! omitt$ prec$5t is ! kn[n consequ5ces ( lett+ brittle ?+s fall to ! gr\nd4 ',caius is a li>1 !re=e he is a c[>d'--presupposes t e li> is a c[>d4 ,?is lib]ty ( suppression is sometimes us$ sophi/ically4 ,! tacit prec$5t is n univ]sally kn[n or accept$1 b if x is que/ion$ ! sophi/ is ready ) an exclamation ( surprise or contempt at our suppos$ ignorance4 ,p]sons :o are afraid ( appe>+ s+ul> 9 _! beliefs are liable to be deceiv$ by ?is trick4 ',x frequ5tly happ5s1' says ,:ately1 '9 ! case ( a fallacy ( omitt$ prec$5t t ! he>]s are left to ! alt]native ( supply+ ei!r a premiss :i* is n true1 or else "o :i* does n prove ! conclusion3 e4g4 if a man expatiates on ! di/ress ( ! c\ntry1 & !nce argues t ! gov]nm5t is tyrannical1 we mu/ suppose him to assume ei!r t e di/ress$ c\ntry is "u a tyranny1 :i* is a manife/ falsehood1 or m]ely t e c\ntry "u a tyranny is di/ress$1 :i*1 h[ev] true1 proves no?+1 ! ,middle ,t]m be+ undi/ribut$4444 ,:i* are we to suppose ! speak] meant u to und]/&8 ,surely j :i*ev] ea* ( 8 he>]s might happ5 to pref]3 "s might ass5t to ! false premiss2 o!rs all[ ! uns\nd syllogism2 to ! sophi/ himself x is indiff]5t1 z long z !y c be br\ght to admit ! conclusion4' ,we sometimes attempt to reason f ,contra/ in/ead ( resemblance1 ) a confus$ notion t ?+s :i* diff] 9 "s respects mu/ diff] also 9 o!rs4 ',:o sp>e? ! rod hate? ! *ild2 ! p>5t :o love? 8 *ild mu/ !re=e sp>e n ! rod4' ,! fallacy ( ?is becomes app>5t :5 we complete ! !orem 9 ! p>allel =m4 ,,vi4 ,! hat+ p>5t sp>es ! rod ---------------------------------------- ------ ,! lov+ p>5t diff]s f ,no ,conclusion ! hat+ p>5t ,! foll[+ has (t5 be5 pres5t$ z a valid argum5t--',:at is univ]sally believ$ mu/ be true2 ! belief 9 ,god's exi/5ce is n univ]sal2 x is !re=e n true4' ,i4 ,:at is univ]sally believ$ is true ------------------------------------ ,! exi/5ce ( ,god is n ,n4 ,c4 univ]sally believ$ ,to e/abli% ! conclusion aim$ at1 x w\ld be necess>y to lay d[n z prec$5t--',:at is n univ]sally believ$ is n true4' ,^! !orems f contra/ are on a p> ) ! foll[+-- ,i4 ,c[s are f\r-foot$ ---------------------------------------- ----- ,%eep are n c[s %eep are n f\r-foot$ ,?is is ! fallacy call$ 9 ! qua9t language ( ! syllogi/s ',illicit ,process ( ! ,major ,t]m4' ,9 ,false ,analogy ! resemblance is s slight t ! application is untru/wor?y1 or a conclusion is drawn 9 excess ( ! resemblance4 ,if f ! habit ( call+ a deep bay or salt-wat] lo* an 'arm' ( ! sea f its analogy to a human arm1 we conclude t ! sea has elb[s & wri/s1 we commit ?is fallacy4 ,! e>? is l an orange1 b we mu/ n ?9k t x is pulpy inside4 ,ak9 to ?is is ! fallacy ( ,false ,g5]ality or ,d\btful ,prec$5t4 ,x consi/s 9 c>elessly or p]v]sely us+ bad antec$5ts :5 bett] are available4 ,?is applies to su* curr5t prejudices z t all ,fr5*m5 are frivol\s1 all ,g]mans my/ical1 all ,jews di%one/1 all ,c>?ag9ians fai?less1 all ri* p pursepr\d1 all nobles haughty1 & s on4 ,ev5 if all ! ,c>?ag9ians we p]sonally knew _h prov$ fai?less1 our g5]al k ( mank9d %\ld keep u f inf]r+ t a :ole nation %\ld be fai?less4 ,! mo/ we %\ld conclude is t "s ,c>?ag9ians are fai?less1 b we are free to ex]cise caution 9 future deal+s ) memb]s ( t race4 ,all ^! g5]alities are gr\nd$ on ?is prior argum5t3 ':5 a kn[n portion ( a class exhibits c]ta9 qualities1 we are ju/ifi$ 9 inf]r+ t ! :ole class possess ^! qualities'--:i* is only occasionally true4 ,! fallacy ( ,accid5t occurs :5 ! prec$5t is s def9$ z n to exclude exceptions1 & ! case happ5s to be "o ( ! exceptions4 ',:at gives pa9 %\ld be ab/a9$ f2 surgical op]ations give pa92 !y %\ld !re=e be ab/a9$ f4' ,! pa9ful ?+s t %\ld be univ]sally ab/a9$ f are ^? :i* give ne$less or useless pa91 n ! sort t give less pa9 ?an !y remove4 ,fal/aff committ$ ?is fallacy :5 he suppos$ t ! ,k+ w\ld be a boon companion l ! ,pr9ce4 ,s did ! coloni/s :o introduc$ rabbits & wat]-cress into ,au/ralia1 on ! supposition t !y w\ld !re h ! same function or value z 9 ,great ,brita94 ,9 consequ5ce ( ! ,accid5tal *ange ! rabbits h develop$ into a pe/1 & ! wat]-cress ob/ructs navigation4 ,if ! applicate is a prop]ty ( ! subject only :5 ! latt] is tak5 collectively1 x w n yield a true conclusion :5 ! p>ts or individuals ( ! subject are tak5 sep>ately4 ,all ! angles ( a triangle are equal to two "r angles1 b x does n foll[ t "o ( !m--?\gh x resembles ! triangle to "s ext5t--is equal to two "r angles4 ,9 ?is in/ance we %\ld r5d] ! mean+ cle> by say+ 'collectively equal1' :5 no argum5t foll[s & no mi/ake is made4 ,?is is call$ ! fallacy ( ,division4 ,! fallacy ( ,composition is ! conv]se ( ?is4 ,:at is true ( sev]al s+ul>s may n be true ( all ( !m tak5 toge!r4 ,because ea* ( ! witnesses 9 a law case is liable to error1 x does n foll[ t ! concurr5t te/imony ( _m is n to be cr$it$4 7,jevons47 ,circul> or ,tautological !orems 7,petitio ,pr9cipii ,begg+ ! ,"q7 are a brea* ( rule #b1 section ,,xviii4 ,?is fallacy (t5 consi/s 9 propos+ z a prec$5t ! case1 or in=mation drawn f ! case & /at$ 9 o!r words4 ',to all[ e man an unb\nd$ fre$om ( spee* mu/ always be1 on ! :ole1 advantage\s to ! ,/ate2 = x is highly conducive to ! int]e/s ( ! ,community t ea* individual %\ld enjoy a lib]ty p]fectly unlimit$ ( express+ 8 s5tim5ts4' 7,:ately47 ,x is conducive t ea* individual %\ld enjoy ---------------------------------------- --------- ,x is advantage\s to all[ ,!re may be tautology 9 a s+le ^w--! '"q-begg+ epi!t4' ,we und]take to prove some?+1 b get no fur!r ?an ! use ( metaphors imply+ ! po9t 9 dispute4 ,= example1 "s sci5tific writ]s are anxi\s to promote ! belief t animal life is a comb9ation ( natural =ces--t !re is no individual life di/9ct f cosmic life1--b all _! pro( consi/s 9 call+ a man or bea/ a 'ma*9e1' & call+ ma*9es 'creatures4' ,?is might be mi/ak5 = ! ,sub/antiali/ doctr9e on ! same subject1 b ! two are radically diff]5t4 ,sub/antialism ass]ts t man & nature h simil> lives--mat]ialism tea*es t !y h only "o life 9 common1 & t ! co>se1 m9dless life ( ! cosmos z conceiv$ reali/ically4 ,conclusions may be us$ z prec$5ts be=e v]ification1 b x is n lawful to assume a hypo!tical prec$5t on ! und]/&+ t x is to be prov$ 9 ! c\rse ( ! argum5t1 & !n use ! conclusion s obta9$ to prove its own prec$5t4 ,?is is also dialectical tautology1 b ! circle includes two or m !orems4 ,:5 naturali/s tell u t 9 ! /ruggle = life ! fitte/ only survive1 & :5 ask$ h[ we "k :i* are ! fitte/ !y reply t ! fitte/ are kn[n by ! fact ( _! surviv+1 we h a tautological argum5t4 ,animals t survive are ! fitte/ ,fitte/ animals survive ---------------------------------------- ------------------------------ ,a p>ticul> animal h5ce x is ! ,?is animal is :i* is ! has surviv$ fitte/ ( its ! fitte/ ( reason x has species its species4 surviv$ ,survival "u competitive conditions is fir/ assum$1 & f x is d$uc$ ! sup]iority ( ! exi/+ type ( animal2 !n ?is inf]5tial sup]iority is (f]$ to ju/ify ! previ\sly imag9$ competitive survival4 ,! two hypo!ses waltz r\nd ea* o!r )\t mak+ any rational advance4 ,:5 a book is quot$ to prove its own au!nticity we h ?is fallacy2 or :5 ! prec$5t is z unkn[n z ! conclusion1--',p>adise 0 9 ,arm5ia1 !re=e ,gihon is an ,asiatic riv]4' ,! academical syllogism z def9$--n always z pres5t$--conta9s two fallacies1 "o ( :i* is tautology4 ',,all ,europeans are :ite2 ,caius is a ,european2 !re=e he is :ite4' ,if1 z logicians say1 ! 'all' is absolute & includes ,caius ev5 be=e he is m5tion$1 !n x is cle> t ! !orem am\nts to say+1 ',all ,europeans are :ite1 & "o ( !m is ,caius4' ',bo? ! tw9s are fair-hair$2 ,caius is "o ( ! tw9s2 !re=e he is fair-hair$'3--! pret5d$ conclusion is m]ely a nam+ ( a "p ( ! prec$5t4 ,! fir/ ( ^! !orems may be int]pret$ s z to give a valid conclusion4 ,we are in=m$ t an unkn[n p]son call$ ,caius is a ,european2 we are n told1 & we d n "k1 :at is ! col\r ( 8 sk92 b because all ! ,europeans we h kn[n h be5 :ite1 we inf]--p5d+ actual k--t ,caius is :ite4 ,logicians int]pret ! syllogism o!rwise1 = !y h a notion t reason %\ld give infallible c]ta9ty4 ,aft] ! prec$5t has be5 divid$ into subject & applicate1 ! =m] is sometimes us$ z applicate & s g5]ates a wrong conclusion4 ,?is may be call$ ,cross ,reason+ or ,diagonal ,reason+--! fallacy t]m$ by logicians ',undi/ribut$ ,middle4' ,manx cats h no tails ---------------------------------------- --- ,?is cat has no tail x mu/ be a ,manx cat ,de ,morgan has ?is example--',8 imbecility ( "* might h be5 inf]r$ f 8 pron5ess to fav\rites2 = all weak pr9ces h ?is fail+4' ,all weak pr9ces are prone ---------------------------------------- - ,he 0 prone he mu/ h be5 weak ,/atem5ts are sometimes put =w>d z reason+ :i* conta9 no case1 ei!r express$ or und]/ood4 ,?is w seem h>dly cr$ible see+ t ! illu/ration ( a case is ! purpose ( argum5tation4 ,n only does x occur1 b a c]ta9 =m ( x is reg>d$ by "s logicians z valid reason+4 ,x is ! 