Questions

This is a list of all the questions and their associated study carrel identifiers. One can learn a lot of the "aboutness" of a text simply by reading the questions.

identifier question
41838Then, you state that silk- hats are the promoters and cause of civilization in a community?
41838For instance, the question once asked a respectable citizen on the witness stand:"Have you stopped beating your mother?"
41838For instance:"You assert that the more civilized a community, the more silk- hats are to be found in it?"
41838Upon what grounds do we argue?
41838What is this mental process?
41838When Newton saw the apple fall, the anticipatory question flashed through his mind,''Why do not the heavenly bodies fall like this apple?''
41838Why?
6560''Is Socrates a man?''
6560''Is it possible for a man who is not writing to write?''
6560''Well, is not an animal a body?''
6560''Why?''
6560''Yes,''''And are you an animal?''
6560( 4) Is there balm in Gilead?
6560( 5) Does not his feebleness of character indicate either a bad training or a natural imbecility?
6560( 5)''Is stone a body?''
6560A cup, for instance, with precisely the same form, may be composed of very different matter- gold, silver, pewter, horn or what not?
6560A full answer to the question''What is a Universal?''
6560All not- B is not- A, and followed by Subalternation?
6560And again--''Can you carry this, that, and the other?''
6560And whether, therefore, the third head of indefinite propositions were not as superfluous as the so- called''common gender''of nouns in grammar?
6560And why not from all?
6560And why?
6560Are abstract terms then, it may be asked, singular or common?
6560Are there then any terms which possess no intension?
6560Are you a thief and a liar too?''
6560Are_ you_ a thief and a liar too?''
6560But logicians anxious for simplification asked, whether a predicate in any given case must not either apply to the whole of the subject or not?
6560But why, it maybe asked, should not the moods of the first figure equally well be regarded as indirect moods of the fourth?
6560But, if you were to ask the same person''Do you mean that cows are all the ruminants that there are, or only some of them?''
6560Can the laws of thought be violated in like manner with the laws of the land?
6560Do these two principles imply one another?
6560Fairchild, is this true?
6560For how could there be action without an agent?
6560From how many of these propositions can the original one be derived?
6560Granting the truth of the following propositions, what other propositions can be inferred by opposition to be true or false?
6560Have you left off beating your mother yet?''
6560Here is the sort of example that Aristotle gives--''Is Plato different from Socrates?''
6560If the major term of a syllogism be the predicate of the major premiss, what do we know about the minor premiss?
6560If the middle term be twice distributed, what mood and figure are possible?
6560In appearance they can be, and manifestly often are violated- for how else could error be possible?
6560In what figures is AEE valid?
6560Is the suppressed premiss in any case disputable on material grounds?
6560Is the term converse here used in its logical meaning?
6560Now in which of these two senses are we using the term''laws of thought''?
6560Or again, that man means a rational, and does not mean a speaking, a religious, or an aesthetic animal, or a biped with two eyes, a nose, and a mouth?
6560Or are they inviolable like the laws of nature?
6560Roughly it may be said that the Realists sought for the answer to the question''What is a Universal?''
6560Since every term must be either abstract or concrete, it may be asked-- Are attributives abstract or concrete?
6560Suppose for a moment that this law did not hold-- then what would become of all our reasoning?
6560The fact is-- so subtle are the ambiguities of language-- that even such a question as''Is a thing white or not- white?''
6560The man was exhibiting a blue horse; and the distinguished stranger asked him--''With what did you paint your horse?''
6560To ask this, is to ask-- Are there any terms which have absolutely no meaning?
6560To which of the heads of predicables would you refer the following statements?
6560Under which of the five heads would the predicates in the following propositions fall?
6560What is the only kind of conclusion that can be drawn in all the figures?
6560What kind of influence have we here?
6560What moods are common to all the figures?
6560What moods are peculiar to the first, second, and third figures respectively?
6560When the middle term is distributed in both premisses, what must be the quantity of the conclusion?
6560When, for instance, a thing is half white and half black, are we to say that it is white or black?
6560When, for instance, we say''If the sky falls, we shall catch larks,''what is it that we really mean to assert?
6560Where would be the use of establishing conclusions about things, if they were liable to evade us by a Protean change of identity?
