,,thinking ,,as ,a ,,science1 ,,by ,,henry ,,hazlitt ,,thinking ,,as ,a ,,science ,,by ,,henry ,,hazlitt ,illustration ,,new ,,york ,e4 ,p4 ,,dutton ,,company #fha ,,fifth ,,avenue ,copyright1 #aiaf ,,by ,e4 ,p4 ,,dutton ,,company ,,contents ,i ,the ,neglect of ,thinking #a ,,ii ,thinking ,with ,method #aa ,,iii ,a ,few ,cautions #ea ,,iv ,concentration #fh ,v ,prejudice and ,uncertainty #ii ,,vi ,debate and ,conversation #abi ,,vii ,thinking and ,reading #ace ,,viii ,writing ,one's ,thoughts #aia ,,ix ,things ,worth ,thinking ,about #bjg ,x ,thinking as an ,art #bcg ,,xi ,books on ,thinking #bdh ,,thinking ,,as ,a ,,science ,i ,,the ,,neglect ,,of ,,thinking ,every man knows there are evils in the world which need setting right4 ,every man has pretty definite ideas as to what these evils are4 ,but to most men one in particular stands out vividly4 ,to some1 in fact1 this stands out with such startling vividness that they lose sight of other evils1 or look upon them as the natural consequences of their own particular evil-in-chief4 ,to the ,socialist this evil is the capitalistic system2 to the prohibitionist it is intemperance2 to the feminist it is the subjection of women2 to the clergyman it is the decline of religion2 to ,andrew ,carnegie it is war2 to the staunch ,republican it is the ,democratic ,party1 and so on1 ad infinitum4 ,i1 too1 have a pet little evil1 to which in more passionate moments ,i am apt to attribute all the others4 ,this evil is the neglect of thinking4 ,and when ,i say thinking ,i mean real thinking1 independent thinking1 hard thinking4 ,you protest4 ,you say men are thinking more now than they ever were4 ,you bring out the almanac to prove by statistics that illiteracy is declining4 ,you point to our magnificent libraries4 ,you point to the multiplication of books4 ,you show beyond a doubt that people are reading more now than ever before in all history4 4 4 4 ,very well1 exactly4 ,that is just the trouble4 ,most people1 when confronted with a problem1 immediately acquire an inordinate desire to 8read-up0 on it4 ,when they get stuck mentally1 the first thing such people do is to run to a book4 ,confess it1 have you not often been in a waiting room or a ,pullman1 noticed people all about you reading1 and finding yourself without any reading matter1 have you not wished that you had some8--something to 8occupy your mind08 ,and did it ever occur to you that you had within you the power to occupy your mind1 and do it more profitably than all those assiduous readers8 ,briefly1 did it ever occur to you to think8 ,of course you 8thought0--in a sense4 ,thinking means a variety of things4 ,you may have looked out of your train window while passing a field1 and it may have occurred to you that that field would make an excellent baseball diamond4 ,then you 8thought0 of the time when you played baseball1 8thought0 of some particular game perhaps1 8thought0 how you had made a grand stand play or a bad muff1 and how one day it began to rain in the middle of the game1 and the team took refuge in the carriage shed4 ,then you 8thought0 of other rainy days rendered particularly vivid for some reason or other1 or perhaps your mind came back to considering the present weather1 and how long it was going to last4 4 4 4 ,and of course1 in one sense you were 8thinking40 ,but when ,i use the word thinking1 ,i mean thinking with a purpose1 with an end in view1 thinking to solve a problem4 ,i mean the kind of thinking that is forced on us when we are deciding on a course to pursue1 on a life work to take up perhaps2 the kind of thinking that was forced on us in our younger days when we had to find a solution to a problem in mathematics1 or when we tackled psychology in college4 ,i do not mean 8thinking0 in snatches1 or holding petty opinions on this subject and on that4 ,i mean thought on significant questions which lie outside the bounds of your narrow personal welfare4 ,this is the kind of thinking which is now so rare--so sadly needed6 ,of course before this can be revived we must arouse a desire for it4 ,we must arouse a desire for thinking for its own sake2 solving problems for the mere sake of solving problems4 ,but a mere desire for thinking1 praiseworthy as it is1 is not enough4 ,we must know how to think1 and to that end we must search for those rules and methods of procedure which will most help us in thinking creatively1 originally1 and not least of all surely1 correctly4 ,when they think at all1 the last thing men think about is their own thoughts4 ,every sensible man realizes that the perfection of a mechanical instrument depends to some extent upon the perfection of the tools with which it is made4 ,no carpenter would expect a perfectly smooth board after using a dented or chipped plane4 ,no gasolene engine manufacturer would expect to produce a good motor unless he had the best lathes obtainable to help him turn out his product4 ,no watchmaker would expect to construct a perfectly accurate timepiece unless he had the most delicate and accurate tools to turn out the cogs and screws4 ,before any specialist produces an instrument he thinks of the tools with which he is to produce it4 ,but men reflect continually on the most complex problems--problems of vital importance to them--and expect to obtain satisfactory solutions1 without once giving a thought to the manner in which they go about obtaining those solutions2 without a thought to their own mind1 the tool which produces those solutions4 ,surely this deserves at least some systematic consideration4 ,some remarks of ,ella ,wheeler ,wilcox under this head will bear quoting3 8,human thinking is still in as great a state of disorder and jumble as language was before the alphabet1 music before the scale was discovered1 printing before ,gutenberg1 or mathematics before ,pythagoras formulated its laws40 8,this systematization of all thought10 she tells us1 would be 8a more far reaching improvement than all the others1 for it will do for education1 health1 economics1 government1 etc41 what the alphabet did for language1 movable type for printing and literature1 the scale for music1 and the rules of arithmetic for calculation4 ,being the exact counterpart of these in its particular field1 its mission1 like theirs1 will be to bring order out of chaos40 ,i believe ,miss ,wilcox exaggerates matters4 ,incidentally ,i for one do not pretend to have discovered anything revolutionary4 ,but the importance of the subject warrants its formulation into as near scientific form as we can bring it4 ,i beg no one to get frightened4 ,science does not necessarily mean test tubes and telescopes4 ,i mean science in its broadest sense2 and in this sense it means nothing more than organized knowledge4 ,if we are to find rules and methods of procedure1 these methods must come from somewhere--must be based on certain principles--and these principles can come only from close1 systematic investigation4 ,it may indeed be urged that we can think best by disregarding all 8rules10 by not paying any attention to method4 ,but the man who maintains this must give reasons2 and once he attempts this he himself is bordering closely on the science of the matter4 ,in short1 the settlement of even this question is part of the science of thinking4 ,and what is to be the nature of this science8 ,for our purposes1 all sciences may be divided into two kinds3 positive and normative4 ,a positive science investigates the nature of things as they are4 ,it deals simply with matters of fact4 ,such a science is physics1 chemistry1 psychology4 ,a normative science is one which studies things as they ought to be4 ,as the name implies1 it seeks to establish a norm or pattern which ought to be adhered to4 ,it studies means of reaching desired ends4 ,to this class belong such sciences as ethics1 education1 agriculture4 ,now these normative sciences1 with the exception of ethics1 are nearly always referred to either as 8arts0 or 8applied sciences40 ,to both of these terms ,i technically but strenuously object4 ,i object to the term 8art0 to designate any set of organized rules for doing a thing1 because 8art0 also means the actual doing of that thing4 ,and this thing may be done1 and often is done1 in total ignorance of the rules governing it4 ,a man may possess the art of swimming--he may be able to swim--without any previous instruction1 without any knowledge of how he ought to hold his body1 arms and legs2 just as a dog may do the same thing4 ,i object also to the term 8applied science10 because to me this term implies that the science it refers to is based on one positive science only4 ,i can think of no so-called applied science which is so based4 ,hygiene1 not alone dependent on physiology1 must derive some of its rules from the chemistry of foods1 as well as from the sciences of sanitation and ventilation1 themselves normative4 ,agriculture is based not only on biology and botany1 but on chemistry and meteorology4 ,the science of thinking1 then1 if such a science there be1 is normative4 ,its purpose is to find those methods which will help us to think constructively and correctly4 ,one more distinction and our preliminaries are over4 ,there are two other sciences with which the science of thinking is liable to become confused2 one positive1 the other normative4 ,the positive science is that branch of psychology which deals with the reasoning process and examines the basis of belief4 ,we shall make frequent use of this science in trying to find rules for thinking1 but it will not be the only science we shall use1 nor will that science be the subject of this book4 ,the normative science with which the science of thinking may become confused is logic4 ,indeed1 logic has sometimes been called the science of thinking4 ,now for our purposes logic is a part of the science of thinking1 but it is not the part which we are primarily to consider4 ,its function is merely negative2 it consists in leading us from error4 ,the part of the science of thinking in which we are interested deals with those positive rules which will help to make us creative thinkers4 4 4 4 ,our ship is headed for the port ,truth4 ,our mind is the engine1 the science of thinking the propeller1 and logic the rudder4 ,without our engine1 the mind1 the propeller of the science of thinking1 which transforms our mental energy most effectively into motion1 would be useless4 ,without the propeller1 which gives motion1 the rudder of logic would be useless4 ,but all three are needed to reach our goal4 99 99 99 99 99 ,and now ,i must bespeak a little patience4 ,the next chapter1 and the one following it1 are going to deal very largely with method and methods4 ,they will touch on classification1 and a lot of other things to which the plain man has an aversion2 to which1 at least1 he usually evinces no very active interest4 ,but it is necessary to consider these things in order to make our study complete4 ,,ii ,,thinking ,,with ,,method ,most of us1 at those rare intervals when we think at all1 do so in a slipshod sort of way4 ,if we come across a mental difficulty we try to get rid of it in almost any kind of hit or miss manner4 ,even those few of us who think occasionally for the mere sake of thinking1 generally do so without regard for method--indeed1 are often unconscious that method could be applied to our thought4 ,but what is meant by method8 ,i may best explain by an example4 ,from somewhere or other1 a man gets hold of the idea that the proper subjects are not being taught in our schools and colleges4 ,he asks himself what the proper subjects would be4 ,he considers how useless his knowledge of ,greek and ,latin has been4 ,he decides that these two subjects should be eliminated4 ,then he thinks how he would have been helped in business by a knowledge of bookkeeping1 and he concludes that this subject deserves a place in the curriculum4 ,he has recently received a letter from a college friend containing some errors in spelling4 ,he is convinced that this branch of knowledge is being left in undeserved neglect4 ,or he is impressed by the spread of unsound theories of money among the poorer classes1 and he believes that everybody should receive a thorough course in economics and finance4 ,and so he rambles on1 now on this subject1 now on that4 ,compare this haphazard1 aimless thinking with that of the man of method4 ,this man is confronted with the same general situation as our first thinker1 but he makes his problem a different one4 ,he first asks himself what end he has in view4 ,he discovers that he is primarily trying to find out not so much--what subjects should be taught in the schools8 as--what knowledge is of most worth8 ,he puts the problem definitely before himself in this latter form4 ,he then sees that the problem--what knowledge is of most worth81 implies that what is desired is not to find what subjects are of worth and what are not1 but what is the relative value of subjects4 ,his next step1 obviously1 is to discover a standard by which the relative value of subjects can be determined2 and this1 let us say1 he finds in the help a knowledge of these subjects gives to complete living4 ,having decided this1 he next classifies in the order of their importance the activities which constitute human life1 and follows this by classifying subjects as they prepare for these activities4#a ,needless to say1 the results obtained by this thinker will be infinitely more satisfactory than those arrived at by his unsystematic brother4 ,method1 then1 is essential4 ,but how are we to apply it in all cases8 ,now there are methods without number1 and in many cases a problem will require a method all its own2 but we here purpose to take up only those most general in application4 ,before considering these methods of thinking1 however1 it would be well to ask ourselves what thinking is4 ,as stated before1 the term is loosely used to cover a wide range of mental processes4 ,these processes we may roughly divide into memory1 imagination and reasoning4 ,it is the last only with which we have to deal4 ,i admit that development of the memory is desirable4 ,i admit that development of the imagination is equally desirable4 ,but they are not the subject of this book4 ,by 8thinking0 ,i mean reasoning4 ,and our present purpose is to find the nature of this process4 ,modern psychologists tell us that all reasoning begins in perplexity1 hesitation1 doubt4 8,the process of reasoning is one of problem solving4 4 4 4 ,the occasion for the reasoning is always a thwarted purpose40#b ,it is essential we keep this in mind4 ,it differs from the popular conception even more than may appear at first sight4 ,if a man were to know everything he could not think4 ,nothing would ever puzzle him1 his purposes would never be thwarted1 he would never experience perplexity or doubt1 he would have no problems4 ,if we are to conceive of ,god as an ,all-,knower1 we cannot conceive of ,him as a ,thinking ,being4 ,thinking is reserved for beings of finite intelligence4 ,were we to study the origin and evolution of thinking1 we would doubtless find that thinking arose in just this way--from thwarted purposes4 ,if our lives and the lives of our animal ancestors had always run smoothly1 if our every desire were immediately satisfied1 if we never met an obstacle in anything we tried to do1 thinking would never have appeared on this planet4 ,but adversity forced us to it4 ,tickle a frog's left leg1 and his right leg will immediately fly up and scratch it4 ,the action is merely what psychologists would call a 8reflex40 ,absolutely no thinking takes place3 the frog would do the same thing if you removed its brain4 ,and if you tickle its right leg its left leg would fly up to scratch4 ,but if you tickled both legs at once they could not both fly up and scratch each other4 ,it would be a physical impossibility4 ,here1 then1 is a difficulty4 ,the frog hesitates2 thinking steps upon the scene4 ,after mature deliberation the frog solves his problem3 he holds his left leg still while he scratches it with his right1 then he holds his right leg still and scratches that with his left4 ,we cannot1 then1 think on 8general principles40 ,to try this is like attempting to chew laughing gas4 ,to think at all requires a purpose1 no matter how vague4 ,the best thinking1 however1 requires a definite purpose1 and the more definite this purpose the more definite will be our thinking4 ,therefore in taking up any special line of thought1 we must first find just what our end or purpose is1 and thus get clearly in mind what our problems are4 ,advising a man to ask himself what his problems are may seem absurd4 ,but it is just this confusion as to what they want to know which has driven men into error time and time again4 ,the history of the never-ending philosophical controversy between 8materialism0 and 8idealism0 is largely a history of different ways of stating the issue2 the progress made is mainly due to the increasing definiteness with which it has been stated4 ,one of the most frequent sources of confusion in stating questions is in failure to distinguish between what is and what ought to be4 ,considering woman suffrage a man will ask himself 8,what is woman's sphere810 when he really wants to know not what woman's sphere actually is1 but what it ought to be4 ,our first step1 then1 is to get our problem or problems clearly in mind1 and to state them as definitely as possible4 ,a problem properly stated is a problem partly solved4 ,what we will do next depends on the nature of the question4 ,in the example 8,what knowledge is of most worth80 we proceeded to look for a criterion of worthiness4 ,and this was really a re-stating of the question4 ,for instead of asking ourselves 8,what knowledge is of most worth810 we began asking 8,what knowledge best prepares for complete living80 ,our next move was to classify4 ,this is essential not only to systematic reasoning but to thinking of any kind4 ,classification is the process of grouping objects according to common qualities4 ,but as almost all objects differ in some qualities and almost all have some qualities in common1 it follows that1 contrary to common belief1 there is no one classification absolutely essential to any group of objects4 ,an infinite number of classifications may be made1 because every object has an infinite number of attributes1 depending on the aspect we take of it4 ,nor is any one aspect of a thing 8truer0 than any other4 ,the aspect we take depends entirely on the purpose we have in mind or the problem we wish to solve4 ,as ,william ,james pointed out3 8,now that ,i am writing it is essential that ,i conceive my paper as a surface for inscription4 ,if ,i failed to do that ,i should have to stop my work4 ,but if ,i wished to light a fire and no other materials were by1 the essential way of conceiving the paper would be as combustible material2 and ,i need then have no thought of any of its other destinations4 ,it is really all that it is3 a combustible1 a writing surface1 a thin thing1 a hydrocarbonaceous thing1 a thing eight inches one way and ten another1 a thing just one furlong east of a certain stone in my neighbor's field1 an ,american thing1 etc41 etc41 ad infinitum40#c ,and if the reader insist that these qualities are merely 8accidental10 and that what the thing really is1 is just paper and nothing else1 the reply is that the reader is intellectually petrified2 that though 8paper0 may be our commonest title for it and may suggest our usual purpose with it1 yet that purpose and this title and the properties which this title suggest have in reality nothing sacramental about them4 ,so because you have classified something from one aspect do not imagine that you are necessarily precluded from classifying it from any other4 ,a man who is studying the theory of money may divide the medium of exchange into standard money and credit currency4 ,but this need not keep him from viewing it as coins1 government notes1 and bank currency1 nor should it prevent him from classifying it into1 say 7#a7 hand-to-hand money1 7#b7 written or printed orders of one party to pay specified sums to another1 and 7#c7 book accounts4#d ,all these classifications will be true2 all may be useful for a full comprehension4 ,every classification should of course be logical2 but it is far more essential that it be utilizable4 ,and while we are treating of utility1 we might note that this pragmatic method can be applied with profit to nearly all our positive problems4 ,before starting to solve a question--while deciding1 for instance1 on the validity of some nice distinction in logic--we should ask ourselves1 8,what practical difference will it make if ,i hold one opinion or the other8 ,how will my belief influence my action80--7using the word 8action0 in its broadest sense74 ,this may often lead our line of inquiry into more fruitful channels1 keep us from making fine but needless distinctions1 help us to word our question more relevantly1 and lead us to make distinctions where we really need them4 ,we are now ready to consider in order a number of constructive methods in thinking4 ,one method applicable to almost all problems is what we may call either the deductive or the priori method4 ,this method reaches a conclusion without observation or experiment4 ,it consists in reasoning from previous experience or from established principles to particular facts4 ,it may1 however1 be used to confirm observation and experiment as well as to take their place4 ,take the all important questions in biology of whether or not specific characteristics acquired by an animal during its life time are inherited by offspring4 ,the a priori method would examine the structures of the body1 the germ plasm from which the offspring develops1 and the relation between them1 and would ask just how a specific change in the body could affect the germ4 ,if it were found that the tissues that are to continue the race were set off so completely from the structures of the body as to make inconceivable any manner by which they could be influenced by changes in these structures1 then this method would decide that acquired characteristics are not transmitted4 ,let us take another example4 ,both the supporters and opponents of woman suffrage have often decided the question without consulting at all the actual results achieved in the ,states where women vote4 ,they have settled the question to their own satisfaction merely on a priori grounds4 ,they have considered woman's supposed mental qualities as compared with man's1 and have decided on her fitness for the ballot solely from these considerations4 ,it must be remembered1 however1 that before women were admitted to suffrage anywhere1 deductive or a priori reasoning was the only kind possible4 ,it is often helpful to look at a problem from the viewpoint of different sciences4 ,a problem in political science will very likely have an economic aspect1 whether it concerns taxation1 tariff1 trusts or the ownership of land1 and so we may look at the question solely from the viewpoint of economics4 ,but the problem may also have an ethical aspect4 ,if it is proposed to pass a universal prohibition law1 you may ask1 8,has the ,government the right to interfere in this way with personal liberty80 ,again1 we could take a psychological view3 we would decide from our knowledge of human nature just what the effect of an alcohol prohibition law would be--whether it would not drive men to even more dangerous drugs1 such as morphine and opium4 ,and now we come to a whole host of effective methods1 all of which may be classed as comparative4 ,the comparative method is as old as thought itself1 but it is strange that even scientists did not begin to use it consciously and consistently until almost the present generation4 ,nowhere is it better illustrated than in modern psychology4 ,most of the so-called branches of psychology are merely different forms of the comparative method of treatment4 8,abnormal psychology0 is merely a comparison of abnormal mental types with normal mental types for the light they throw on each other4 8,child study0 is a comparison of the mind of the child with that of the adult4 8,animal psychology0 is a comparison of the actions of animals with each other and with those of man4 ,and none of these methods is of any value except in so far as it makes use of comparison4 ,often consciously used in the consideration of problems is the so-called historical method4 ,this method1 as its name implies1 consists in obtaining knowledge of a thing by considering its past record4 ,the word history is popularly used in so narrow a sense1 however1 being restricted only to the history of nations1 and often merely to the political history of nations1 that we can avoid confusion by calling this method the evolutionary4 ,in the final analysis the method is comparative1 for it really consists in comparing a thing at one period of development with itself at another period4 ,let us take our example from political science4 ,the historical method1 in its popular sense1 has been so much used here1 even to the exclusion of other methods1 that it would seem needless to speak of it4 ,but often the method has been abused and often it has not been given broad enough treatment4 ,it traces the growth of an institution1 or of an idea--personal liberty1 say1--through successive periods4 ,it notes what the path has been1 and judges of the probable future tendency4 ,but a far broader outlook than we get from this narrowly conceived 8historical0 method is furnished by evolutionary sociology4 ,here we inquire into the origin of society and of the various trades1 industries1 professions and pursuits of all kinds1 and to do this we go far into prehistoric times4 ,nowhere is the evolutionary method more strikingly seen than in biology4 ,since ,darwin's great theory was promulgated the science has gone forward by leaps and bounds4 ,we have derived untold benefit from a comparison of man and animals in the light of this hypothesis2 even study of the development of individual man has been aided4 ,the discovery of the fact of evolution constituted an incalculable advance1 but the method for study which it furnished was of even greater importance4 ,i have spoken of the comparison of man and animals 8in the light of this 7evolutionary7 hypothesis40 ,this brings us to a point which must be kept in mind in practically all observation4 ,we are often exhorted to 8observe40 ,presumably we are to do this 8on general principles40 ,such advice is about as foolish as asking us to think on general principles4 ,imagine for the moment what would happen if you started right now to 8observe0 as much as you could4 ,you might begin with this book and notice the size of the type1 the amount of margin1 the quality of the paper1 the dimensions of the page1 the number of pages4 ,but you have by no means exhausted the number of properties possessed by this book4 ,you must observe that it is also combustible1 that it is destructible1 that it is machine made1 that it is ,american printed1 that it is such and such a price1 that it weighs so many ounces1 that it is flat1 that it is rectangular1 that its thickness is so much4 4 4 4 ,the absurdity is obvious4 ,if we started out merely to observe1 with no definite purpose in mind1 we could keep it up forever4 ,and get nowhere4 ,nine out of every ten observations would never be put to use4 ,we would be sinfully wasting our time4 ,to observe most profitably1 just as to think most profitably1 we must have a definite purpose4 ,this purpose must be to test the truth of a supposition4 ,a concrete example will make this clear4 ,a man has been shipwrecked on an island and believes himself to be alone there4 ,one day1 as he is walking along the beach1 he discovers footprints4 ,how did they get there8 ,his first assumption is that they are his own4 ,it occurs to him1 however1 that he had not been near this spot for over a week1 and that yesterday's storm would have washed any footprints away4 ,this objection is confirmed by making a footprint himself and comparing it with the one observed1 and noticing that they differ markedly4 ,the footprints being those of some one else1 how did the man who made them get there8 ,the first supposition is that he came in a boat4 ,the idea of a small boat is dismissed because of the assumed great distance of this island from other land4 ,therefore the man must have come in a large vessel4 ,but the footprints lead to a wet part of the sand and the tide is just going down4 ,in this case they are very recent--made not more than a half hour ago4 ,this being so the man who made them could not have had time to get back to any ship and sail out of sight4 ,if he came in a ship it should be still in view4 ,the discoverer of the footprints climbs a tree from which he can view the sea around the entire island4 ,he can sight no vessel4 ,the supposition or hypothesis that the unknown came in a ship is abandoned4 ,then the suggestion comes that the unknown has been on the island during the entire time that the shipwrecked man thought himself alone4 ,this suggestion is tested in a manner similar to the others4 4 4 4 ,the example sums up roughly the general process of all thought1 and brings out the motive and value of observation4 ,let us analyze it4 ,the first thing to happen is the arousal of a feeling of perplexity1 the appearance of a problem4 ,the man has been shambling along1 doubtless 8thinking0 in that loose sense referred to4 ,he has perhaps kicked several stones loose that would have set a geologist worrying1 and has picked branches from bushes which would have puzzled a botanist4 ,but this man has not had his curiosity aroused until he has come to these footprints4 ,his thinking starts with his perplexity4 ,after this doubt has been aroused the most obvious solution suggests itself--8my own footprints40 ,but if true1 this suggestion involves the co-existence of other facts1 some of which are known and some of which may be determined4 ,thus1 if they were his own footprints1 it must1 among other things1 necessarily follow 7#a7 that he had been at that spot before1 7#b7 that nothing had happened since that time to remove the prints1 7#c7 that the footprints corresponded to his own4 ,the first consequence involved--that he had been there before--was a fact1 but the others were not1 and so the suggestion was dropped4 ,then a second hypothesis occurred--8the man came in a ship0--and this was tried out in a similar way4 ,notice that in each case the consequences dependent on the truth of the suggestion are tried out 7#a7 by memory1 7#b7 by observation or experiment4 ,memory came when he thought of the last time he had walked near the beach and of yesterday's storm4 ,observation came when he compared his footprint with the one seen1 when he followed the footprints along the sand and noticed where they led1 when he climbed a tree and looked for a ship4 ,there were a number of other things which he could have observed4 ,he might have noticed the texture of the sand1 what kind of a tree he was climbing1 what sort of clouds were in the sky4 ,but he did not observe these interesting things simply because they would throw no light on the truth or falsity of his supposition4 ,in another problem one of these facts might have been of value4 ,it is almost possible to sum up the whole process of thinking as the occurrence of suggestions for the solution of difficulties and the testing out of those suggestions4 ,the suggestions or suppositions are tested by observation1 memory1 experiment4 ,supposition and observation alternate4 ,the first facts observed--in the case foregoing1 the footprints--make the problem1 they suggest the supposition4 ,a supposition is that the man came in a boat4 ,if the man came in a boat such and such would be the case--the boat would still be visible1 etc4 ,if the boat is not visible the supposition is given up and another one made2 if the boat is visible the supposition is confirmed4 ,this is a case of simple and rudimentary thinking1 but it illustrates roughly the process of thought on even the most complicated problems of science4 ,the methods we have been discussing may all be considered simply as means for helping good suggestions occur to us4 ,let us illustrate by considering a few methods of rather restricted application4 ,we are often aided in the solution of a problem by asking its opposite4 ,if we ask ourselves 8,what constitutes gracefulness80 we may find ourselves at a loss for suggestions1 because gracefulness always seems 8so natural40 ,but if we ask its opposite1 8,what constitutes awkwardness810 suggestions are more apt to occur4 ,if we find1 for instance1 that awkwardness consists in undue bodily effort in making a movement1 we may assume that gracefulness consists in ease of movement4 ,in the same way the question of what makes us forget may be helped by asking ourselves what makes us remember1 and light may be thrown on the causes of success in business and in life by a study of the causes of failure4 ,the method of analogy likewise encourages suggestions4 ,analogy consists in noting certain likenesses between things1 and assuming that they also possess other common qualities4 ,striking use of analogy is made in dealing with the planet ,mars4 ,at each pole there are great white patches4 ,the size of these varies markedly with the seasons1 which suggests that like the earth1 ,mars has great areas of ice and snow at its two poles which melt and re-form4 ,the general surface is reddish1 but three-eighths of it is covered by blue-green tracts1 and these are usually inferred to be seas4 ,these again are connected by an intricate system of blue-green lines1 which some scientists believe to be canals1 but on this there is much