'p>ticul>' syllogism ( ! ,?ird ,figure4 ,socrates 0 poor2 ,socrates 0 wise4 ,f ^! premises no conclusion c be extract$1 unless x be ! v]bal summ>y--',socrates 0 bo? poor & wise4' ,b logicians draw f x ! dialectic conclusion-- ,!re=e "s m5 h be5 poor & wise1 or ,!re=e "o man has be5 poor & wise4 ,bo? ^! conclusions are inadmissible4 ,x is because !y are empirically true t we are apt to ?9k _! tru? dep5ds on ! antec$5t in=mation4 ,if we wi% to ext5d ! qualities ( ,socrates to '"s m5' we mu/ make !m a case ) ',socrates is poor & wise' = a prec$5t1 b ,i fail to see h[ x is to be done4 ,if we add to ! premises1 ',"o man 0 ,socrates1 !re=e "o man 0 poor & wise1' we h a tautological fallacy4 ,j4 ,s4 ,mill notices a fallacy :i* am\nts to an ,inv]sion ( ! ,p>allel3 ! conclusion is kn[n or believ$ & ! tru? ( ! antec$5ts is inf]r$ backw>ds4 ',p cont9ually ?9k & express !mselves z if !y believ$ t ! premises _c be false if ! conclusion is true4 ,! tru?1 or suppos$ tru?1 ( ! inf]5ces :i* foll[ f a doctr9e1 (t5 enables x to f9d acceptance 9 spite ( gross absurdities 9 x4 ,h[ _m philosophical sy/ems :i* _h sc>cely any intr9sic recomm5dation h be5 receiv$ by ?\ghtful m5 because !y 7 suppos$ to l5d additional support to religion1 morality1 "s fav\rite view ( politics1 or "s o!r *]i%$ p]suasion2 n m]ely because _! wi%es 7 !reby enli/$ on its side1 b because its lead+ to :at !y deem$ s\nd conclusions appe>$ to !m a /rong presumption 9 fav\r ( its tru?1 ?\gh ! presumption1 :5 view$ 9 its true light1 am\nt$ only to ! abs5ce ( t p>ticul> evid5ce ( falsehood :i* w\ld h result$ f its lead+ by correct inf]5ce to some?+ already kn[n to be false4'#ai ,! conclusion ( an argum5t may sometimes be left unexpress$4 ,if ! antec$5ts are /rong & ! conclusion obvi\s x weak5s ! argum5t to /ate ! conclusion 9 full1 besides reflect+ on ! capacity ( ! read] or he>] to draw ! conclusion = himself4 ,h5ce we f9d at ! end ( controv]sial & indignant writ+s su* expressions z--',comm5t is sup]flu\s'--',we leave ! read] to draw 8 own conclusions1'--or simply a po9t ( exclamation is app5d$4 ,sophi/ical ins9uations are sugge/$ 9 ?is mann]4 ,a tra9 ( ideas is laid t g5]ates a conclusion :i* ! speak] is afraid or a%am$ to put into words4 ,! second fault ( ! syllogism z def9$ may be call$ ! fallacy ( ,no ,application4 ,x consi/s 9 arrang+ propositions s z to end 9 a classification1 b no applicate is deta*$ & no rational conclusion is drawn4 ',jones is a ,wel%man2 all ,wel%m5 are ,britons2 !re=e ,jones is a ,briton4' ,if 9 actual ?9k+ x 7 ev] desir$ to e/abli% by argum5t t ,jones is a ,briton1 x w\ld be ) ! object ( apply+ to him "s quality connot$ by ,briton1 b ! pres5ce ( :i* 9 ,jones is a matt] ( d\bt4 ,?is w\ld be a conclusion--b n ! m]e classification4 ,irrelevant ,conclusion--! fallacy call$ by ,ari/otelians ,ignoratio el5*i--is an attempt to sub/itute a bett] argum5t = ! "o propos$1 b :i* proves some?+ :i* has n be5 d5i$1 or /igmatises some?+ t has n be5 ass]t$4 ,x frequ5tly arises f hone/ ignorance ( ! "q at issue1 z 9 ! objections usually made to ! ,b]keleyan ,sub/antialism4 ,x c also be us$ z a weapon ( sophi/ry1 by confus+ ! matt] 9 dispute or div]t+ att5tion to side issues4 ,x is irrelevant to ! tru? ( a conclusion to po9t out t he :o n[ supports x =m]ly oppos$ x1 or t 8 conduct is inconsi/5t ) a belief 9 x4 ,appeals to passion--to rev]5ce = au?ority--to popul> belief--are in/ances ( ?is fallacy4 ,! be/ protection aga9/ ,fallacy--next to a ?or\gh k ( ! matt]--is a cle> notion ( ! prop]ties ( a valid argum5t2 x is useful h[ev] to be able to di/+ui% & "n ! faulty !orems "o con/antly meets 9 controv]sial spee*es & writ+s4 ,footnote #ag3 ,"o fault ( obs]vation is notic$ by =mal logicians2 x is t ( assign+ an improp] cause1 ,non causa pro caus or ,po/ hoc ergo propt] hoc4 ,x is evid5t t defects 9 e o!r category h an equal light to be notic$4 ,footnote #ah3 ,:ately compla9s ( ! dis9cl9ation %[n by logicians to put _! rules into practice4 ',:5ev] !y h to treat ( any?+ t is beyond ! m]e elem5ts ( ,logic1 !y totally lay aside all ref]5ce to ! pr9ciples !y h be5 occupi$ 9 e/abli%+ & expla9+1 & h rec\rse to a loose1 vague1 & popul> k9d ( language2 su* z w\ld be be/ suit$ inde$ to an exot]ical disc\rse b seems /rangely incongru\s 9 a pr(ess$ logical treatise4444 ,surely x af=ds b too mu* plausibility to ! cavils ( ^? :o sc(f at ,logic altoge!r1 t ! v writ]s :o pr(ess to tea* x %\ld nev] !mselves make any application (1 or ref]5ce to1 its pr9ciples1 :51 & :5 only1 su* application & ref]5ce are to be expect$4' ,logic1 ,book ,,iii4 ,introd4 ,! fact "h admitt$ proves t ev5 logicians d n f9d _! me?od ( any practical use4 ,b :at is ! mean+ ( ! emphatic ':5 only'8 ,:y %\ld a logical me?od be unsuitable = e sort ( subject except ^? matt]s ( logic t are beyond ! m]e elem5ts8 ,footnote #ai3 ,logic1 ',fallacies1' c4 #f4 ,,academical ,,dialectic ,,xxxi--,,analogy ,logicians ( ,greek inspiration apply ! t]m reason+ or argum5t to at lea/ eight diff]5t intellectual op]ations1 "s ( !m important inde$ b only "o ( !m argum5t4 ,?is is ,analogy--:i* receives b little notice f logicians because x does n give c]ta9 conclusions4 ,! op]ations mi/ak5 = argum5t are3 ,imm$iate ,inf]5ce-- ,ari?metical ,calculation-- ,geometrical ,demon/ration-- ,induction-- ,ari/otle's ,dictum-- ,m$iate ,comp>ison-- ,syllogism4 ,,xxxii--,,imm$iate ,,inf]5ce ,"s logicians ma9ta9 t x is possible to draw a k9d ( conclusions f "o judgm5t alone4 ,^! pret5d$ conclusions are ( two species4 ,! fir/ is a re/atem5t 9 diff]5t words ( ! :ole or "p ( ! s+le idea1 & x is prec$$ by '!re=e' to give x ! appe>ance ( an argum5t4 ',all m5 suff]1 !re=e "s m5 suff]4' ',john is a man1 !re=e he is a liv+ creature4' ',?is weighs t d[n1 !re=e x is heavi]4' ,^! are all obvi\s tautologisms4 ,x is n an inf]5ce to d5y ! opposite ( :at we h ass]t$1 z ',! wea!r is w>m1 !re=e x is n cold4' ,! conditional & dilemmatic examples ( logicians ab\nd 9 su* 'inf]5ces4' ,we _c entirely avoid ^! locutions1 z !y give po9t & cle>ness to spee*1 b !y are n argum5t1 ev5 :5 introduc$ by '!re=e4' ,! o!r species ( spuri\s conclusions arises out ( :at is te*nically call$ ,conv]sion4 ,?is is a process p]mitt$ 9 ,syllogi/ic 9 ord] to r5d] propositions m explicit4 ,! subject may *ange places ) ! pr$icate1 a '"s' may be ins]t$1 an 'all' suppress$1 or a 'n' may be made to qualify "o ^w in/ead ( ano!r4 ,9 all ?is !re mu/ be no *ange 9 ! mean+ ( ! proposition1 & !re=e !re c be no inf]5ce4 ,if ! second proposition means some?+ m or diff]5t f ! fir/1 ano!r premise is unconsci\sly tak5 = grant$1 or ! suppos$ int]pretation am\nts to int]polation4 ,! reason] may h inadv]t5tly or sophi/ically add$ some?+ to ! orig9al datum4 ,"h is an example ( inf]5ce by conv]sion--',all cabbages are plants1 !re=e "s plants are cabbages4' ,if x is n und]/ood f ! t]ms ( ! fir/ proposition t plants are limit$ to su* z are cabbages1 ! '"s' ( ! conv]t$ proposition is an int]polation suppli$ f ! reason]'s k ( ! matt]4 ,9 ?is case ! 'quantification' ( plants is n a valid inf]5ce f ! orig9al in=mation4 ,,xxxiii--,,ari?metical ,,calculation ,ari?metic is fir/ a manipulation ( symbols call$ 'figures4' ,!re are t5 ( ^!1 & !y are capable ( _m species ( comb9ation1 & an indef9ite numb] ( individual op]ations "u ea* species4 ,c]ta9 rules gov]n ea* sort ( op]ation1 & :5 ! rules are prop]ly und]/ood & recollect$ ! op]ations c be p]=m$ ) absolute c]ta9ty4 ,al?\gh ! figures h names relat+ to numb]1 & ! problems giv5 = ex]cise make m5tion ( acres1 p\nds1 tons1 miles1 & all sorts ( concrete objects1 ! symbolic calculations ( books h no necess>y relation to real ?+s1 numb]s1 or quantities4 ,!y are a purely conv5tional treatm5t ( arbitr>y m>ks t may mean any?+ or no?+4 ,t is ! ari?metic ( ! 's*ools4' ,!re is no trace ( reason+ or argum5t 9 x--x is m]e rule & recollection4 ,!re is h[ev] real ,numb] & !re is real ,quantity4 ,numb] is t quality 9 :i* a gr\p ( ?ree ?+s 7= in/ance7 is se5 to diff] f a gr\p ( f\r or sev51 ev5 :5 ! ?+s are o!rwise q simil>4 ,we beg9 by di/+ui%+ t5 prim>y degrees ( ?is diff]5ce1 & !n consid] o!r degrees z multiples or p>ts ( ^! prim>y degrees4 ,quantity is degree 9 size1 & is a prop]ty q diff]5t f numb]4 ,b1 = conv5i5ce1 we assume t quantities are all units or fractions ( c]ta9 /&>d quantities1 & we are ?us enabl$ to use ! same t]ms = bo? numb] & quantity4 ,! names :i* writt5 language provides = ! num]ical degrees & _! comb9ations are inconv5i5t to use1 & s a set ( symbols 0 devis$ exclusively = num]ical designation4 ,^! are ! figures ( ari?metic4 ,!y are ! te*nical vocabul>y ( numb]1 & ( quantity consid]$ z numb]4 ,numb] & quantity admit ( b two k9ds ( v>iation--increase & dim9ution4 ,^! v>iations c be d5ot$ s correctly by figures1 t any comb9ation we fir/ make 9 figures accord+ to rule c be reproduc$ 9 real objects1 provid$ ! objects are 9 o!r respects possible4 ,! result ( ?is p]fection ( te*nical nom5clature is t our /udy ( numb] & quantity has be5 transf]r$ f real objects to figures4 ,x has become symbolic & indirect1 & mo/ ( u nev] g beyond ! symbols2 t is1 :at we call ari?metic is an affair ( figures1 n ( true quantities & numb]s4 ,we talk ( miles1 tons1 & p\nds /]l+1 b we d n ?9k ( miles1 tons1 & p\nds /]l+--we ?9k ( figures4 ,a ?\s& %ill+s is to u1 :5 ari?metically /at$1 '#ajjjs41' j z x is "h repres5t$ on pap]2 we d n ?9k ( silv] co9s1 & we c\ld n if we tri$ imag9e a ?\s& ?+s ( any sort4 ,!re is 9 reality an enorm\s diff]5ce betwe5 '#jjjas4' & '#ajjjs41' b to ! ari?metician ! only objective diff]5ce is "o ( arrangem5t 9 figures4 ,f ^! consid]ations x foll[s t !re are two sci5ces ( numb]4 ,!re is ! true sci5ce :i* deals ) quantities really se5 9 objects & imag9$ 9 ! m9d1 & an artificial sci5ce deal+ ) figures :i* h only a hi/orical connection ) real quantity4 ,( ! latt]1 un=tunately1 our ari?metical education *iefly consi/s4 ,we are nev] taught to di/+ui% numb] & size 9 ?+s by ! 