POSTSCRIPT, REPLYING TO CRITICISMS. 



AMONG objections made to any doctrine, those which come 

 from avowed supporters of an adverse doctrine must be con 

 sidered, other things equal, as of less weight than those 

 which come from men uncommitted to an adverse doctrine, 

 or but partially committed to it. The element of preposses 

 sion, distinctly present in the one case and in the other case 

 mainly or quite absent, is a well-recognized cause of differ 

 ence in the values of the judgments : supposing the judg 

 ments to be otherwise fairly comparable. Hence, when it is 

 needful to bring the replies within a restricted space, a fit 

 course is that of dealing rather with independent criticisms 

 than with criticisms which are really indirect arguments for 

 an opposite view, previously espoused. 



For this reason I propose here to confine myself substanti 

 ally, though not absolutely, to the demurrers entered against 

 the foregoing classification by Prof. Bain, in his recent work 

 on Logic. Before dealing with the more important of these, 

 let me clear the ground by disposing of the less important. 



Incidentally, while commenting on the view I take re 

 specting the position of Logic, Prof. Bain points out that 

 this, which is the most abstract of the sciences, owes much 

 to Psychology, which I place. among the Concrete Sciences; 

 and he alleges an- incongruity between this fact and my 

 statement that the Concrete Sciences are not instrumental 