controversy4 ,in ,mars we have at once an illustration of the possibilities and dangers of analogy4 ,in the whole discussion of constructive method thus far1 ,i have left out the two most common and useful methods of all4 ,the first of these we may designate by a somewhat formidable title3 empirical observation4 ,empirical1 at least for our present purposes1 means merely that which comes within experience4 ,but the term is generally opposed to scientific4 ,thus ,dewey gives an example3 8,a says1 #8,it will probably rain to-morrow4' ,b asks1 #8,why do you think so8' ,and ,a replies1 #8,because the sky was lowering at sunset4' ,when ,b asks1 #8,what has that to do with it8' ,a responds1 #8,i do not know1 but it generally does rain after such a sunset4' ,he does not perceive any connection between the appearance of the sky and the coming rain2 he is not aware of any continuity in the facts themselves--any law or principle1 as we usually say4 ,he simply1 from frequently recurring conjunction of the events1 has associated them so that when he sees one he thinks of the other40#e ,this1 however1 is not what ,i mean to imply by the term empirical observation4 ,i mean rather thinking on the basis merely of facts which occur in the natural course of events1 which have not been systematically produced by ourselves or others for the purpose of solving a problem4 ,logicians usually call this method simply observation1 and oppose it to experiment4 ,but ,i object to calling this simply observation because experiment itself is really observation1 only in one case we observe merely events which happen to occur1 and in the other we observe the results of events which we have made occur4 ,the true way of distinguishing these two methods would be to call one empirical observation1 and the other experimental observation4 ,this empirical method--if indeed ,i am justified in calling it a method--is the most common in all thinking4 ,to give examples of it would be to show how men generally think4 ,but the method has real value1 and may even be the most important of all1 for if we thought without it our ideas would doubtless be original1 but very dangerous4 ,let us apply it to some of the problems considered under other methods4 ,empirical observation is used where experiment is impossible--often1 unfortunately1 where experiment is merely inconvenient4 ,in political science the empirical method would consist in noting the effect of certain laws1--e4g41 tariffs of different countries and of the same country at different periods--and noting economic conditions at the time the different tariffs were in effect4 ,allowance would be made for other factors which could influence the country's economic condition and the effect of the tariff could then be determined4 ,the empirical method of dealing with meteorology1 the science of weather1 would consist in making a study of cloud formations1 wind velocity1 moisture in the air1 temperature1 etc41 and noting what conditions usually or perhaps invariably followed certain of these conditions4 ,from this1 conclusions could be drawn as to what weather to expect following certain conditions4 ,but valuable as empirical observation is1 and often as we must use it1 it should never be employed when we can experiment4 ,when the empirical method is rightly used allowance always has to be made for certain irrelevant factors4 ,but 8making allowances0 is always sheer guess work4 ,the experimental method consists not in making allowances for certain factors1 but in eliminating those factors4 ,in our example from political science experiment is practically impossible1 because the factors which may influence economic conditions are innumerable1 and even were they few1 no country could survive the dangers of being experimented upon--to say nothing of its permitting it4 ,experiment is similarly impossible in dealing with weather conditions directly4 ,it is impossible in astronomy4 ,but it could be applied quite easily to most questions4 ,suppose you wanted to determine beyond question which of two methods of teaching a given subject was the better4 ,we shall assume for the moment that you have unlimited time and money to experiment4 ,it may be thought that we could settle this simply by teaching one person according to one method and another person according to the other1 and that we could determine the relative merits of each method from the progress made by each pupil4 ,this1 however1 would be practically of no use whatever4 ,one pupil might be naturally brighter than the other1 and so would naturally learn quicker1 even were he taught by an inferior method4 ,to make the experiment of any use we should first take two groups of pupils--the larger the better4 ,for it is obvious that if we take a great number of pupils and place them in two groups the differences between the individuals will tend to offset one another4 ,let us say the subject is one in which the progress can be quantitatively measured1 say typewriting1 and let us suppose there are fifty pupils in each group4 ,if after a given time all the pupils in one group had attained a greater speed with accuracy than all the pupils in the other1 the test would be almost unquestionable4 ,this would be even more conclusive if the groups were reasonably well balanced4 ,for if all of one group were men and all of the other were boys1 the men might make more rapid progress than the boys even with a less efficient system4 ,but it should be easy to divide classes and groups so as to have a reasonable balance of intelligence between them4 ,the probable result of any experiment would be that in neither class would all the pupils make more progress than all the pupils of the other1 though you might find that the preponderating majority in one class improved faster than those in the other1 and this would probably be sufficient to indicate the superiority of one method1 even though one or two pupils in the second group progressed faster than one or two in the first4 ,i say 8probably0 because there are still many irrelevant factors which might influence the result4 ,for instance1 if you had a different teacher for each group1 one group might make greater progress not because of the method but because of the teacher4 ,this means either that one teacher should teach both groups1 or that we should multiply the number of groups and the number of teachers1 and have half the teachers teaching half the groups by one method1 and the other half teaching by the other method4 ,of course here too the more we could multiply the number the better it would be4 ,even then there might be some reasonable question as to the validity of the experiment1 for it might be that one method would tend to encourage faster progress at the beginning1 but that the other would lead to greater progress in the long run4 ,this could be determined only by carrying our experiment over a long period4 ,and we might still have irrelevant factors1 for the machines on which one group learnt to typewrite might be superior to those on which the other group learnt1 and this factor would have to be eliminated in a similar way to the others4 ,the experimental method has been well summed up by ,thomson and ,tait in their ,natural ,philosophy3 8,in all cases when a particular agent or cause is to be studied1 experiments should be arranged in such a way as to lead if possible to results depending on it alone2 or1 if this cannot be done1 they should be arranged so as to increase the effects due to the cause to be studied till these so far exceed the unavoidable concomitants1 that the latter may be considered as only disturbing1 not essentially modifying the effects of the principal agent40 ,in all experiments one must exercise ingenuity in finding other causes besides the one to be studied which may possibly influence a result1 and in eliminating these4 ,it might benefit the reader considerably if he were to think out for himself how he would apply experiment in its most thoroughgoing form to solve a given question1 say the inheritance of acquired characteristics4 99 99 99 99 99 ,i have now cited enough methods to at least indicate what 8thinking with method0 means4 ,to satisfy a certain human craving all of these have been named1 though sometimes arbitrarily4 ,of course each may have to be modified to some extent to adjust it to different problems4 ,i must repeat3 there are methods numberless1 and some problems will require methods all their own4 ,but what is important is that every problem should be dealt with by as many methods as possible4 ,doubtless you have used1 at some time or other in the course of your thinking1 nearly every one of the methods ,i have so far suggested4 ,but the point is not that you have never used these methods at all1 but that you have not used them often enough4 ,you were unaware what method you were using4 ,consequently you used it only occasionally4 ,you used it only when you stumbled on it accidentally4 ,to formulate methods is to bring them to your attention1 so that you may use them always1 thoroughly1 correctly1 consistently4 ,we have treated political science from most angles4 ,we have applied more than one method to several other problems4 ,to still further clarify1 exemplify and impress this point1 ,i shall show the application of method to one more subject4 ,suppose you wanted to invent a system of shorthand1 and wanted to make it as perfect as possible4 ,how would you go about it8 ,your first step should be to restate your question most advantageously4 ,you want to create certain characters or symbols1 which will 7#a7 take the shortest time to write1 7#b7 will be easily recognized by yourself or others1 even if written carelessly1 and 7#c7 which will not be so numerous or so complex as to be difficult to learn4 ,you may decide that such symbols would have even further requirements4 ,next you should decide on the methods to use in attacking your problem--this in order not to forget any4 ,now assume you have decided on these methods and that the first is the a priori4 ,your conclusion might be that it would be impossible to have a different symbol for every word1 and that it is necessary to have some sort of alphabet4 ,should this alphabet be based on that used in longhand8 ,that is1 should merely a simpler symbol stand in place of each letter8 ,or should a different symbol represent each sound8 ,or would it be possible to have a different elementary symbol for each syllable8 ,having decided the basis for your symbols or characters1 you will know at least approximately the number required4 ,your problem will then become that of making the characters as simple as possible1 so that they may be written most quickly2 and yet as different from each other as possible so that if written carelessly 7as they will be when written swiftly71 they may be easily recognized4 ,you might try writing down all the simplest symbols you can think of4 ,or you might ask yourself whether there is any fundamental geometrical figure from which you can derive your symbols4 ,or you might study the simplest and easiest movements of the hand1 and base your characters on these4 ,this a priori method is most apt of all to provoke real thinking4 ,it should therefore be taken up before any of the others4 ,not only is it best for making you think deeply1 but it will be more likely than any of the others to make you think originally4 ,however1 whether attended by great or little success1 this method should be followed by others4 ,not the least fruitful of these would be the evolutionary4 ,this1 of course1 would consist in studying the history of shorthand1 finding out the direction in which it has been tending1 and thus anticipating in some degree its future development4 ,as this method is comparative we would naturally be led from it to comparing the shorthand systems of to-day1 and assaying the good and bad qualities of each4 ,these could only be assayed if we knew something of shorthand theory1 and thus our experience with the deductive or a priori method would be of service4 ,implied in here is a method of different nature than any we have yet discussed1 but one of immense help4 ,in turning from the deductive method to a study of shorthand systems which others have developed1 you have an opportunity to compare the results of your own thinking with those obtained by others4 ,if you have failed to solve the question in as good a manner as these others1 you can ask yourself wherein and why your own reflections and ingenuity fell short4 ,if you follow this method with all problems--i4e41 thinking a thing out for yourself before looking up what others have thought--you will soon improve your thinking surprisingly4 ,the method is capable of application in every problem1 from inventing an adding machine to trying to find how the plumber got that #c4df on the bill4 ,but to return to shorthand4 ,we still have the empirical and experimental methods4 ,in this particular case the difference between them would be simply one of degree4 ,we could find1 for instance1 what systems were used by the fastest shorthand writers2 but we could get nothing conclusive from this1 for we would have to make allowance for the natural ability and length of training of these writers4 ,from merely looking at two outlines or characters1 it is often difficult to tell which can be written faster4 ,this could only be tested by writing hundreds in a row and finding the time it took to write the same number of each4 ,of course such experiment is capable of indefinite expansion4 ,in dealing with method heretofore1 ,i have at times come dangerously near to making a false assumption4 ,i have been talking as if a man who took up political science1 shorthand1 or any other subject1 were dealing with only one problem4 ,as a matter of fact he is dealing with a whole series of problems4 ,just how many it is difficult to say1 because no problem worthy of the name is an indivisible unit1 and may always be broken into smaller problems4 ,the whole science of sthetics is included in the simple question 8,what is beauty801 the science of ethics is merely the answer to 8,what is right conduct801 and metaphysics may be reduced to the problem 8,what is reality80 ,but when we come to deal with any of these we instinctively break them up into smaller and more concrete problems1 making the treatment easier1 just as a general attempts to split his enemy's forces1 so that he can annihilate one section at a time4 ,often1 indeed1 the very division of the larger problem into smaller problems constitutes its solution1 for we finally come to a problem which practically answers itself1 and which we recognize as being included in1 or a particular form of1 some more general problem to which we already know the answer4 ,a man sets before himself the question1 8,what is the proper sphere of ,government80 ,perhaps he will first of all consider certain different specific activities which might possibly be supposed to come within the sphere of governmental interference4 ,he might ask himself1 for instance1 8,should the ,government interfere with freedom of contract80 ,notice that he has here temporarily made his problem narrower1 he has chosen to break it up in order to deal with it part by part4 ,but even when he came to cope with this smaller problem he would probably find it necessary to break this up1 and he would therefore take a specific example4 ,suppose a man works for so much an hour1 and that nine hours' work a day gives him the minimum amount on which he can live and support his family4 ,would it be wise to limit the legal working day of such a man to eight hours8 ,this problem practically answers itself1 and so further division is unnecessary4 ,of course the answer to this does not determine the answer to the original question1 for other parts still remain to be considered4 ,in fact1 much of the success of our thinking will depend upon just how we divide our big problems into subsidiary problems1 and just what our subsidiary or subordinate problems are4 ,this will depend to some extent on our own natural sagacity1 and to some extent on mere chance4 ,no rigid rules can be laid down4 ,the only advice which can be offered is that when a thinker breaks up a problem he should do so with an eye to utility and definiteness4 ,john ,stuart ,mill1 in an essay on ,jeremy ,bentham1 pointed out that the secret of the latter's strength and originality of thought lay in his method1 which 8may be shortly described as the method of detail2 of treating wholes by separating them into their parts1 abstractions by resolving them into things1--classes and generalities by distinguishing them into the individuals of which they are made up2 and breaking every question into pieces before attempting to solve it40 ,the method was not absolutely original with ,bentham1 but 8whatever originality there was in the method1 in the subjects he applied it to1 and in the rigidity with which he adhered to it1 there was the greatest40 ,the systematic thinker is careful of the manner in which he marshals his difficulties4 ,he knows that certain problems should properly be considered before certain others1 and he saves himself labor and sometimes error by considering them in that order4 ,before asking himself how ,government should cure a given social evil1 he first asks whether it is the duty or even the right of the ,state to attend to that particular evil at all4 ,in other words1 before asking what the ,state should do in any particular case1 he considers first what the proper sphere of government is4 ,it must be admitted that a previous question often cannot be discovered until one has actually attempted the solution of a problem4 ,in the foregoing instance1 it would be difficult to determine the proper sphere of government by any other method than a consideration of particular cases where government interference suggests itself4 ,in fact1 it is only by deep reflection on a subject that we come to realize most of the problems involved4 ,you walk along the road with your friend the botanist and he stops to pick what looks to you to be a common wild flower4 8,hm10 he muses1 8,i wonder how that got in this part of the country80 ,now that is no problem to you1 simply because you do not happen to know why that particular flower should not be there--and what men do not know about they take for granted4 ,knowledge furnishes problems1 and the discovery of problems itself constitutes an intellectual advance4 ,whenever you are thrashing out a subject1 write down every problem1 difficulty and objection that occurs to you4 ,when you get what you consider a satisfactory solution1 see whether or not it answers all of them4 ,i have stated that method is essential to good thinking4 ,i have given rules and examples of methodic thinking4 ,but ,i do not want to create a false impression4 ,if a man has not within him the materials of a thinker1 no amount of method can make him one4 ,half the thinking process1 as pointed out1 depends on the occurrence of suggestions4 ,the occurrence of suggestions depends on how ideas are associated in a man's mind4 ,while this depends to some extent on the education and the whole past life and environment of the individual1 it depends far more on inborn mental qualities4 ,all method can do is to awaken the most fruitful associations of ideas already in mind4 ,hence the more methods we adopt--the greater the number of views we take of any problem--the more solutions will suggest themselves4 ,there is one further reason why we should take as many different viewpoints as possible4 ,in our example of the inheritance of acquired characteristics in animals1 if we had been sure that the results of our deductive reasoning were correct1 it would have been a sinful waste of time to experiment4 ,but when we attack a problem by several methods we can compare the results from each4 ,if these results agree we have good evidence that our solution is correct4 ,but if we have adopted quite a number of viewpoints1 and have not let the results of one influence those of the next1 they are almost certain to be at variance4 ,this means that we have erred in applying one or several methods4 ,how are we to find which of the methods it was1 and how are we to prevent such errors8 ,this is the subject of our next chapter4 ,,iii ,a ,,few ,,cautions ,thus far we have considered only positive and constructive thinking1 and means for obtaining relevant suggestions4 ,we have had almost nothing to do with cautions1 means for avoiding fallacy and error1 and means for testing the truth and value of suggestions4 ,most writers who have discussed thinking have dwelt so much on the negative aspect--so much on what we should not do--and have so slighted the question of what we should do1 that ,i have perhaps been led to adopt this order1 more from a feeling of revolt than because it is logically better4 ,but ,i believe ,i have logic on my side4 ,constructive methods make thinking 8go02 cautions steer it in the right path4 ,an automobile without a steering gear is almost as useless as one without a motor4 ,but an automobile can go without being steered1 whereas it cannot be steered unless it is going4 ,but while with automobiles we can clearly divide moving from steering1 we cannot do this with thinking4 ,the two processes are so inextricably bound up1 that we cannot engage in one without engaging in the other2 we cannot even speak of one without implying the other4 ,i have divided them for convenience of exposition4 ,but in the last chapter we were forced to deal slightly with cautions1 and here we shall have to consider constructive methods to some extent4 ,a case in point is classification4 ,in taking this up from a constructive standpoint1 ,i remarked that all classifications ought to be logical4 ,but ,i did not say what ,i meant by logical1 nor did ,i tell how a logical classification could be secured4 ,the two most prominent errors made in classifying are 7#a7 not making classifications mutually exclusive1 7#b7 not making them cover all the objects or phenomena supposed to be classified4 ,the first error is the less common1 for though occurring among all thinkers1 it is comparatively infrequent among those who proceed with caution4 ,it is1 moreover1 more easily discovered than the second4 ,consider the classification of constructive methods into comparison1 observation1 and experiment4 ,it is apparent that these methods overlap4 ,we cannot compare without observing1 much of our observation involves comparison1 when we experiment we must of course observe the results obtained1 and the results are usually always compared4 ,all three methods could be classed under observation4 ,it is well to remember1 however1 that the first classification may be useful--even more so than one strictly logical1 and that the nature of a subject will often make impracticable1 divisions which do not overlap in some degree4 ,the second error--that of not making a classification cover all the objects or phenomena it is supposed to cover--is not so easy to detect4 ,it is one to which the greatest philosophers have been heir4 ,some of our ,socialist friends say there are but two kinds of people3 capitalists and laborers1 8the people who live on others and the people who are lived on40 ,they overlook that class of farmers who own a little piece of land and do their own tilling4 ,even if they insist that such a class 8is rapidly becoming extinct10 the fact remains that it is still with us and must be taken into account4 ,all classifications are made with a certain number of facts in mind1 and fortunate is he who happens to have just the right facts4 ,we cannot hold many facts in mind at once1 and we often generalize upon thousands of things by taking a supposedly representative dozen4 ,to avoid error all we can do is to keep constantly on the lookout for examples1 especially those which apparently will not fit into our generalization4 ,if they go in without straining anything1 our classification receives added warrant4 ,but sometimes you will find that where you have three classes a new fact will necessitate a fourth1 and that often it will overturn your whole beautiful structure4 ,there is another phase of thinking1 which while chiefly cautionary1 is also in part constructive4 ,we have so often been warned to 8avoid the treachery of words0 and to 8define all our terms0 that a repetition of the advice seems unnecessary4 ,but we cannot overlook the excellent counsel of ,blaise ,pascal4 ,he urges that we not only define our terms1 but that whenever we use them we mentally substitute the definition4 ,however1 this needs to be qualified4 ,if every time we used a term we stopped to substitute its definition1 our thought might be exact but would hardly move forward very rapidly4 ,it will usually be sufficient simply to substitute the definition a few times1 for after doing this we shall gradually come to know exactly what we mean by a term1 and further substitution would merely waste time4 ,of course1 all this need be applied only to terms new1 technical or equivocal2 or those used in a mooted proposition4 ,i have spoken of analogy as a constructive method4 ,this1 however1 should be used only for suggestion1 for it is most dangerous4 ,often we use an analogy and are quite unaware of it4 ,thus many social and political thinkers have called society an 8organism10 and have proceeded to deal with it as if it were a large animal4 ,they have thought not in terms of the actual phenomena under consideration1 but in terms of the analogy4 ,in so far as the terms of the analogy were more concrete than those of the phenomena1 their thinking has been made easier4 ,but no analogy will ever hold good throughout1 and consequently these thinkers have often fallen into error4 ,the quickest way to detect error in analogy is to carry it out as far as it will go--and further4 ,every analogy will break down somewhere4 ,any analogy if carried out far enough becomes absurd4 ,we are most likely to err when we carry an analogy too far1 but not to the point where the absurdity is apparent4 ,take the analogy employed in our first chapter1 comparing thinking and a ship4 ,for the sake of the image ,i shall make this a motor-boat4 ,we might carry this out further4 ,we might compare the effect on the mind of books and experience to the fuel used for the engine4 ,the brain1 transforming outward experience into thought1 might be paralleled with a carburetor transforming fuel into usable form4 ,an idea may be compared to a spark4 ,all this is very fascinating4 ,it may even lead to suggestions of real value4 ,but it is bound soon or late to develop into the ludicrous4 ,the analogy in question1 however1 does not need to be developed to be confuted4 ,for unless a boat has a propeller and a rudder1 its engine is useless4 ,a mind is capable of attaining truth without even being aware of the existence of a science of thinking or of logic4 ,another way to find whether an analogy is fallacious is to see whether you can discover a counter analogy4 ,surely this is the most effective practice in refuting analogy in argument4 ,this suggests the case of the man who had a ticket from ,new ,york to ,chicago1 and tried to use it from ,chicago to ,new ,york4 ,the railroad refused to accept it1 whereupon the man brought suit4 ,the lawyer for the defendant1 in the heat of the debate1 said1 8,why1 a man might just as well pay for a barrel of potatoes and then demand a barrel of apples60 ,whereupon the attorney for the plaintiff replied1 8,it would be rather like a grocer selling a man a barrel of potatoes and then trying to compel him to eat them from the top down1 refusing to allow him to turn the barrel upside down and begin eating them from the bottom up40 ,it is best to avoid analogy except for purposes of suggestion1 or as a rhetorical device for explaining an idea already arrived at by other means4 ,i have been forced to defend my advice to take as many viewpoints as possible1 by pointing out that the conclusions obtained from these viewpoints might disagree2 in fact would be almost sure to disagree4 ,of course1 this disagreement might be avoided if we allowed the conclusions reached by one method or viewpoint to influence our conclusions in another4 ,but if we do this we give our problem more shallow treatment1 and we are not so sure of a result when we get it4 ,when a mathematician adds a column of figures from the top down1 he confirms by re-adding from the bottom up4 ,he knows that if he added in the same manner the second time he would be liable to fall into the same errors4 ,and in thinking1 when we leave one method and take up another1 we should try to forget entirely the first conclusion and begin on the problem as if we had never taken it up before4 ,after we have taken up all the applicable methods1 then1 and then only1 should we begin to compare conclusions4 ,time forbids doing this with all problems4 ,time forbids even attacking all problems from different points of view4 ,but there are some problems where this unquestionably ought to be done4 ,the problem of whether or not characteristics acquired during the life time of one individual may be inherited by his offspring1 if dealt with at all1 is too important to be left to the a priori method alone4 ,this problem asks whether the children of educated parents will necessarily be innately superior to the children of uneducated parents2 it asks whether the man of today is superior to the ancient ,greek1 or even the present day savage2 or1 assuming that the negro race is inferior to the white race1 it asks whether generations of education will bring it to the white race level or leave it unchanged2 it asks whether the hope of improving the human race lies in education or eugenics4 ,no question can be more important than this in its practical bearings4 ,the answer to it will profoundly influence our opinions in education1 psychology1 ethics1 economics1 political science--even philosophy and metaphysics4 ,the answer we obtain to this question from deductive reasoning1 no matter how unanswerable or conclusive it may seem1 should be checked up by nothing short of the most thoroughgoing experiment4 ,unfortunately the experiments needed for this particular question cannot be carried on by the layman4 ,it is equally to be regretted that scientists have been none too thorough in carrying them out themselves4 ,but we should remember that any result we arrive at should be subject to revision1 and that if we take up this problem at all1 we should at least make it our duty to read about and criticise all the experiments that come to our notice4 ,a question has perhaps just occurred to the reader4 ,if the deductive method is to be checked up by experiment1 and the results of the experiment are always to be taken1 why not experiment first1 and omit theory altogether8 ,leaving aside the fact that theory is the best guide for experiment--that were it not for theory and the problems and hypotheses that come out of it1 we would not know the points we wanted to verify1 and hence would experiment aimlessly--a more serious objection is that experiment is seldom if ever perfect1 for it nearly always involves some unverified assumption4 ,i have referred to empirical observation and experiment as two different methods4 ,but the difference is mainly1 if not solely1 one of degree4 ,if we experimented to find out whether acquired characteristics were inherited1 it is obvious that our experiments would have to be confined to animals4 ,if we found1 let us say1 that no acquired characteristic was ever transmitted to offspring1 we could not say that this would be equally true of man1 but would be justified in concluding only that the acquired characteristics of animals are not transmitted to descendants4 ,nay1 we could not go even this far4 ,we would have to confine ourselves to the statement that certain acquired characteristics of the few score animals we had experimented upon were not transmissible4 ,but even this statement would involve assumption4 ,we could say only that certain acquired characteristics of the few score animals we had experimented upon had not been transmitted in these particular instances4 ,we would have to limit ourselves to a bare statement of fact2 we could draw no conclusion whatever4 ,but if we had attacked this problem from the deductive standpoint1 and had concluded that owing to certain conditions holding alike in all animals and in man1 acquired characteristics could not possibly be transmitted1 we would have sufficient ground for deriving from our experiments a broad generalization4 ,experiment and deduction are not the only methods which can be checked up against each other4 ,we can do likewise with the comparative and the experimental1 the historical and the theoretical--in fact1 all viewpoints applicable to any one problem4 99 99 99 99 99 ,when you encounter a question about which there is a controversy1 and where the adherents of both sides nearly equal each other in number and intellectual status1 you may be almost certain that each side has caught sight of some truth1 but that neither has seen the whole truth2 and you should endeavor to unite both sides by a broader and deeper solution4 ,a classic philosophical example of this method is ,herbert ,spencer's attempt to reconcile science and religion1 and his effort to unite the 8intuitional0 and 8experiential0 schools of thought4 ,the intuitionists maintained that the mind had from birth intuitions by which it knew certain truths independently of experience4 ,such truths as the axiom that a straight line is the shortest distance between two points1 or that it is morally wrong to do certain acts1 were regarded as among these intuitions4 ,the 8empiricists0 or 8sensationalists10 on the other