'eye1' t is1 by reason4 ,! symbolism t 0 orig9ally int5d$ to assi/ real ari?metical ?\ght has end$ by supplant+ x4 ,an ignorant %eph]d1 bricklay]1 or c>p5t]1 :o is accu/om$ to make a rapid e/imate ( ! numb] ( ?+s 9 a mass1 or ! area ( plank+ 9 a log1 has a bett] tra9+ 9 real ari?metical sci5ce ?an "s ma!maticians4 ,if we are oblig$ to practise g5u9e ari?metical ?\ght 9 eng9e]+1 a/ronomy1 & o!r pr(essions1 our s*ola/ic symbolism gets realis$ to "s ext5t1 & is a great assi/ance 9 ari?metical e/imation4 ,b )\t ?is x has no m ref]5ce to numb] & quantity ?an a musical education1 bas$ entirely on ! pr9t$ or writt5 notation1 has to ! appreciation ( musical s\nds4 ,a book ari?metician is 9 ! position ( a p]son ?or\ghly acqua9t$ ) !oretical music1 & :o c ev5 compose music accord+ to rule1 b :o is unable to di/+ui% a high note f a l[ "o or h>mony f discord 9 actual s\nd4 ,x w ?us be se5 t x is only 9 ! real ari?metic t reason+ c ent]4 ,! judgm5t 9 free ari?metical obs]vation is ! c\nt+ ( actual gr\ps & ! measurem5t ( actual surfaces1 & ! argum5t consi/s 9 e/imat+ ! numb] ( individuals 9 o!r gr\ps1 & ! size ( o!r surfaces1 )\t c\nt+ or measurem5t4 ,b ?is ex]cise nev] ent]s into symbolic ari?metic4 ,all ! app>5t conclusions ( book ari?metic are tautological2 !y consi/ 9 repeat+ 9 "o comb9ation ( symbols ! :ole or "p ( :at has be5 already giv5 9 ano!r comb9ation4 ,x is an ex]cise 9 expression--no?+ m4 ,ari?metical ratio has a resemblance to ! rational p>allel4 #c3e33i3ae might be arrang$ ?us-- #e #ae ----- #c #i ,?is is n argum5t1 = two reasons4 7#a7 ,! app>5t conclusion is n an ef=t ( rational imag9ation2 x is a figure t c be obta9$ ) infallible c]ta9ty by treat+ ! o!r figures accord+ to a rule1 :i* has only to be recollect$ & appli$4 7#b7 ,! relation betwe5 ! left-h& figures & ! "r-h& figures is n a categorical judgm5t2 x is a =m ( resemblance1 & s x _c yield a valid conclusion4 ,,xxxiv--,,geometrical ,,demon/ration ,?is ex]cise is reg>d$ by logicians z "o ( ! pure/ =ms ( argum5t4 ,x is no?+ m ?an an aid to a c]ta9 k9d ( p]ception4 ,take1 = in/ance1 ! fif? proposition ( ! fir/ book ( ,euclid--',! angles at ! base ( an isosceles triangle are equal1 & if ! equal sides be produc$ ! angles on ! o!r side %all also be equal4' ,! proposition is accompani$ by a diagram ( an isosceles triangle ) ! equal sides already produc$1 s t ! conditional phras+ ( ! proposition does n mean t ! production ( ! sides1 & :at results !refrom1 are future or possible ev5ts :i* nei!r ,euclid nor anybody else has yet exp]i5c$1 & ! probability ( :i* is an argum5tative conclusion4 ,:at ! proposition means is ?is3 an isosceles triangle ( :i* ! equal sides h be5 produc$1 has equal angles on ! same side ( ! base bo? )9 & )\t ! triangle4 ,x is an affirmation ( :at is1 n ( :at we mu/ believe to be = reasons to be giv54 ,! tru? ( ! proposition is se5 at once f simple inspection ( ! diagram4 ,x is an association ( prop]ties relat$ 9 a c]ta9 mann]4 ,x has _m relations :i* ! geomet] does n m5tion 9 ?is proposition1 b ^? :i* he m5tions are se5 to be correctly describ$ z soon z we direct att5tion to !m4 ,if we h any d\bt on ! subject we remove x by measur+ ! angles4 ,euclid h[ev] does n appeal to ! p[]s ( inspection we c ex]cise 9 ?is case1 & he ignores our facilities = measurem5t4 ,he appeals to simpl] & easi] k9ds ( p]ception express$ 9 8 axioms1 :i* he began by assum+ we 7 capable ( ex]cis+ )\t demon/ration4 ,!y con/itute :at he consid]s ! m9imum p[] ( relational p]ception1 :i* if a man h n he _c be taught geometry4 ,euclid also 9 ?is proposition ref]s to ! result ( a prior demon/ration1 ! relation 9 :i* he supposes we h seiz$4 ,by means ( ^! antec$5ts he prompts our p]ceptive faculty up to ! po9t ( see+ ! relations express$ 9 ?is proposition4 ,if we saw !m )\t ! prompt+1 ! latt] is sup]flu\s2 if ! relations d n /& ! te/ ( measurem5t1 ! prompt+ goes = no?+4 ,all ,euclid's demon/rations are ( ?is sort4 ,!y are po9t+s-out ( :at c be se5 by inspection & suffici5t att5tion4 ,he is n br++ a case "u a prec$5t--he is describ+ relations 9 ?+s1 t may s]ve z prec$5ts 9 concrete or appli$ geometry4 ,! s]vice he p]=ms is t ( a connoisseur :o po9ts out ! beauties ( a picture or l&scape to a c>eless or un9t]e/$ spectator4 ,relations are sometimes difficult to see--mu* m difficult ?an col\rs or masses--& !re is a legitimate sph]e ( usefulness = p :o po9t out :at o!rs are apt to ov]look4 ,!re is no pr$iction 9 ?is4 ,we are n ask$ to conceive any?+ t is n be=e u4 ,geometrical demon/ration ?us assi/s p]ception1 b does n imply reason+4 ,euclid does n argue--he prompts4 ,^? :o ma9ta9 t ,euclid is syllogi/ic d s on ! gr\nd t ! axioms are g5]alisations1 & t z (t5 z "o is cit$ !re occurs ! subsumption ( an object "u a class-notion4 ,t w\ld n be argum5t2 b let u suppose x means br++ a case "u a prec$5t4 ,!n if ! axioms be prec$5ts & ! demon/ration an application ( !m to new cases1 ! !orem is a fallacy--a useless argum5t writt5 to prove a =egone c]ta9ty1 = ! conclusion c be & g5]ally is p]fectly kn[n )\t ref]5ce to ! demon/ration4 ,x appe>s to me m true to reg>d ! axioms z ! simple/ relations1 :i* ev]ybody may be suppos$ capable ( p]ceiv+1 & t geometrical demon/ration consi/s 9 %[+ t o!r relations n s app>5t are really v>ieties or comb9ations ( ! simpl] relations4 ,by us+ 9 conc]t ) ! axioms ! relations already demon/rat$1 we are enabl$ to grasp relations t w\ld n h be5 at all obvi\s on fir/ beg9n+ ! geometrical praxis4 ,euclid's geometry is ?us a s]ies ( graduat$ lessons 9 a special sort ( obs]vation1 n a sy/em ( d$uctive argum5ts4 ,! educational !ory t geometry is exceptionally good tra9+ = ! reason--ap>t f its practical utility 9 me*anics--is ?us evid5tly a mi/ake4 ,ab/ract geometry may induce habits ( m9ute obs]vation & exact def9ition1 b reason n[h]e ent]s into ! /udy4 ,z a rational gymna/ic !re is no?+ bett] ?an ! game ( *ess4 ,,xxxv--,,induction ,^? :o cont5d t !re is a k9d ( argum5t call$ ,inductive diff]5t f ! ,d$uctive1 illu/rate _! view by "s su* example z ! foll[+3--',?is1 t1 & ! o!r magnet' t is1 all ! magnets we "k 'attract iron2 !re=e all possible magnets attract iron4' ,!y say !re is an irresi/ible compulsion 9 ! m9d to draw su* a conclusion f in=mation ( ! k9d exemplifi$1 & !y contra/ t type ( ?\ght ) a d$uctive argum5t l--',all magnets attract iron2 ?is object is a magnet2 !re=e x attracts iron4' ,!y figure ! =m] z a progress upw>ds1 ! latt] z a regress d[nw>ds4 ,t is ,induction z und]/ood by ,j4 ,s4 ,mill & ,sir ,william ,hamilton2 on ?is po9t ^! philosoph]s happ5 to agree4 ,! fir/ ( ^? argum5ts is a d$uction ) ! prec$5t omitt$4 ,express$ 9 full x am\nts to ?is--',any relation obs]v$ sev]al times to subsi/ betwe5 two classes ( objects1 & conc]n+ :i* no exception has ev] be5 obs]v$1 may be tak5 z univ]sal2 !re is su* a relation betwe5 kn[n magnets & kn[n iron2 !re=e x may be reg>d$ z univ]sal4' ,! prec$5t is n a m5tal compulsion1 b a result ( exp]i5ce4 ,induction z above def9$ is !re=e only a species ( d$uctive conclusions4 ,mo/ logicians take ! ^w ,induction 9 its etymological s5se1 z mean+ sy/ematic obs]vation c>ri$ on ) a view to obta9+ a g5]al idea ( "s class ( objects2 or ( e/abli%+ a categorical relation betwe5 "o object or class & ano!r1 by elim9at+ all ! alt]native correlatives4 ,9 nei!r op]ation w\ld ,induction be argum5t4 ,9 sci5ce a 'p]fect induction' is "o 9 :i* all exi/+ objects ( a class1 or all objects relat$ 9 a c]ta9 mann]1 h be5 p]ceiv$1 s t !re is no o!r object conc]n+ :i* a conclusion c be drawn4 ,9 su* cases1 says ,mill1 !re is no induction--only a summ>y ( exp]i5ce4 ,he evid5tly reg>d$ ! conclusion ) respect to unkn[n cases z ! ess5ce ( induction1 :]eas 9 ! sci5tific s5se ! induction is ! positive cont5t ( ! idea1 or ! ab/ract relation--! unkn[n cases are ignor$1 or !re may be none4 ,9 sci5tific writ+s induction sometimes means ! me?od ( obs]vation r ?an ! result--! me?od ( correct+ inf]5ces by p]ception1 :]ev] possible4 ,,xxxvi--,,ari/otle',s ,,dictum ,?is is usually put into ,engli% ?us--',:atev] is affirm$ or d5i$ ( a class1 may be affirm$ or d5i$ ( any "p ( t class1' & su* an affirmation or d5ial is suppos$ to be an act ( reason4 ,ar*bi%op ,:ately exp\nds ! ,dictum 9 analys+ ! foll[+ !orem--,:atev] exhibits m>ks ( design _h an intellig5t au?or2 ! _w exhibits m>ks ( design2 !re=e ! _w _h an intellig5t au?or4 ',9 ! fir/ ( ^! premises1' he says1 'we f9d x assum$ univ]sally ( ! class ( ?+s :i* exhibit m>ks ( design1 t !y _h an intellig5t au?or2 & 9 ! o!r premise1 ! _w is ref]r$ to t class z compreh5d$ 9 x3 n[ x is evid5t t :atev] is said ( ! :ole ( a class1 may be said ( any?+ compreh5d$ 9 t class3 s t we are ?us au?oris$ to say ( ! _w1 t x _h an intellig5t au?or4 ,aga91 if we exam9e a syllogism ) a negative conclusion1 z1 e4g4 no?+ :i* exhibits m>ks ( design c\ld h be5 produc$ by *ance2 ! _w exhibits1 c42 !re=e ! _w c\ld n h be5 produc$ by *ance3 ! process ( ,reason+ w be f\nd to be ! same2 s9ce x is evid5t1 t :atev] is d5i$ univ]sally ( any class may be d5i$ ( any?+ t is compreh5d$ 9 t class4 ,on fur!r exam9ation x w be f\nd1 t all valid argum5ts :atev] may be easily r$uc$ to su* a =m z t ( ! =ego+ syllogisms2 & t consequ5tly ! pr9ciple on :i* !y are con/ruct$ is ! ,,univ]sal ,,pr9ciple ( ,reason+4'#bj ,! examples giv5 by ,:ately are p]fectly valid2 ! fir/ is a con/ructive argum5t 9 ! ,six? ,category1 ! second a /igmatic 9 ! ,fif?4 ,i h 9 sev]al places admitt$ t ! argum5ts adduc$ by syllogi/s are sometimes correct1 ! fault compla9$ ( be+ 9 ! mode 9 :i* su* correct argum5ts are int]pret$4 ,!y are int]pret$ wrongly1 & !n o!r !orems are f\nd or made agree+ ) ! int]pretation1 & ! admitt$ s\ndness ( ! fir/ !orems is us$ to procure acceptance = ! second4 ,?