FUNCTIONS AND VALUE OF THE SYLLOGISM. 227 



fact taking place, and all reasoning as carried on in the form 

 into which it must necessarily be thrown to enable us to apply 

 to it any test of its correct performance. 



Although, therefore, all processes of thought in which the 

 ultimate premises are particulars, whether we conclude from 

 particulars to a general formula, or from particulars to other 

 particulars according to that formula, are equally Induction ; 

 we shall yet, conformably to usage, consider the name Induc- 

 tion as more peculiarly belonging to the process of establish- 

 ing the general proposition, and the remaining operation, 

 which is substantially that of interpreting the general propo- 

 sition, we shall call by its usual name, Deduction. And we 

 shall consider every process by which anything is inferred 

 respecting an unobserved case, as consisting of an Induction 

 followed by a Deduction ; because, although the process needs 

 not necessarily be carried on in this form, it is always susceptible 

 of the form, and must be thrown into it when assurance of 

 scientific accuracy is needed and desired. 



8. The theory of the syllogism, laid down in the pre- 

 ceding pages, has obtained, among other important adhesions, 

 three of peculiar value ; those of Sir John Herschel,* Dr. 

 Whewell,t and Mr. Bailey ; J Sir John Herschel consider- 

 ing the doctrine, though not strictly " a discovery," to 

 be " one of the greatest steps which have yet been made in 

 the philosophy of Logic." "When we consider" (to quote 

 the further words of the same authority) " the inveteracy of 

 the habits and prejudices which it has cast to the winds," there 

 is no cause for misgiving in the fact that other thinkers, no 

 less entitled to consideration, have formed a very different esti- 



* Review of Quetelet on Probabilities, Essays, p. 367. 



f Philosophy of Discovery, p. 289. 



J Theory of Reasoning, cb. iv. to wbich I may refer for an able statement 

 and enforcement of the grounds of the doctrine. 



It is very probable that the doctrine is not new, and that it was, as Sir 

 John Herschel thinks, substantially anticipated by Berkeley. But I certainly 

 am not aware that it is (as has been affirmed by one of my ablest and most 

 candid critics) "among the standing marks of what is called the empirical phi- 

 losophy." 



152 



