FUNCTIONS AND VALUE OF THE SYLLOGISM. 229 



if no error appears, he recognises that the transcript has been 

 correctly made. But we do not call the examination of the 

 copy a part of the act of copying. 



The conclusion in an induction is inferred from the 

 evidence itself, and not from a recognition of the sufficiency 

 of the evidence ; as I infer that my friend is walking towards 

 me because I see him, and not because I recognise that my 

 eyes are open, and that eyesight is a means of knowledge. In 

 all operations which require care, it is good to assure ourselves 

 that the process has been performed accurately ; but the test- 

 ing of the process is not the process itself; and, besides, may 

 have been omitted altogether, and yet the process be correct. 

 It is precisely because that operation is omitted in ordinary 

 unscientific reasoning, that there is anything gained in cer- 

 tainty by throwing reasoning into the syllogistic form. To 

 make sure, as far as possible, that it shall not be omitted, we 

 make the testing operation a part of the reasoning process 

 itself. We insist that the inference from particulars to par- 

 ticulars shall pass through a general proposition. But this is a 

 security for good reasoning, not a condition of all reasoning ; 

 and in some cases not even a security. Our most familiar 

 inferences are all made before we learn the use of general pro- 

 positions ; and a person of untutored sagacity will skilfully 

 apply his acquired experience to adjacent cases, though he 

 would bungle grievously in fixing the limits of the appropriate 

 general theorem. But though he may conclude rightly, he 

 never, properly speaking, knows whether he has done so or 

 not ; he has not tested his reasoning. Now, this is precisely 

 what forms of reasoning do for us. We do not need them to 

 enable us to reason, but to enable us to know whether we 

 reason correctly. 



In still further answer to the objection, it may be added 

 that, even when the test has been applied, and the sufficiency 

 of the evidence recognised, if it is sufficient to support the 

 general proposition, it is sufficient also to support an inference 

 from particulars to particulars without passing through the 

 general proposition. The inquirer who has logically satisfied 

 himself that the conditions of legitimate induction were 