+s br\ght "u ! same def9ition ought to be ess5tially alike1 b !y are n s :5 ! utmo/ latitude is tak5 to 'assume' t pr$icates h prop]ties :i* !y obvi\sly h n4 ,! objections we make to ! ,dictum z above int]pret$ are--7#a7 t 9 reason+ ! prec$5t 7major premise7 ne$ n be a class2 7#b7 if x is a class1 x consi/s ( all kn[n ?+s ( a simil> k9d1 n ( all possible ?+s ( a simil> k9d4 ,:5 int]pret$ 9 ! latt] s5se ! ,dictum becomes dialectically tautological1 z has be5 (t5 obs]v$4 ,,xxxvii--,,m$iate ,,comp>ison ,a few pages fur!r on ,:ately gives a totally diff]5t acc\nt ( reason+1 )\t be+ aw>e ( 8 inconsi/5cy4 ',e syllogism has ?ree1 & only ?ree t]ms3 viz4 ! middle t]m & ! two t]ms 7or extremes1 z !y are commonly call$7 ( ! ,conclusion or ,"q4 ,( ^!1 fir/1 ! subject ( ! conclusion is call$ ! m9or t]m2 second1 its pr$icate1 ! major t]m2 & ?ird1 ! middle t]m1 7call$ by ! old] logicians ,argum5tum7 is t ) :i* ea* ( !m is sep>ately comp>$1 9 ord] to judge ( _! agreem5t or disagreem5t ) ea* o!r4 ,if !re=e !re 7 two middle t]ms1 ! extremes or t]ms ( conclusion n be+ bo? comp>$ to ! same1 c\ld n be conclusively comp>$ to ea* o!r4'#ba ,"h reason+ is made to consi/ 9 comp>+ two ?+s by ref]5ce to a ?ird :i* bo? resemble4 ,!re is n a ^w ab\t classification1 :i* is decl>$ j be=e--9 l\d capitals--to be ! univ]sal pr9ciple ( reason+6 ,on ?is def9ition we rem>k-- 7#a7 ,comp>ison by m$iation is untru/wor?y1 unless ! qualities comp>$ be rigidly def9$ or re/rict$1 z 9 geometry & ! use ( /&>ds 7,,xxii74 ,9 geometry ! only two qualities recognis$ are figure & magnitude4 ,! axiom ( m$iate comp>ison means t ?+s hav+ ! same magnitude z a ?ird ?+ are to be consid]$ equal1 ?\gh !y may h diff]5t outl9es4 ,b ! axiom is liable to be untrue 9 ?+s ( ?ree or m qualities4 ,add col\r4 ,!n a :ite sph]e may resemble a :ite cube on ! "o side1 & a black sph]e on ! o!r1 b ! :ite cube does n at all resemble ! black sph]e4 ,?is axiom is !re=e inadmissible or at lea/ extremely risky 9 logic1 :i* treats ( ?+s hav+ _m qualities4 7#b7 ,comp>ison1 h[ev] correctly p]=m$1 is nev] ! end1 b only a means1 ( reason+4 ,,xxxviii--,,syllogism ,we h already _h two di/9ct def9itions ( syllogism4 ,accord+ to ! fir/ x is ! application ( class-attributes to individuals kn[n to belong to ! class2 accord+ to ! second x is ! comp>ison ( two ?+s or t]ms by ref]5ce to a ?ird :i* bo? resemble4 ,:5 we arrive at ! *apt]s 9 logic books devot$ to ! exposition ( ! syllogism 9 detail1 we f9d t ! !orems !re discuss$ d n con=m to ei!r ( ^? def9itions4 ,! only sort ( syllogism t c be 'conv]t$' is "o consi/+ ( two classifications1 & a conclusion :i* pr$icates a classification1 z ?us-- ,all ,engli%m5 are ,europeans2 ,john ,smi? is an ,engli%man2 !re=e ,john ,smi? is a ,european4 ,obs]ve ! diff]5ce betwe5 ?is !orem & t adduc$ 9 illu/ration ( ! ,dictum 7,,xxxvi74 ,9 ! latt] ! fir/ premise is a categorical judgm5t & s !re=e is ! conclusion2 9 ! !orem j giv5 ! fir/ premise is a classification1 & ! conclusion is necess>ily a classification4 ,we fir/ rem>k t su* an 'argum5t' is nev] met ) 9 real spontane\s ?9k+--x occurs only 9 logic books4 ,x is manufactur$ exclusively = ,p]ipatetic consumption4 ,! reason x is n to be f\nd is simple--! conclusion x yields is a classification1 & t is n en\gh = valid argum5t4 ,9 reason+ we may introduce a classification z ! m9or premise--t is1 ! proposition :i* br+s ! case "u ! prec$5t--b ! applicate is nev] a g5]al or class idea4 ,x is "o or m prop]ties ab/ract$ f ! subject 7:e!r ! latt] be a s+le object or g5]al idea71 & appli$ to ! case4 ,m]ely to classify a case & s leave x w\ld answ] no rational purpose4 ,logicians urge 9 recomm5dation ( ?is syllogism t x gives a c]ta9 conclusion4 ,! premises be+ correct1 ! conclusion is infallibly true4 ,no d\bt x is1 = 9 contemplat+ a ?+ we c m5tally ent] x into all ! classes to :i* x appe>s to belong1 :atev] be _! g5]ality4 ,kn[+ ! class ,european & ! individual ,john ,smi?1 we see at once t ! latt] is conta9$ 9 ! =m]1 & we c d ?is )\t putt+ him fir/ 9 ! m9or class ,engli%4 ,x is l say+1 ',! pavilion is 9 ! g>d51 ,john ,smi? is 9 ! pavilion1 !re=e he is 9 ! g>d54' ,( c\rse he is6 ,! m9or premise ( a d\ble classification is sup]flu\s4 ,! fact t su* conclusions are c]ta91 %[s h[ nugatory !y are4 ,we are n c]ta9 ( any?+ till x has be5 exp]i5c$4 ,9 legitimate reason+ ! conclusion is nev] m ?an probable4 ,! c]ta9ty ( ^! d\ble classifications %[s t we are /at+ :at we already "k--n imag9+ an ideal addition to our positive k4 ,doctr9e ( ! ,pr$icate4 ,s long z logicians are p]mitt$ to fabricate _! own examples1 all is pla9 sail+ ) ! syllogism4 ,b !y are sometimes oblig$ to deal ) g5u9e argum5ts4 ,9 ?is case :at !y d is to assume t = logical purposes e pr$icate ( ! prec$5t--t is1 ! applicate--is a g5]al or class t]m4 ,ev5 :5 an argum5t is good !y spoil x ) a bad !ory4 ,sir ,william ,hamilton /ates t up to 8 "t logicians recognis$ b "o type ( proposition--t call$ by him ! proposition '9 ext5sion1' :i* means ! classify+ ( ! subject4 ,he ann\nc$ t he int5d$ to introduce a proposition '9 compreh5sion1' mean+ a judgm5t 9 ! category ( inh]5ce--z = in/ance1 'man is responsible4' ,he fur!r said t he recognis$ a ?ird type ( proposition1 t conc]n+ 'cause & effect4' ,b 9 ! c\rse ( work+ out ^! logical novelties he seems to h discov]$ t !y 7 irreconcilable ) conv]sion1 & s he dropp$ !m4 ,! judgm5t 9 compreh5sion1 he !n decl>$1 0 to all int5ts & purposes ! same z "o 9 ext5sion1 & z to causation--:y1 a cause is a class1 & an effect is an individual belong+ to t class6#bb ,let u see :at is ! result ( treat+ applicates z g5]al ideas4 ,take an example 9 ea* ( ! categories4 ',! pap] is :ite4' ,?is means t ! pap] has ! prop]ty or attribute ( :it5ess4 ,9 logic x is int]pret$ to mean t pap] is an individual ( ! class :ite4 ,?is is wrong1 = !re is no su* class4 ,no sane p]son w\ld =m a class out ( salt1 sn[1 milk1 *9a1 silv]1 ! moon1 & o!r :ite ?+s2 = ?\gh !y h a common prop]ty x is n ! sign ( a common human utility4 ,! confus+ a s+le prop]ty ) a class is n always ow+ to exig5cies ( syllogism4 ,x p]vades ! writ+s ( mo/ ,we/]n metaphysicians1 & may be acc\nt$ = 9 ?is mann]4 ,g5]al ideas & ab/ract prop]ties or ideas h 9 common t !y are p>tial recognitions ( :at we p]ceive 7,,xiv74 ,! p>tition 9 ea* is h[ev] made 9 a diff]5t way1 & = a diff]5t purpose4 ,9 g5]alisation ! selection is done almo/ me*anically4 ,we see _m ?+s t h "s common relation1 function1 or utility = u1 & we rememb] only s mu* ( !m z appe>s to be necess>y = ! recognition ( t relation or utility--j s mu* ( ! ,intellectual exp]i5ce z has always accompani$ ! ,s5tim5tal exp]i5ce4 ,! process is v l t ( putt+ a piece ( wood or ivory 9 a turn+-la!1 & :ittl+ (f all t we d n want4 ,a g5]al idea is ! useful core ( a multitude ( sup]pos$ obs]vations1 ea* ( :i* _h some?+ irrelevant--some?+ :i* x is bett] to =get4 ,we :ittle ?is (f & rememb] only ! core4 ,ab/raction1 on ! o!r h&1 is a consci\s & delib]ate op]ation f beg9n+ to end4 ,x consi/s 9 di/+ui%+ "o by "o ! prop]ties ( a ?+1 & ev5 treat+ ea* prop]ty z if x _h an indep5d5t exi/5ce4 ,= ?is ex]cise x is n necess>y to obs]ve _m ?+s3 we c analyse "o alone1 ?\gh an acqua9tance ) o!r cognate objects is sometimes necess>y to call our att5tion to s+le prop]ties4 ,we ne$ ! %ock ( diff]5ce to be able to di/+ui% well a f9e ab/raction--! diff]5ce betwe5 %ades ( col\rs1 = example4 ,ab/raction is ?us a m9ute att5tion to individuals1 & ne$ n = a mom5t be conf\nd$ ) g5]alisation4 ,ano!r cause ( ! confusion 9 "q c be trac$ to ! use ( ! v]b 'is' to repres5t bo? ! relation ( a ?+ to ! g5]al idea x has contribut$ to =m1 & ! relation ( a s+le prop]ty to ! ?+ 9 :i* x inh]es4 ,we say ',! man is a ,briti% subject'--classify+ him2 we say also ',! man is cold'--m5tion+ "o ( 8 attributes4 ,!re is no class ( cold m51 & ! two relations h no?+ 9 common4 ,a class does n inh]e 9 a man z cold inh]es 9 him4 ,!re is no object correspond+ to class--x is a conceptual creation4 ,! ambiguity ( 'is' fav\rs ! syllogi/ic doctr9e ( pr$ication1 & !re is a rule to ! effect t 9 syllogis+ propositions1 all v]bs are to be conv]t$ into 'is' 7or its conjugates7 ) a p>ticiple or n\n1 s t if !y 7 n be=e /atem5ts ( classification !y n[ become su*4 ',he walks' is cle>ly no classification2 b 'he is walk+' is assimilat$ by false analogy to su* a classification z 'he is human1' & s is treat$ z a classification by ^? :o reason accord+ to ! ,lett]4 ,! sub/antive v]b has no positive & uni=m mean+4 ,z an auxili>y x is a m]e sign ( t5se1 & 9 o!r positions x is an indef9ite m>k ( relation%ip1 ! precise mean+ ( :i* mu/ be det]m9$ by ! subject & ! context4 ,x may sometimes be disp5s$ ) 9 classification1 z ',victoria ,reg9a'--',phillips1 ,d5ti/4' ,9 ! second category we h su* propositions z '! book lies on ! table4' ,9 syllogi/ic ?is is fir/ alt]$ to '! book is ly+ on ! table1' & x is feign$ t 'ly+ on ! table' is a class or g5]al idea1 & 'book' an individual ( t class4 ,to int]pret '! groom /&s by ! horse' a class has to be creat$1 compos$ ( ! p]sons :o happ5 to be /&+ by horses4 ',! m\nta9 is t5 miles (f' is a judgm5t 9 p]spection4 ,syllogi/ically we are ask$ to believe t a class ( ?