Expression of Thought Connection. 
13 
VARIETIES OF THOUGHT CONNECTION. 
Passing now from the objective to the ideal, I shall endeavor 
to show that, in all cases in which thoughts are conceived to be 
joined, one of them is either wholly or partially included in the 
other. I do not therefore need to consider the case in which 
two thoughts are mutually exclusive. The same is true with 
the case of thoughts conceived as coincident. Moreover this in¬ 
teresting case, however occurring, would naturally be expressed 
by a plural and not by the help of anything called a conjunction. 
There remain to be considered then three cases only. * 1 A. 
Two thoughts have a part only of each in common. B. The 
first contains the whole of the second. C. The second contains 
the whole of the first. 
A. Two thoughts contain each a part of the other. 
This case may be illustrated most clearly by a form of sentence 
which, though little used, has appeared in widely different 
languages. Thus: (from old German) "Up from his seat arose 
Herr Hagen spoke as follows. ” There are here two complete 
sentences, presenting two complete judgments. One is: "Hagen 
rose from his seat. ” The other is: " Hagen spoke as follows. " 
The two have a common factor, namely the first term "Hagen." 
This term is only once named and only once thought. 2 
venience, instead of increasing, let A -j- C and C + B be each diminished 
to C. C then stands for two areas; and these are coterminal or coincident. 
(4) Let now C be diminished as much as possible, namely to zero. Ac¬ 
cording to the view-point one may say with equal truth that 0, as part of 
A -f- C, is the smallest possible part of C -f- B; the left area is excluded 
from the right. Again C as part of C + B is the smallest possible part 
of A -f- C; the right area is excluded from the left. And still again C as 
part of both A -J- C and C + B is the smallest possible part of both; the 
two areas are mutually exclusive. 
1 1 necessarily omit thoughts occurring in different minds; for obviously 
the thoughts of one mind have no existence for another until they become 
also the thoughts of that other. Simultaneous thoughts in the same mind 
I also omit, because in linguistic presentation they are perforce expressed 
in succession or as a plural. 
2 In such cases the common factor is usually symbolized a second time 
by “ who,” the second symbol allowing a second inflection expressing as- 
