340 THE SCIENCE OF LOGIC 



physically, certain ? Is this belief involved in induction ? Is it a synthetic, 

 or an analytic, judgment ? What right have we to infer general uniformity 

 from observed partial uniformity ? Does the validity of induction presuppose 

 belief in the existence of God? Does it rest ultimately on this belief? Is 

 the (categorial) principle of uniformity reached by induction. Must it be 

 reached antecedently to the establishing of any narrower law of nature ? 

 How does Mill account for our belief in the uniformity of nature ? Are the 

 inductions by which we establish special laws of nature, enumerative ? Is 

 &quot; belief in uniformity &quot; a &quot; presupposition &quot; of &quot; rigorous induction &quot; ? Ac 

 count for Mill s failure to derive scientific certitude from induction. What 

 kind of &quot; unity &quot; is discernible in the physical universe ? In order to reach 

 certitude by means of induction, must we postulate that the universe is in 

 telligible ? that physical phenomena are connected by metaphysical rela 

 tions ? What sort of certitude do we reach by induction, and why ? Is the 

 principle of uniformity the &quot;major premiss&quot; of the inductive process? Is 

 the latter an inference at all ? Compare the function of the principle of uni 

 formity in induction, with the function of the Dictum de omni et nullo in 

 deduction. Is belief in uniformity involved in the use of deduction ? Why 

 are the grounds of this belief not discussed in the logic of deduction ? 



CHAP. V. What is the function of hypothesis? Is every supposition in 

 science an hypothesis ? Must an hypothesis be true in order to be useful ? 

 Describe the various kinds of hypothesis distinguished by logicians, and 

 compare them with one another. In an hypothesis of cause, must the sup 

 posed cause be itself a phenomenon? Must it be at least picturable by the 

 imagination ? How far, or in what sense, must it be capable of detection ? 

 What are so-called &quot; occult &quot; causes ? Are any hypotheses admissible in 

 philosophy though not admissible in science, or vice versa? Explain the 

 rote of analogy in suggesting and verifying hypotheses. Are all legitimate 

 hypotheses capable of rigorous verification ? In what does this latter con 

 sist ? Can hypotheses be verified by cumulative evidence ? What do you 

 understand by &quot; Consilience of Inductions,&quot; and &quot; Extension of Hypotheses &quot; ? 

 Discuss the significance of simplicity in an hypothesis. Why do philosophers 

 differ as to what the ultimate systematic conception really is, which would 

 best explain the totality of human experience ? Indicate briefly the condi 

 tions for a legitimate scientific hypothesis. Besides analogy, indicate some 

 other sources of hypotheses. Explain and illustrate the argument from 

 analogy. How is the force of such an argument to be tested ? How are 

 such arguments formally expressed ? Expound and illustrate the teaching of 

 Aristotle on Example and Analogy. 



CHAP. VI. Show that all observation involves selection, judgment, and 

 inference. Compare experiment with observation. What is the aim of per 

 ceptual analysis in induction ? Give an outline of the process of experimen 

 tal analysis of facts, indicating the causes of its complexity and difficulty. 

 Explain the significance of &quot;exceptions,&quot; and the reason for repetition of 

 instances. What is to guide us in marking off the field for observation and 

 experiment ? What two principles of elimination underlie all applications of 

 the analytic process ? Enumerate the various ways in which the process can 

 be conducted. Does logic enable us to determine which of these &quot;methods &quot; 

 we are to apply in a given inductive inquiry ? Formulate and illustrate each 