+s exi/s hav+ ! common prop]ty ( be+ t5 miles (f1 & t ! m\nta9 is ent]$ 9 t class4 ,! absurdity ( ?is doctr9e is self-evid5t4 ,9 ! rema9+ categories ! r$uction to 'is' has1 if possible1 a worse effect4 ,9 *ang+ ',canada lies we/ ( ,irel&' into ',canada is a c\ntry ly+ we/ ( ,irel&1' we lose ! relation 9 concretion1 & express in/ead a v]bal def9ition4 ,in/ead ( affirm+ a position we expla9 a "n4 ,9 su* a proposition z '! t[n ( ,a lies #ajj miles due nor? ( ,b1' x is pla9 ! pr$icate _c be a class1 = only "o place has ! quality express$4 ,9 ! fif? category we h su* a proposition z 'wat] freezes :5 ! temp]ature falls to z]o ,c5tigrade4' ,?is is turn$ into a sub/antive s5t5ce by say+ 'wat] is t liquid :i* freezes1' c41 :i* is a v]bal or id5tical proposition4 ',cecrops f\nd$ ,a!ns' is a judgm5t 9 causation4 ,9 turn+ x into ',cecrops 0 7or is7 ! f\nd] ( ,a!ns1' we emphasise ! man's "n1 b ! relation signifi$ by 'f\nd$' is slurr$ ov] or lo/ sight (4 ,boole conv]ts ',caes> conqu]$ ! ,gauls' into ',caes> is he :o conqu]$ ! ,gauls1'#bc & ?is he int]pret$ z classification4 ,we ne$ n be surpris$ t he %\ld suppose a class c\ld be =m$ by "o individual1 = he else:]e tells u t ,no?+ is a class4#bd ,classification is n judgm5t ( any sort--x is a v>iety ( recollection4 ,logicians imag9e x is ! only judgm5t1 & s f> z !y c !y degrade true judgm5ts to t spuri\s =m4 ,moods ( ! ,syllogism4 ,hav+ p]suad$ !mselves t classification is ! beg9n+1 middle1 & end ( reason+1 logicians next proce$ to divide ! matt] ( _! sci5ce4 ,mod]n logicians :o h "s acqua9tance ) real ?9k+ z exemplifi$ 9 works ( physical sci5ce1 c1 if act+ accord+ to _! natural intellig5ce1 lay d[n correct rules = divid+ a subject4 ,^! are simple & obvi\s3 divide accord+ to fundam5tal resemblance--let ea* division correspond to "s def9ite human utility--let ! m important prop]ties take prec$5ce ( ! less important1 & s =?3 ! m]e/ common s5se4 ,b 9 ! division ( _! own subject !y foll[ ,ari/otle1 & s lose _! way4 ,x is pla9 t an act ( reason+ is a m5tal ?+ 9 ! fir/ place1 & only :5 utt]$1 & ?us 9 a second>y s5se1 is x a mat]ial object4 ,! classification ( argum5ts %\ld !re=e foll[ m5tal *>act]i/ics4 ,logicians make x foll[ ! mat]ial *>act]i/ics ( ! t]ms 9 :i* ! argum5ts are utt]$4 ,_! moods ( ! syllogism are m]e v>ieties ( expression1 n v>ieties ( reason4 ,! numb] ( ^! moods is accid5tal1 dep5d+ on flexibility ( language & +5uity 9 inv5t+ v>ieties ( syntax4 ,m]e transposition ( premises con/itutes a diff]5ce ( mood4 ,logicians h[ev] pret5d to base _! num]ation on a m g5]al necessity4 ,!y calculate f ! di/9ctive p>ts ( ! ?ree propositions =m+ a syllogism1 v>i$ by negation1 c41 t !re ought to be sixty-f\r moods4 ,exp]i5ce proves t 9 spite ( _! free & easy me?od ( multiply+ syllogi/ic v>ieties !y _c produce any?+ l t numb]4 ,"o logician has ?irty-six moods1 ano!r ?irty-two1 a ?ird elev52 ! m or?odox fix ! numb] at n9ete54 ,b !y all admit t e argum5t c be r$uc$ to "o ( f\r fundam5tal types--! moods ( ! ,fir/ ,figure4 ,:y !n h m classes ?an ^! f\r8 ,because1 says ,:ately1 x w\ld be 'occasionally t$i\s' to r$uce e argum5t to ! fir/ figure4 ,if ! #aa1 #ai1 #cb1 or #cf classes 7 natural argum5ts tak5 d[n unt\*$ f m5's lips1 & x 0 f\nd to be useless & tr\blesome to r$uce !m to f\r artificial =ms1 ! plea might be admitt$4 ,b ! s-call$ valid syllogisms are !mselves artificial1 & j z t$i\s to make z ! moods ( ! fir/ figure4 ,n only s1 b an elaborate sy/em ( mnemonic rules is provid$ = r$uc+ ! valid moods to ! fundam5tal moods1 ?us admitt+ t ! =m] are only int]m$iate halt+ places betwe5 ! natural spee* & ! fundam5tal moods4 ,x is expect$ t ! int]m$iates %\ld be r$uc$ to ! fir/ figure4 ,is !re any?+ analog\s to ?is sort ( division 9 any sci5ce or bran* ( practical ?\ght8 ,w\ld logicians !mselves sanction su* a classification 9 a natural sci5ce8 ,if a zoologi/1 = example1 7 to det]m9e be=eh& h[ _m classes ( animals !re ought to be1 w\ld !y n say he 0 act+ improp]ly8 ,if1 aft] discov]+ t he _h five times z _m classes z he c\ld f9d animals to put into !m1 he /ill reta9$ 8 classification & requir$ 8 pupils to write out ! names or symbols ( all ! useless classes--w\ld n logicians be apt to call him a p$ant8 ,yet 9 a mod]n "w on logic su* a task is prescrib$ = /ud5ts3-- ',write out ! sixty-f\r moods ( ! syllogism1 & /rike out ! fifty-?ree invalid ones4' ,we might h excus$ ! exi/5ce ( a m]ely v]bal classification 9 logic1 if x 7 accompani$ by & subord9at$ to a classification ( !orems consid]$ z m5tal facts4 ,b 9 syllogi/ic ! v]bal is ! dom9ant classification1 & we h se5 f ! proc$ure ( ,sir ,william ,hamilton--9 dropp+ 8 categorical judgm5ts--t :5 ! two pr9ciples ( division conflict1 x is ! m5tal :i* has to give way4 ,! ,lett] is all[$ to kill ! ,_s4 ,all ! ,moods r$ucible to ,"o4 ,syllogi/s appe> n to "k _! own s*ematism v well4 ,!y say !re are f\r ultimate moods1 :i* x is impossible to r$uce to any l[] numb]4 ,b s9ce ea* ( ! f\r is1 m5tally1 a d\ble classification1 x mu/ be possible to reflect ?is common prop]ty 9 ! mode ( expression4 ,! diff]5ce betwe5 !m c only be v]bal4 ,let u adopt ano!r ?an ! ord9>y symbolism4 ,cut a c>d into ?ree triangul> pieces ( unequal size1 & call !m by ! lett]s ,a1 ,b1 ,c1 beg9n+ ) ! l>ge/4 ,^! are ! t]ms ( ! syllogism4 ,a ,a _/,b _/ ,b _/ _/,c _/ _/,c _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/ ------------ ------------ ---------- ,b>b>a4 ,cel>5t4 ,a ,a _/,b _/ ,b _/ _/ ,c _/ _/ ,c _/ _/ 3 _/ _/ 3 _/ _/ 3 3 _/ _/ 3 3 _/ _/ _/ 3 _/ _/ _/ 3 _/ _/ _/ 3 _/ _/ _/ 3 ------------444 ------------ ----------444 ,d>ii4 ,f]io4 ,! fir/ mood ,b>b>a is =m$ by plac+ ! c>ds on top ( ea* o!r1 s t ,b is )9 ! m>g9 ( ,a1 & ,c )9 ! m>g9 ( ,b4 ,?is is ! syllogism1 ',all ,b is ,a1 all ,c is ,b1 !re=e all ,c is ,a4' ,next let ,b & ,c be z above1 b let ,a be :olly ap>t f bo?4 ,?is is ,cel>5t3 ',no ,b is ,a1 all ,c is ,b1 !re=e no ,c is ,a4' ,9 ,d>ii ! :ole ( ,b is 9 ,a1 b only a "p ( ,c co9cides ) ,b4 ,! syllogism is3 ',all ,b is ,a1 "s ,c is ,b1 !re=e "s ,c is ,a4' ,9 ,f]io ,a is aga9 :olly sep>at$ f ! o!rs1 & ,c is only p>tially 9 ,b4 ,argum5t3 ',no ,b is ,a1 "s ,c is ,b1 !re=e "s ,c is n ,a4' ,x is to be rememb]$ t all ! o!r figures & moods are r$ucible to ! above figure ( f\r moods1 s t ! r$uction applicable to ! latt] is equally applicable to ! =m]4 ,to r$uce ,d>ii to ,b>b>a all t is necess>y is to ignore ! dott$ "p ( ,c4 ,t is sugge/$ by ! use ( ! ^w '"s1' :i* has a correlative 'all' or 'o!rs4' ,b ! correlative quantity does n ent] into ! syllogism1 & we "k no?+ ab\t x4 ,x may n ev5 exi/4 ,we are !re=e at lib]ty to sub/itute = '"s ,c' ! "n ,d1 & consid] x an integ] in/ead ( a fraction4 ,!n we h ! ,b>b>a syllogism3 ',all ,b is ,a1 all ,d 7 "s ,c7 is ,b1 !re=e all ,d is ,a4' ,! phrase 'all ( "s' is q all[able3 ',i met "s firem51 all ( :om wore brass helmets4' ,f]io 9 ! same mann] is r$uc$ to ,cel>5t4 ,! dott$ "p ( ,c is cut away1 & ! "p really significant 9 ! syllogism is call$ ,e4 ,!n ',no ,b is ,a1 all ,e is ,b1 no ,e is ,a4' ,f9ally ,cel>5t c be r$uc$ to ,b>b>a4 ,b _c inde$ be enclos$ 9 ,a1 b we assume ! exi/5ce ( a :ole hav+ all ! *>act]s :i* ,a has n1 or hav+ none ( ! *>act]s :i* ,a has4 ,?is is ! :ole ,f ,n-,a4 ,!n ,cel>5t becomes ,b>b>a ?us3 ',all ,b is ,f1 all ,c is ,b1 !re=e all ,c is ,f4' ,?is demon/rates t !re is only "o fundam5tal op]ation :]e syllogi/s suppose !re are at lea/ f\r4 ,! diff]5ce is :olly a matt] ( language1 & disappe>s on *ang+ ! names ( ! t]ms & ignor+ irrelevant sugge/ions4 ,b ! syllogism1 ,i repeat1 does n repres5t ! act ( reason+1 & its moods & figures are fit only to be a game = *ildr54 ,footnote #bj3 ,logic1 ,book ,i4 #c4 ,footnote #ba3 ,logic1 ,book ,,ii4 c4 #c4 #b4 ,footnote #bb3 ,lectures1 iii4 pp4 #bhg & #cef4 ,! impossibility ( reconcil+ _! def9itions & rules to real ?9k+ & argum5t is ! despair ( logicians4 ,mo/ ( !m take to symbols1 :i* are m accommodat+ ?an real exp]i5ce1 hav+ j su* prop]ties z _! mak]s *oose to put 9 !m4 ,sir ,william ,hamilton _h ! c\rage to decl>e t a logician might use argum5ts ( a concrete or real =m1 b t x is n necess>y !y %\ld agree ) real fact4 ',! logician has a "r to suppose any mat]ial impossibility1 any mat]ial falsity2 he takes no acc\nt ( :at is objectively impossible or false1 he has a "r to assume :at premises he please1 provid$ t !y d n involve a contradiction 9 t]ms4'--,id4 #cbb4 ,t means 9 pla9 ,engli% t a logician may misrepres5t matt]s ( fact1 if he _c o!rwise e/abli% 8 !ory6 ,footnote #bc3 ,laws ( ,?