METHOD OF DISCOVERY. 59 



It was so in the first case, and it was confirmed by 

 the second. True, it is a very small basis, but still it is 

 enough to make an induction from ; you generalize the 

 facts, and you expect to find sourness in apples where 

 you get hardness and greenness. You found upon 

 that a general law, that all hard and green apples are 

 sour; and that, so far as it goes, is a perfect induction. 

 Well, having got your natural law in this way, when 

 you are offered another apple which you find is hard 

 and green, you say, "All hard and green apples are 

 sour; this apple is hard and green, therefore this 

 apple is sour." That train of reasoning is what logi- 

 cians call a syllogism, and has all its various parts and 

 terms, — its major premiss, its minor premiss, and its 

 conclusion. And, by the help of further reasoniug, 

 which, if drawn out, would have to be exhibited in two 

 or three other syllogisms, you arrive at your final 

 determination, " I will not have that apple." So that, 

 you see, you have, in the first place, established a law 

 by Induction, and upon that you have founded a 

 Deduction, and reasoned out the special conclusion 

 of the particular case. Well now, suppose, having 

 got your law, that at some time afterwards, you are 

 discussing the qualities of apples with a friend : you 

 will say to him, "It is a very curious thing, — but I 

 find that all hard and green apples are sour ! " Your 

 friend says to you, "But how do you know that?' 

 You at once reply, " Oh, because I have tried them over 

 and over again, and have always found them to be so." 

 Well, if we were talking science instead of common 

 sense, we should call that an Experimental Verification. 



