J34G APPENDIX B. 



diiiLT to technical language, and arrive at certain symbolical 

 results ; just as in Algebra, having got one expression of 

 Equality, we go on till we obtain another. But when this is 

 reached we are no nearer our end, unless we go on to tit things 

 to our symbols. The Dictum de Omni et Nullo is perfectly 

 futile, unless that Omnc and Xntlnni u ive place to actual 

 things. And the application of the syllogistic process will be 

 the takinir things, i he they genera, species, individuals, concep 

 tions, what they may.) and trying to discover fresh relations 

 between them bv means of that process. Logic then does not 

 provide us with our knowledge of these things: nor does it 

 connect them together: it only affirms that when connected 

 together in certain wavs certain results must follow, certain 

 connections be discovered. It does not profess to touch upon 

 the most important branch of human knowledge, the gathering 

 of conceptions from thinus,- it does not profess to connect 

 thoM- conceptions, tor to provide us with principles.) it does not 

 even li ivc us a means of testing the truth of our judgments. 

 It demands two already formed judgments, and from them it 

 deduces a third : one which is already involved in the fore- 

 jnmio; two; and which contains nothing really new. 



Hut Phvsics demand more than this. They require a Me 

 thod which shall take charge of particulars, and watch over 

 the &amp;lt;rrowth and clearness of our conception-: they must be 

 tended regularly and from the beginning: this the Aristotelian 

 Loo-ic was utterly unable to do; and consequently no truth was 







ever obtained through its instrumentality. Tseful it is for 

 arrangement ; and as a secondary method in the growth of 

 sciences: but placed where it is placed by Aristotle, it must 

 fail. Had it failed and been thrown aside, or applied, as De 

 duction is now being applied in modern sciences, no evil would 

 have resulted; but it obtained such holds on men s minds that 

 a freat reformer, stern, and without respect for age and name, 

 was needed, before its empire could be brought to an end. 

 Such a reformer, in an age when thought was just freeing 

 itself from the trammels of centuries, was Bacon. We must 

 pardon his excessive anger against Aristotle, and his unfair 

 ness towards him, when we remember what interests were at 