\ght1 p4 #ce4 ,footnote #bd3 ,ibid4 p4 #dg4 ,,/udies ,,9 ,,dialectic ,,xxxix ,! !orems giv5 = practice 9 logic books are useful dialectic mat]ial1 b !y d n fully illu/rate all ! categories4 ,logicians h no def9ite categories1 & 9 select+ examples !y are unconsci\sly biass$ 9 fav\r ( ^? t c be mo/ easily int]pret$ to signify classification4 ,! really g5]ali/ic examples are r>e2 ! mo/ are judgm5ts ( inh]5ce1 admitt$ 9 virtue ( ! assumption t inh]5t prop]ties c--:5 x is ne$ful to pres]ve ! traditional notion ( pr$ication--be consid]$ class-ideas4 ,!orems 9 p]spection & concretion we d n expect to f9d 9 logic books1 = ^!1 9 s f> z !y are di/9ct f association1 are categories peculi> to ! ,b]keleyan philosophy4 ,:ately has ! foll[+ example 9 association--',lias lies above r$ s&/one2 r$ s&/one lies above coal2 !re=e lias lies above coal4' ,no d\bt ,:ately w\ld1 9 syllogis+ ?is1 h *ang$ ! propositions to ',r$ s&/one is ly+1' c41 & h assum$ t 'ly+ above coal' is a class to :i* r$ s&/one belongs4 999999 ,"h are examples ( argum5ts 9 inh]5ce-- ,a hot sk91 quick pulse1 int5se ?ir/ h inv>iably 9 my exp]i5ce coexi/$ ) fev]2 ! p]son n[ exam9$ exhibits ^! symptoms1 s ,i inf] t he has a fev]4 ,great wid? ( skull betwe5 ! e>s is inv>iably f\nd unit$ ) a de/ructive temp]am5t2 ?is animal's skull is v wide betwe5 ! e>s2 h5ce x may be conclud$ t he has a de/ructive temp]am5t4 ,clov5 feet belong univ]sally--i4e4 z f> z our exp]i5ce goes--to horn$ animals2 we may conclude t ?is fossil animal1 s9ce x appe>s to h _h clov5 feet1 0 horn$4 ,i4 ,clov5 feet inh]e ) horns ---------------------------------------- ---- ,fossil animal appe>s to x is probable he h _h clov5 feet _h horns ,:5 an ar*itect1 contemplat+ ! fragm5ts ( a build+1 re/ores x 9 imag9ation aft] ! analogy ( simil> build+s1 we h an argum5t 9 inh]5ce4 ,su* speculations are g5]ally too long & complex = analysis1 b an in/ructive example occurs 9 ,canon ,rawl9son's ,sev5? ,ori5tal ,mon>*y1 :i* ,i w v5ture to quote1 m>k+ ! phrases t introduce or express ! rational idea4 ,obs]ve ! diff]5ce ( /yle betwe5 ?is1 :i* is real practical reason+1 & ! trivial c]ta9ties ( ,syllogi/ic4 ',:at rema9s ( ?is massive erection ! ,takht-i-,khosru1 or palace ( ,*osros ,anu%irwan1 at ,ctesiphon is a m]e fragm5t1 :i*1 to judge f ! o!r extant ,sassanian ru9s1 _c h =m$ s mu* z "o f\r? "p ( ! orig9al edifice4 ,no?+ has come d[n to our day b a s+le vault$ hall on ! gr&e/ scale1 toge!r ) ! m]e out] wall ( :at no d\bt con/itut$ ! ma9 facade ( ! build+4 ,! ap>tm5ts1 :i*1 accord+ to all analogy1 mu/ h exi/$ at ! two sides1 & 9 ! re>1 ( ! great hall1 "s ( :i* %\ld h be5 vault$1 h :olly p]i%$4 ,imag9ation may supply !m f ! ,firuzabad1 or ! ,ma%ita palace2 b n a trace1 ev5 ( _! f\ndations1 is extant2 & ! details consequ5tly are unc]ta91 ?\gh ! g5]al plan c sc>cely be d\bt$4 ,at ea* side ( ! great hall 7 probably two lat]al ones1 communicat+ ) ea* o!r1 & capable ( be+ ent]$ ei!r f ! hall or f ! out] air4 ,beyond ! great hall 0 probably a dom$ *amb] equall+ x 9 wid?1 & op5+ ^u a c\rt1 r\nd :i* 7 a numb] ( mod]ate-siz$ ap>tm5ts4 ,! entire build+ 0 no d\bt an oblong squ>e1 ( :i* ! %ort] sides seem to h measur$ #cgj feet4 ,x _h at lea/ ?ree1 & may n improbably h _h a l>g] numb] ( entrances1 s9ce x belongs to tranquil times & a secure locality4' 999999 ,! mo/ notable argum5t 9 ! category ( concretion is und\bt$ly ! inf]5ce z to ! sph]icity ( ! e>?4 ,next is ! sub-inf]5ce by ,columbus t ,*9a c\ld be rea*$ by sail+ we/w>d f ,portugal4 ,if ! syllogi/ic op9ion 7 valid--t a conclusion mu/ be absolutely true or absolutely false--! exp$ition ( ,columbus 0 bas$ on a fallacy4 ,mo/ p ?9k x 0 em95tly rational4 ,no "o has se5 ! nor? or ! s\? poles1 & ! conviction t !y c\ld be realis$1 if c]ta9 difficulties ( transport 7 ov]come1 is a sub-inf]5ce ( ! same "*4 ,"h is a common type ( inf]5ce 9 p]spection-- ,,iii4 ,t *ur* is #ajj y>ds (f ---------------------------------------- -- ,a man appe>s on he is #ajj ys4 (f ! ro( ( ! *4 ,& ?is-- ,,iii4 ,t di/ant h\se is #fj ft4 high ---------------------------------------- ------------ ,x appe>s to be scaffold$ ! scaffold is ab\t to a ?ird ( its height #bj feet high ,9 ^! cases we h n se5 ! man or ! scaffold+ be=e1 & h n measur$ ! latt] or ! di/ance to ! =m]3 ! conclusions are imag9>y judgm5ts fairly drawn f kn[n premises4 999999 ,! deciph]+ ( hi]oglyphics1 cunei=m inscriptions1 & rema9s ( o!r dead & =gott5 languages1 is argum5t 9 causation4 ,examples _c conv5i5tly be quot$ ev5 9 a cond5s$ =m1 b ?is k9d ( reason+ is mo/ int]e/+ dialectically f ! slightness ( ! analogies t are nev]!less f\nd to give valid conclusions4 999999 ,?is is consid]$ argum5t by ,:ately-- ,i4 ,l\is is a good k+ ---------------------------------------- ---------- ,! gov]nor ( ,france !re=e ! g4 ( ,f4 is is ,l\is a good k+ ,! suppos$ case is a v]bal proposition1 s]v+ to r5ame ! subject ( prec$5t4 ,!re is no reason+4 ,if we already "k t ,l\is is a good k+ & is also ! gov]nor ( ,france 7! giv5 matt]s ( fact71 !re is no rational imag9ation involv$ 9 re>rang+ ^! data z 9 ! propos$ conclusion4 999999 ',he :o calls y a man speaks truly2 he :o calls y a fool calls y a man2 !re=e he :o calls y a fool speaks truly4'--,a fallacy ( cross reason+1 & ! pr$icate is a class4 ,all fools are m5 ---------------------- ,y are a man ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',no?+ is heavi] ?an plat9a2 fea!rs are heavi] ?an no?+2 !re=e fea!rs are heavi] ?an plat9a4'--,a trivial equivoque4 ,! foll[+ is m subtle4 ',!ft is a crime2 !ft 0 enc\rag$ by ! laws ( ,sp>ta2 !re=e ! laws ( ,sp>ta enc\rag$ crime4'--,at mo/ ! laws ( ,sp>ta enc\rag$ "o crime2 b !re is a fallacy ( equivocation4 ,tak+ ?+s surreptiti\sly f ! p]son 9 ^: possession !y may be1 is n a crime--is n !ft--9 a society s communi/ic z ! ,sp>tan4 ,!re x 0 enc\rag$ z an ex]cise 9 adroitness4 ,?is example %[s ! necessity ( kn[+ ! matt] ( ! argum5t4 999999 ',w>m c\ntries alone produce w9e2 ,spa9 is a w>m c\ntry2 !re=e ,spa9 produces w9e4' ,v4 ,w9e is p4 9 w4 c\ntries ---------------------------------------- - ,spa9 is a w>m c4 ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',meat & dr9k are necess>ies ( life2 ! rev5ues ( ,vitellius 7 sp5t 9 meat & dr9k2 !re=e ! rev5ues ( ,vitellius 7 sp5t on ! necess>ies ( life4'--,fallacy ( composition3 meat & dr9k 9 mod]ate quantities are necess>ies ( "o life1 b n food ( e k9d & 9 excessive quantities4 999999 ',he :o is mo/ hungry eats mo/2 he :o eats lea/ is mo/ hungry2 !re=e he :o eats lea/ eats mo/4'--,a fallacy ( accid5t3 he :o eats lea/ does n at ! same "t eat mo/4 999999 ',:atev] body is 9 motion mu/ move ei!r 9 ! place :]e x is1 or 9 ! place :]e x is n2 nei!r ( ^! is possible2 !re=e !re is no su* ?+ z motion4'--,x is an abuse ( reason to attempt to disprove matt]s ( fact4 ,! conclusion ( an argum5t be+ always problematical1 x c h no =ce aga9/ actual exp]i5ce4 ,we exp]i5ce motion1 !re=e x _c be disprov$4 999999 ',a wise lawgiv] mu/ ei!r recognise ! rew>ds & puni%m5ts ( a future /ate1 or he mu/ be able to appeal to an extraord9>y ,provid5ce1 disp5s+ !m regul>ly 9 ?is life2 ,moses did n d ! =m]1 !re=e he mu/ h done ! latt]'--7,w>burton1 f ,:ately74--,! reason] omitt$ to e/abli% t ,moses 0 a wise lawgiv]1 s t ! prec$5t does n apply to 8 case1 except by c\rtesy4 999999 ',t man is indep5d5t ( ! caprices ( =tune :o places 8 *ief happ9ess 9 moral & intellectual excell5ce2 a true philosoph] is indep5d5t ( ! caprices ( =tune2 !re=e a true philosoph] is "o :o places 8 *ief happ9ess 9 moral & intellectual excell5ce4' ,an in/ance ( cross reason+4 ,i4 ,he :o places is indep5d5t ---------------------------------------- -- ,philosoph] is indep5d5t ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',= ^? :o are b5t on cultivat+ _! m9ds by dilig5t /udy1 ! incitem5t ( academical hon\rs is unnecess>y2 & = ! idle x is ineffectual1 = su* are indiff]5t to m5tal improvem5t2 !re=e ! incitem5t ( academical hon\rs is ei!r unnecess>y or ineffectual4' ,a fallacy ( d\btful prec$5t3 because two k9ds ( /ud5ts are n b5efit$ by ! hope ( hon\rs x is prematurely conclud$ t no o!rs exi/ :o may be s b5efit$4 999999 ',he :o be>s arms at ! comm& ( ! magi/rate does :at is lawful = a ,*ri/ian2 ! ,swiss 9 ! ,fr5* s]vice1 & ! ,briti% 9 ! ,am]ican s]vice1 bore arms at ! comm& ( ! magi/rate2 !re=e !y did :at is lawful = a ,*ri/ian4' ,! conclusion is valid s f> z ! in=mation giv5 enables u to judge4 ,if we "k f o!r s\rces t ! ,swiss & ,briti% :o are ref]r$ to1 committ$ atrocities at ! comm& ( ! magi/rate1 ! conclusion is a fallacy ( accid5t4 ,9 g5]al x is lawful to obey a magi/rate1 b !re may be p>ticul> cases :5 x is n4 999999 ',anyone :o is c&id w refra9 f condemn+ a book )\t read+ x2 "s review]s d n refra9 f ?is2 !re=e "s review]s are n c&id4'--,?is is cross reason+ & invalid4 ,x is "o ?+ to say t ! unc&id d n refra91 & ano!r t all :o d n refra9 are unc&id4 ,! conclusion is tak5 f ! latt] proposition1 :i* is n ass]t$4 999999 ',ev]yone desires happ9ess2 virtue is happ9ess2 !re=e ev]yone desires virtue4' ,i4 ,:oev] desires an effect desires ! cause ( t effect ---------------------------------------- ------------------------ ,ev]yone desires ! happ9ess ev]yone desires virtue :i* is caus$ by virtue ,! case is manife/ly untrue4 999999 ',he :o has a confirm$ habit ( any k9d ( action ex]cises no self-d5ial 9 ! practice ( t action2 a good man has a confirm$ habit ( virtue2 !re=e he :o ex]cises self-d5ial 9 ! practice ( virtue is n a good man4'--7,ari/4 ,e?4 ,bk4 ,,ii41 f ,:ately47 ,,vi4 ,i4 ,he :o has a ex]cises no ,he :o ex]cises no is good habit1 c4 self-d5ial self-d5ial 9 ! practice ( virtue ---------------------------------------- --------------------------- ,a good man has ,he ex]cises no ,he :o does ,n4 ,c4 ?is habit ) self-d5ial ) ex]cise c4 respect to virtue respect to virtue ,! conclusion drawn is fallaci\s1 ! second !orem be+ bas$ on contra/4 999999 ',accord+ to !ologians1 a man mu/ possess fai? to be acceptable to ! ,deity2 n[ he :o believes all ! fables ( hea!n my?ology mu/ possess fai?2 !re=e su* a "o mu/1 accord+ to !ologians1 be acceptable to ! ,deity4' ',fai?' is ambigu\s1 mean+ 9 ! prec$5t1 spiritual aspiration1 & 9 ! case ignorant cr$ulity4 999999 ',no evil %\ld be all[$ t good may come ( x2 all puni%m5t is an evil2 !re=e no puni%m5t %\ld be all[$ t good may come ( x4'--',evil' is ambigu\s1 mean+ wrong-do+ 9 ! prec$5t & pa9 9 ! case2 ! conclusion is !re=e fallaci\s4 999999 ',! pr9ciples ( ju/ice are v>iable2 ! appo9tm5ts ( nature are inv>iable2 !re=e ! pr9ciples ( ju/ice are no appo9tm5ts ( nature4'--7,ari/4 ,e?4 ,bk4 ,v41 f ,:ately47 ,! t]ms 'pr9ciples ( ju/ice' & 'nature' require to be def9$4 ,x might be said t ju/ice is "o pr9ciple1 ev]y:]e & always ! same1 & t only its embodim5ts 9 law & cu/om are v>iable4 999999 ',:at happ5s e day is n improbable2 "s ?