hand1 maintained that all our knowledge--even of such a fact1 for instance1 as that two and two are four1 where we cannot conceive otherwise--is learned solely from the individual's experience1 taken in its broadest sense4 ,herbert ,spencer thought he recognized some truth in both these doctrines1 and came forward with the theory that there are certain truths which are intuitions so far as the individual is concerned1 but that these intuitions have been inherited from our ancestors1 were originally built up through the ages1 and represent the accumulated experience of the race4 ,whatever may be thought of ,spencer's success in this case1 the value of the method itself is undoubted4 ,it was frequently used by ,kant1 ,hegel1 ,fichte and other ,german philosophers4 ,i have remarked that it is almost possible to sum up the entire process of thinking as the occurrence of suggestions for the solution of difficulties and the testing out of those suggestions4 ,the constructive methods discussed were called means for making good suggestions occur to us4 ,from this standpoint the cautions with which we have just been dealing may be considered as tests of suggestions4 ,let us refer back to the analysis of thinking given in the case of the man who discovered footprints on the beach4 ,even there1 in order to give any adequate idea of his thought process1 ,i was obliged to show that for various reasons he rejected certain suggested solutions4 ,but this negative method could be more fully developed4 ,because the man rejected a certain solution1 it does not follow that it was necessarily wrong4 ,suppose the final suggestion--that the unknown had been on the island all the time--were to have been tested out1 and that certain further facts were discovered which tended to disprove it2 the man might find it necessary to look for still another solution4 ,but suppose this were not forthcoming1 suppose that all the possibilities had been exhausted4 ,it would be necessary to return to some of the original suggestions4 ,he would have to see whether an error had been made in testing them4 ,in rejecting the suggestion of a small boat he may have overestimated the distance of this island from other land4 ,he may have underestimated the difficulties that a man in a small boat is capable of surmounting4 ,in rejecting the supposition of a ship1 he may have erred in his judgment of the time the footprints had been on the beach1 or of the time it would take a large vessel to get out of sight4 ,what is essential is that all suggestions be tested out1 either by memory1 observation or experiment1 in all their implications1 and that the tendency be resisted to accept the first solution that suggests itself4 ,for the uncritical thinker will always jump at the first suggestion1 unless an objection actually forces itself into view4 ,remaining in a state of doubt is unpleasant4 ,the longer the doubt remains the more unpleasant it becomes4 ,but the man who is willing to accept this unpleasantness1 the man who is willing carefully to observe1 or experiment if need be1 to test the validity of his suggestions1 will finally arrive at a solution much deeper1 and one which will give him far more satisfaction1 than the superficial answer obtained by the man of careless habits of thought4 ,thomas ,a4 ,edison says he always rejects an easy solution of any problem and looks for something difficult4 ,but the inventor has one great advantage over any other kind of thinker4 ,he can test his conclusion in a tangible way4 ,if his device works1 his thinking was right2 if his device doesn't work1 his thinking was wrong4 ,but the philosopher1 the scientist1 the social reformer1 has no such satisfactory test4 ,his only satisfaction is the feeling that his results harmonize with all his experience4 ,the more critical he has been in arriving at those results1 the more deep and permanent will be that feeling1 the more valuable will be his thoughts to himself and to the world4 4 4 4 ,even in the first chapter ,i intimated that logic would constitute a part of the science of thinking4 ,i intimated1 moreover1 that it would constitute almost the whole of what may be called the negative side of thinking--those rules which serve to steer thought aright4 ,though cautionary1 the advice given in this chapter is not usually given in books on logic4 ,but though ,i cannot overemphasize the importance of a knowledge of logic1 ,i cannot deal with it here4 ,the science can receive justice only in a book devoted entirely to it4 ,if he has not already done so the would-be thinker should study a work on logic1 for unless the present book is supplemented by some treatise on that science it cannot be regarded as complete4 ,in order not to confuse the reader ,i shall recommend only one book4 ,in order to encourage him ,i shall recommend a small book1 one not so deep as to be incomprehensible or repulsive to the beginner1 but at the same time one which is recognized as a standard treatise3--,elementary ,lessons in ,logic1 by ,stanley ,jevons4 ,,iv ,,concentration ,what is the hardest task in the world8 ,to think4--,,emerson4 ,we have been dealing with the subject of thinking4 ,we have considered it from both a positive and negative side4 ,but while we have devoted our attention to thinking1 we have neglected the thinker4 ,in more scientific terms1 we have treated thought from the logical side2 we are now to treat it from the psychological4 ,few people will admit specific faults in themselves of any kind1 especially if these happen to be intellectual4 ,but almost any man is willing to confess that he cannot always 8concentrate0 when he wants to1 in fact1 that he is one of the countless victims of 8mind wandering40 ,most of us imagine we know just what we mean by both these terms4 ,but if we are to judge by most of what has been written1 no two terms are more misconceived4 ,before trying to find the best means of concentrating1 we must first find just what we mean by concentration4 ,in a previous chapter ,i said that suggestions for solutions 8occurred40 ,i did not say how or why4 ,to discover this we must refer to the famous psychological principle of association4 ,any train of thought is made possible by previous connections of ideas in our minds4 ,while a girl sits at her window a parade passes along a nearby street4 ,the band is playing1 and ere the tune is completed the band has gone so far that the music is no longer audible4 ,but the tune still goes along in her mind1 and she completes it herself4 ,it suggests a dance she had been to where it was played1 and this suggests that she danced the two-step to it4 ,the two-step suggests the more modern one-step1 and this leads her to compare the familiar dancing of to-day with the distant and respectful minuet4 ,this is an example of a random train of ideas4 ,it is that loose 8thinking0 referred to in our first chapter4 ,but even this is made possible only by the connection of ideas in our mind at some previous period4 ,no thought can enter our minds unless it is associated in some way with the previous thought4 ,psychologists have traditionally classified associations into four kinds3 association by succession1 by contiguity1 by similarity and by contrast4 ,the example just given involves all four4 ,association by succession means that when two ideas or impressions of objects have entered the mind in succession1 the second is likely to be suggested whenever the first is thought of4 ,a tune consists in a succession of notes1 and when the first notes are brought to mind1 as by a passing band1 the rest will follow--sometimes in spite of ourselves4 ,association by contiguity means that when two objects or ideas have been in consciousness together1 one is always likely to suggest the other thereafter4 ,this was the case with the music and the dance1 or the music and the two-step4 ,association by similarity occurs when two ideas resemble each other in some particular4 ,they need not have occurred together at any past time1 nor after each other4 ,the fact that they have a common element suffices to bring up one idea when the other is in mind3 thus the two-step suggested the one-step4 ,association by contrast needs no explanation4 ,it is exemplified when the idea of present-day dancing brings up the idea of distant dancing4 ,any attempt to show why the mind acts in this way1 any explanation of the way in which the different kinds of association are made possible1 would bring us into physiological psychology1 would involve a study of the brain and the nervous system4 ,for our purposes it is sufficient to keep in mind that such associations do take place4 ,without them no idea can occur4 ,without them thought is impossible4 ,the bearing of all this on concentration has yet to be made plain4 ,we must remember that every idea has more than one associate2 in fact that each idea generally has a cluster of possible associates4 ,instead of suggesting the minuet1 the one-step may have made the fox trot or the three-step occur to the young lady4 ,it may have made her think of a young man with whom she danced it1 or the trouble she had in learning it4 ,each of these suggestions1 in turn1 would also have potential connections with a cluster of ideas4 ,when we are thinking at random--when we are day dreaming1 as in the example given--the strongest association1 or the first to be aroused1 is the one we dwell upon4 ,but when we are thinking with a purpose1 in a word1 when we are reasoning1 we reject all associations which have no bearing on our purpose1 and select only those which serve it4 ,concentration does not1 as popularly supposed1 mean keeping the mind fastened on one object or idea or in one place4 ,it consists in having a problem or purpose constantly before one4 ,it means keeping our thought moving toward one desired end4 ,concentration is often regarded as intense or focused attention4 ,but the fact is that all attention is focused attention4 ,psychologists are fairly well agreed that we can attend to only one thing at a time4 ,mind wandering1 and so-called distributed attention1 is really attention directed first to one thing1 then to another1 then to another2 or first to one thing1 then to another1 and then back again to the original object1 resting but a few moments on each idea4 ,concentration may best be defined as prolonged or sustained attention4 ,it means keeping the mind on one subject or problem for a relatively long period1 or at least continually reverting to some problem whenever one's thoughts momentarily leave it4 ,having decided just what we mean by concentration1 our next step is to inquire whether concentration is worth while4 ,the reader may smile at this question or he may be shocked1 according to his temperament4 ,but if most men were so convinced that concentration is such an unquestionable virtue1 they would practice it a little more4 ,at least they would make greater efforts to practice it than they do at present4 ,the truth is that concentration1 per se1 is of little value4 ,the value of concentration depends almost entirely on the subject concentrated on4 ,almost any one will agree that even were a man to allow his mind to dwell now on one important problem and now on another1 without stopping a very appreciable time at any1 he might nevertheless be improving his time far more than a man who concentrated continually on some insignificant and inconsequential question4 ,but of course this is not really an argument against concentration4 ,it has no application when you concentrate on the proper subject4 ,for if you start to concentrate on some question which you have decided is really important1 you should keep at it1 allowing no deviation4 ,it may be that during the course of your thought associations will be aroused which will suggest or bear upon important problems1 problems more important perhaps than the one you originally started to concentrate on4 ,but if you immediately abandoned every problem you started to think of1 whenever you came across one which you imagined was just as important1 you would probably never really solve any big question4 ,our attention is guided by interest4 ,if a man merely allows his thoughts to flow at random1 thinking only of those things which spontaneously arouse his interest1 he may or may not attend to things worth thinking about4 ,all will depend upon the path in which his natural interests run4 ,but the point is that if the subject he thinks about is valuable1 it will be so only by accident2 whether or not his thinking is useful will depend upon mere chance4 ,if however he consciously chooses a subject--chooses it because he believes it to be important--then his thinking will be worth while4 ,but there is another reason why concentration is necessary4 ,suppose a man started to put up a barbed wire fence1 got as far as driving in all the posts1 then lost interest in the fences and decided to grow potatoes in his field1 plowed up the ground1 lost interest in the field and neglected to plant the seeds2 decided to paint his house1 got the porch done1 lost interest 4 4 4 ,that man might work as hard as any other man1 but he would never get anything done4 ,so with the mind wanderer and the concentrator4 ,the mind wanderer thinks of a problem1 loses interest1 and abandons it4 ,the concentrator sticks to it until it is solved4 ,much of our mind wandering is due to the fact that we are not fully convinced of the importance of the problem being attacked1 or that we regard other problems or ideas as more important4 ,concentration consists in devoting one's mind to the solution of one problem4 ,during our train of thought associations bring up new ideas or suggest problems which do not bear on the question at hand4 ,now when we wander1 when we follow up these irrelevant ideas or suggested problems1 or when we happen to glance at something or hear something and begin to think of that1 we do so because of a half-conscious belief that the new idea1 problem or fact needs attending to1 is important4 ,i have already pointed out that if this new idea is important it will be so only by accident4 ,if we were consciously to ask ourselves whether any of these irrelevant problems were as important as the one we were concentrating on1 or even important at all1 we would find1 nine times out of ten1 that they were not4 ,therefore before beginning to concentrate you should assure yourself that the problem you are about to attack is one worth solving1 or at least devoting a certain time to4 ,and during that time you should think only of that problem1 and unhesitatingly throw out all irrelevant suggestions coming either from your course of thought or from external sights and sounds4 ,one qualification is necessary4 ,sometimes an irrelevant suggestion occurs which is nevertheless really important and worth developing4 ,as this might be forgotten1 and as it might never occur again1 it would be poor counsel indeed to ask that it be thrown aside forever4 ,the best move in such a case would be to make written note of the suggestion or problem1 so that it could be referred to at some future time4 ,having written the idea1 you will have it off your mind1 and will be able to continue your line of thought without perturbation4 ,it has been suggested that a great aid to concentration is writing one's thoughts4 ,it must be admitted that this certainly helps one to keep much closer to a subject4 ,ordinarily we wander without being aware of it1 and bring our minds back to a subject only after sudden intermittent realizations that we have gone astray4 ,when we write our thoughts1 however1 we doubly secure ourselves against mind wandering4 ,all writing requires a certain effort1 and this alone is sufficient to keep most of us from writing irrelevant thoughts1 or anything not directly bearing upon the subject in hand4 ,when we write1 too1 we capture our thoughts in tangible symbols2 we make them less elusive than in their original form4 ,finally1 we keep our entire past train of thought in view4 ,like an oarsman1 who cannot look ahead1 but guides himself by the objects he is constantly leaving further behind1 we keep to our original course of thought by a survey of the ideas already written4 ,in spite of these great advantages1 writing has certain serious handicaps as a practical method for concentrating4 ,first among these is its slowness4 ,thoughts flash through our minds much faster than we can write them4 ,we either lose many ideas by the wayside1 or fail to go as far in our subject as we otherwise would4 ,another disadvantage is that we are forced to give part of our attention to the physical act of writing1 and thus cannot concentrate entirely on our subject4 ,there are two methods of writing comparatively free of at least one of these handicaps4 ,both shorthand and typewriting1 if mastered to any degree1 are much faster than ordinary writing4 ,this is especially true1 of course1 of shorthand4 ,but even with a good stenographer shorthand has serious defects4 ,unless one is quite expert it requires even more attention than longhand1 and at that is often unable to keep pace with thought4 ,typewriting requires almost no attention from a touch operator1 but it too is open to the charge of slowness1 coming in this respect about midway between short and longhand4 ,but to those so unfortunate as not to know either shorthand or typewriting the necessity for still another method is evident4 ,indeed1 even those acquainted with these two arts cannot always use them4 ,if every time we were to think we had to have with us a typewriter1 or even a pencil and note-book1 we would not engage in any too much reflection4 ,fortunately there is one method superior to any yet named1 which requires no study before its application1 and no paraphernalia during it4 ,it consists in simply talking your thoughts as you think them4 ,one who has not tried this can have no idea of its effect4 ,it possesses almost all the advantages of writing4 ,you cannot wander without realizing the fact immediately4 ,it makes your thinking much less vague than if you thought silently1 increases your vocabulary1 always keeps pace with your ideas1 and requires practically no attention4 ,it may be objected that silent thinking itself is put in unspoken words4 ,but this is not true4 ,part of silent thinking consists of unspoken words1 but part of it consists of images1 concepts and attitudes which pass through our minds and which we do not take the trouble to name4 ,in silent thinking1 too1 there are also what appear to be occasional dead stops4 ,all these processes drift into each other indefinably and are unrecognizable4 ,when we talk we realize whether our images or concepts are vague or definite by our ability to name them1 and we realize when our thought comes to a 8dead stop0 by the fact that we miss the sound of our own voice4 ,another practice can be used with talking4 ,the degree of concentration we give to any subject depends upon the degree of natural interest we take in it4 ,mind wandering comes because we are also interested in other subjects4 ,no matter how slight our interest in a thing1 we would always concentrate on it if we were interested in nothing else4 ,to secure sustained attention1 then1 we should 7#a7 stimulate or increase interest in problems we want to concentrate on1 7#b7 decrease or remove temporarily any interest in the things we do not want to think about4 ,men often complain that noises distract their attention4 ,while not impossible1 it is inconvenient and unpleasant to shut off our ears4 ,but men are far more distracted by sights than they are by sounds4 ,and they never think of merely shutting their eyes4 ,the next time you attempt to concentrate--silently or by talking--try shutting your eyes and see whether or not you are helped4 ,talking has one disadvantage--it cannot always be used4 ,to practice it1 you must either lock yourself up in your room1 or sit alone in a forest or field1 or walk along unfrequented streets and by-ways4 ,you can by no means allow any one to hear or see you talking to yourself4 ,if you are caught doing this some asinine idiot is sure to mistake you for one4 ,we are brought back again1 then1 to the necessity of occasionally thinking in silence4 ,there is one other reason why we shall sometimes need to do this4 ,thoughts of certain kinds are so elusive that to attempt to articulate them is to scare them away1 as a fish is scared by the slightest ripple4 ,when these thoughts are in embryo1 even the infinitesimal attention required for talking cannot be spared4 ,but later1 as they take more definite and coherent form1 they can and should be put into words1 for otherwise they will be incommunicable and useless4 ,no definite rule can be laid down1 however1 as to what should be spoken and what thought of silently4 ,this depends to a large extent upon the individual thinker4 ,some will probably find that talking helps them in almost all their thinking1 others that it is often an actual hindrance4 ,the same is true of closing one's eyes4 ,if you do not know which is better for you1 find out by experiment4 ,at those times when you suddenly catch yourself wandering1 it would be a good plan to stop occasionally and trace back your train of thought to the point where it left its original direction4 ,in this way you would get some valuable insight into the how and why of mind wandering2 you would be helped in recognizing its appearance sooner the next time it occurred4 ,whenever a person is left alone for a short time1 with no one to talk to and no 8reading matter02 when for instance1 he is standing at a station waiting for his train1 or sitting at a restaurant table waiting for his order1 or hanging on a subway strap when he has forgotten to buy a newspaper1 his 8thoughts0 tend to run along the tracks they have habitually taken4 ,if a young man usually allows a popular tune to float through his head1 that will be most likely to happen2 if he usually thinks of that young lady1 he will most likely think of her then2 if he has often imagined himself as some great political orator making a speech amid the plaudits of the multitude1 he is likely to see a mental picture of himself swinging his arms1 waving flags and gulping water4 ,the only way a man can put a stop to such pleasant but uneducative roamings1 is to snap off his train of day dreaming the first moment he becomes aware of it1 and to address his mind to some useful serious subject4 ,his thoughts will be almost sure to leak away again4 ,they may do this as often as fifteen times in half an hour4 ,but the second he becomes aware of it he should dam up the stream and send his thoughts along the channel he has laid out for them4 ,if he has never done this he will find the effort great4 ,but if he merely resolves now that the next time his mind wanders he will stop it in this manner1 his resolve will tend to make itself felt4 ,if he succeeds in following this practice once it will be much easier a second time4 ,every time he does this it will become increasingly easy1 until he will have arrived at the point where his control over his thoughts will be almost absolute4 ,not only will it be increasingly easy for him to turn his mind to serious subjects4 ,it will become constantly more pleasurable4 ,frivolous and petty trains of thought will become more and more intolerable4 ,this whole idea of forcing our thought has been questioned by no less a thinker than ,herbert ,spencer4 ,let us hear what he has to say regarding his own practice3 8,it has never been my way to set before myself a problem and puzzle out an answer4 ,the conclusions at which ,i have from time to time arrived1 have not been arrived at as solutions of questions raised2 but have been arrived at unawares--each as the ultimate outcome of a body of thoughts which slowly grew from a germ4 ,some direct observation1 or some fact met with in reading1 would dwell with me3 apparently because ,i had a sense of its significance4 ,it was not that there arose a distinct consciousness of its general meaning2 but rather that there was a kind of instinctive interest in those facts which have general meanings4 ,for example1 the detailed structure of this or that species of mammal1 though ,i might willingly read about it1 would leave little impression2 but when ,i met with the statement that1 almost without exception1 mammals1 even as unlike as the whale and the giraffe1 have seven cervical vertebr1 this would strike me and be remembered as suggestive4 ,apt as ,i thus was to lay hold of cardinal truths1 it would happen occasionally that one1 most likely brought to mind by an illustration1 and gaining from the illustration fresh distinctiveness1 would be contemplated by me for a while1 and its bearings observed4 ,a week afterwards1 possibly1 the matter would be remembered2 and with further thought about it1 might occur a recognition of some wider application than ,i had before perceived3 new instances being aggregated with those already noted4 ,again after an interval1 perhaps of a month1 perhaps of half a year1 something would remind me of that which ,i had before remarked2 and mentally running over the facts might be followed by some further extension of the idea4 ,when accumulation of instances had given body to a generalization1 reflexion would reduce the vague conception at first framed to a more definite conception2 and perhaps difficulties or anomalies passed over for a while1 but eventually forcing themselves on attention1 might cause a needful qualification and a truer shaping of the thought4 ,eventually the growing generalization1 thus far inductive1 might take a deductive form3 being all at once recognized as a necessary consequence of some physical principle--some established law4 ,and thus1 little by little1 in unobtrusive ways1 without conscious intention or appreciable effort1 there would grow up a coherent and organized theory4 ,habitually the process was one of slow unforced development1 often extending over years2 and the thinking done went on in this gradual1 almost spontaneous way1 without strain4 4 4 40#f ,but compare this method with that of ,john ,stuart ,mill2 who speaks of 8the mental habit to which ,i attribute all that ,i have ever done1 or ever shall do1 in speculation2 that of never abandoning a puzzle1 but again and again returning to it until it was cleared up2 never allowing obscure corners of a subject to remain unexplored because they did not appear important2 never thinking that ,i perfectly understood any part of a subject until ,i understood the whole40#g ,mill's method was1 in short1 8that of conscious and vehement effort directed towards the end he had in view4 ,he solved his problems by laborious application and study40#h ,william ,minto writes of ,adam ,smith3 8,his intellectual proceedings were calm1 patient1 and regular3 he mastered a subject slowly and circumspectly1 and carried his principles with steady tenacity through multitudes of details that would have checked many men of greater mental vigor unendowed with the same invincible persistence40 ,with such thinkers differing so markedly in their methods1 the ordinary man is left bewildered4 ,he may indeed decide that effort or no effort makes little difference4 ,let us1 however1 look to the psychology of the question1 and see whether we can find any guiding principle4 ,spencer1 defending his method1 says3 8,a solution reached in the way described1 is more likely to be true than one reached in pursuance of a determined effort to find a solution4 ,the determined effort causes perversion of thought4 ,when endeavoring to recollect some name or thing which has been forgotten1 it frequently happens that the name or thing sought will not arise in consciousness2 but when attention is relaxed1 the missing name or thing often suggests itself4 ,while thought continues to be forced down certain wrong turnings which had originally been taken1 the search is vain2 but with the cessation of strain the true association of ideas has an opportunity of asserting itself4 ,and1 similarly1 it may be that while an effort to arrive forthwith at some answer to a problem1 acts as a distorting factor in consciousness and causes error1 a quiet contemplation of the problem from time to time1 allows those proclivities of thought which have probably been caused unawares by experiences1 to make themselves felt1 and to guide the mind to the right conclusion40 ,spencer's first argument1 that an effort to recollect something is often without results1 while the thing is remembered later when we are not trying to think of it1 is true as to fact4 ,but it does not show that the effort was unfruitful4 ,as pointed out in the discussion of association1 one idea is associated with not only one other idea but with an entire group4 ,this may give a possible explanation of why it is so often difficult to recollect anything when we make a determined effort4 ,the attempt partly arouses a whole cluster of ideas1 each of which tends to return1 but is prevented from doing so by all the others4 ,it is analogous to a crowd of people all struggling to get through a narrow doorway4 ,they cause such a jam that for a time no one succeeds4 ,when the pushing and jostling cease one person at a time is able to pass through4 ,when effort is abandoned1 probably all but one of the associates become dormant1 and this one slides into consciousness at the slightest provocation4 ,whether or not this explanation is true1 it is a fact that though an effort may not produce results at the time1 still if it had not been made1 the associate which finally comes to mind would probably never have occurred at all4 ,the reader has possibly found that when learning some skilled movement1 such as bicycle riding1 skating or swimming1 his first attempts seemed without result1 but after an interval of a week or a month1 when trying again1 he suddenly discovered that he could do what he wanted from the very start4 ,surely no one would contend that this could happen without the previous effort6 ,i must also question ,spencer's remark that 8with the cessation of strain the true association of ideas has an opportunity of asserting itself40 ,the brain has no hidden mechanism by which it can separate the true from the false4 ,to be sure1 if we use no effort the most usual and strongest associations will be more likely to assert themselves1 and it may be that often these will have more warrant than unusual and weaker associations4 ,outside of this1 there is no superiority4 ,but the main reason why we cannot follow the method of ,herbert ,spencer is that we are not all ,herbert ,spencers4 ,his thought naturally tended to serious and useful channels4 ,consequently he did not have to force it there4 ,if the reader is one of those rare and fortunate beings whose thoughts run only to useful subjects1 and who always concentrate from pure spontaneous interest1 ,i sincerely advise him not to force himself4 ,and if such a being happens to be reading the present chapter ,i assure him he is criminally wasting his time1 and that he should drop the book or turn to the next chapter with all possible haste4 ,but if the reader numbers himself with the miserable majority whose minds are ever running away with them1 he will find it necessary to use effort in thinking--at least for a while4 ,one remark of ,spencer is undoubtedly true4 ,this is 8that an effort to arrive forthwith at some answer to a problem1 acts as a distorting factor in consciousness and causes error40 ,and here1 strange to say1 his practice is in substantial agreement with the apparently opposite method of ,john ,stuart ,mill4 ,for note that ,mill speaks of 8again and again returning to it a puzzle until it was cleared up40 ,both imply their agreement rather than state it outright2 ,spencer by his use of the word 8forthwith0 and ,mill by his words 8again and again40 ,here the practice of both differs from that of the vast majority of men4 ,yet neither thinker seemed to be clearly conscious how it differed4 ,the average man 7that mythical creature67 when he has just been confronted with a problem1 may wrestle with it with all the vigor of a great thinker4 ,but as he sees difficulties multiplying about him1 he gradually becomes more and more discouraged4 ,finally he throws up the problem in disgust1 contenting himself with the reflection that it cannot be solved1 or that it will take somebody who knows more than he to solve it4 ,a real thinker1 however1 if confronted with the same problem1 will look for a solution from every possible viewpoint4 ,but failing an answer he will not give up4 ,instead he will let the subject drop for a while1 say a couple of weeks or perhaps longer1 and then refer to it again4 ,this time he will find that certain obscurities have become a little clearer2 that certain questions have been answered4 ,he will again attack his puzzle with energy4 ,and if he does not obtain a complete solution he will once more put it aside1 returning to it after another interval1 until finally a satisfactory solution presents itself4 ,you may fail to see any difference between thinking for two hours separated by two weeks1 and thinking for two consecutive hours4 ,as an experiment1 then1 the next time you come across a puzzle which you fail to solve at first tilt1 write down all the unsatisfactory solutions suggested1 and all the questions1 difficulties and objections met with4 ,you may leave this for a few weeks4 ,when you return to it a few of the difficulties will look less formidable1 and some of the questions will have practically answered themselves4 7,of course some of the difficulties may look more formidable1 and a few new questions may have arisen47 ,if a solution is not found at the second attempt1 the problem may again be sent to your mental waiting room4 ,but