388 FALLACIES. 



were grounded, this would be non-observation of cir- 

 cumstances. 



The former case, in so far as the act of induction 

 from insufficient evidence is concerned, does not fall 

 under this second class of Fallacies, but under the 

 third, Fallacies of Generalization. In every such 

 case, however, there are two defects or errors instead 

 of one : there is the error of treating the insufficient 

 evidence as if it were sufficient, which is a Fallacy of 

 the third class ; and there is the insufficiency itself ; 

 the not having better evidence ; which, when such 

 evidence, OF in other words, when other instances, 

 were to be had, is Non-observation ; and the erro- 

 neous inference, so far as it is to be attributed to this 

 cause, is a Fallacy of the second class. 



It belongs not to our purpose to treat of non- 

 observation as arising from casual inattention, from 

 general slovenliness of mental habits, want of due 

 practice in the use of the observing faculties, or insuf- 

 ficient interest in the subject. The question pertinent 

 to logic is Granting the want of complete competency 

 in the observer, on what points is that insufficiency on 

 his part likely to lead him wrong ? or rather, what 

 sorts of instances, or of circumstances in any given 

 instance, are most likely to escape the notice of 

 observers generally ; of mankind at large ? 



3. First, then, it is evident that when the in- 

 stances on one side of a question are more likely to 

 be remembered and recorded than those on the other ; 

 especially if there be any strong motive to preserve 

 the memory of the first but not of the latter; these 

 last are likely to be overlooked, and escape the obser- 

 vation of the mass of mankind. This is the recog- 

 nised explanation of the credit given, in spite of reason 