+s1 aga9/ :i* ! *ances are _m ?\s&s to "o1 happ5 e day2 !re=e "s ?+s aga9/ :i* ! *ances are _m ?\s&s to "o1 are n improbable4'--,a fallacy ( division3 t improbable ?+s 9 g5]al happ5 e day does n r5d] ! occurr5ce ( any "o a probable ev5t4 999999 ',protection f puni%m5t is pla9ly due to ! innoc5t2 !re=e1 z y ma9ta9 t ?is p]son ought n to be puni%$1 x appe>s t y are conv9c$ ( 8 innoc5ce4'--,a fallacy ( cross reason+4 ,i4 ,innoc5t p]sons des]ve protection ---------------------------------------- ------------ ,?is p]son des]ves protection ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',he :o _c possibly act o!rwise ?an he does1 has nei!r m]it nor dem]it 9 8 action2 a lib]al & b5evol5t man _c possibly act o!rwise ?an he does 9 reliev+ ! poor2 !re=e su* a man has nei!r m]it nor dem]it 9 8 action4'--,to 'h m]it 9 an action' is sc>cely intelligible4 ,a man's m]it is 9 8 "*1 & 8 actions are effects & signs ( "*4 999999 ',all ! fi% t ! net inclos$ 7 an indiscrim9ate mixture ( v>i\s k9ds2 ^? t 7 set aside & sav$ z valuable 7 fi% t ! net inclos$2 !re=e ^? t 7 set aside & sav$ z valuable 7 an indiscrim9ate mixture ( v>i\s k9ds4' ,an in/ance ( ! fallacy ( division3 :at is true ( ! :ole cont5ts ( ! net is n necess>ily true ( a portion ( ! cont5ts4 999999 ',a desire to ga9 by ano!r's loss is a violation ( ! t5? comm&m5t2 all gam+1 !re=e1 s9ce x implies a desire to pr(it at ! exp5se ( ano!r1 involves a brea* ( ! t5? comm&m5t4'--,a valid argum5t 9 inh]5ce4 ,all desire to ga9 by1 c4 violates ---------------------------------------- ---------- ,gam+ involves ?is k9d ( desire x violates 999999 ',he t de/roys a man :o usurps despotic p[] 9 a free c\ntry1 des]ves well ( 8 c\ntrym52 ,brutus de/roy$ ,caes>1 :o usurp$ despotic p[] 9 ,rome2 !re=e he des]v$ well ( ! ,romans4'--,if ,rome 0 'a free c\ntry' ! conclusion is valid4 999999 ',no fi% suckles its "y2 ! :ale suckles its "y2 ! :ale is !re=e no fi%4' ,i4 ,:at suckles is no-fi% ------------------------------ ,:ale suckles x is no-fi% 999999 ',?is explosion mu/ h be5 occasion$ by gunp[d]1 = no?+ else w\ld h possess$ suffici5t =ce4' ,v4 ,explosions ( a c]ta9 c only be occasion$ by de/ructiv5ess gunp[d] ---------------------------------------- ---------- ,?is explosion has t x mu/ h be5 de/ructiv5ess occasion$ by gunp[d] 999999 ',e man %\ld be mod]ate1 = excess w cause disease4' ,v4 ,to avoid disease mod]ation is requisite ---------------------------------------- ------- ,e man %\ld avoid e man %\ld disease be mod]ate 999999 ',bless$ are ! m]ciful1 = !y %all obta9 m]cy4' ,i4 ,to obta9 m]cy is bless$ ---------------------------------------- -- ,^? :o %[ m]cy !y mu/ be obta9 m]cy consid]$ bless$ 999999 ',"s speculative m5 are unwor?y ( tru/2 = !y are unwise1 & no unwise man c be tru/$4' ,i4 ,unwise m5 are n to be tru/$ ---------------------------------------- ---------- ,"s speculative m5 !y are n to be tru/$ are unwise 999999 ',no idle p]son c be a successful writ] ( hi/ory2 !re=e ,hume1 ,macaulay1 ,hallam & ,grote mu/ h be5 indu/ri\s4' ,i4 ,successful hi/orians are n idle p]sons ---------------------------------------- ---- ,hume & ! re/ 7 !y _c h successful hi/orians be5 idle p]sons 999999 ',li?ium is an elem5t2 = x is an alkali-produc+ sub/ance1 :i* is a metal1 :i* is an elem5t4'--,fallacy ( no-application4 ,e alk4 is a metal ,e metal is an elem5t prod4 sub/4 ---------------------------------------- ------------------------ ,l4 is alk4 x is a metal ,l4 is a metal x is an elem5t p4 sub/4 999999 ',rational be+s are acc\ntable = _! actions2 brutes n be+ rational1 are !re=e exempt f responsibility4' ,i4 ,rational be+s are acc\ntable ------------------------------------ ,brutes n rational ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',:atev] t5ds to )draw ! m9d f pursuits ( a l[ nature des]ves to be promot$2 classical le>n+ does ?is1 s9ce x gives u a ta/e = intellectual enjoym5ts2 !re=e x des]ves to be promot$4' ,v4 ,i4 ,:atev] gives t5ds ,:atev] t5ds des]ves ---------------------------------------- ----------------- ,le>n+ gives x t5ds ,le>n+ t5ds x des]ves 999999 ',bacon 0 a great lawy] & /atesman2 & z he 0 also a philosoph]1 we may inf] t any philosoph] may be a great lawy] & /atesman4'--,! !orem inf]s ! g5]al inh]5ce ( philosophy ) em95ce 9 law & politics1 f ! s+le in/ance ( ,bacon3 x is evid5tly a fallacy ( d\btful prec$5t4 999999 ',sn[don is ! highe/ m\nta9 9 ,engl& & ,wales4 ,sn[don is n s high z ,b5 ,nevis4 ,!re=e ! highe/ m\nta9 9 ,engl& & ,wales is n s high z ,b5 ,nevis4' ,?is means3 '! highe/ m\nta9 9 ,engl& & ,wales is call$ ,sn[don1 & x is n s high z ,b5 ,nevis4' ,! app>5t conclusion m]ely repeats a "p ( ! in=mation giv5 already4 ,!re is no case4 ,! foll[+ is a !orem ( ! same k9d-- ',li?ium is ! lighte/ metal kn[n4 ,li?ium is ! metal indicat$ by "o bright l9e 9 ! spectrum4 ,!re=e ! lighte/ metal kn[n is ! metal indicat$ by a spectrum ( "o bright l9e4' 999999 ',if ye 7 ,abraham's *ildr51 ye w\ld d ! works ( ,abraham4' ,,vi4 ,abraham's *ildr5 d 8 works ---------------------------------------- -------- ,if ye 7 8 *ildr5 ye w\ld d 8 works 999999 ',s9ce all metals are elem5ts1 ! mo/ r>e ( all ! metals mu/ be ! mo/ r>e ( all ! elem5ts4'--,!re is a suppress$ prec$5t to ! effect t ! mo/ r>e individual ( a species mu/ be ! mo/ r>e ( its g5us1 :i* may or may n be true4 999999 ',all vice is odi\s2 b av>ice is a vice2 = x makes m5 slaves2 !re=e av>ice is odi\s4' ,v4 ,i4 ,:atev] enslaves is a vice ,all vice is odi\s ---------------------------------------- ---------------------------- ,av>ice enslaves x is a vice ,av>ice is a vice x is odi\s 999999 ',bucephalus is a horse2 a horse is a quadrup$2 a quadrup$ is an animal2 an animal is a sub/ance2 !re=e ,bucephalus is a sub/ance4' ,all horses are quads4 ,quads4 animals ,animal sub/ance ---------------------------------------- ----------------------- ,bu4 is a h4he is q4,b4 is quad4he is an4,bu4 is an4he is sub/4 ,?is is :at logicians call a ,sorites4 ,!re may be a *a9 ( valid argum5ts1 9 :i* ! conclusion ( "o is prec$5t or case ( ! next2 b ! propositions j quot$ d n make an argum5t1 be+ m]ely a /r+ ( classifications4 ,if we "k :at ,bucephalus & sub/ance mean1 we "k by p]ception t ,bucephalus is a sub/ance4 999999 ',e be+ is !n happy :5 x acquires ! prop] p]fection ( its nature2 & consequ5tly all vital be+s are capable ( receiv+ felicity t are capable ( arriv+ at ! p]fection ( _! nature4' ,i4 ,e be+ t acquires is happy ---------------------------------------- ---------------- ,all vital be+s capable mu/ be capable ( receiv+ ( acquir+ felicity ,?is is p]il\sly ne> tautology2 x c be sav$ only by assum+ t 'e be+ capable ( happ9ess' is a m ext5sive class ?an 'all vital be+s capable ( arriv+ at ! p]fection ( _! nature4' 999999 ',! s\l's debility is n ow+ to h] lapse into matt]2 = z ?is lapse is volunt>y1 ! s\l mu/ h s9n$ prior to h] desc5t4' ,,vi4 ,volunt>y lapse proves prior s9 ---------------------------------------- -------- ,s\l's lapse is v4 h] debility mu/ h be5 antec$5t to lapse 999999 ,cogito ergo sum4-- ,i4 ,:atev] ?9ks is ---------------------------------------- --- ,i ?9k ,i mu/ believe t ,i am ,t we exi/ is ! mo/ c]ta9 fact we "k3 x _c be /r5g!n$ by any argum5tation4 ,if we c d\bt t we are1 we c ) bett] reason d\bt t we ?9k4 999999 ,"h is ,hamilton's example ( a disjunctive syllogism1 :i* he consid]$ a valid argum5t--',! hope ( immortality is ei!r a rational expectation or an illusion2 b ! hope ( immortality is a rational expectation2 !re=e ! hope ( immortality is n an illusion4' ,x is a flagrant tautologism4 999999 ',if man be n a morally responsible be+1 he mu/ want ei!r ! p[] ( recognis+ moral good 7z an intellig5t ag5t71 or ! p[] ( will+ x 7z a free ag5t72 b man wants nei!r ( ^! p[]s2 !re=e man is a morally responsible be+4' ,adopt$ by ,hamilton f ,krug & giv5 z valid4 ,x is fir/ a fallacy ( contra/1 & if am5d$ 9 ?is respect x w\ld /ill be a fallacy ( tautology4 ,i4 ,if m4 lack$ c]ta9 pp4 he w\ld be irresp4 ---------------------------------------- --------- ,he does n lack ^! pp4 ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',if ,aes*9es jo9$ 9 ! public rejoic+s1 he is inconsi/5t2 if he did n1 he is unpatriotic2 b he ei!r jo9$1 or n1 !re=e he is ei!r inconsi/5t or unpatriotic4'--,an excell5t specim5 ( logicians' logic3 on a p> ) ?is--,if x is f9e wea!r1 ,i g2 if x ra9s1 ,i /ay2 x mu/ ei!r ra9 or be f9e1 !re=e ,i mu/ ei!r g or /ay4 999999 ',if ! _w 7 et]nal1 ! mo/ useful arts1 su* z pa9t+1 c4 w\ld be ( unkn[n antiquity3 & on ! same supposition !re w\ld be records long prior to ! ,mosaic2 & likewise ! sea & l& 9 all p>ts ( ! globe might be expect$ to ma9ta9 ! same relative situations n[ z =m]ly3 b none ( ^! is ! fact3 !re=e ! _w is n et]nal4' ,if "s ?