if it is only of reasonable difficulty a solution is bound1 soon or late1 to be discovered4 ,it is difficult to say just what effects this change in thought1 when apparently one has engaged in no reflection during the interval4 ,the attempted solution probably gives a certain 8set0 to our minds4 ,without being aware of it we observe facts relating to our problem4 ,ideas which occur to us in other connections are unconsciously seen in their bearing on the unsolved question4 ,in short1 8those proclivities of thought which have probably been caused unawares by experience0 make themselves felt4 ,it may be imagined that if we think too much we will be liable permanently to injure our mighty intellects4 ,this has sometimes happened4 ,but there is no serious danger of it4 ,thinking on one useful subject for a long while will not hurt you any more than thinking on a thousand different useless subjects for the same period4 ,but of course you should not try to concentrate when you are sleepy1 when you have a headache1 when some other bodily pain distracts your attention1 or when your mind is in any way tired4 ,if you attempt to concentrate at these times you will endanger your mental and physical health4 ,not only this1 but the thinking done during such periods will be of such poor quality that it will be practically useless if not harmful4 ,this applies even to cases where mental fatigue is almost inappreciable4 ,thinking done in the evening seldom approaches in efficacy the thinking done in the first hours of the morning4 ,but you should always make sure your mind is actually tired4 ,it may merely be tired of a particular subject4 ,an objection of a different kind may be raised against concentrating at every opportunity4 ,it has often been noticed that names have been recalled and problems solved when we were thinking of something else4 ,it may be urged that such solutions would not have occurred when concentrating1 because the exact associations which led up to them would not have been present4 ,this is occasionally true4 ,but there are still reasons why ,i must maintain my position4 ,no matter how well a man may have trained himself to concentrate1 there will always be short periods when his mind will wander1 and these will suffice for any accidental associations4 ,moreover1 the fact that these mind wandering periods occasionally do good does not excuse their existence4 ,the most fallacious ideas1 the most demoniacal practices1 the most despicable characters of history1 have occasionally done good4 ,the fact is that for every useful association which occurs during mind wandering1 ten associations just as useful will occur during concentration4 ,the only reason useful mind wandering associations appear frequent is that they are unexpected1 therefore more noticed when they come4 ,it has been frequently said that many of the world's greatest inventions were due to accident4 ,in a sense this is true4 ,but the accident was prepared for by previous hard thinking4 ,it would never have occurred had not this thinking taken place4 ,it is said that the idea of gravitation came to ,newton because an apple fell on his head4 ,perhaps4 ,but apples had been falling ever since there were apple trees1 and had probably been falling on men's heads ever since men had acquired the habit of getting their heads in the way4 ,the idea of the steam engine is supposed to have come to ,watt while observing a tea kettle4 ,but how many thousands before him had not seen steam coming out of kettles8 ,the idea of the pendulum for regulating time occurred to ,galileo from observing a swinging lantern in a cathedral4 ,think how many others must have seen that lantern swinging6 ,it is probable that in all these cases the invention or idea had been prepared for1 had been all but formed1 by downright hard thinking in previous periods of concentration4 ,all that was needed was the slightest unusual occurrence to make the idea complete and conscious4 ,the unusual occurrence1 the accident1 which has so often received the credit for the invention or the idea1 merely made it come sooner1 for with the thinking these men did1 it was bound to come eventually4 4 4 4 ,of course ,i really do not seriously expect anybody to concentrate at every opportunity4 ,i don't myself4 ,i merely wanted to establish the fact that it's the best thing4 ,but every man1 even the tired business variety1 should set aside at least half an hour a day1 or three and a half hours a week4 ,i realize what a great hardship it is for some people to devote one-forty-eighth of their time to such a useless pastime as thinking4 ,but if they will make the sacrifice for seven consecutive days they will find themselves bearing up nobly at the end4 ,there is even a possibility that they may be encouraged to extend the time4 ,v ,,prejudice ,,and ,,uncertainty 8,from time to time there returns upon the cautious thinker1 the conclusion that1 considered simply as a question of probabilities1 it is decidedly unlikely that his views upon any debatable topic are correct4 #8,here1' he reflects1 #8are thousands around me holding on this or that point opinions differing from mine--wholly in most cases2 partially in the rest4 ,each is as confident as ,i am of the truth of his convictions4 ,many of them are possessed of great intelligence2 and1 rank myself high as ,i may1 ,i must admit that some are my equals--perhaps my superiors4 ,yet1 while every one of us is sure he is right1 unquestionably most of us are wrong4 ,why should not ,i be among the mistaken8 ,true1 ,i cannot realize the likelihood that ,i am so4 ,but this proves nothing2 for though the majority of us are necessarily in error1 we all labor under the inability to think we are in error4 ,is it not then foolish thus to trust myself8 ,when ,i look back into the past1 ,i find nations1 sects1 philosophers1 cherishing beliefs in science1 morals1 politics1 and religion1 which we decisively reject4 ,yet they held them with a faith quite as strong as ours2 nay--stronger1 if their intolerance of dissent is any criterion4 ,of what little worth1 therefore1 seems this strength of my conviction that ,i am right8 ,a like warrant has been felt by men all the world through2 and1 in nine cases out of ten1 has proved a delusive warrant4 ,is it not then absurd in me to put so much faith in my judgments8' 0#i ,i trust the reader will pardon this second rather extended quotation from ,herbert ,spencer1 but the thought expressed must be kept in mind if we are to approach our present subject in the proper spirit4 4 4 4 ,our subject is prejudice4 ,our object is to free ourselves as much as possible from our own prejudices4 ,but before we can get rid of a thing it is first necessary to recognize that thing when we see it4 ,prejudice is often confused with intolerance4 ,they are not the same4 ,a man may be prejudiced and not intolerant4 ,you may think that your alma mater1 your city1 or your country1 is the greatest in the world1 for little other reason than simply that it is yours4 ,your opinion is prejudiced4 ,but you may not protest if any other man thinks that his alma mater1 or his city1 or his country1 is the best in the world4 ,in fact you may not have much respect for him if he doesn't think so4 ,and your opinion is tolerant4 ,on the other hand1 a man may be intolerant and not prejudiced4 ,you may decide1 solely on the evidence and on grounds of pure reason1 that paper money--fiat money--is always a harmful form of currency1 and you may be justly wrathful against the man who advocates it4 ,you may even wish him suppressed4 ,yet you may be able to answer all his arguments4 ,but you fear that if he is allowed to air his views they will take hold on minds as shallow as his own4 ,you fear that once they have taken root it will be difficult to dislodge them1 and that in the meanwhile they may do harm by being put into practice4 ,you are intolerant4 ,but you are not prejudiced4 ,it is well to remember this distinction when accusations of prejudice are flying through the ozone4 ,one thing more must be kept in mind4 ,prejudice has less connection with truth and falsity than is generally supposed4 ,the fact that a man is unprejudiced does not make his opinion right4 ,and the fact that a man is prejudiced does not necessarily make his opinion wrong2 though it must be admitted that if it is right it will be so only by accident4 ,it is often thought that prejudice can be immediately recognized4 ,locke says1 8,every one is forward to complain of the prejudices that mislead other men or parties1 as if he were free and had none of his own4 4 4 4 ,this is the mote which every one sees in his brother's eye1 but never regards the beam in his own40#aj ,however1 slight consideration will convince us that because one man accuses another of prejudice1 it does not follow that the accused is guilty4 ,the general practice is to accuse of prejudice any one whose views happen to differ from our own4 ,let us consider a formal dictionary definition of prejudice3 8,judgment formed without due examination2 opinion adverse to anything1 without just grounds or sufficient knowledge40 ,this is not altogether satisfactory4 ,a man may form a judgment without sufficient knowledge and still be unprejudiced4 ,he may be perfectly open minded and willing to change his opinion if other evidence is adduced4 ,but even if the formation of a judgment without sufficient knowledge is prejudice1 it is often justified4 ,at all events1 every one will agree that the foregoing definition helps us little in discovering our own prejudices4 ,all of us1 for instance1 believe our judgment on any given question has been formed with due examination1 each being his own judge of what constitutes 8due40 ,it is difficult to find any satisfactory definition4 ,perhaps the best ,i can do is to point out various specific forms of prejudice and their causes4 ,the first form of prejudice ,i shall name consists in a love for1 and a desire to hold1 some opinion4 ,we may roughly ascribe this desire to three causes3 7#a7 ,we desire an opinion to be right because we would be personally benefited if it were4 ,promise a man that if he invests his money in the ,lookgood ,gold ,mine he will receive dividends of over #dj per cent4 annually1 and he is in danger of becoming extremely gullible4 ,he shirks looking up the previous record of the promoters or directors because he has a secret and indefined fear that if he does he will find their pictures in the ,rogues' ,gallery4 ,advertise in a magazine that any thin man can gain seven to fourteen pounds a week by drinking ,fattilac and you will receive hundreds of answers enclosing the fifty cents for a trial bottle4 ,not one desperately slim man in ten will stop to ask himself how the miracle can be performed4 ,in fact1 he will do his worst to argue himself into the matter4 ,he will tell himself that the advertisement is in a reliable magazine1 that the company would not dare to make an assertion like that unless it could make good1 that 4 4 4 ,but we may pass over the more obvious benefits1 and proceed to those causes of prejudice less consciously selfish or directly beneficial4 ,if an economist were to write a book attempting to prove that bankers were really unnecessary and could be dispensed with1 it is a rather sure guess that a banker would not regard very highly the intellectual powers of that economist4 ,if he considered his arguments at all1 it would be only with the view of refuting them4 ,in an even less conscious way1 a rich man is likely to oppose socialism or communism1 not so much because he has evidence of intrinsic worth against them1 but because he fears that if such systems of society were put into effect he would lose most of his wealth4 ,the man who has nothing is likely to look with favor upon these schemes1 because they offer him promise of better things4 ,the mere fact that we are ignorant of a certain thing will prejudice us against it1 while knowledge of it will prepossess us in its favor4 ,ten chances to one a person who has been taught ,esperanto will favor the adoption of an international language--and the adoption of ,esperanto in particular4 ,most of the remarks on the uselessness of the classics come from those ignorant of them2 while those who1 in order to get a college degree or for some like reason1 have been forced to study ,greek and ,latin1 will generally always exaggerate their importance4 ,most of the opposition to simplified spelling is due to the fact that having taken the time and toil to master our atrociously inconsistent spelling1 people have a vague fear that if a phonetic system were adopted1 children1 the ignorant classes and persons of poor memories would be able to spell just as well as they1 without one quarter the trouble of learning4 ,not that they are conscious of this childish and unworthy attitude1 for usually they are not1 but the motive is operative none the less4 ,of course in all the foregoing cases of prejudice1 as in those to follow1 none of the victims ever uses any of his real reasons in argument1 though he will bring forward nearly every other reason on earth to justify his belief4 ,and to do him justice1 it must be admitted that he is often unaware of the true cause of his inclination to one side rather than another4 ,though it is less directly selfish1 the patriotic bias may fairly be classed with the prejudices we have just been considering4 ,at this time the most stupendous war of all history is raging4 ,but ,i know of no ,german or ,austrian or ,turk or ,bulgarian who has so far admitted that the ,british or the ,french or the ,russians or the ,italians or the ,belgians or the ,servians or the ,montenegrins or the ,japanese can by any possibility have right on their side1 nor do ,i know of any ,japanese or ,montenegrin or ,servian or ,belgian or ,italian or ,russian or ,frenchman or ,englishman who believes that the ,bulgarians or the ,turks or the ,austrians or the ,germans are in the right4 ,philosophers and men of science are no exception2 ,mnsterberg1 ,eucken and ,haeckel write publicly in favor of ,germany and fifty of ,england's foremost authors unanimously sign a pronunciamento in support of their native country--yet nobody is surprised4 7#b7 ,another reason why we desire an opinion to be right is because we already happen to hold it4 ,as one writer expresses it1 8,we often form our opinions on the slightest evidence1 yet we are inclined to cling to them with grim tenacity40 ,there are two reasons for this4 ,when we have formed an opinion on anything1 the chances are that we have communicated it to some one1 and have thereby committed ourselves to that side4 ,now to reverse an opinion is to confess that we were previously wrong4 ,to reverse an opinion is to lay ourselves open to the charge of inconsistency4 ,to be inconsistent--to admit that our judgments are human and fallible--this is the last thing we can ever think of4 8,inconsistency10 said ,emerson1 8is the hobgoblin of little minds40 ,and if by this he meant inconsistency in the sense of changing opinions already formed1 we must agree with him4 ,the hypothesis maker has a specific form of this fear of inconsistency4 ,this type of theorist makes a supposition to account for certain facts4 ,when he meets with certain allied facts for which the supposition apparently does not account1 he either ignores said facts1 or cuts and trims them1 or bullies them into his theory4 ,hypotheses per se have never done any harm4 ,in fact they are indispensable in all thought1 especially as an aid to observation4 ,but it is the desire to prove an hypothesis correct1 simply because it is our hypothesis1 or because it is a fascinating hypothesis1 which has done harm4 ,darwin says that he had made it a habit 8whenever a published fact1 a new observation or thought came across me1 which was opposed to my general results1 to make a memorandum of it without fail and at once2 for ,i had found by experience that such facts and thoughts were far more apt to escape from the memory than favorable ones40 ,the second reason for desiring to cling to an opinion because we already hold it is one which could probably best be explained by physiological psychology and a study of the brain4 ,we feel almost a physical pain when a tenet we have long cherished is torn up and exposed4 ,the longer we hold an opinion1 the harder it is for us to get rid of it4 ,in this respect it is similar to habit4 ,nor is the comparison an analogy merely4 ,an opinion is a habit of thought4 ,it has the same basis in the brain1 and is subject to the same laws1 as a habit of action4 ,it is well known that the opinions of a man over forty are pretty well set4 ,the older a man grows1 the harder it is for him to change an opinion--or for others to change it for him4 ,the side of a controversy we see first is usually the side we see last4 ,this is because the arguments we meet do not have to shake up or dislodge anything in our brain 7unless we are very critical1 and we generally aren't74 ,but once let an opinion gain entrance1 and any opinion contrary to it will have to dislodge the old one before it can find a place for itself4 ,and as ,mark ,twain has remarked1 8,when even the brightest mind in our world has been trained from childhood in a superstition of any kind1 it will never be possible for that mind1 in its maturity1 to examine sincerely1 dispassionately1 and conscientiously any evidence or any circumstance which shall seem to cast a doubt upon the validity of that superstition40 ,of course ,mark ,twain was wrong4 ,of course we are ,the ,reasoning ,race1 as he cynically intimates we are not4 ,to religion1 for instance1 the most important question which can engage our understanding1 each of us always gives independent thought4 ,it is a mere accident1 of course1 that almost all of the #djj1jjj1jjj ,chinamen are ,buddhists4 ,it is a mere accident that the overwhelming mass of ,east ,indians are ,brahmans4 ,it is only by chance that practically all ,turks1 ,persians and ,arabians are ,mohammedans4 ,and it merely happened to happen that ,england is ,protestant and ,ireland is ,catholic4 4 4 4 ,but it is unsafe to bring this question of religion too near home4 ,we now come to our third cause of desire3 7#c7 ,we desire an opinion to be wrong because we would be forced to change other opinions if it were not2 or we desire an opinion to be right because then we would be able to retain our other opinions4 ,this is a most widespread form of prejudice4 ,but ,i believe it is1 fortunately1 the most defensible4 ,its defensibility1 however1 depends mainly on the opinions we fear to change4 ,these we may divide into two kinds3 7a7 ,those which have been formed without thought2 borrowed opinions1 etc4 ,the greatest opposition to the theory of evolution came from those conservative ,christians who saw that it undermined any literal interpretation of ,genesis4 ,if these ,christians had investigated the sources of that book1 had considered its probable authority1 had given thought to the possibility of inspired writing1 and had finally decided in favor of the ,biblical narrative2 then--right or not--their opposition to ,darwin's theory would have been free at least from this sort of prejudice4 ,but most of this opposition had come from persons who had not thought of ,genesis1 but had accepted it from the first1 because it had been dogmatically hammered into their heads since childhood4 ,hence it was prejudice1 pure and simple4 7b7 ,the second kind of opinions we fear to change are those resting mainly upon evidence4 ,william ,james gives an example3 8,why do so few #8scientists' even look at the evidence for telepathy1 so-called8 ,because they think1 as a leading biologist1 now dead1 once said to me1 that even if such a thing were true1 scientists ought to band together to keep it suppressed and concealed4 ,it would undo the uniformity of nature1 and all sorts of other things without which scientists cannot carry on their pursuits40#aa ,darwin writes that when a youth he told ,sedgwick the geologist of how a tropical ,volute shell had been found in a gravel pit near ,shrewsbury4 ,sedgwick replied that some one must have thrown it there1 and added that if it were 8really imbedded there1 it would be the greatest misfortune to geology1 as it would overthrow all that we know about the superficial deposits of the ,midland ,counties0--which belonged to the glacial period4#ab ,some readers may object to calling the last case prejudice4 ,they may say that ,sedgwick was perfectly justified4 ,that1 however1 is not the present question4 ,prejudice itself may sometimes be justified4 ,but ,sedgwick tacitly admitted that he not only believed the shell had not been imbedded1 he actually desired that it had not been4 ,and our desires always determine1 to a great extent1 the trouble we take to get evidence1 and the importance we attach to it after we have it4 ,emerson's remark1 that inconsistency is the hobgoblin of little minds1 is true in a double sense4 ,for not only is it harmful to fear to change an opinion which we have entertained1 it is even harmful at times to fear to hold simultaneously two opinions incongruous with one another4 ,if a thought springs up in your mind1 and you come to see after a time that it is inconsistent with another thought1 do not immediately try to throw out one or the other4 ,instead1 think the new thought out in all its bearings and implications1 just as if you had never had the first4 ,perhaps follow the same practice with the first idea4 ,by and by one will reveal its falsity and the other its truth4 ,or more likely you will find that there was some truth in each idea1 and you will reconcile the two in a truth higher1 deeper1 or more comprehensive4 99 99 99 99 99 ,i have set down these three cases of prejudice to help the reader in recognizing the same or similar prejudices in himself4 ,and the mere recognition of prejudices as prejudices will do much toward their elimination4 ,but though we all strenuously maintain our anxiety to get rid of prejudices1 the real reason most of us have them is that we do not want to get rid of them4 ,we are all willing to get rid of prejudice in the abstract4 ,but when some one troubles himself to point out any particular concrete prejudice of ours we defend it and cling to it like a dog to his bone4 ,the only way we can get rid of this desire to cling to our prejudices1 is thoroughly to convince ourselves of the superiority of the truth2 to leave not the slightest doubt in our own minds as to the value of looking with perfect indifference on all questions2 to see that this is more advantageous than believing in that opinion which would benefit us most if true1 more important than 8being consistent10 more to be cherished than the comfortable feeling of certainty4 ,when we really do desire to get rid of our prejudices we will put ourselves on the path of getting rid of them4 ,and not before then4 ,one more prejudice has yet to be considered4 ,this may be called the prejudice of imitation4 ,we agree with others1 we adopt the same opinions of the people around us1 because we fear to disagree4 ,we fear to differ with them in thought in the same way that we fear to differ with them in dress4 ,in fact this parallel between style in thought and style in clothing seems to hold throughout4 ,just as we fear to look different from the people around us because we will be considered freakish1 so we fear to think differently because we know we will be looked upon as 8queer40 ,if we have a number of such dissenting opinions we will be regarded as anything from a mere crank to a fanatic or one with a 8screw loose40 ,when our backs are turned people will wisely point their index fingers to their temples and move them around in little circles4 ,our fear of freak opinions is only equalled by our dread of ideas old-fashioned4 ,a little while ago it was considered popular to laugh at the suffragettes4 ,and everybody laughed4 ,now it is getting to be popular to laugh at the anti-suffragettes4 ,a little while ago it was considered quite comme il faut to fear socialism4 ,now it is becoming proper to remark1 8,there is really quite a good deal of truth in their theories40 ,and soon we shall doubtless all be out and out socialists4 ,nor is the prejudice of imitation confined to the layman4 ,if anything1 it is even more common among so-called 8thinkers40 ,i remember quoting some remark of ,spencer to an acquaintance1 and getting this3 8,yes1 but isn't ,herbert ,spencer's philosophy considered dead80 ,this same acquaintance also informed me that ,john ,stuart ,mill had been 8superseded40 ,he candidly admitted--in fact seemed rather proud of the fact--that he had read practically nothing of either philosopher4 ,i am not trying to defend ,spencer or ,john ,stuart ,mill1 nor am ,i attempting to bark at the heels of any of our present-day philosophers4 ,but ,i am willing to wager that most of these same people now so dithyrambic in their praise of ,james1 ,bergson1 ,eucken and ,russell will twenty-five years hence be ashamed to mention those names1 and will be devoting themselves solely to ,post-neofuturism1 or whatever else happens to be the passing fadosophy of the moment4 ,if this is the most prevalent form of prejudice it is also the most difficult to get rid of4 ,this requires moral courage4 ,it requires the rarest kind of moral courage4 ,it requires just as much courage for a man to state and defend an idea opposed to the one in fashion as it would for a city man to dress coolly on a sweltering day1 or for a young society woman to attend a smart affair in one of last year's gowns4 ,the man who possesses this moral courage is blessed beyond kings1 but he must pay the fearful price of ridicule or contempt4 ,there is another form of this prejudice of imitation radically opposed to this4 ,just as with fashions in clothes there are people who strive to imitate others1 so there are people who devote themselves entirely to being 8different40 ,their greatest fear is that they will be taken for 8one of the mob40 ,they dress themselves as uniquely as possible in order to acquire 8individuality40 ,we have these same people in the realm of thought4 ,they are in constant trepidation lest they say something that everybody else says4 ,they say things not for the sake of truth but for humor or paradox4 ,their great delight is to affirm or defend something 8new0 regardless of its truth2 something deliciously radical which will shock everybody else and startle even themselves4 ,the worst part of this is that these people gradually come to regard their propositions as true1 just as a liar finally comes to believe his own lies4 ,the only cure for such a mental condition is a constant sincerity in every opinion we advance4 ,people are often led into the fault by a motive not incommendable in itself--the desire for originality4 ,but they choose the wrong path to their goal4 ,if you make originality and radicalness your aim1 you will attain neither truth nor originality4 ,but if you make truth your aim you will very likely get truth1 and originality will come of itself4 ,there are hundreds of prejudices1 hundreds of forms of prejudice4 ,there is1 for instance1 the prejudice of conservatism1 which manifests itself in a vague fear that if the present order were changed in any particular--if women were given the vote1 if socialism were to triumph1 if a new filing system were to be installed at the office--all would be lost4 ,but ,i cannot deal adequately with all the forms of bias which flock to mind4 ,the distinguishing mark of the great thinkers of the ages was their comparative freedom from the prejudices of their time and community4 ,in order to avoid these prejudices one must be constantly and uncompromisingly sounding his own opinions4 ,eternal vigilance is the price of an open mind4 99 99 99 99 99 ,prejudice is not the only danger which lies in wait for the would-be thinker4 ,in his very efforts to get rid of prejudice he is liable to fall into an even greater intellectual sin4 ,this sin is uncertainty4 ,as uncertainty and doubt are nearly synonymous1 the reader will probably be surprised at this statement because of the praise ,i have hitherto accorded to the doubtful attitude4 ,but the doubtful attitude1 necessary and praiseworthy as it is1 should not be maintained always4 ,we think in order to have opinions4 ,we have opinions in order to guide action2 in order to act upon should occasion require4 ,herbert ,spencer1 even after his remarks quoted at the beginning of this chapter1 which imply the need of extreme caution1 adds1 84 4 4 ,in daily life we are constantly obliged to act out our inferences1 trustless as they may be-- 4 4 4 in the house1 in the office1 in the street1 there hourly arise occasions on which we may not hesitate2 seeing that if to act is dangerous1 never to act at all is fatal4 4 4 40 ,there are other reasons why we cannot afford to keep the doubtful attitude4 ,if our lives were interminable1 if we had limitless time for thinking1 we could afford to remain in doubt indefinitely4 ,but life is fleeting4 ,so if you have examined facts obtainable on such a question as psychic phenomena1 have kept your mind open for a certain time1 and have decided that communication with the dead is impossible1 you are justified in discontinuing to look for evidence on that question4 ,every hour devoted to examining such evidence would be an hour taken away from thought on some other subject1 and the law of diminishing returns is just as applicable in thinking as in economics4 ,another trouble with the attitude of doubt is that when not properly utilized it hinders rather than aids the acquisition of truth4 ,this is especially the case when it takes the form of fear of prejudice4 ,if guided by this fear1 in our anxiety not to discriminate in favor of one side of a question we are apt to discriminate in favor of the other4 ,in an attempt to give an opposing argument due consideration1 we are liable to give it undue consideration4 ,instead of removing prejudice with reason we may be trying to balance one prejudice with a counter prejudice4 ,when a person disagrees with him1 a very conscientious thinker1 fearing that he may be prejudiced1 and in order to prove himself broad-minded1 will often say regarding an objection1 8,well1 there may be something in that40 ,now your only excuse for ever saying1 8,there may be something in that10 will be as an attitude to assume in experimenting or observing1 or looking up material or arguments to find whether there actually is anything in it4 ,then1 if you do not find anything in it you are justified in saying so--and you ought to4 ,it is useless to stimulate doubt unless you intend1 on grounds of reason1 to settle the doubt4 ,the doubtful attitude should be maintained only so long as you are actively searching for evidence bearing on a question4 ,maintained at any other time or used in any other way it means merely uncertainty1 indefiniteness1 vagueness1 and leads nowhere4 ,it is important that we be unprejudiced4 ,it is even more important that our views be definite4 ,and if our definite views are wrong8 4 4 4 ,but the words of ,thomas ,huxley on this subject cannot be improved3 8,a great lawyer-statesman and philosopher of a former age--,i mean ,francis ,bacon--said that truth came out of error much more rapidly than it came out of confusion4 ,there is a wonderful truth in that saying4 ,next to being right in this world1 the best of all things is to be clearly and definitely wrong1 because you will come out somewhere4 ,if you go buzzing about between right and wrong1 vibrating and fluctuating1 you come out nowhere2 but if you are absolutely and thoroughly and persistently wrong1 you must1 some of these days1 have the extreme good fortune of knocking your head against a fact1 and that sets you all straight again40#ac ,when you find yourself fluctuating back and forth between two opinions you might find it helpful to hold an internal debate4 ,state to yourself as strongly as possible the case for the affirmative1 and then put as convincingly as possible the case for the negative1 holding a refutation if necessary4 ,you may even elaborate this by writing the arguments for both sides in parallel columns4 ,of course you should never use an argument which you can see on its face to be fallacious1 nor a statement which represents merely a prejudice and nothing more4 ,you should use only such arguments as you think a sincere debater would conscientiously employ4 ,by thus making your reasons articulate you will often find that there is really no tenable case at all for one side1 and you will seldom fail to reach a definite conclusion4 ,this method of arriving at a decision may be voted childish and even artificial1 but nothing is to be despised which can render intellectual help4 ,one word more on this4 ,there is a type of individual1 most often met with among writers1 who fears to make a statement of his thought definite1 because he has a faint suspicion that it may be wrong4 ,he wishes to allow himself plenty of loopholes to slip out of an intellectual position in case any one should attack it4 ,hence he never says outright1 8,such and such is the case40 ,instead1 his talk or writing is guarded on all sides by such expressions as 8,it is probable that10 8it is possible that10 8the facts seem to indicate that02 or 8such and such is perhaps the case40 ,not satisfied with this he makes his statement less positive by preceding it with an 8,i believe10 or worse yet1 with an 8,i am inclined to believe40 ,this is often done under the impression that it is something noble1 that it signifies broadmindedness1 lack of dogmatism1 and modesty4 ,it may4 ,if it does1 so much the worse for broadmindedness1 lack