104 THE SCIENCE OF LOGIC. 



which are partly, and often even mainly, verbal, owe their existence 

 to the misunderstandings that arise from looseness and vagueness 

 in the use of terms. We might instance the dispute as to whether 

 proper names are connotative (37). 1 Mere controversy, mere 

 arguing, will never settle such questions : with a little attention 

 to clearness and precision in our use of language, they will settle 

 themselves. 



It will, however, be found that in most cases the real cause 

 of these &quot; verbal &quot; disputes is a difference of view as to the reality 

 or existence of the objects defined, in the sphere in which exist 

 ence is claimed for them. So long as a definition is not supposed 

 to carry with it any implication of the existence of the thing 

 defined, in some appropriate sphere, contentions about its limits 

 will of course be necessarily verbal and only verbal ; they will 

 have for object the number of notes or attributes we shall agree 

 to include in the connotation of the term. But it is precisely 

 because connotation is not fixed arbitrarily, because it is not 

 merely a matter of convention, because definition carries with it 

 a general assumption that the terms defined are the names of 

 realities existing in some sphere other than that of the individual s 

 own inventive thought, that definitions are so constantly chal 

 lenged and disputed, and with a conviction on all sides that the 

 debate is about matters of vital reality, and not about mere con 

 ventions as to the use of words. 



A little reflection on the manifold and conflicting definitions we encounter 

 in regard to such terms as &quot;The True Religion,&quot; &quot;The Christian Religion,&quot; 

 &quot;The Christian Church,&quot; &quot;The Catholic Church,&quot; etc., is all that is needed 

 to convince us how very intimately people s views as to facts influence the 

 meanings they attach to words. 



About the intensive definition of &quot;True Religion&quot; as &quot;a religion be 

 lieved to be true by those professing it,&quot; there would scarcely be any dispute ; 

 but about the sphere of its denotation the atheist would differ from the theist 

 (33), the former referring religion to the sphere of people s beliefs the latter 

 to the sphere of reality ; and about its denotation in the sphere of reality 

 the atheist, the indifferentist, and the Catholic, would disagree, the first denying 

 the existence of any true religion in the real sphere (making the denotation 

 zero], the second holding the existence of several more or less true and 



1 Were we to remove successively the handle, blades, etc. of a penknife, re 

 placing each by a new part similar to the part removed, we might dispute whether 

 we should be still in possession of the same penknife. Our dispute would here 

 rest on our conception of what it is that constitutes individual sameness, and how 

 the latter is lost ; this conception determining the meaning we attach to the word 

 &quot;same &quot;. 