+s 7 diff]5t ! w4 w\ld be et]nal f :at !y are ---------------------------------------- -------------- ,!y are n diff]5t ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',if ! _w exi/$ f et]nity1 !re w\ld be records prior to ! ,mosaic2 & if x 7 produc$ by *ance1 x w\ld n be> m>ks ( design3 !re are no records prior to ! ,mosaic1 & ! _w does be> m>ks ( design3 !re=e x nei!r exi/$ f et]nity1 nor is x ! "w ( *ance4' ,two !orems are "h mix$ toge!r1 bo? fallacies ( contra/-- ,exi/5ce ( records w\ld prove ! w4 et]n4 ---------------------------------------- ------- ,records d n exi/ ! w4 is non-et]nal ,non-exi/5ce ( m>ks wd4 pr4 w4 made by *ance ---------------------------------------- --------- ,! m>ks exi/ w4 0 n made by *ance 999999 ',if ?is man 7 wise1 he w\ld n speak irrev]5tly ( ,scripture 9 je/2 & if he 7 good he w\ld n d s 9 e>ne/2 b he does x1 ei!r 9 je/ or e>ne/2 !re=e he is ei!r n wise or n good4' ,z x /&s ?is is q circul>1 b x might be r5d]$ valid by g5]alisation3-- ,,vi4 ,to speak irrev4 ( ,scr4 9 indicates t a man is n je/ or e>ne/ wise or n good ---------------------------------------- ----------------- ,?is man does x we mu/ inf] t he is n w4 or n g4 999999 ',if virtue 7 a habit wor? acquir+1 x mu/ ensure ei!r p[]1 or weal?1 or hon\r1 or pleasure2 b virtue ensures none ( ^!2 !re=e virtue is n a habit wor? atta9+4' ,fallacy ( contra/-- ,i4 ,:at ensures is wor? ---------------------------- ,v4 does n ensure ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',if m5 are n likely to be influ5c$ 9 ! p]=mance ( a kn[n duty by tak+ an oa? to p]=m x1 ! oa?s commonly adm9i/]$ are sup]flu\s2 if !y are likely to be s influ5c$1 ev]yone %\ld be made to take an oa? to behave rightly ?r\gh\t 8 life2 b "o or o!r mu/ be ! case2 !re=e ei!r ! oa?s commonly adm9i/]$ are sup]flu\s1 or ev]yone %\ld be made to take an oa? to behave rightly ?r\gh\t 8 life4'--,?is w be m intelligible if contract$ ?us3 ,if oa?s fail to influ5ce !y are sup]flu\s2 if !y influ5ce !y %\ld be obligatory2 b !y ei!r influ5ce or d n2 !re=e !y are ei!r sup]flu\s or %\ld be obligatory4 ,!re is no argum5t2 ! alt]native conclusions m]ely repeat ! alt]native prec$5ts4 999999 ',if virtue is volunt>y1 vice is volunt>y2 b virtue is volunt>y2 !re=e s is vice4' 7,ari/4 ,e?4 ,bk4 ,,iii4 quot$ by ,:ately47 ,?is is a circul> way ( say+ t we believe x to be a fact t vice is volunt>y4 ,! argum5tative =m is probably suppos$ to give ! ass]tion great] weight ?an x w\ld h if express$ z a p]ceptual judgm5t4 999999 ,?is is valid argum5t1 accord+ to ,hamilton--',if man 7 suit$ to live out ( society1 he w\ld ei!r be a god or a bea/2 b man is nei!r a god nor a bea/2 !re=e he is n suit$ to live out ( society4'--,x has faults ( contra/ & tautology4 ,i4 ,only gods & bea/s are suit$ ------------------------------------ ,man is nei!r g4 nor b4 ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',if iron is impure1 x is brittle2 b ?is iron is impure2 !re=e x is brittle4'--,a valid dogmatic argum5t4 ,i4 ,impure iron is brittle ----------------------------------- ,?is iron is imp4 x mu/ be br4 999999 ',if ! wea!r is f9e1 we %all g into ! c\ntry2 n[ ! wea!r is f9e1 !re=e we %all g into ! c\ntry4'--,we nev] get beyond ! simple judgm5t t our go+ into ! c\ntry is associat$ ) f9e wea!r4 999999 ,! foll[+ is valid3--',z (t5 z ! wea!r is f9e1 my bro!r has a habit ( go+ into ! c\ntry2 if ! wea!r be f9e to-morr[ ,i inf] t he w g into ! c\ntry4' ,"h a p>ticul> hypo!tical case is illu/rat$ by ref]5ce to a g5]al habit4 999999 ',z (t5 z ! wea!r is f9e my bro!r goes into ! c\ntry2 if x be n f9e to-morr[ ,i conclude t he w n g into ! c\ntry4'--,a fallacy ( contra/3 we are n in=m$ 9 ! antec$5ts :at ! bro!r does on wet days4 999999 ',if !re are %>p]s 9 ! company we ought n to gamble2 b !re are no %>p]s 9 ! company2 !re=e we ought to gamble4' ,i4 ,pres5ce ( %4 =bids to gamble ---------------------------------- ,abs5ce ( %4 ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',logic z x 0 cultivat$ by ! s*oolm5 prov$ a fruitless /udy2 !re=e logic z x is cultivat$ at ! pres5t day mu/ be a fruitless /udy likewise4'--,we mu/ take ! conclusion z valid1 until we "k 9 :at respects mod]n logic is sup]ior to s*ola/ic logic4 999999 ',few treatises ( sci5ce convey important tru?s1 )\t any admixture ( error1 9 a p]spicu\s & int]e/+ =m3 !re=e ?\gh a treatise w\ld des]ve mu* att5tion :i* %\ld possess su* excell5ce1 x is pla9 t few treatises ( sci5ce d des]ve mu* att5tion4' ,?is means no m ?an t treatises ( a c]ta9 excell5ce w\ld des]ve att5tion1 & t !re are few ( !m4 ,!re is no argum5t4 999999 ',"s objects ( great beauty answ] no o!r purpose b to gratify ! sight3 _m fl[]s h great beauty2 & _m ( !m accord+ly answ] no o!r purpose ?an to gratify ! sight4' ,i4 ,"s obj4 :i* answ] are beautiful -------------------------------------- ,_m fl[]s are beaut4 ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',none b ,:ites are civilis$2 ! anci5t ,g]mans 7 ,:ites2 !re=e !y 7 civilis$4' ,i4 ,all civilis$ nations are ,:ites --------------------------------- ,anc4 ,g]4 7 ,:4 ,n4 ,c4 999999 ',wilkes 0 a fav\rite ) ! populace2 he :o is a fav\rite ) ! populace mu/ und]/& h[ to manage !m2 he :o und]/&s h[ to manage !m mu/ be well acqua9t$ ) _! "*2 he :o is well acqua9t$ ) _! "* mu/ hold !m 9 contempt2 !re=e ,wilkes mu/ h held ! populace 9 contempt4' ,fav\rites mu/ kn4 h[ to ,he :o kn4 h[ mu/ be manage to manage acqua9t$ ---------------------------------------- --------------------------- ,w4 0 a fav4 he knew h[ to man4 ,w4 knew he 0 acq4 ,he :o is acq4 mu/ despise ------------------------------------ ,w4 0 acq4 he mu/ h desp4 999999 ',some?+ has exi/$ f et]nity4 ,= s9ce some?+ n[ is1 x is manife/ t some?+ always 04 ,o!rwise ! ?+s t n[ are mu/ h ris5 out ( no?+1 absolutely & )\t cause4 ,:i* is a pla9 contradiction 9 t]ms4 ,= to say a ?+ is produc$1 & yet t !re is no cause at all ( t production1 is to say t some?+ is effect$ :5 x is effect$ by no?+1 t is1 at ! same "t :5 x is n effect$ at all4 ,:atev] exi/s has a cause ( its exi/5ce1 ei!r 9 ! necessity ( its own nature1 & !n x mu/ h be5 ( itself et]nal3 or 9 ! w ( "s o!r be+1 & !n t o!r be+ mu/1 at lea/ 9 ! ord] ( nature & causality1 h exi/$ be=e x4' ,9 ?is !orem we h a case--',some?+ is'2 & a conclusion--',some?+ has exi/$ f et]nity4' ,! reason] seeks a cr$ible or conceivable prec$5t by :i* to connect t conclusion ) ! case4 ,we are (f]$ a *oice ( two !orems4 ,! fir/ is unt5able1 = we h nev] _h ! exp]i5ce t is giv5 z prec$5t2 x is also tautological1 z ! 'some?+' ( ! case is ! ':atev]' ( ! prec$5t4 ,v4 ,:atev] exi/s 9 ! necessity has exi/$ f et]nity ( its own nature ---------------------------------------- --------------------------- ',some?+' exi/s 9 ! necessity x has exi/$ f et]nity ( its own nature ,x is n inconceivable t some?+ %\ld be self-exi/5t1 b we "k no?+ z to its be+ et]nal4 ,we are n famili> en\gh ) self-exi/5t ?+s & et]nal ?+s to w>rant u 9 ass]t+ dogmatically t :]e ! fir/ quality is1 !re also mu/ be ! second4 ,! next !orem is t ev]y?+ mu/ be caus$1 & t causation involves a regressum ad inf9itum4 ,on ?is pr9ciple !re mu/ h be5 ?+s = an et]nity backw>ds4 ,accord+ to ! !ory ( causation giv5 9 section ,,xxvii1 a true beg9n+ is rea*$ :5 we discov] ! motive1 design & p[] t produc$ an effect4 ,x is n necess>y to ask next :at caus$ t motive1 design & p[]4 ,! inf9ite regress is applicable only to mat]ial sequ5ce1 9 :i* !re is no prop] beg9n+ or end4 ,! au?or ( ! above argum5t seems to be try+ to comb9e ! notion ( causation by w ) t ( inf9ite regress4 ,b 8 language is too obscure to make x c]ta9 :at he means exactly4 999999 ,! ?ree foll[+ !orems--9 a dilut$ =m--occur 9 an o!rwise excell5t "w on ! politics & social life ( ! anci5t ,greeks4 ',! ,a!nians :o oppos$ ! union ( ,greece & ,mac$onia 7 old m51 & ! result 0 mis*iev\s2 o!r simil> in/ances are f\nd 9 hi/ory2 !re=e ! gov]nm5t ( old m5 is always mis*iev\s4'--,a fallacy ( false g5]ality4 ,ev]ybody kn[s t "s old m5 h be5 wise gov]nors4 ,cic]o1 f 8 exp]i5ce1 drew ! opposite conclusion--t ! only safe rul]s 7 old m54 ',all old political lead]s are mis*iev\s2 ,glad/one is old2 !re=e he is to be consid]$ politically mis*iev\s4'--,ev5 7 ! prec$5t n false ! argum5t is sup]flu\s1 = ! effect ( ,glad/one's politics is n[ matt] ( fact or hi/ory4 ',glad/one is politically mis*iev\s2 he advocates ,home ,rule = ,irel&2 !re=e ,iri% ,home ,rule mu/ be mis*iev\s4'--,a fallacy ( division3 a political lead] might on ! :ole be mis*iev\s1 b 8 measures ne$ n on t acc\nt be ea* & e "o mis*iev\s4 ,if dialectic 7 taught g5]ally & on a rational me?od1 a responsible au?or w\ld avoid bad reason+ ( ?is sort z c>efully z he avoids bad gramm>1 vulg> imag]y1 or faulty ari?metic4 99 99 99 99 99 99 ,transcrib]'s note3 ,punctuation has be5 correct$ )\t comm5t4 ,! spell+ 9 ?is book is t f\nd 9 ! ,ox=d ,engli% ,diction>y 7,,o$74 ,page #gh3 'com=mable' correct$ to 'con=mable' ,! foll[+ is an argum5t con=mable to ! above rules4 ,page #ii3 un-ext5d$1 im-mat]ial1 im-pond]able ,! au?or us$ hyph5s 9 ! above words = emphasis4 ,o!r in/ances ( hyph5s us$ = emphasis occur 9 ! book4 ,o!r in/ances ( hyph5at$ & unhyph5at$ words occur 9 ! book4 ,page #afd3 'premiss' is a v>iant ( 'premise' 7,,o$71 :i* occurs m frequ5tly 9 ! book4 ,page #baf3 'inclose is a v>iant ( 'enclose' 7,,o$74 ,all ! fi% t ! net inclos$ 7 an indiscrim9ate4444