of dogmatism1 and modesty4 ,never yield to the temptation to word your thoughts in this manner4 ,if you truly and firmly believe that 8such and such is the case0 say 8such and such is the case02 not 8it is possible that such and such is the case10 or 8such and such is perhaps the case10 or 8it is my belief that such and such is the case40 ,people will assume that it is your belief and not somebody else's4 ,suppose you have made a positive statement4 ,and suppose you later find it to be wrong8 ,well then1 acknowledge that it is wrong4 ,acknowledge that you have done something human2 that you have done something which every man before you has done2 that you have made a mistake4 ,i realize such a confession is hard4 ,it is the severest blow you can deal to yourself1 and few people will think the better of you for doing it4 ,most of them will say1 8,see1 he acknowledges himself that he was wrong40 ,and with these people1 both you and your theory will be far more discredited than if you had clung to it until the end of your life1 no matter how obviously1 how flagrantly1 it opposed itself to facts4 ,but a few people will appreciate your sacrifice4 ,a few people will admire your bigness4 ,and you will grow4 ,you will grow as a thinker4 ,what is more1 you will grow morally4 ,and the time will come when you will have fewer and fewer occasions to reverse yourself1 for you will learn to think longer before you advocate an opinion4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the question of the avoidance of prejudice and the necessity of breaking off doubt1 remains still unsettled4 ,there can be no doubt that the two desideratums conflict2 that to cut off doubt1 or even to refrain from stimulating it1 is to encourage by so much the dominance of prejudice4 ,the answer to this question will depend entirely upon the particular problem under consideration4 ,no rules can be laid down4 ,everything will depend upon the importance of the question1 upon the possibility or frequency of occasions when we may be called to act upon the answer1 and upon the way in which the answer will affect conduct when we do act upon it4 ,where the importance of the question is trifling1 it would be foolish to sound our prejudices too deeply1 or to go to any elaborate pains to collect evidence4 ,where immediate1 unhesitating action is required1 remaining in doubt might be fatal4 ,any decision would be better than no decision4 ,when the importance of the question is vital1 or when the possibility of having to act on the answer is distant1 we can afford to preserve our doubts1 to suspend final judgment1 for years--perhaps during our entire life2 and we should spare no pains to investigate fully all that relates to the question4 ,just how much trouble to take1 how long to keep alive the attitude of doubt in any particular question1 will have to be decided by the individual4 ,his own judgment must be the sole criterion4 ,,vi ,,debate ,,and ,,conversation ,the mind engages in many activities which have power either for evil or good4 ,just what influence they will exert depends on how we use them4 ,one of the most important of these activities is debate4 ,debate brings in that unequaled form of incentive for all action which psychologists call 8social pressure0 and which here means nothing more than the desire to excel a fellow-being in some line of endeavor4 ,when debating we concentrate1 and we do so without conscious effort4 ,we are too interested in defeating our opponent to wander from the subject4 ,we are forced to think rapidly4 ,not least of all1 we are compelled to think articulately4 ,but with all its advantages1 debate is one of the most potent sources of prejudice4 ,in the heat of controversy1 we adopt any and every argument that comes handy4 ,every statement of our opponent is considered only in the light of how it can be refuted4 ,we are willing to use almost any objection against him1 so long as we believe he will see no flaw in it4 ,it is of utmost importance that we find how to avoid these pitfalls4 ,the first thing we must do is to adopt a complete change of attitude toward an opponent's arguments4 ,whenever we meet with a fact which we would not like to cite in a debate2 because1 to put it mildly1 it would not help our side2 we should carefully investigate that fact4 ,we should consider whether if true it changes the aspect of things4 ,we should get rid of the idea that in order to vindicate our side we must answer every contention our opponent advances4 ,for this opponent of ours will very likely be a man in full possession of his senses2 at least some of his arguments will be rational4 ,when they are1 we should be willing to acknowledge it4 ,their truth does not necessarily make his side right4 ,his arguments may be irrelevant2 they may be outbalanced by some other reason or reasons4 ,attempts to prove too much are liable to put us into the position of the lawyer whose client is alleged to have been sued for putting a hole in a borrowed umbrella4 ,the lawyer proved first1 that his client did not borrow the umbrella2 second1 that there was a hole in it when he got it2 third1 that there was nothing the matter with it when he returned it4 ,after you have had a friendly argument with an acquaintance1 you take leave either with the satisfaction that you have bested him1 or with a vague consciousness that though you were right1 he was just a trifle more skillful at bringing forward arguments4 ,but having this satisfaction or dissatisfaction1 you seldom think any more of the matter until the next time you meet him4 ,now this practice is helpful neither to your debating nor your thinking4 ,after you have taken leave of your acquaintance1 and are left to the quietude of your own thoughts1 you should mentally run over your controversy4 ,you should dispassionately consider the bearing and weight of his arguments2 and then1 reviewing your own1 ask yourself which were valid and relevant and which were not4 ,if you find you have used a sophism you should resolve never to use it again1 even though your opponent may have been unable to answer it4 ,the question of morals aside1 this is poor practice if you ever hope to become a thinker4 ,in the end1 it will tell against you even as a debater4 ,you can use your debates for constructive material as well as for criticism4 ,after a controversy you can go over the arguments of your opponent which you could not refute1 or refuted but lamely1 and think of the answers you might have given4 ,of course you should take care that these answers are not sophistical4 ,the question will very likely come up again2 if not with the same friend1 then with another1 and when it does you will find yourself prepared4 ,but the best debater1 or at least he who gets the most from debating1 is the man who looks for evidence and thinks not for debate1 but to obtain a correct conclusion4 ,after he has reached a conclusion in this manner1 he does not advance every possible reason to support it4 ,he does not even utilize the reasons on which others base a similar belief1 if he does not himself accept these reasons4 ,he states merely that evidence and those reasons which have led him to accept his conclusion1 nothing more4 ,while we are considering debate1 ,i may well say a few words about conversation in general4 ,we do not and cannot always argue with our friends1 even though we scorn the dictums of formal etiquette4 ,but because we do not argue1 it does not follow that we gain nothing4 ,in fact1 ordinary conversation has advantages numerous over debate1 not the least of which is the comparative freedom it gives from prejudice4 ,but the value of conversation depends both on what we talk about1 and whom we talk with4 ,too much of our talk is on petty matters1 is uneducative4 ,and even if we converse on worthy topics1 it will profit us little if we do not talk with worthy people4 ,when we commune with a dull mind1 our thoughts are forced1 in some degree1 down to the level of that mind4 ,but dull people do not usually talk of weighty matters1 nor do active intellects dwell long on trifles4 ,therefore if we rightly choose our companion we can conscientiously leave our path of conversation to choose itself4 ,one aspect of conversation remains to be treated--its corrective power4 8,there is a sort of mental exposure in talking to a companion2 we drag our thoughts out of their hiding-places1 naked as it were1 and occasionally we are not a little startled at the exhibition4 ,unexpressed ideas are often carefully cherished until1 placed before other eyes as well as our own1 we see them as they really are40#ad ,,vii ,,thinking ,,and ,,reading ,up to now ,i have dealt with thinking almost as if it could be carried on without external aid4 ,as with cautionary and constructive thought1 ,i have perhaps been led to do this because of a reaction from the usual insistence upon reading as indispensable to mental improvement1 and the corresponding neglect of the need for independent thinking4 ,men thought before there were books1 and men can still think without reading1 but they cannot4 4 4 4 ,i was about to remark that they could not read without thinking1 but on second thought ,i am inclined to doubt it4 ,however1 we have clung to the natural order1 for we first considered unaided thinking1 then the help given by conversation and dispute1 and finally we are to examine the aid rendered by reading4 ,there can be no doubt that this order follows the development of thought both in the individual and in the human race4 ,while no complaint can be made of lack of quantity in what has been written on reading1 most of it has not taken up the subject from the proper standpoint2 still less has dealt with it in the right manner4 ,there has been counsel galore urging people to read2 and recently there has been a great deal of advice on what to read4 ,but comparatively very little has been said on how to read4 ,at one time reading was regarded an untainted virtue1 later it was seen that it did us no good unless we read good books1 and now there is a dawning consciousness that even if we read good books they will benefit us little unless we read them in the right way4 ,but even where this consciousness has been felt1 little attempt has been made to solve the problem systematically4 ,leisurely discourses1 pretty aphorisms1 and dogmatic rules have been the forms in which the question has been dealt with4 ,such conflicting adages as 8,a good book should be read over and over again02 and 8,the art of reading is the art of skipping10 are not very serviceable4 ,the necessity of some sort of orderly treatment is evident4 ,before we consider how to read1 some queer person may ask us to put the previous question1 8,should we read at all80 ,now the value of reading has1 in times past1 been seriously doubted by thinkers and non-thinkers4 ,the philosopher ,democritus put out his eyes so that1 ceasing to read1 he might think4 ,we are not going to follow his example4 ,but we can readily sympathize with him when we think of the many learned men who have read themselves into dreamy stupidity2 men who know what everybody else thought1 but who never have any thoughts of their own4 ,we must admit that the arguments of these cranks are at least good medicine for the prevalent belief that the more a man reads the more he will know and the better thinker he will become4 ,learning to think by reading is like learning to draw by tracing4 ,in each case we make the work of another man our basis1 instead of observing directly from ,nature4 ,the practice has its value1 it is true2 but no man ever became a great artist by tracing1 and no man will ever become a great thinker by reading4 ,it can never become a substitute for thought4 ,at best1 as ,john ,locke says1 8,reading furnishes the mind only with materials of knowledge1 it is thinking makes what we read ours40#ae ,our problem may be divided in two parts3 7#a7 ,what ratio should our reading bear to independent thinking1 and 7#b7 how should we read when we do read8 ,it may be thought that we can learn something about the first question by investigating the practice of great thinkers4 ,but the outcome of such an investigation is likely to be disappointment4 ,kant1 for instance1 was an omnivorous reader2 so were ,huxley and ,sir ,william ,hamilton2 and outside the circle of philosophers1 men as unlike as ,gibbon1 ,macaulay1 ,milton and ,thomas ,a4 ,edison4 ,on the other hand1 ,spencer seldom ever read1 and ,hobbes is famous for his remark that if he had read as much as other men he would have known as little4 ,auguste ,comte was unique in that he read copiously until he conceived his ,positive ,philosophy1 and then hardly at all until the end of his life4 ,even were it found that most great thinkers adhered to nearly the same practice1 it would prove little2 for how could we tell whether they were good thinkers on account of1 or in spite of it8 ,we can agree a priori1 however1 with the remark of ,schopenhauer that 8the safest way to have no thoughts of one's own is to take up a book every moment one has nothing else to do40 ,and we may agree with him further3 8,a man should read only when his thoughts stagnate at their source1 which will happen often enough even with the best of minds4 ,on the other hand1 to take up a book for the purpose of scaring away one's own original thoughts is a sin against the ,holy ,spirit4 ,it is like running away from ,nature to look at a museum of dried plants1 or gaze at a landscape in copper-plate40#af ,it would be folly to lay down any fixed mathematical ratio between the time we should devote to reading and the time we should give to thinking4 ,but one hour given to reading plus one hour given to thinking would be certainly more beneficial than two hours devoted entirely to reading4 ,you can find quite a number of serious-minded men who put by a certain period each day for reading4 ,but how many of them put by any time at all for thinking8 ,it would be unjust to say they do not think4 ,but at best their thinking is merely accidental--and apparently considered so4 ,surely it is as important that we lay aside a definite period each day for thinking as it is that we lay aside some time for reading4 ,but how much this time should be and whether it should bear any specific ratio to the time given to reading can best be decided after a consideration of the problem of how to read4 ,this problem has unfortunately been much misconceived4 ,those who have laid stress on the maxim1 8,a good book should be read over and over again10 have done so in the belief that this is the best way to get the most out of a particular book4 ,but the object of reading is not to get the best out of any one book1 but out of reading in general4 ,a realization of this end will change our problem somewhat4 ,it will bring us to a consideration1 for example1 of the law of diminishing returns4 ,while the more we re-read a book the more we get out of it1 it must be remembered that with a few possible exceptions1 every time we re-read it we add less to our knowledge than we did the previous time4 ,this means that we can usually make much faster progress by reading other books1 in which case we do not merely read over what we already know for the most part4 ,whether re-reading is ever justified1 and when1 is a question which will be considered a little later4 ,the law of diminishing returns applies to an entire subject as well as to a single book4 ,that is to say1 past a certain point1 every book we read on a particular subject1 while it will probably add to our knowledge1 will not yield as much return as a book of equal merit on another subject1 new to us4 ,the problem of reading asks how we can acquire the greatest number of ideas1 and how we can arrive at truth rather than the verdict of an author4 ,it assumes a limited time and asks how we can use that time most profitably4 ,not least of all1 it asks how we can best combine our reading with original thought4 ,from the remarks already made1 it is evident that we cannot prescribe any one method for dealing with all books4 ,even works of similar nature and merit will be treated in different ways1 depending on the order in which we read them1 and like conditions4 ,the mastery of any book will not be an end in itself4 ,it will be subordinated to the larger end of obtaining the best from reading as a whole4 ,but for the sake of clearness1 ,i shall for the present consider our end as the mastery of some particular subject1 and shall indicate a plan of reading to best serve that end4 ,needful qualifications will come later4 ,i shall first outline a typical plan of study1 and then review and explain it in detail4 ,assuming you have chosen a subject1 your first step should be to do a little unaided thinking on it4 ,next ,i would advise the selection of a comprehensive text book4 ,this should be read critically and written note made of the problems taken up which you do not believe have been adequately treated1 or the solutions of which are in any way unsatisfactory4 ,these you should think out for yourself4 ,a second book may in some cases be read in the same thorough manner as this first one1 and the problems recorded in the same way4 ,after that all books on that subject may be read 8hop1 skip and jump0 fashion1 for the new problems or solutions they suggest4 ,i do not expect the foregoing plan to be strictly adhered to1 for the nature of the subject studied will make certain changes necessary4 ,however1 it demands more detailed explanation and perhaps defense4 ,let us take up the first step advised--giving a little unaided thought to the subject4 ,my only reason for advising 8a little0 thinking1 is that ,i know if ,i asked more the reader would probably do nothing at all4 ,indeed many readers will fail to see the necessity of thinking about a subject before studying it4 ,many may even question the possibility of doing so4 8,how is a man to think about a subject on which he knows nothing80 you ask4 ,let us1 however1 consider4 ,the very fact that you want to study a subject implies that the phenomena with which it deals are not clear to you4 ,you desire to study economics1 for instance1 because you feel that you do not understand everything you should about the production1 distribution and consumption of wealth4 ,in other words1 something about these phenomena puzzles you--you have some unsolved problems4 ,very well4 ,these problems are your materials4 ,try to solve them4 8,but how can ,i solve them when ,i know nothing of economics80 ,kindly consider what a science is4 ,a science is nothing more than the organized solution of a number of related problems4 ,these problems and their answers have been changed and added to the ages through4 ,but when the science first started there was no literature on it4 ,it originated from the attempts of men to solve those problems which spontaneously occurred to them4 ,before they started thinking these men knew nothing of the science4 ,the men who came after them availed themselves of the thoughts of those before1 and added to these4 ,the whole process has been one of thought added to thought4 ,yet1 in spite of this1 people still cling to the belief1 even if they do not openly avow it1 that we never can make any headway by thinking1 but that in order to be educated1 or cultured1 or to have any knowledge1 we must be reading1 reading1 reading4#ag ,i almost blush for this elaborate defense4 ,everybody will admit the necessity for thinking--in the abstract4 ,but how do we regard it in the concrete8 ,when we see a man reading a good book1 we think of him as educating himself4 ,when we perceive a man without a book1 even though we may happen to know that he is engaged in reflection1 we do not look upon him as educating himself1 though we may regard him as intelligent4 ,in short1 our habitual idea of thought is that it is a process of reviewing what we already know1 but not of adding anything to our knowledge4 ,of course no one would openly avow this opinion1 but it is the common acting belief none the less4 ,the objections to thought are inarticulate and half-conscious4 ,i am trying to make them articulate in order to answer them4 ,to return1 then1 to the remark that we should use as materials for unaided thinking the problems which occur spontaneously4 ,you will find when you begin to solve these that other problems will arise1 and that up to a certain point1 the deeper you go into a subject--the more critical you are in your thinking--the more problems will occur4 ,perhaps it would be too much to ask you to solve all of these4 ,yet even a little of this preliminary thinking will be of immense help in reading4 ,it will give you a far better sense of the importance of different problems which a book considers1 and you will not judge their significance merely by the space it devotes to them4 ,an author may indeed bring before us certain problems which had not hitherto occurred1 and stimulate in us a sense of their importance4 ,but this artificial stimulation can never take the place of natural and spontaneous wonder4 ,once we have obtained a solution of a problem which has arisen spontaneously and from within1 we do not easily forget it4 ,our independent thinking1 too1 will have given us an idea of the difficulties presented by problems1 and will make us more critical in reading and more appreciative of the solutions of an author4 ,not least of all1 if we read first we are extremely liable to fall into the routine and traditional ways of considering a subject1 whereas if we first think1 we are more likely in our insophistication to hit upon an idea of real originality4 ,one last objection to thinking before reading remains4 ,schopenhauer has answered it in his forcible manner3 8,a man may have discovered some portion of truth or wisdom after spending a great deal of time and trouble in thinking it over for himself1 adding thought to thought2 and it may sometimes happen that he could have found it all ready to hand in a book and spared himself the trouble4 ,but even so it is a hundred times more valuable1 for he has acquired it by thinking it out for himself4 ,for it is only when we gain our knowledge in this way that it enters as an integral part1 a living member1 into the whole system of our thought2 that it stands in complete and firm relation with what we know1 that it is understood with all that underlies it and follows from it1 that it wears the color1 the precise shade1 the distinguishing mark1 of our own way of thinking1 that it comes exactly at the right time1 just as we felt the need for it2 that it stands fast and cannot be forgotten40#ah ,despite the strong case that ,schopenhauer makes out1 ,i am satisfied with my former advice--that a little thinking will suffice4 ,not only because1 as already said1 the reader will probably do nothing if advised to do more2 but because after a certain amount of thinking has been done1 it is more profitable to avail ourselves of the wisdom of the ages1 stored in books1 and to do our thinking after we have acquired the main outlines of this wisdom4 ,for when we think a problem out1 with the feeling that even after we have obtained a solution we shall probably find it in a book later1 we have not the incentive that we have when we feel we have covered most of the old ground and that thinking may bring us into new territory4 ,the practice of ,gibbon remains to be considered3 8,after glancing my eye over the design and order of a new book1 ,i suspended the perusal until ,i had finished the task of self-examination2 till ,i had revolved in a solitary walk all that ,i knew or believed1 or had thought on the subject of the whole work1 or of some particular chapter4 ,i was then qualified to discern how much the author added to my original stock1 and ,i was sometimes satisfied by the agreement1 sometimes armed by the opposition of our ideas40#ai ,the trouble with this method is that it is not critical enough2 that is1 critical in the proper sense4 ,it almost amounts to making sure what your prejudices are1 and then taking care to use them as spectacles through which to read4 ,we always do judge a book more or less by our previous prejudices and opinions4 ,we cannot help it4 ,but our justification lies in the manner we have obtained these opinions2 whether we have infected them from our environment1 or have held them because we wanted them to be true1 or have arrived at them from substantial evidence and sound reasoning4 ,if ,gibbon had taken a critical attitude toward his former knowledge and opinions to make sure they were correct1 and had then applied them to his reading1 his course would have been more justifiable and profitable4 ,in certain subjects1 however1 ,gibbon's is the only method which can with profit be used4 ,in the study of geography1 grammar1 a foreign language1 or the facts of history1 it is well1 before reading1 simply to review what we already know4 ,here we cannot be critical because there is really nothing to reason about4 ,whether ,george ,washington ought to have crossed the ,delaware1 whether 8shall0 and 8will0 ought to be used as they are in ,english1 whether the verb 8avoir0 ought to be parsed as it is1 or whether ,hoboken ought to be in ,new ,jersey1 are questions which might reasonably be asked1 but which would be needless1 because for the purposes we would most likely have in mind in reading such facts it would be sufficient to know that these things are so4 ,we might include mathematics among the subjects to be treated in this fashion4 ,though it is a rational science1 there is such unanimity regarding its propositions that the critical attitude is almost a waste of mental energy4 ,in mathematics1 to understand is to agree4 99 99 99 99 99 ,we come to the second step outlined in our plan of study--the selection of a comprehensive text book4 ,every large subject has gathered about it a vast literature1 more than one man can ever hope to cover completely4 ,this literature may be said to consist wholly of two things3 information as to facts1 and opinions on those facts4 ,in other words1 any book you read on that subject will probably contain some facts new to you and will contain also the thoughts and reflections of the author4 ,of course you should endeavor to learn as many facts as possible4 ,but it is not necessary to know all that has been thought about the subject4 ,you are supposed to have a mind of your own2 you are supposed to do some thinking for yourself4 ,but though it is not necessary that you know all that has been thought1 it is well that you know at least part of what has been thought1 and so far as possible1 the best part4 ,for as just pointed out1 if you attempt to think out an entire subject for yourself you will expend great energy and time in arriving at conclusions which have probably already been arrived at during the generations that the subject has had its being4 ,therefore you should endeavor to get1 in as short a time as possible1 the greatest number of important facts and the main outlines of the best that has been thought4 ,so if you sincerely intend to master any subject1 the best way to begin is by the selection of the most comprehensive and authoritative work you can secure4 ,the man who desires to study any subject is commonly advised to read first a small 8introductory0 book1 then a larger one1 and finally the largest and most authoritative volumes4 ,the trouble with this practice is that you will have to study each book in turn4 ,if you take up the most thorough book first you need merely glance through the smaller books1 for the chances are that they will contain little that is new to you1 unless they happen to be more recent4 ,the only justification for reading a small book first is that the larger books are apt to be technical and to assume a certain knowledge of the subject4 ,however1 the authoritative treatise or treatises on a subject usually refer far less to the smaller books than the smaller books do to them4 ,any greater depth of thought which the larger works may possess can be made up for by increased concentration on the part of the reader4 ,of course if a man does not intend to master a subject thoroughly1 but only to get some idea of its broad outlines1 the case is different4 ,he would then be justified in reading a small work4 ,another advantage of beginning a subject with the study of a comprehensive and authoritative volume or main textbook1 is that you avoid confusion4 ,the man who has mastered one foreign language1 say ,french1 will always find his knowledge of great benefit to him for the study of another language1 such as ,spanish4 ,but any one who has begun at about the same time the study of two or more foreign languages must remember his confusion1 and how his vague knowledge of one tongue hindered him in the acquisition of the other4 ,so with reading4 ,when we peruse a book in the usual casual way we do not master it4 ,and when we read a book on the same subject immediately after it1 the different viewpoint is liable to cause bewilderment and make us worse off than before the second book was started4 ,we do not like to devote a lot of time to one book1 but would rather run through several books in the same time1 believing that we thereby gain more ideas4 ,we are just as mistaken as a beginner in swimming who would attempt to learn several strokes before having mastered one well enough to keep afloat4 ,a main text being of such importance1 its choice involves responsibility4 ,but how are we to know whether one book is superior to another until we have read both8 ,and if we are confronted with this difficulty even when familiar with a subject1 how much greater must be our task when we know nothing of it8 ,these difficulties do not appear so formidable in practice4 ,failing other means1 the best method of selecting a main text is by reputation4 ,if we do not even know what book has the best reputation1 we can easily find out by referring to so acknowledged an authority as the ,encyclopedia ,britannica1 and consulting the bibliography in the article on the subject4 ,but reputation does not furnish the only means of selecting4 ,by merely glancing through a book1 stopping here and there to read entire paragraphs--a task of ten or fifteen minutes--we can form an estimate which later reading will usually justify4 ,for an author betrays himself in every line he writes2 every slightest remark reveals in some manner the breadth and depth of his thought4 ,but just how well we can judge a book in this way depends both on our own ability and on the time we devote to glancing through it4 ,a few general requirements in a main text have been implied in stating the purpose of having one4 ,the book with the best reputation is not necessarily the best for you4 ,in economics ,adam ,smith's ,wealth of ,nations1 though easily the most famous book on the subject1 would hardly be suitable as a main text because it has been superseded4 ,but though recency is always an asset1 this does not mean that the most recent book is always or even usually the best4 ,the common idea1 though it is usually but vaguely formulated1 is that the writer of the more recent book has had all the previous books to draw upon1 and has therefore been able to extract the best from all of them and add to this his own thoughts4 ,the fallacy of this has been pointed out in the trenchant language of ,schopenhauer3 8,the writer of the new book often does not understand the old books thoroughly1 and yet he is unwilling to take their exact words2 so he bungles them and says in his own bad way that which has been said very much better and more clearly by the old writers1 who wrote from their own lively knowledge of the subject4 ,the new writer frequently omits the best things they say1 their most striking illustrations1 their happiest remarks1 because he does not see their value or feel how pregnant they are4 ,the only thing that appeals to him is what is shallow and insipid40 ,the value of recency will depend on the subject2 while it would be essential in aviation1 its importance would be far less in ethics4 ,it is not well to take as your main text a book presenting a number of different and conflicting viewpoints4 ,one purpose of a main text is to avoid confusion4 ,do not start the study of psychology1 for instance1 by reading a history of the subject giving the views of different thinkers4 ,begin by taking up one definite system4 ,finally1 be sure to select a book covering the entire field4 ,do not1 for instance1 take a volume on the tariff to begin the study of economics4 99 99 99 99 99 ,we pass now to the third step advised--to read critically4 ,by this ,i do not mean that we should read skeptically or to confute everything an author says4 ,i mean simply that we should resist our natural tendency to have our minds swayed by every opinion he expresses4 ,i mean that before allowing an idea to slip into our minds we should first challenge its truth2 we should examine its evidence4 ,perhaps you have listened to a debate4 ,after the affirmative had made his impassioned plea you were all for the affirmative4 ,when the negative came forward and presented his case1 you found yourself favoring him4 4 4 4 ,why do debaters always try to get the last say8 ,why is it that in a formal debate1 the affirmative1 which usually has the last say1 is most often the side that wins8 ,i could state the reason bluntly4 ,but if ,i did the honorable judges of such controversies would not feel that their critical powers had been complimented4 ,the tendency to absorb the opinions of others manifests itself to just as great a degree in reading4 ,i have held debating up as an example merely because it brings out more strongly1 more strikingly1 the effects of such a tendency4 ,but how can it be resisted8 ,if we have