92 THE EXPERIMENTAL THEORY 



else which enters in ; something else beyond the odor 

 as it was first experienced determined the validity 

 of its meaning. Here then, perhaps, we have a 

 transcendental, as distinct from an experimental 

 reference? Only if this something else makes no 

 difference, or no detectable difference, in the smell 

 itself. If the utmost observation and reflection 

 can find no difference in the smell quales that fail 

 and those that succeed in executing their inten 

 tions, then there is an outside controlling and dis 

 turbing factor, which, since it is outside of the sit 

 uation, can never be utilized in knowledge, and 

 hence can never be employed in any concrete test 

 ing or verifying. In this case, knowing depends 

 upon an extra-experimental or transcendental fac 

 tor. But this very transcendental quality makes 

 both confirmation and refutation, correction, criti 

 cism, of the pretensions or meanings of things, 

 impossible. For the conceptions of truth and 

 error, we must, upon the transcendental basis, sub 

 stitute those of accidental success or failure. 

 Sometimes the intention chances upon one, some 

 times upon another. Why or how, the gods only 

 know and they only if to them the extra-experi 

 mental factor is not extra-experimental, but makes 

 a concrete difference in the concrete smell. But 

 fortunately the situation is not one to be thus de 

 scribed. The factor that determines the success 

 or failure, does institute a difference in the thing 