thought out a subject thoroughly1 if we have acquired a stock of clear and definite ideas on it1 criticism in reading will largely take care of itself4 ,by dint of our own thinking we will know what is relevant and what is not2 we shall be able to judge the truth and importance of the various arguments offered4 ,the chances are1 however1 that we shall not have given much previous thinking to the subject1 and that even if we have we shall not have gone as far as the author1 who doubtless availed himself of other books4 ,consequently certain problems which he takes up will not even have occurred to us1 and hence will not have received our consideration4 ,but where our thinking has not helped us1 and even where it has1 we should look critically upon every statement of an author1 instead of lazily acquiescing in it4 ,the difference between critical and ordinary reading1 is that in the former we look for objections1 in the latter we wait until they happen to occur to us4 ,even then we do not hold our objections steadily in mind2 we are as likely as not to accept later arguments based upon one we have previously objected to4 ,in order to avoid this perhaps the best we can do when we object to any statement or believe we have found a fallacy1 is to make written note of it in the margin4 ,to some extent this will prevent forgetting it4 ,too few or too many marginal notes are both extremes to be shunned4 ,if we make too many we shall be apt to lose a true sense of proportion and fail to distinguish essential criticisms from nonessentials4 ,the only way we can keep clear of this extreme is to avoid quibbling and hair-splitting1 making only such written criticisms as we feel we could unblushingly defend before the author himself4 ,often however we may feel that a statement is untrue1 or that an argument is fallacious1 and yet be unable to point out just where or how it is so4 ,in this case perhaps the best plan would be merely to put a question mark in the margin in order to remind ourselves that the statement has not been fully accepted4 ,we ought to make sure what we object to because it is a peculiarity of the human mind that it does not require evidence for a statement before accepting it2 it generally accepts any statement which has no evidence against it4 ,unless we reject a statement and know why we have done so1 it is liable to insinuate itself in our reasoning1 and the longer it remains the more difficult it is to get rid of it4 ,this is why it is so important to avoid as many pitfalls as possible at the beginning of a subject4 ,the reader may find that even when he reads critically he will accept a certain statement at the time2 and then perhaps much later1 say a month1 an objection to that statement will occur to him1 or he will see that it at least ought to be qualified4 ,for an explanation of this we must go back to an analysis of the thinking process4 ,every idea which enters the mind1 either from independent thinking or from reading1 is accepted as true if it is in full conformity with our past experience as we remember it4 ,in all thinking or reading1 the new idea arouses associates on its entrance4 ,an hypothesis or principle1 for instance1 arouses in our minds past experiences of particular instances4 ,if all these conform it is accepted4 ,but in ordinary uncritical reading or thinking1 only a few associates are aroused4 ,in critical reading1 we look for as many associates as possible1 especially those which do not conform4 ,it is this purpose kept in mind which helps to recall and awaken these associates4 ,no matter how critical our attitude1 however1 we cannot at any given time recall every relevant associate1 though later a 8non-conforming0 associate is likely to occur to us by pure accident4 ,while you are criticising a book line by line1 and after you have finished reading it1 you should note the importance and relevancy of the arguments accepted and rejected4 ,while an author may make a statement with which you disagree1 its truth or falsehood may not affect the rest of what he has to say1 or it may affect merely a few corollaries drawn from it4 ,in other cases the truth of his entire conclusion may depend upon it4 ,again1 an author may incontrovertibly prove something--which is entirely without bearing on the subject4 ,this means that you should keep the precise question constantly before your mind4 ,often you will find an author making a statement which really amounts to nothing more than a mere airing of his prejudices1 or at best the bare statement of a conclusion4 ,if he says1 8,socialism is the greatest menace of our civilization10 and leaves it go at that1 not telling how or why1 you should mentally note this as a statement1 as a statement merely2 you should not allow it to influence your opinion either way4 ,finally1 remember that though you may be able to refute every argument an author brings forward in support of a conclusion1 his conclusion may still be correct4 ,it is possible for a man to be right for the wrong reasons4 ,while ,i believe all the foregoing suggestions are judicious and necessary1 ,i am willing to admit that their wisdom may reasonably be doubted4 ,but there is one practice about which there can be no controversy--that of making sure you thoroughly understand every idea of an author4 ,while most people will not verbally contradict this advice1 their actual practice may be a continual contradiction of it4 ,they will be in such haste to finish a book that they will not stop to make sure they really understand the more difficult or obscure passages4 ,just what they hope to gain it is difficult to say4 ,if they think it is wasting time to try to understand every idea1 it is surely a greater waste of time to read an idea without understanding it4 ,to be sure1 the difficulty of understanding may be the fault of the author4 ,it may be due to his involved and muddled way of expressing himself4 ,it may be the vagueness of the idea itself4 ,but if anything this is all the greater reason why you should attempt to understand it4 ,it is the only way you can find whether or not the author himself really knew what he was talking about4 ,to understand thoroughly the thought of another does not necessarily mean to sympathize with it2 it does not mean to ask how that other came by it4 ,it means merely to substitute as far as possible concrete mental images for the words he uses1 and analyze those images to discover to what extent they agree with facts4 ,better to carry this out1 you might follow another practice of immense value4 ,whenever you are puzzled as to an author's meaning1 or whenever you do not care to accept his solution of a problem but are undecided as to what the solution is1 or whenever you want to carry an idea further than he has1 or above all1 whenever an original and important relevant thought is suggested to you1 you should take your eyes from your book--shut it if necessary--and let your thinking flow on2 give it fair play1 even if it takes an hour before your vein of suggested thought exhausts itself4 ,of course this practice will prevent you from finishing a book as soon as you otherwise would4 ,and if finishing a book be your aim1 ,i have nothing to say4 ,but if your end is to attain true1 sound knowledge1 knowledge which you will retain2 if your object is to become a thinker1 the practice will prove of unspeakable benefit4 ,it will not interfere with concentration4 ,remember your object is to concentrate primarily on the subject1 not on the book2 you intend to become a thinker1 not an interpreter or a commentator or a disciple of any author4 ,and there are two reasons why this thinking should not be put off until after you have finished a book4 ,the first and more important is that after you have finished reading1 most of the ideas will have unrecallably dropped out of mind4 ,the second is that when you are undecided about the solution of a problem1 you will often find later arguments depending upon that solution4 ,unless its truth or falsity is decided in your own mind you will not know how to deal with these later arguments4 ,i have spoken of feeling that an argument is fallacious1 and of being unable to point out just where it is so4 ,to cease reading for a while1 and to endeavor to make these inarticulate objections articulate1 is excellent practice for training analytic powers and developing clearness of thought4 ,another way of reading a book is what ,i may call the anticipating method4 ,whenever a writer has started to explain something1 or whenever you see that he is about to1 stop reading and try to think out the explanation for yourself4 ,sometimes such thinking will anticipate only a paragraph1 at other times an entire chapter4 ,school and college text-books1 and in fact formal text-books generally1 often contain lists of questions at the end of the chapters4 ,where you find these1 read them before you read the chapter1 and where possible try to answer them by your own thinking4 ,this practice will make you understand an explanation much more easily4 ,if your thinking agrees with the author's explanation it will give you self-confidence4 ,it will make you realize whether or not you understand an explanation4 ,if you were not able to think the thing out for yourself you will appreciate the author's explanation4 ,if your thinking disagrees with that of the author you will have an opportunity to correct him--or be corrected4 ,in either case your opinion will rest on firmer grounds4 ,not least of all you will be getting practice in self-thinking4 ,after reading and criticising a book1 it is a good practice to study one taking a different viewpoint1 or written even in direct opposition4 ,you will doubtless find that it points out many fallacies and controverts many statements in the first book1 which you allowed to pass unchallenged4 ,ask yourself what the trouble was4 ,was your attitude too receptive8 ,did you swallow words without substituting clear mental images8 ,did you fail to trace out the consequences of a statement8 ,all these questions will help you do better the next time4 ,because of your ignorance of the facts1 your failure to refute a conclusion will sometimes not be your fault4 ,but even here1 though you cannot contradict an author's statement of facts1 you can criticise conclusions drawn from those facts4 ,take an instance4 ,in making an inquiry into the causes of fatigue1 ,professor ,mosso of ,turin selected two dogs as nearly alike as possible4 ,one he kept tied1 and the other he exercised until it was thoroughly tired4 ,he then transfused blood of the tired dog into the veins of the rested one1 and produced in the latter every sign of fatigue4 ,from this he concluded that fatigue was due to certain poisons in the blood4 ,now we cannot contradict the fact of this experiment3 that the rested animal was made to look tired4 ,but we can question the inference drawn4 ,the truth of the conclusion aside1 was the evidence sufficient to establish it8 ,might not1 for instance1 similar results have been produced upon the rested dog if blood of another rested dog had been transfused into it8 ,had ,mosso made such an experiment8 ,other objections should easily occur to one4 ,questions which admit of treatment by studying both sides are too numerous to mention4 ,the literature of philosophy furnishes particularly good material4 ,examples which at present occur to me are ,sir ,william ,hamilton's philosophy versus ,mill's ,examination of ,sir ,william ,hamilton's ,philosophy1 and ,herbert ,spencer's ,first ,principles versus ,william ,james' essay1 ,herbert ,spencer's ,autobiography and ,henri ,bergson's criticism of ,spencer in his ,creative ,evolution4 ,uncritical students of the history of philosophy often find themselves agreeing with each thinker in turn1 no matter how much he contradicts previous thinkers1 and end by acquiescing in the last system they read about4 ,i remember a philosophy class which completed its studies with ,pragmatism4 ,of course it was merely a coincidence1 but at the end of the course fully nine-tenths of the students declared themselves ,pragmatists6 ,it is almost needless to remark that an author who pretends to point out fallacies in another is not necessarily right4 ,there are men who pride themselves on 8reading both sides of a subject02 but unless they have been critical1 their knowledge is not half as clear or as likely to be true as that of a man who has read only one side1 but who has read it critically4 99 99 99 99 99 ,we have now to consider the next step outlined in the suggested plan of reading--8written note should be made of the problems taken up which you do not believe have been adequately treated1 or the solutions of which are in any way unsatisfactory4 ,these you should think out for yourself40 ,when reading a book you will often come across a statement1 perhaps an entire chapter1 with which you disagree4 ,this disagreement should be recorded in the form of a question2 as for instance1 8,is such and such the case80 ,you may doubt whether an author's explanation really explains4 ,you may have a vague inarticulate suspicion that he is sliding over facts1 or that his solution is too superficial4 ,this suspicion should also be recorded in the form of a question4 ,often again1 while reading1 a problem connected with the subject will occur to you which the author has not even considered4 ,this too should be recorded4 ,all these questions should unfailingly be written1 either in the margin or on a piece of paper or notebook kept always at hand4 ,you should then set aside a definite time for thinking and attempt to solve the questions for yourself4 ,and in thinking for yourself you should not make the author's remarks the basis of your thinking4 ,you should deal with a problem almost as if it had never occurred to any one else but you4 ,simply because somebody else has been satisfied with a certain solution1 that is no reason why you should be4 ,you should deal directly with the facts1 data and phenomena under consideration2 not with the opinions of others about those facts1 data and phenomena4 ,you should not ask yourself whether the pragmatists are right1 or whether the nominalists are right1 or the socialists1 or the evolutionists1 or the ,democrats1 or the ,presbyterians1 or the hedonists1 or what not4 ,you should not ask yourself which 8school0 of thinking you ought to belong to4 ,you should think a problem out for yourself1 in every way that phrase implies4 ,at the end you may1 incidentally1 find yourself agreeing in the main with some school of thought4 ,however1 this will be only accidental1 and your thought will be much more likely to be true4 ,but you should never agree with a school of thought any more than independent thinking leads you to4 ,of problems dealt with in this manner1 some will take ten minutes1 others a week4 ,if you encounter a particularly obstinate problem it may be best to leave it for a while1 say a week or two or even longer1 and go on with other problems4 ,when problems are thus recurrently treated it may take months1 even years1 before a satisfactory solution is reached4 ,in such cases you should be willing to give months and even years to their solution4 ,if a problem is not important enough to devote so much time to you may be forced to abandon it2 but you should constantly keep in mind the fact that you have not solved it1 and you should be willing to admit to others that you have not solved it4 ,never allow mere intellectual laziness to stifle your doubts and make you think you have solved a problem1 when you know in your heart of hearts that you have worked yourself into the state of belief merely to save yourself mental discomfort4 ,when most of your problems have been solved and your views made definite you may resume your reading4 ,you may proceed to other books on the subject4 ,as to the suggestion that another book on the subject might be dealt with in the same manner as this first one3 this will depend largely on the individual subject4 ,it will depend on just what books have been written on that subject4 ,if none completely or adequately covers the field1 or if there are two or more good books representing radically different viewpoints1 more than one book probably ought to be studied in this comprehensive manner4 ,but this must be left to the reader's discretion4 99 99 99 99 99 ,we come now to the last part of our plan--8after that all books may be read #8hop1 skip and jump' fashion1 for the new problems or solutions they suggest40 ,i have already implied the necessity for this in formulating the law of diminishing returns4 ,after we have read several books on a subject it would be manifestly foolish to continue reading books on that same subject in toto4 ,we would merely be going over again knowledge already in our possession1 instead of using our time more profitably by entering new territory4 ,but any good book will contain something unique2 some facts or principles to be found nowhere else2 or perhaps merely an unusually clear way of explaining some old principle1 or a new light on it4 ,this we should endeavor to get without wasting our time by plowing through the entire volume4 ,theoretically our problem is difficult2 on its face it would seem impossible4 ,we are to read all the important parts of a book2 that is1 the parts most important for us1 and nothing but the important parts4 ,but until we read it how are we to know whether any given part of a book is important8 ,in practice1 however1 our difficulty is not so formidable4 ,we can eliminate the greater mass of the relatively useless part of a book by a glance at its table of contents4 ,if we see there titles which suggest subjects or aspects of subjects in which we are not interested1 or that we feel we already know enough about1 or that are simply outside the particular purpose we have in consulting that book at all1 we can omit those chapters and confine ourselves to the others4 4 4 4 ,when we were children first learning to read we had to look at every letter in a word1 then spell it out4 ,finally its meaning dawned upon us4 ,as we became more proficient we did not have to look at every letter2 we could read words as wholes with the same rapidity as the separate letters4 ,accurate psychological tests have determined that a man can read such words as 8and0 and 8the0 with even greater rapidity than any single letter composing them4 ,we finally reach the point where we can read short phrases at the same rate as we formerly could single words4 ,but the secret of the scholar who can cover efficiently much more ground than ordinary men is not so much that he reads faster1 as that he reads less4 ,in other words1 instead of reading every word he glances down a page and sees certain 8cue0 words or rather 8cue0 phrases1 for the eye and mind take in phrases as wholes4 ,if he is familiar with the subject 7and he is not to employ this method unless and until he is7 he knows immediately1 by 8a sort of instinct0 as ,buckle called it1 whether any new or valuable thought is on that page4 ,when he finds that there is he involuntarily slackens his pace and reads that thought at ordinary reading pace or even slower4 ,sometimes indeed he will read whole chapters slowly1 word for word1 if the contents are sufficiently novel and important to warrant it4 ,read by this 8hop1 skip and jump0 fashion a book the size of the present volume might take an hour or even less4 ,but it is almost impossible to give even an approximate estimate of the time such reading ought to take4 ,of course the longer you spend the more you will get out of a book1 but the return per time invested will be less and less4 ,on the other hand if you read the book too fast you may be wasting your time altogether2 you may end by understanding nothing at all4 ,much will depend upon the originality and depth of the book1 upon the reader's familiarity with the subject1 and upon his native mental qualities4 ,many may object to practicing the foregoing method because they have a vague feeling that it is their duty to read every word in a book4 ,i suspect that the real reason for this is simply so that when asked they can conscientiously say they have read the book4 ,whereas if they had followed this skipping method they would be able to say only that they had 8glanced through it0 or at best that they had 8read parts of it40 ,to this objection ,i have nothing to say1 for ,i am confining my remarks to those in search of truth and knowledge rather than conversation and the good opinion of those who believe that reading from cover to cover is the only path to wisdom4 ,i might point out in passing1 however1 that if we do follow this method there will be a half dozen books which we can say we have 8glanced through0 to one which we would otherwise have been able to say we had 8read40 ,this way of dealing with a book is constructive and positive as opposed to the negative method of critical reading4 ,for we read for suggestion only2 we carry forward some line of thought of an author1 which is better for intellectual development than trying to find if he was wrong and where he was wrong4 ,not only is this positive method more interesting2 in some respects it is better even for criticism4 ,for in carrying forward an author's line of thought1 noting its consequences and implications and considering different cases where it applies1 we find whether or not it leads to absurd conclusions2 whether or not all concrete instances conform with it4 ,it should be kept in mind that this method is not to be followed until the main text-book has been studied4 ,consequently when it is followed your mind will have been fortified by previous reading and thinking2 valuable thoughts of an author will tend to impress you and be remembered1 while his trite or erroneous ideas will tend to be ignored4 ,but after all1 what is important is not your attitude or method at the time of reading a book1 but the thinking done later4 ,the critical attitude has its shortcomings1 for when we are on the lookout for an author's mistakes we often miss the full significance of his truths4 ,on the other hand when 8reading for suggestion0 we may too often allow an error to pass unquestioned4 ,but both these disadvantages may be overcome if we do enough thinking afterward4 ,only one thing ,i must insist on3 make sure you understand every sentence of a book4 ,do not 8guess0 you understand it4 ,do not slide over it in the hope that the author will explain it later4 ,do not work yourself into the belief that after all it is not really important4 ,rather than this1 better by far do not read the book at all4 ,not only will you get little or nothing from it but you will be forming the worst of intellectual habits--that of thinking you understand when you do not4 ,if you have made every reasonable effort to understand an author and then have not succeeded1 write in the margin 8,i do not understand this10 or draw a line alongside the sentence or passage4 ,if you have to do this too often you should put the volume aside for a time4 ,it is either too advanced for you or it is not worth reading4 ,as to the thinking you do after reading4 ,often problems connected with the subject of a book you have read may arise spontaneously in mind1 or an objection to a statement may suddenly occur to you when thinking on some other topic4 ,of course when this happens you should not stifle your thoughts4 ,but besides this1 definite periods should be put aside for thinking on what you have read and on the problems you have written4 ,i cannot insist on this too strenuously or too often4 ,a good task to set before yourself is to take every idea you agree with in a book and try to treat it as a 8germ40 ,tell yourself that you will develop it beyond the point where the author left off4 ,of course this will not always be possible4 ,you will seldom succeed4 ,but there is nothing like hitching your wagon to a star1 and it will do no harm to set this up as an ideal4 99 99 99 99 99 ,a few miscellaneous problems remain to be considered4 ,how should we deal with authors with whom we disagree fundamentally8 ,herbert ,spencer relates that he twice started ,kant's ,critique of ,pure ,reason1 but disagreeing fundamentally with the first and main proposition he ceased reading4 ,now to do this is to give an author too much credit for consistency4 ,for even if every other proposition he sets forth is ostensibly a corollary from his leading one1 some of them will contain much truth4 ,it is impossible to be consistently wrong4 ,add to this the possibility that the author may be right on his first proposition after all4 ,however1 no book with a viewpoint radically different from our own should be used as a main text1 for we would get little benefit from it4 ,if the book is by an obscure author we may safely lay it aside altogether4 ,but if it is by so famous and so bepraised a philosopher as ,kant we should at least glance through the entire volume for suggestions4 ,how many times ought we to read a book8 ,i have already partly answered this in formulating the law of diminishing returns4 ,few books are worth re-reading4 ,rather than read one book twice on any given subject it will most often be more profitable to read another book on it4 ,for the second will not only serve as a review of previous knowledge1 but will furnish you with new ideas1 different aspects and new problems4 ,certain books1 however1 can never be replaced by others4 ,they occupy this position either because they deal with a subject not elsewhere dealt with or because they take an entirely novel aspect1 or solely because they are the works of supreme genius1 for while the main conclusions reached in works of this last type may be found elsewhere1 the manner of thinking can never be4 ,these books should be read twice4 ,the main text-book selected on any subject will usually be chosen because it is the best and most comprehensive work on that subject4 ,for this reason it should be read a second time even if such reading is only of the hop1 skip and jump variety4 ,we should not re-read a book immediately upon the first completion but should always allow a long interval to elapse4 ,there are several reasons for this4 ,after an interval we acquire perspective2 we are in a position to know whether a book has done us any good and just about how much4 ,we may find after this interval that a work of which we thought quite highly at the time of reading has really not helped us appreciably either in thought or action4 ,we may find that we have outgrown the need of it4 ,even if we finally decide to re-read we shall find the wait of immense help to our memory4 ,if we re-read a book after an interval of six months1 three years after our second reading we will remember its contents much better than if we had read it three times in unbroken succession4 ,add to this that in the lapse of time we shall have forgotten most of the work1 and shall therefore approach it the second time with greater interest than if it were still fresh in mind2 that our experience1 reading and thinking in the meantime will make us see every sentence in a different light1 enabling us to judge our own marginal criticisms 7if we have made any7 as well as the book1 and the advantage of waiting cannot be doubted4 ,i do not believe it will ever be necessary to read a book more than twice1 that is1 so far as thought and knowledge are concerned4 ,with books read for their style or for mere amusement the case is different4 ,how long should one read at a sitting8 ,some men find that their thought is choked by reading4 ,some find it stimulated4 ,but results vary according to the length of time reading is carried on4 ,reading for very long periods at a stretch often deadens original thought4 ,the writer finds that he nearly always derives benefit from reading for short periods1 say ten or fifteen minutes4 ,this is in some measure due to the increased concentration which short periods allow4 ,on the other hand1 some people find that a certain momentum is acquired during long reading periods4 ,the reader can only experiment to find how long a period best suits his individual case4 ,how about concentration8 ,this has been considered in relation to independent thinking1 but in reading the problem is somewhat different4 ,in thinking our task is to choose relevant associates4 ,in reading the associates are chosen for us4 ,our task is to stick to them1 instead of following the associates which occur to us either from what we read or from sights and sounds about us4 ,but associates which occur to us from what we read are of two kinds3 relevant and irrelevant1 and the former should of course be followed out4 ,this however should be done deliberately1 in the manner ,i have previously indicated1 and when the vein of suggested thought has been exhausted we should bring attention back to our book4 ,the problem of concentration is not a very serious one in reading4 ,it may sometimes be difficult to concentrate on a book4 ,but it is infinitely easier than concentrating on a problem by unaided independent thought4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the plan of reading ,i have laid out is merely suggestive4 ,what ,i chiefly wanted to show was that all books cannot be treated alike1 that we cannot lay down dogmatic inflexible rules to apply to every volume4 ,our method of reading will vary with the nature of a book or of the subject it treats4 ,it will depend upon the books we have already read and even upon the books we contemplate reading later4 ,the good you get out of reading will depend entirely on how you allow it to affect you4 ,if every book you read suggests more problems1 gives you worth-while questions and topics to think about in spare moments1 enriches your intellectual life and stimulates your thought1 it is performing its proper function4 ,but if you read solely to answer problems you cannot answer for yourself1 if every time you are puzzled about anything you run to a book to have it explained1 and accept without question the explanation there given2 in short1 if you use your reading to save yourself from thinking1 you had better stop reading altogether4 ,smoking is a far less harmful form of dissipation4 ,i have not yet definitely indicated the ratio which time given to reading should bear to time devoted to thinking4 ,i have avoided this because of the many factors to be taken into account4 ,but if the reader happens to have a spare hour to devote to the improvement of his mind1 he will not go very far wrong if he gives thirty minutes to reading and thirty minutes to thinking4 ,his thinking may be on the subject he has read1 or part of it may be on other problems4 ,that is not so important4 ,but the reader must not imagine that his thinking need be restricted to these thirty minutes or any other thirty minutes4 ,the glorious advantage of thinking is that it can be fitted in at any odd moment4 ,the entire apparatus for carrying it on is always with you4 ,you do not even need a book for it4 ,i remind the reader of this at the risk of repeating myself4 99 99 99 99 99 ,it was pointed out at the beginning of this chapter that the reading of any book is not an end in itself1 but should be subordinated to the larger end of obtaining the best from reading in general4 ,but for the sake of clearness our end was temporarily considered as the mastery of some particular subject4 ,i indicated a plan of reading to best serve that end4 ,i also promised that needful qualifications would come later4 ,in stating the law of diminishing returns it was pointed out that it applied to whole subjects as well as to books1 that 8past a certain point every book we read on a subject1 while it will probably add to our knowledge1 will not yield as much return as a book of equal merit on another subject new to us40 ,while this is true it applies to but a small extent when subjects are read by the method just outlined1 for while we do not get as much out of any book as we would out of one of equal merit on another subject1 we read it so much faster that the return per time and energy expended is practically as great4 ,this fast reading is made possible by our previous knowledge on the old subject4 ,if the book on the new subject were read in the same manner1 we might get little or nothing from it4 ,with this objection out of the way ,i suggest that the reader get a specialty4 ,books read in the ordinary unsystematic fashion1 now on this subject and now on that1 leave little permanent impression4 ,even if they do1 we feel that though our range of reading may be wide we have at best but a smattering of many things4 ,in the final analysis a smattering of knowledge is in most cases of no more use than total ignorance4 ,better by far be ignorant of many things and know one thing well1 than know many things badly4 ,besides the utility of having a specialty is the pleasure we derive4 ,there is always an intense satisfaction in feeling that one is an 8expert10 an 8authority0 in some subject4 ,when some ,congressman makes an inaccurate remark which trespasses on your specialty you can write a letter to the ,times or the ,sun explaining the error of his ways1 and incidentally exhibiting your own limitless erudition4 ,when your friends get into an argument on some question within your chosen field they will remark1 8,ask ,john ,jones4 ,he ought to know40 ,and even when you have to confess abysmal ignorance on some question outside of your domains1 you may still have the satisfaction of believing that people are excusing you within themselves with an 8,oh1 well1 but he knows a lot about someology40 ,one writer estimates that 8fifteen minutes a day or a half hour three days a week devoted to one definite study will make one a master in that field in a dozen years40#bj ,this statement should interest those people who 8haven't the time0 to take up any specialty outside their own business1 but who spend at least half an hour every day in newspaper or magazine reading--with nothing to show for it at the end of twenty years4 ,just what subject you make your specialty ,i am not at present concerned4 ,it may be aeronautics1 astronomy1 banking1 ,greek history1 differential calculus1 social psychology1 electricity1 music1 philosophy of law1 submarines1 soap manufacture1 religion1 metaphysics1 sun-motors1 education1 literary style or the moon4 ,but whatever it is1 it ought to be a subject in which you are interested for its own sake--which most frequently means one which you do not make your vocation4 ,if you get tired of it1 drop it and take up something in which you are interested4 ,your thinking and study should be pursued as a pleasure--not as a duty4 ,if your subject is a narrow one1 if let us say it is merely a branch of what is generally considered a science1 you should first get a clear idea of the broad outlines of the science before taking the specialty up4 ,should you1 for instance1 select the tariff1 begin your study by using as your main text a book on general economics4 ,even if you make your specialty an entire science you will derive great help by reading in other sciences4 ,in ethics1 for instance1 a knowledge of psychology1 biology and sociology will prove of surprising value4 ,this means that for the sake of knowing the specialty itself1 if for nothing else1 you should not pursue it exclusively4 ,if ever you find yourself in danger of doing this it would be well to lay down a rule that every third or fourth book you read must be one which does not deal with the subject you have chosen as your own4 ,,viii ,,writing ,,one',s ,,thoughts ,reading maketh a full man1 conference a ready man1 and writing an exact man4--,,bacon4 ,any attempt to formulate a science or art of thinking would not be complete without at least some discussion of writing4 ,indeed writing is so closely bound up with thinking that ,i have been compelled to refer to it several times in the discussion of thought and reading4 ,i have already spoken of writing as an aid to concentration4 ,i was wont to depreciate it on account of its slowness4 ,but this is practically its only fault4 ,thoughts come to us when writing which we get in no other way4 ,one is often surprised1 when reading something one has written at a previous time1 at some of the remarks made4 ,we seem to have temporarily grown wiser than ourselves4 ,but the great advantage of writing is that it preserves thought4 ,what printing has done for humanity in preserving the knowledge of the ages1 writing will do for the individual in preserving his own reflections4 ,when some thought has occurred to us we believe at the time we are thinking it that it is ours forever4 ,we cannot conceive that it shall ever be forgotten4 ,perish that belief6 ,i have sometimes had an idea occur to me 7really671 and have believed it absolutely new1 at least so far as ,i was concerned4 ,but on looking over things written before1 ,i have found that ,i had had almost identically the same thought at another time4 ,not only did ,i forget the idea2 ,i did not even recognize it at its second appearance4 ,to be sure1 in these cases the thoughts came a second time4 ,but thoughts are seldom so obliging4 ,therefore when an idea occurs or when you have solved a problem1 even a problem suggested by a book1 you should immediately put the idea or solution in writing4 ,you may of course wait until the end of the day4 ,but the safest way of capturing an idea is to write it the minute after it flashes through your brain1 or it may be lost forever4 ,it was with this in mind that in the chapter on reading ,i advised immediately writing not only ideas but problems which occurred to one4 ,the discovery of a new problem is just as important and necessary for intellectual advance as the solution of an old one4 ,if we do not write our problems we are apt to forget they exist2 we put ourselves in danger of assuming without question some proposition which is not true4 ,to facilitate the writing of your thoughts and meditations ,i suggest a notebook kept specially for that purpose4 ,in addition to this you should always carry about with you some blank paper and a pencil1 so as to be ever ready to jot down anything4 ,to write an idea does not of course imply that you cannot later reject it1 or change it1 or develop it further4 ,the elusiveness of thoughts is most strikingly brought out when writing them down4 ,when we are writing a long sentence we have in mind the exact words with which we are going to finish it4 ,but our attention is called for the moment to the physical act of writing1 and presto6--the words are gone2 we are compelled to end our sentence in a different way4 ,i have mentioned the advantages of shorthand and typewriting for keeping pace with thought4 ,i need merely repeat my advice to use these acquirements if you have them4 ,thoughts1 ,i must repeat1 are fleeting4 ,no device for trapping them should be despised4 ,not least among the advantages of a notebook in which to write thoughts is the permanent historical record it gives4 ,every thought we write should be dated1 day1 month and year1 like a letter4 ,when we come to read over ideas jotted down from time to time in this manner1 we shall see before us an intellectual autobiography4 ,we shall see how our recent thoughts compare with those written sometime ago4 ,we shall see just what our opinions were at certain times1 and how they have changed4 ,and we shall see whether our mental progress has been marked1 or whether we have been standing still4 ,it may be considered absurd to suggest that every thought you write in your note-book be put in the best style you can command4 ,we are wont to differentiate 8style0 and 8matter40 ,it is doubtful whether this distinction is quite valid4 ,it is doubtful whether we know just what we mean when we make it4 ,indeed ,arnold ,bennett goes so far as to say3 8,style cannot be distinguished from matter4 ,when a writer conceives an idea he conceives it in the form of words4 ,that form of words constitutes his style1 and it is absolutely governed by the idea4 ,the idea can only exist in words1 it can only exist in one form of words4 ,you cannot say exactly the same thing in two different ways4 ,slightly alter the expression1 and you slightly alter the idea4 ,surely it is obvious that the expression cannot be altered without altering the thing expressed6 ,the writer1 having conceived and expressed an idea1 may1 and probably will1 #8polish it up4' ,but what does he polish up8 ,to say that he polishes up his style is merely to say that he polishes up his idea1 that he has discovered faults and imperfections in his idea1 and is perfecting it4 ,the idea exists in proportion as it is expressed2 it exists when it is expressed1 and not before4 ,it expresses itself4 ,a clear idea is expressed clearly and a vague idea vaguely40#ba ,mr4 ,bennett1 ,i suspect1 is a victim of exaggeration4 ,but this much is true3 ,thought and style are mutually dependent to a far greater degree than is generally supposed4 ,not only will an improvement in a thought improve its wording2 an improvement in wording will improve the thought4 ,now as to the application of this4 ,i have referred to the occurrence in reading of 8inarticulate0 objections4 ,the sole reason these are inarticulate is because the objection is too vague even to find expression4 ,in a case like this we should word our objection the best we can1 no matter how ridiculous or indefensible it at first sounds4 ,but we should word it in as many ways as possible2 we should say it in all different sorts of ways2 we should write it in every different kind of way4 ,gradually our objection will become definite1 clear1 forceful4 ,in short1 we shall not only have improved our way of stating our thought2 we shall have improved the thought itself4 ,to study clearness of statement or acquisition of vocabulary is to study means of improving thought4 ,your notebook should not be used solely for the entry of 8thoughts0 as such1 but any striking way of wording a thought which occurs to you should likewise be immediately written4 ,but while there is some truth in ,arnold ,bennett's statement that the wording is the thought1 from another point of view its very opposite is true4 ,the wording is never the thought4 ,strictly speaking1 8thought0 is something which can exist only in the mind4 ,it can never be transferred to paper4 ,what then is it that we write8 ,if words and sentences are not thought1 what are they8 ,if they are not thought how is it possible to transfer thought through the medium of writing8 ,the fact is that words1 though they are not thought1 are the associates of thought4 ,you hear the word 8horse40 ,very likely the visual image of a horse arises in mind4 ,this image1 idea1 notion1 8concept10 will depend on your experience of particular horses4 ,it will never be a logical abstract of these4 ,it will never be a horse without color1 particular size1 sex or breed1 as is sometimes thought4 ,it may however have different elements in it from different horses you have seen4 ,it may be the image of just one particular horse you remember4 ,but no such thing as a general concept exists in the mind4 ,we have a particular image which stands for all horses4 ,the name of course is general4 ,it--or its definition--may be called the logical concept4 ,but the name itself is not used in thought4 ,it is an arbitrary symbol which serves merely to arouse a particular image associated with it1 and this image is dealt with as if general4 ,this image we shall call the concept4 ,it is the working concept3 the psychological as opposed to the logical concept4 ,as your concept of a horse will depend on your experience of particular horses1 another person's concept will depend on his experience of that animal4 ,and as his experience can never be exactly the same as yours1 his concept1 though it may be similar to yours1 will not be the same4 ,not only will no one else have the same mental image or concept as you but you yourself will never have exactly the same image twice4 ,this image will vary with the setting in which it occurs--with the associates which happen to arouse it4 ,if you are reading about a great battle and the word 8horse0 is mentioned1 a certain kind of horse will suggest itself to you4 ,if you are reading about a grocery wagon and see the word 8horse0 another kind will suggest itself4 ,this whether the animal is described by adjectives or not4 ,at one time you may think of the horse as in motion1 at another time as at rest4 ,unfortunately many so-called psychologists seem to consider the concept1 even this image-concept1 as something fixed in the individual1 or at best as only changing with actual experience of the thing conceived4 ,the truth is that the image or images aroused on hearing any word are not the same for two seconds at a time4 ,they are fluid1 dynamic2 never static1 immobile4 ,they are associates of the words in a constant state of flux4#bb ,when the concept of one individual varies from one moment to the next1 how must the concepts of different individuals differ from each other6 ,i have instanced the idea of a horse because it is so simple and concrete4 ,in actual thinking we never meet with a simple separated concept or with a single word2 we deal with at least an entire sentence4 ,this means that our images vary even more widely at different times than was the case in the example4 ,it means that the images of other people are at a correspondingly greater variance from ours4 ,as to the application of all this to writing4 ,we have an idea2 thinking it important we decide to jot it down4 ,now we cannot jot down the idea1 but only words associated with it4 ,we cannot even write all the words associated with it1 for there are too many4 ,so we write a comparative few2 and we say we have written the idea4 ,but all we have really written is something associated with the idea4 ,when we read this over at a later time we shall not have the same ideas aroused as were in mind originally1 but at best only similar ideas4 ,for the associates of words1 like all associates1 are constantly changing2 and thanks to the frailties of human memory exactly the same associates are never aroused twice4 ,so after a long interval they will be much different than at the time we wrote4 ,the reader will often have the experience of 8writing a thought0 and thinking it very important1 but on reading it at another time he will fail to see why he ever considered it worth putting on paper4 ,the truth is that at the time he wrote the idea it probably was important1 because he had the right concepts4 ,but when he came back to the words he had written they failed to re-suggest the former concepts and associates4 ,this difference between words and thought is even more strikingly brought out when the written thought is read by some other person than the writer4 ,the writer is likely at least to have approximately the same concepts as at the time of writing4 ,and he is greatly aided by his memory in recalling the concepts and associated ideas previously in mind1 the words suggesting these4 ,but when a person reads what some one else has written1 he translates the words into the concepts previously connected with them in his own mind4 ,thus an author can never literally transfer an idea4 ,he can merely put down certain arbitrary symbols1 which will serve to arouse a similar thought in his readers4 ,how greatly the reader's thought differs from the author's it is difficult if not impossible to determine1 for minds can only communicate by words4 ,it is this difference in associated concept which often makes a reader fail to appreciate the profoundest thoughts of an author1 and even1 on the other hand1 occasionally to see depth where it does not exist4 ,we come now to the solution of the problem to which this rather extended discussion has been preparatory4 ,how is an author to convey1 as nearly as possible1 his actual idea8 ,and the answer is3 he should word it in as many different ways as possible4 ,if a person had never been to a city and you wanted to give him an idea of it1 you would show him photographs taken from different viewpoints4 ,one photograph would correct and supplement the other4 ,and the more photographic viewpoints he saw the more complete and accurate would be his idea--the more his concept would approximate the actual city4 ,but he could never more than approximate2 he could never obtain the idea of a man who had visited that city4 ,an author's language is a photograph of his thought4 ,he can never actually transfer an idea1 but by wording it in different ways he can show different photographs of it4 ,if1 for example1 a second wording does not conform with the first concept which a reader has formed1 the reader will be obliged to modify that concept4 ,and if the idea is repeated in a number of different ways he will have to modify his concept so much that he will gradually more and more approximate the idea of the author4 ,i remember the story in some educational treatise of an inspector who entered a school room1 asked the teacher what she had been giving her class1 and finally took up a book and asked the following question1 8,if you were to dig a hole thousands and thousands of feet deep1 would it be cooler near the bottom or near the top1 and why80 ,not a child answered4 ,finally the teacher said1 8,i'm sure they know the answer but ,i don't think you put the question in the right way40 ,so taking the book she asked1 8,in what state is the center of the earth80 ,immediately came the reply from the whole class in chorus1 8,the center of the earth is in a state of igneous fusion40 4 4 4 ,there is1 and has been for the past generation1 a great cry in educational circles that we should teach things1 not words4 ,in some instances this is inadvisable1 even impracticable4 ,but if the teacher in the foregoing story had taken the trouble to word her idea in at least more than one way1 she might have implanted a real idea in her pupils4 ,she would at least have found that as it was they had none4 99 99 99 99 99 ,one more question remains4 ,if you are writing a composition1 a letter1 an essay1 or even a book1 what is the best way to get down all your thoughts1 without losing any of value2 to get them down in the best order and in the best style8 ,in other words what is the path of greatest efficiency in transferring thoughts from your mind to paper8 ,we have already considered such devices as shorthand4 ,of course dictation1 where it is possible1 is an obvious advantage4 ,but ,i mean here to consider the aspects of the problem which apply more especially to compositions of some length4 ,it is related of ,auguste ,comte that he composed his books by thinking them over down to the minutest details1 down to the very phraseology of the sentences1 before penning a single word1 but that when he came to writing he could turn out an astounding amount of work in a given time4 ,unless a person have a remarkable memory1 however1 he will forget most of what he has thought by the time he comes to writing it4 ,comte's method might nevertheless be profitably applied to short sections of compositions4 ,and where conciseness or perspicuity are desired1 it will often be found useful to think out an entire sentence before writing a word of it4 ,perhaps the best way of ensuring efficiency in writing is by the card system4 ,this consists in writing on a separate card every valuable idea that occurs to you1 immediately after it occurs4 ,when you finally come to writing you can arrange these cards in any order desired1 throwing out the ideas you no longer consider important1 and adding those which are necessary to complete or round out the work4 ,,ix ,,things ,,worth ,,thinking ,,about ,the man who cannot wonder1 who does not habitually wonder1 is but a pair of spectacles behind which there is no eye4--,,carlyle4 ,up to now ,i have treated exclusively of how to think1 but have made no mention of what to think4 ,i have treated of the best methods of dealing with different subjects and questions2 ,i have not considered what subjects or problems are most worth dealing with4 ,of course the important thing is that you do think4 ,it is not absolutely essential that the results of your thinking are results which can be directly made use of4 ,thinking is an end in itself4 ,most men imagine that 8thinking for the sake of thinking0 may appeal to philosophers1 but means nothing to them1 as they like to think only when by so doing they can forward some practical end4 ,these people do themselves an injustice4 ,perhaps you1 ,o reader1 are among them4 ,if so1 let me appeal to your personal experience4 ,have you ever tried to solve a toy puzzle1 tried to take the two wire hooks apart without bending them8 ,or have you ever stopped to tackle a problem on the family page of your evening or ,sunday newspaper8 8,a grocer buys fifteen dozen eggs1 he sells--0 you know what ,i mean4 ,you admit that you have4 ,exactly4 ,you have been thinking for the mere sake of thinking4 ,if you protest that you didn't care about the thinking1 that you took no pleasure in the thinking1 which was merely incidental1 but that what really urged you on and gave you pleasure was the solution of the puzzle1 you are again deceiving yourself4 ,the thinking was not incidental4 ,thinking and problem solving are identical4 ,the fact is that you set yourself to solving a problem1 to removing a mental hindrance1 for the mere sake of getting the answer1 with absolutely no thought of what you were going to do with the answer when you got it4 ,but if you can derive so much pleasure from thinking which you cannot put to use1 how much greater should be your pleasure when your conclusions can be utilized8 ,for when you think of something useful1 you have not only the present pleasure of solving your problem1 but the ulterior pleasure of applying your solution to action1 or to the solution of some further problem4 ,and while ,i again admit that thinking is an end in itself1 this does not prevent it from being at the same time a means to some further end4 ,after all is said there is really no reason why we should be prejudiced against problems or subjects that are useful4 ,the mere decision that we should think of useful questions is insufficient4 ,very few questions are without some use4 ,even the solution of the family page puzzle might some day be useful in solving a similar problem arising in your own business2 and even if this never came to pass you might spring the puzzle on your friends1 and make yourself socially more interesting4 ,thought given to a question in a debating book now before me1 8,resolved1 that ,ferocious ,wild ,beasts are more to be dreaded than ,venomous ,reptiles10 might result in knowledge which would come handy in selecting equipment if one decided to journey to the wilderness of ,south ,america4 ,but there are millions of problems of as much use as these2 and it is not within the power of one lone mortal1 of years three score and ten1 to compass even a corner of them4 ,our question is not--what problems are of use81 but--of how much use are certain problems81 or stated in another way1--what is the relative utility of problems8 ,any adequate consideration of this question would involve the selection of some criterion for utility1 and the testing of individual problems by that criterion4 ,but to treat such a question with anything like justice is beyond the scope of this book2 it would require almost a volume in itself4 ,it is almost the same as the problem1 ,what knowledge is of most worth81 and the most masterly treatise on that question which has ever been written can be found in ,herbert ,spencer's epoch-making little work1 ,education4 ,i sincerely hope that the reader study this4 ,but ,i hope even more earnestly that before he does so he first think the problem out independently1 for it is one of the most important he can put before himself4 ,but our present question--that of the relative importance of problems--is slightly different from that of the relative importance of knowledge4 ,the first deals with thought and the second with information1 or the materials of thought2 the first with a process of getting knowledge and the second with knowledge itself4 ,i believe for example that a knowledge of his own body and of the laws of health is the most valuable a man can have1 but there are few problems concerning the body which ,i would include in the first rank4 ,there are several reasons for this4 ,in the first place1 while it may be true that such questions taken as a whole are more important than any other class of questions1 taken separately they are relatively minor2 there are no one or two questions of all-encompassing importance to which all the others are subsidiary4 ,moreover1 such questions1 while they undoubtedly require thought for their solution1 depend to a relatively great extent on observation and experiment4 ,no sane medical student would sit down and follow out a lengthy course of reasoning as to where the heart is2 he would merely observe or dissect1 or consult the book of a man who had dissected1 and save mental fatigue4 ,not least of all1 questions of physiology require extensive1 highly technical and detailed information--information which requires years of special study to acquire--before any thinking that is at all safe can be put upon them4 ,so in estimating the relative value of problems1 there are other considerations besides the value of knowledge4 ,but it is not my purpose here to discuss the general principles upon which the selection of worth-while questions should be made4 ,that task ,i leave to the reader4 ,i have chosen rather the concrete path of suggesting a list of questions which ,i consider of great import4 ,i believe that no matter how much thought the reader gives to any one of them he will not be losing his time4 ,i have elsewhere pointed out that the more knowledge a man has the more problems he will have4 ,it is equally true that unless a man has some knowledge on a subject he will not be able to appreciate or even understand some of its most important problems4 ,it is only when we begin to think of subjects that we discover problems and realize their significance4 ,in stating most of the following problems1 therefore1 ,i have often thought it necessary to add a few sentences in explanation1 and have sometimes stated a question in a variety of forms in order to more clearly convey the thought4 99 99 99 99 99 ,are specific characteristics1 acquired during the lifetime of an individual1 inherited by his offspring8 ,i have referred so often to this problem and its importance that further explanation is hardly necessary4 8,characteristics0 of course refer to intellectual and moral as well as physical characteristics4 ,what is the influence of the individual mind on society and of social environment on the individual8 ,does the form of government determine the character of a people1 or does the character of a people determine their form of government8 ,or do government and character react on each other1 and how8 ,the same question may be asked of all other social institutions4 ,does the religion of a people determine their character1 or does the character of a people determine their religion8 ,this whole problem is somewhat similar to that immediately preceding1 regarding the interaction of the individual and the social mind4 ,is society for the benefit of the individual or is the individual for the benefit of society8 ,should the jurisdiction of the government be extended or curtailed8 ,or should it be extended in some directions and curtailed in others8 ,does the answer to this problem depend on the answer to the previous one8 ,another form of the same problem is3 ,what is the proper sphere of government8 ,should the government grant monopolies8 ,patents1 for example8 ,what would be the most practicable plan for abolishing or minimizing war8 ,those who do not wish to beg the previous question may first ask whether it is always desirable to prevent war1 whether war is always an evil4 ,what is the effect of war on the physical future of the race8 on national and individual character8 on government8 on national liberty8 on personal liberty8 ,what are the ethics of war8 for aggression8 for territorial conquest8 for 8national honor08 for defense of a weaker nation8 for defense against invasion8 ,what is the effect of preparedness8 of universal preparedness8 of preparedness of an individual nation8 ,in each case what are the principles on which the extent of preparedness should be determined8 ,what are the fundamental causes of war8 ,how can they be removed8 ,is it possible to remove all of them8 ,which is the rightful owner of land1 the community or the individual8 ,to state the problem in another form3 ,should private land ownership be abolished8 ,who should be entitled to vote8 ,this of course is a question similar to woman suffrage1 but it is much broader4 ,it deals not only with the qualification of sex1 but of age4 ,should any one under twenty-one have the vote8 ,the validity of property and educational qualifications should also be considered4 ,how should the relations of the sexes be regulated8 ,put in slightly narrower and perhaps less objectionable form3 ,what would be just laws governing marriage and divorce8 ,what is the effect of attempted ,state interference with the law of supply and demand8 ,does the unrestricted working out of this law forward ultimate justice8 ,just what is the validity and the meaning of the expression 8,the law of supply and demand08 ,the question could be taken up in connection with minimum wage laws1 railroad rate regulations1 8extra crew0 laws1 etc4 ,which is the best policy3 free trade1 revenue tariff1 or protective tariff8 ,or under what conditions is each best8 ,with what classes of commodities8 ,what would be an equitable and sound currency system8 ,this question is somewhat technical1 and would have to be considered in the form of a number of subsidiary problems4 ,ought money to have an intrinsic value8 ,what is the effect of 8fiat0 paper currency on money of intrinsic value and on prices8 ,the effect of credit8 ,the effect of fluctuations in the supply of gold8 ,ought there be a double standard or a multiple standard8 etc4 ,should conduct be judged by the pleasure or happiness it yields8 ,stated in another form1 almost a different problem3 ,is utility a good moral guide8 ,should conduct be judged by its tendency to produce individual well-being1 or should it be judged by its tendency to produce the well-being of all humanity1 or of all sentient beings8 ,this problem cannot be lightly dismissed in favor of universal well-being4 ,this becomes apparent when we attempt to give an undogmatic and non-question-begging answer to the query3 ,why should a man act for the benefit of others8 ,no science is more provocative of thought than ethics4 ,the question of whether acts should be declared good or bad as they tend to produce pleasure or happiness1 either individual or in humanity as a whole1 or whether 8virtue0 or 8morality0 is an end in itself1 is one of the most subtle and elusive we can attempt to solve2 no matter which answer we give we are brought into logical and psychological dilemmas from which it seems impossible to escape4 ,this is also true of the problem of whether our knowledge of what constitutes right and wrong comes from experience or from intuition4 ,the broadest form of the ethical problem1 which includes the two preceding italicized problems1 is3 ,what is the proper criterion for determining right and wrong conduct8 ,or even less dogmatic3 ,can there be a criterion for determining right and wrong conduct1 and what is it8 ,somewhat allied with the ethical problem is that problem of problems3 how to live8 ,by this is meant how to put the most into life and get the most out of it2 what vocation to follow2 what hobbies1 amusements1 avocations to take up2 how to plan time by months1 by weeks1 by days1 by hours4 ,how much time and energy do certain activities deserve8 ,how much can we afford to give them8 ,restated3 what activities are of most worth8 ,of course every one does think of problems connected with the art of living4 ,but he thinks of them as little unconnected questions4 ,barely indeed does any one go about the solution of the general problem of living in an orderly1 systematic manner4 ,to insist upon the broad practical bearings of the problem would be unnecessary1 absurd4 ,by its very nature it is the most 8practical0 question we can ask4 ,any particular solution or treatment may be impractical1 but this does not affect the question itself4 ,what are the respective influences of environment 7education1 experience1 etc47 and innate tendencies in determining character8 ,which is the greater determinant8 ,does pleasure depend upon the satisfaction of instinctive desires1 or do desires for certain activities depend upon the pleasure accompanying the previous performance of such activities8 ,does an activity or the possession of an object give us pleasure because we have previously desired it1 or do we desire an activity or an object because we have previously obtained pleasure from it8 ,or do pleasure and desire interact1 and just how8 ,the solution of this psychological problem is of tremendous importance in ethics4 ,does the mind depend entirely on the brain8 ,that is1 are all thoughts1 emotions1 feelings1 due to material changes in the brain8 ,the answer we give to this problem may determine our answer to the question of immortality4 ,what knowledge is of most worth8 ,i have so fully discussed the importance of this question and the method of proceeding with its solution that further explanation is needless4 ,one sphere of thought where the thinker is compelled to be original2 where it is practically impossible for him to fall into beaten tracks1 is invention4 ,but there is useless as well as useful invention4 ,a man's ambition may range all the way from inventing a machine to harness directly the limitless power of the sun1 down to devising a tenacious tip for shoelaces4 ,but he should be careful about inventing something already patented4 ,he should be even more careful to avoid inventing something for which there is no demand4 ,one of ,edison's first patents was for a machine to register quickly the votes of legislative assemblies4 ,and it worked4 ,but the legislative assemblies didn't want it1 because they didn't want their votes quickly registered4 ,that would have ended good old filibuster methods4 ,another invention of great uselessness which has been several times attempted is a machine to write words just like the human hand writes them4 ,there are really so many useful things which do not exist and for which there is a demand1 that it seems quite a pity nine out of ten patents in the files at ,washington are for things inutile4 ,if the would-be inventor cannot himself think of something really needed1 almost any big patent attorney house will send him an entire book of suggestions on 8,what to ,invent40 ,invention usually requires highly technical knowledge1 not to speak of facilities for experiment and a well-supplied purse4 ,but nothing gives more solid satisfaction to its creator than a successful appliance4 ,while the conscientious philosopher is constantly harassed by doubts as to whether1 after all1 he has discovered truth2 the inventor need not worry4 ,his machine either works or it does not work1 and he knows the truth of his thought thereby4 ,on the other hand the philosopher will always have some thoughts4 ,be they true or not they may at least be interesting and worth recording1 whereas the inventor may toil on for years and years with absolutely nothing to show for his exertion at the end4 4 4 4 ,there are a number of problems that are not of great 8practical0 importance1 but whose theoretic value is so transcendent as to compel attention4 ,among these are certain problems in psychology1 but more especially in metaphysics1 philosophy and even religion1 insofar as religion can be said to have problems4 ,is there a ,god and is it possible for man to learn anything of ,his nature8 ,some readers may object to the first part of this question4 ,but ,i state it because ,i am anxious to avoid dogmatism4 ,is the soul immortal8 ,what do we mean by the soul8 ,does science disprove the life after death8 ,what is the test of truth8 ,how shall we know truth when we have it8 ,what after all is 8truth08 ,are our wills free1 or are our actions predetermined8 ,some may object to this way of stating the question4 ,much confusion exists as to the meaning of the problem4 ,a different way of stating it would lead to different treatment4 ,what is the 8will08 ,what do we mean by 8free08 ,what do we mean by 8predetermined08 ,the problem of existence4 ,how did the universe come into being8 ,this is the last problem in which interest can be stimulated from without4 ,no matter in how many different ways he phrases it1 a writer cannot convey this sense of mystery to another4 ,it must arise from within4 ,most of the time we accept1 we take for granted1 the universe and the existent order of things1 and it requires the greatest effort to keep alive our mystification and doubt for even short periods4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the list of questions foregoing is of course merely suggestive4 ,it is impossible to select1 say twenty-five questions1 and pronounce them the twenty-five most important that can be asked4 ,i fully realize there are questions of greater importance than some ,i have propounded4 ,but ,i have not gone so far as to advise that every one of these should be thought over4 ,the list has been given merely for thought stimulation1 and to indicate what is meant by 8worth while0 questions4 ,unfortunately ,i have not been able to explain why most of these are so important4 ,to have done so would have required too much time for each individual problem4 ,it would have drawn us too far out of our subject4 ,the reader must find out or sense the importance for himself4 ,practically all of the problems given in the list come under one of the sciences1 especially if we count metaphysics or philosophy as a science1 which it is in so far as it is organized knowledge4 ,this may seem somewhat narrow4 ,now ,i admit there are important problems which are not included in any science4 ,but there are very few4 ,as soon as deep thought is given to a problem its treatment becomes systematic4 ,it either falls into one of the sciences or a new science evolves about it4 ,john ,stuart ,mill once started a journal in which he promised himself to put one thought a day1 but he did not permit himself to record there any thought on a problem falling within one of the special sciences4 ,none of the thoughts he put in the journal is of any great value4 ,it came to an abrupt end in about two months4 ,it may be objected that though the questions selected are most important in themselves1 there are other things more worth thinking about1 because of the mental discipline they yield4 ,now putting aside the fact that questions important in themselves should be dealt with ultimately--that mental discipline would be useless unless applied to important problems--,i must voice my suspicion that the most useful questions are also the best for training the mind4 ,it may be true that punching the bag will help a prizefighter in boxing4 ,but other things equal1 a man who has spent one week in actual boxing is better prepared to enter the prize ring than one who has devoted a month to bag punching4 ,the best practice for boxing is boxing4 ,the best practice for solving important questions is solving important questions4 ,nor do ,i admit the contention is valid that one problem rather than another should be thought of because it is 8deeper40 ,we cannot truthfully say that psychology is a 8deeper0 science than ethics1 or that metaphysics is deeper than psychology1 or vice versa4 ,most subjects and most problems are just as deep as we care to make them4 ,their depth depends entirely on how deep we go into them4 ,this applies especially to the so-called philosophical sciences4 ,we may give them shallow treatment or we may give them profound treatment4 ,but we shall usually find that the deepest questions are the most important questions4 ,for the most important questions have generally attracted the greatest minds2 consequently they have been given the deepest treatment2 and when a man reads the attempted solutions of these great minds his thoughts tend toward this deeper plane4 ,of course certain problems1 especially in mathematics1 can be dealt with by only one method4 ,in this case we may properly speak of some problems being objectively deeper or at least more difficult than others4 ,some objections may be offered to several of the questions in my list1 on the ground that they are invalid4 ,such problems as the immortality of the soul and the problem of existence may be declared inscrutable1 unsolvable4 ,such a problem as 8,is society for the benefit of the individual or is the individual for the benefit of society80 may be said to imply that society is something which has been voluntarily formed like the ,state4 ,it may be declared that this is not the case2 it may be objected that this question is meaningless4 ,all these objections may be justified4 ,but their truth cannot be determined until we actually attempt a solution4 ,the determination of the validity of a problem is part of the problem4 99 99 99 99 99 ,we come now to the question of what is most worth reading4 ,the simplest answer is that that is most worth reading which is most worth thinking about1 and therefore we should read those books which deal with such problems as ,i have indicated4 ,but this counsel needs to be supplemented4 ,a conservative estimate places the number of books in the world at #d1ejj1jjj4 7,this estimate was made before the war broke out1 and the war-books by now have doubtless brought the number to #e1jjj1jjj47 ,this does not mean books as collections of printed sheets of paper bound together--books as physical objects--for if it did the number would be immensely greater4 ,it means #d1ejj1jjj 7or more7 separate and distinct treatises4 ,if you were to read one book every two weeks1 you would read about twenty-five a year1 and if you read for fifty years you would cover #a1bej4 ,one book in every three thousand six hundred6 7#c1fjj67 ,from this it is apparent that even the most omnivorous reader1 even the reader who can cover a book swiftly by efficient skipping1 will at least have to ask himself before beginning a volume1 8,is this a book in a thousand8 ,can ,i afford to read this at the cost of missing nine hundred and ninety-nine others80 ,and most men who ask this question will have to substitute the number five thousand1 or even ten thousand4 ,nine-tenths of our reading is on mere chance recommendation1 passing whim or by sheer accident4 ,we catch sight of a book on a library table4 ,having nothing better to do we pick it up2 we start perusing it4 ,every book read in this way means a sinful waste of time4 ,to be sure1 a book read in this chance manner might 7accidentally7 be very good--even better than some you would have planned for2 but this will happen seldom1 and is never a justification of the practice4 ,by going a round about way to a place a man might stumble across a lost pocketbook1 but this would not justify taking round about ways4 ,the first thing needed1 then1 is that we should plan our reading4 ,perhaps the best way to do this would be to make out a list of the books we intend to read for the coming year1 or say a list of from a dozen to twenty-five volumes1 and then read them in the order listed4 ,another good plan is to jot down the title of every book we intend to read1 and keep the list about with us4 ,then when we meet with a book which we think would be good to read1 or which we feel we simply must read1 we can before starting it glance at our list4 ,the formidable array we find there will probably induce us either to give up entirely our intention to read the book before us1 or at least to put it somewhere on the list which will allow more important books to be read first4 ,some people cannot endure planning their reading in this manner4 ,it grates on them to think they are tied down to any sort of program2 it seems to deprive them of the advantages of spontaneous interest4 ,well1 if you cannot plan your reading prospectively1 at least plan it retrospectively4 ,if you cannot keep a list of books you intend to read1 at least keep a list of books you have read4 ,refer to this from time to time4 ,see whether you have been reading uniformly good literature4 ,see whether you have been reading too much on one topic and not enough on another1 and what topics you have been long neglecting4 ,but at best this method is a poor substitute for planning your reading prospectively4 ,we should plan not only with regard to topics and subjects1 but with regard to authors4 ,obviously if two men of equal ability both study the same subject1 one will get more out of his study than the other if he reads authors who treat the subject on a deeper plane--provided of course he understands them4 ,whether consciously or not1 we tend to imitate the authors we read4 ,if we read shallow books we are forced1 while reading them1 to do shallow thinking4 ,our plane of thought tends toward the plane of thought of the authors we study2 we acquire either habits of careful critical thinking1 or of dogmatic lack of thinking4 ,this emphasizes the importance of reading the best books1 and only the best books4 ,our plane of thinking is determined not alone by the good books we read1 but by all the books we read2 it tends toward the average4 ,most men imagine that when they read a good book they get a certain amount of good out of it1 and that this good will stay with them undiminished4 ,provided they read a certain number of serious books1 they see no reason why they should not read any number of superficial or useless books1 or any amount of ephemeral magazine or newspaper literature4 ,they expect the serious reading to benefit them4 ,they do not expect the shallow reading to harm them4 ,this is just as if they were to buy and eat unnutritious and indigestible food1 and excuse themselves on the ground that they ate nourishing and digestible food along with it4 ,the analogy may be carried further4 ,as it is the average of the physical food you digest which ultimately determines the constitution of your body1 so it is the average of the mental food you absorb which determines the constitution of your mind4 ,one good meal will not offset a week of bad ones2 one good book will never offset any number of poor books4 ,further1 as no one has a perfect memory1 you do not retain all you read any more than you retain all you eat4 ,therefore if you do not want your mind to retrogress1 you should not rest satisfied with books already read1 but should continue to read books at least as good as any previous4 ,as at any given time your bodily health--so far as it depends on food--is mainly determined by the meals of the last few days or weeks1 so is your mental health dependent on the last few books you have read4 ,one of the first things we should look to in selecting books is their comprehensiveness4 ,to quote ,arnold ,bennett3 8,unless and until a man has formed a scheme of knowledge1 be it but a mere skeleton1 his reading must necessarily be unphilosophical4 ,he must have attained to some notion of the interrelations of the various branches of knowledge before he can properly comprehend the branch of knowledge in which he specializes40#bc ,as an aid in forming this scheme of knowledge1 ,mr4 ,bennett suggests ,herbert ,spencer's ,first ,principles4 ,i heartily endorse his choice4 ,i would add to it the essay on ,the ,classification of the ,sciences by the same author4 ,these works are classics1 and one of the most regrettable of difficulties is that of getting people to read the classics4 ,mention to a man ,darwin's ,origin of ,species or ,descent of ,man1 and he will reply1 8,oh1 yes1 that's the theory that says men descended from monkeys40 ,satisfied that he knows all there is to know about it1 he never reads any of ,darwin's works4 ,now passing over the fact that the theory does not assert that man descended from monkeys and never intended to assert it2--what a compliment to ,darwin's thought and brevity to assume that all his books can be summed up in a phrase6 ,but ,darwin is not the only sufferer4 ,if we come across the title of a classic often enough1 and hear a lot of talk 8about it and about0 and a few quotations from it1 we gradually come to believe we know all the contents worth knowing4 ,this is why ,shakespeare1 and in fact most of the classics1 are so seldom actually read1 and why we go for our serious reading to a book on 8,how to ,read ,character from ,handwriting0 or to a sensational volume on prostitution by one of our modern 8sociologists40 ,the only way we can keep ourselves from such stuff is to lay out some definite end1 some big objective1 to be attained2 and before reading a book we should ask how that helps us to attain it4 ,i have not given a formal list of books worth reading1 nor do ,i intend to2 one of the reasons being that the work has been done so well by others4 ,ever since ,sir ,john ,lubbock published his list of one hundred best books1 the number of selections has been legion4 ,charles ,eliot's selection for his ,five ,foot ,shelf is to be commended1 and a little volume by ,frank ,parsons ,the ,world's ,best ,books4 ,of course our purpose is special3--to find the best books for making thinkers2 but the remarks already made should aid the reader sufficiently in making his own selection from these lists4 ,as previously pointed out1 if the reader is studying a specialty he can usually find a fairly well selected bibliography at the end of the article on that specialty in any standard encyclopedia4 99 99 99 99 99 ,the reader probably sees clearly by now that it is impossible to do his own thinking in every case2 that if he is to have sound knowledge on important questions he must have the courage to be ignorant of many things4 ,how much trouble to go to in any particular case it is difficult to say4 ,we can lay it down as a general principle that questions of the highest importance1 such as those of which ,i have given a suggestive list--questions which deal with facts known or easily ascertainable1 and which depend for their right solution more on thinking than on anything else--a man should solve for himself1 and should take the greatest caution in so doing4 ,on the other hand1 questions of the highest importance which depend for their solution mainly on full and detailed knowledge of highly technical facts which lie outside of one's specialty1 should be dealt with by consulting authorities and taking their word for it4 ,there still remains the great mass of questions which are relatively unimportant1 but continually coming up in our daily life1 the answers to which greatly influence our conduct4 ,time forbids us not only from thinking these out for ourselves1 but even from consulting an authority--for the selection of an authority often involves almost as much intellectual responsibility as self-thinking4 ,the only thing we can do is to accept the verdict of popular opinion4 ,custom1 convention and popular belief1 no matter how many times they have been overthrown1 have fairly reliable foundations4 ,popular ideas1 to be sure1 are products of mere unorganized experience4 ,they are empirical2 seldom if ever scientific4 ,but though they are founded on experience which is unorganized1 they are founded on so much of it that they are worthy of respect4 ,society could not long exist if it persisted in acting on beliefs altogether wrong1 though it is safe to say that popular ideas are never more than approximately right4 ,but unless and until you have either thoroughly thought over a question for yourself or have consulted an acknowledged and trustworthy authority1 it is best tentatively to accept and act on common belief4 ,to think and act differently1 merely for the sake of being different1 is unprofitable and dangerous1 all questions of ethics aside4 ,x ,,thinking ,,as ,,an ,,art ,i discovered1 though unconsciously and insensibly1 that the pleasure of observing and reasoning was a much higher one than that of skill and sport4--,,darwin',s ,autobiography4 ,to know is one thing2 to do another4 ,to know the science of thinking is not to possess the art of thinking4 ,yet ,i doubt not that there are readers who having finished1 would deem it sufficient that they had the knowledge1 and would feel they had gotten all the good or harm out of this book that there is in it4 ,they would put it aside4 ,they would think no more of it4 ,the trouble with these good people 7unfortunately ,i speak of the overwhelming majority7 is that they expect information to apply itself4 ,they expect that once they have learnt a thing they will act according to their knowledge4 ,this is the very last thing a normal human being does4 ,the only way we can ever get ourselves to apply knowledge is to do so by what will at first be a conscious effort4 ,we shall have to devote much attention to it4 ,old established custom will have to be broken4 ,we do not act according to knowledge2 we act according to habit4 ,even after we have decided1 for instance1 that we ought to give a little independent thinking to a subject before reading about it1 we shall very likely continue to read books without previous thought4 ,some people may imagine that the reason we do not practice what we learn is that we do not remember what we learn4 ,they are mistaken4 ,when learning ,german1 ,i had much difficulty in knowing what prepositions required the genitive1 dative or accusative cases4 ,i finally learnt all of them alphabetically in their respective groups1 and could rattle them off at a rate which would make most native ,germans blush for envy4 ,the only trouble was that when ,i came to an actual sentence requiring one of these prepositions ,i continually forgot to apply my knowledge4 ,some one would have to point an error out to me before it would occur to me to do so4 ,even then ,i would have to think long before the proper case occurred4 ,but while it is not true that we fail to practice a thing merely because we fail to remember it1 it is true that if we do not practice we are not very likely to remember it4 ,the only way we could remember would be by constant re-reading1 for knowledge unused tends to drop out of mind4 ,knowledge used does not need to be remembered2 practice forms habits and habits make memory unnecessary4 ,the rule is nothing2 the application is everything4 ,practice being the thing needful1 it is essential that we put aside a certain amount of time for it4 ,unless you lay out a definite program1 unless you put aside1 say1 one-half hour every day1 for pure downright independent thinking1 you will probably neglect to practice at all4 ,one-half hour out of every twenty-four seems little enough4 ,you may think you can fit it in with no trouble4 ,but no matter how shamelessly you have been putting in your time1 you have been doing something with it4 ,in order to get in your thirty minutes of thinking1 you will have to put aside something which has been habitually taking up a half hour of your day4 ,you cannot expect simply to add thinking to your other activities4 ,some other activity must be cut down or cut out4#bd ,you may think me quite lenient in advising only one-half hour a day4 ,you may even go so far as to say that one-half hour a day is not enough4 ,perhaps it isn't4 ,but ,i am particularly anxious to have some of the advice in this book followed4 ,and ,i greatly fear that if ,i advised more than a half hour most readers would serenely neglect my advice altogether4 ,after you have been able for a month to devote at least one-half hour a day to thinking1 you may then1 if you choose1 extend the time4 ,but if you attempt to do too much at once1 you may find it so inconvenient1 if not impracticable1 that you may give up attempting altogether4 ,throughout the book ,i have constantly kept in mind that ,i wish my advice followed4 ,i have therefore laid down rules which may reasonably be adhered to by an average human1 rules which do not require a hardened asceticism to apply1 and rules which have occasionally been followed by the author himself4 ,in this last respect1 ,i flatter myself1 the present differs from most books of advice4 ,above all ,i urge the reader to avoid falling into that habit so prevalent and at the same time so detrimental to character3--acquiescing in advice and not following it4 ,you should view critically every sentence in this book4 ,wherever you find any advice which you think needless1 or which requires unnecessary sacrifice to put into practice1 or is wrong1 you should so mark it4 ,and you should think out for yourself what would be the best practice to follow4 ,but when you agree with any advice you see here1 you should make it your business to follow it4 ,the fact that part of the advice may be wrong is no reason why you should not follow the part that is right4 ,most people honestly intend to follow advice1 and actually start to do it1 but 4 4 4 ,they try to practice everything at once4 ,as a result they end by practicing nothing4 ,the secret of practice is to learn thoroughly one thing at a time4 ,as already stated1 we act according to habit4 ,the only way to break an old habit or to form a new one is to give our whole attention to the process4 ,the new action will soon require less and less attention1 until finally we shall do it automatically1 without thought--in short1 we shall have formed another habit4 ,this accomplished we can turn to still others4 ,as an example let us take the different methods of looking at questions considered in the second chapter4 ,most readers will glance over these methods1 and agree that they are very helpful--and the next problem which perplexes them will probably be solved by no method at all1 or will be looked at from one standpoint only4 ,about the best1 perhaps the only way by which the reader could get himself to use habitually every valuable method possible1 would be to take one of the methods1 say the evolutionary1 and consciously apply it1 or attempt to apply it1 to a whole list of problems4 ,in this way he could learn the possibilities and limits of that particular method4 ,again1 he could take an individual problem and consciously attempt to apply every possible method to its solution4 ,he could continue such practice until he had so formed the habit of using method that it would be employed almost unconsciously4 ,concentration1 method in book reading1 and all the other practices here advocated should be learned in the same conscious1 painstaking way1 one thing at a time1 until thoroughly ingrained4 ,it must be left to the reader's own ingenuity to devise the best methods of acquiring each particular habit4 ,of course it is possible to do a thing well--it is possible to follow the rule for doing it--without knowing the rule4 ,if a man take a live interest in a subject he will naturally tend to look at it from a number of different viewpoints4 ,if he be eternally on the lookout for errors and fallacies in his own thinking he will gradually evolve a logic of his own4 ,and this logic will be concrete1 not abstract2 it will be something built into1 an integral part of1 concrete thought1 and he will be constantly strengthening the habit of using it4 ,compared with the logic of the books it may be crude1 but it will not consist of mere rules1 which can be recited but which are seldom applied4 ,so with grammar4 ,instance the writer's experience with ,german4 ,few native ,germans could recite offhand what prepositions govern the genitive1 dative and accusative1 even if they knew what was meant by these terms4 ,but they would 7most of them7 use these cases correctly1 and without the least thought4 ,the educated ,englishman or ,american flatters himself that his correct speech is due to his study of grammar4 ,this is far from true4 ,his speech is due to unconscious imitation of the language of the people with whom he comes into contact1 and of the books he reads4 ,and needless to say1 the cultivated man comes into contact with other cultivated men and with good literature2 the ignoramus does not4 ,most of our thinking is influenced in this way4 ,the great thinkers of the past improved their innate powers not by the study of rules for thinking1 but by reading the works of other great thinkers1 and unconsciously imitating their habitual method and caution4 ,the fact to remember is that a rule is something that has been formulated after the thing which it rules4 ,it is merely an abstract of current practice or of good practice4 ,rules are needful because they teach in little time what would otherwise require much experience to learn1 or which we might never discover for ourselves at all4 ,they help us to learn things right in the beginning2 they prevent us from falling into wrong habits4 ,the trouble with unsupplemented imitation1 conscious or unconscious1 is that we tend to imitate another's faults along with his virtues4 ,rules enable us to distinguish1 especially if we have learned the reason for the rules4 ,but practice and rules should not be compared as if they were opposed4 ,the true road is plenty of practice with conscientious regard to rule4 ,it may be insisted that this has its limits2 that there is a point beyond which a man cannot improve himself4 ,i admit that practice has its limits4 ,it may be true that there is a point beyond which a man cannot advance4 ,but nobody knows those limits and no one can say when that point has come4 ,no two individuals profit in the same degree by the same practice4 ,with a given amount one man will always improve faster than another4 ,but the slower man may keep up with his more speedy brother by more practice4 ,i shall not repeat here the fable of the hare and the tortoise4 ,but any one who has discovered a flaw in his mental make-up1 any one who believes that he cannot concentrate1 or that his memory is poor1 and that therefore he can never become a thinker1 should find consolation in the words of ,william ,james3 8,depend upon it1 no one need be too much cast down by the discovery of his deficiency in any elementary faculty of the mind4 4 4 4 ,the total mental efficiency of a man is the resultant of all his faculties4 ,he is too complex a being for any one of them to have the casting vote4 ,if any one of them do have the casting vote1 it is more likely to be the strength of his desire and passion1 the strength of the interest he takes in what is proposed4 ,concentration1 memory1 reasoning power1 inventiveness1 excellence of the senses--all are subsidiary to this4 ,no matter how scatter-brained the type of a man's successive fields of consciousness may be1 if he really care for a subject1 he will return to it incessantly from his incessant wanderings1 and first and last do more with it1 and get more results from it1 than another person whose attention may be more continuous during a given interval1 but whose passion for the subject is of a more languid and less permanent sort40#be ,,xi ,,books ,,on ,,thinking ,the reader who desires to study further on the subject of thinking will find a wide field before him--but he will have to search in cosmopolitan quarters4 ,while much has been written on thinking1 it has been in an incidental manner1 and has found its way into books written mainly to illuminate other subjects4 ,among the few books or essays devoted exclusively or mainly to thinking may be mentioned3--,john ,locke1 ,the ,conduct of the ,understanding2 ,isaac ,watts1 ,the ,improvement of the ,mind2 ,arnold ,bennett1 ,mental ,efficiency2 ,t4 ,sharper ,knowlson1 ,the ,art of ,thinking2 ,arthur ,schopenhauer1 ,on ,thinking for ,oneself1 in his ,essays4 ,the last is especially recommended4 ,it is only about a dozen pages long1 and is the most stimulating essay written on the subject4 ,this1 together with ,john ,locke's ,conduct 7which1 by the way1 is also fairly short7 may be considered the two 8classics0 in the meager literature on thinking4 ,there is an extensive literature on the psychology of reasoning1 on the 8positive0 science of thinking4 ,the best single work on this subject is ,john ,dewey's ,how ,we ,think4 ,william ,james' chapter on ,reasoning in his ,principles of ,psychology might also be consulted with profit4 ,s4 ,s4 ,colvin's1 ,the ,learning ,process contains some interesting chapters bearing on thought4 ,on method1 the amount of literature is even more imposing than that on the psychology of reasoning4 ,probably the most thorough book is ,stanley ,jevon's ,the ,principles of ,science1 though this1 consisting of two volumes1 will require quite some ambition to attack4 ,a good recent short work is ,j4 ,a4 ,thomson1 ,introduction to ,science4 ,herbert ,spencer's short essay1 ,an ,element in ,method1 in his ,various ,fragments might also be mentioned4 ,of those works treating method mainly from a corrective standpoint1 ,i have already mentioned ,jevon's ,elementary ,lessons in ,logic4 ,the authoritative and most comprehensive book on logic is still ,john ,stuart ,mill's great tome4 ,of course this list of books on method1 as well as that on the psychology of reasoning1 cannot pretend to be more than merely suggestive4 ,if the reader desires an extensive bibliography in either of these subjects he will probably find it in one of the books mentioned4 ,on doubt and belief1 ,william ,clifford1 ,the ,ethics of ,belief1 and ,william ,james1 ,the ,will to ,believe1 might be read4 ,the viewpoints of the two essays are in almost direct contradiction4 ,on reading1 ,alexander ,bain's ,the ,art of ,study1 in his ,practical ,essays1 will be found useful4 ,bacon's essay ,on ,studies1 which is not more than a couple pages long1 contains more concentrated wisdom on the subject than is to be found anywhere4 ,on subjects most worth thinking about1 the reader cannot do better than read ,herbert ,spencer's essay ,what ,knowledge is of ,most ,worth8 in his ,education4 ,as to books most worth reading1 consult the lists of ,john ,morley1 ,sir ,john ,lubbock1 and ,frederic ,harrison2 ,sonnenschein's ,best ,books 7in two volumes72 ,baldwin's ,the ,book ,lover2 ,dr4 ,eliot's ,five ,foot ,shelf and ,frank ,parson's ,the ,world's ,best ,books1 previously referred to4 ,on the art of living--the art of planning time so as to have room for thinking1 as well as valuable hints as to how that thinking is to be carried out--consult ,arnold ,bennett1 ,how to ,live on ,twenty-four ,hours a ,day1 and ,e4 ,h4 ,griggs1 ,the ,use of the ,margin 7both very1 very small books74 ,finally1 there is much useful material1 as well as incalculable inspiration1 to be obtained from the intellectual and literary biographies of great thinkers4 ,especially is this true of autobiography4 ,among others may be mentioned the autobiographies of ,john ,stuart ,mill and ,herbert ,spencer1 and an autobiographical fragment by ,charles ,darwin4 ,,footnotes3 #a ,see ,herbert ,spencer1 ,education4 #b ,pillsbury1 ,essentials of ,psychology4 #c ,principles of ,psychology1 ,vol4 ,,ii1 p4 #ccb4 #d ,see ,william ,a4 ,scott1 ,money4 #e ,how ,we ,think4 #f ,autobiography1 ,vol4 ,i1 p4 #dfc4 #g ,autobiography4 #h ,hugh ,elliot1 ,the ,letters of ,john ,stuart ,mill4 #i ,essay1 ,over-,legislation4 #aj ,the ,conduct of the ,understanding4 #aa ,the ,will to ,believe4 #ab ,autobiography4 #ac ,science and ,education4 #ad ,t4 ,sharper ,knowlson1 ,the ,art of ,thinking4 #ae ,the ,conduct of the ,understanding4 #af ,on ,thinking for ,oneself4 #ag ,this may seem unjustified4 ,witness1 however1 this remarkable statement in a prospectus of ,charles ,eliot's 8,five ,foot ,shelf03 8 4 4 4 ,the man who has not read the #8,wealth of ,nations' is hardly qualified to speak or even think wisely on these vital subjects40 ,if this be true1 ,adam ,smith himself was hardly qualified because he certainly could not have read his own book before he had written it6 #ah ,essay ,on ,thinking for ,oneself4 #ai ,autobiography4 #bj ,edward ,griggs1 ,the ,use of the ,margin4 #ba ,literary ,taste4 #bb ,the most advanced and severe psychologists may object to some statements in this exposition4 ,i admit that a word may be used as the concept1 but only provided it is accompanied by a 8fringe0 of potential associates4 ,i also admit that in order to be dealt with as if general1 the visual image must be accompanied by such a 8fringe40 ,but ,i do insist that this fringe itself is in a constant state of flux4 ,that is the important point for our present purposes4 #bc ,literary ,taste4 #bd ,and consult ,arnold ,bennett's ,how to ,live on #bd ,hours a ,day4 #be ,talks to ,teachers4 ,,the ,,end ,,transcriber',s ,,note3 ,original spelling and grammar have been generally retained4 ,original small caps are now uppercase4 ,italics look like this4 ,footnotes have been relabeled #a-be and moved to the end of the book4 ,the transcriber produced the cover image and hereby assigns it to the public domain4 ,original page images are available from archive4org--search for 8cu#caibdjcajadhfg04