6560Wherein then does the difference lie?
6560Wherein then lies the difference?
6560Why are the premisses of Fesapo and Fresison not transposed in reduction like those of the other moods of the fourth figure?
6560Why can there be no subaltern moods in the third figure?
6560Why do the premisses EA yield a universal conclusion in the first two figures and only a particular one in the last two?
6560Why is it sufficient to distribute the middle term once only?
28696Adjunct for South- West Cell?
28696Adjunct for West Half?
28696Compartment for xy''?
28696Then who_ were_ they, who were sentenced to imprisonment and were also sentenced to hard labour? 28696 which book do you mean?"
28696''In_ E_''?
28696AND REASON?
28696Adjunct for North- East Quarter, Outer Portion?
28696Adjunct for South Half, Inner Portion?
28696Adjunct for South Half?
28696And how many Members have entered?"
28696And of a Sorites?
28696And what are its''Premisses'', its''Partial Conclusions'', and its''Complete Conclusion''?
28696And what are its''Premisses''and its''Conclusion''?
28696And what is a''Class''?
28696And''in_ A_''?
28696Do n''t you know that a Universal Negative_ asserts_ the existence of its Subject?
28696Does this leave us free to make what supposition we choose as to_ E_?
28696Have you got your new Club started yet?"
28696I., II., or III.?"
28696If we assume( as surely we may?)
28696Q. Compartment for m''?
28696Q. Compartment for x''y''m?
28696Q. Compartment for ym?
28696RHYME?
28696The question now arises"What is the_ rest_ of the information which this Proposition gives us?"
28696They_ must_ have had the verdict''guilty''returned against them, or how could they be sentenced?"
28696What arbitrary rule does it sometimes require?
28696What are the''Subject''and the''Predicate''of a Proposition?
28696What are the''Universe of Discourse'', the''Eliminands'', and the''Retinends'', of a Syllogism?
28696What are''Concrete''and''Abstract''Propositions?
28696What are''Converse''Propositions?
28696What are''Genus'',''Species'', and''Differentia''?
28696What are''Real''and''Imaginary''Classes?
28696What is a Proposition''in_ I_''?
28696What is a''Definition''?
28696What is a''Sorites''?
28696What is a''Syllogism''?
28696What is implied, in a Proposition of Relation, as to the Reality of its Terms?
28696What is its''Normal''form?
28696What is the''Normal''form of a Proposition of Existence?
28696What is the''Universe of Discourse''?
28696What is''Classification''?
28696What is''Dichotomy''?
28696What is''Division''?
28696What makes you think we have?"
28696What_ else_ do we need to be told, in order to know that_ all_ of them are there?
28696What_ else_ do we need to be told, in order to know that_ all_ of them are there?
28696When are Classes said to be''Codivisional''?
28696Why should_ we_ be responsible for the validity of the Syllogisms of so antiquated an author as Aldrich?"
28696You do n''t mean to tell me those tourists_ need_ to run?
28696_ Author._"And here, again, I suppose you do n''t mean to assert there_ are_ any such convicts in existence?"
28696_ Author._"Oh,_ that''s_ what you meant, is it?
28696_ The use of"is- not"( or"are- not") as a Copula._ Is it better to say"John_ is- not_ in- the- house"or"John_ is_ not- in- the- house"?
28696_ What is implied, in a Proposition of Relation, as to the Reality of its Terms?_ Propositions beginning with"Some"19"""No"""""All""§ 5.
28696db''_{0}...( 10) Now what can we take along with db''_{0}?
4763And is it Nature, or Art, that is to have the credit of this happy change?
4763But why is this?
4763Do you mean to tell us that all these Logicians are wrong?
4763So you like a doll better than a cousin? 4763 The Man in the Wilderness asked of me''How many strawberries grow in the sea?''"
4763Very glad to hear it: and how do you make it out to be so?
4763Well, some geraniums are red, are n''t they?
4763Well, who expects to be comfortable, out shopping?
4763What are you talking about geraniums for? 4763 Why, do n''t you see that it''s absurd to call him a miserly merchant?
4763Why, how do you make THAT out? 4763 Why, is n''t he very rich?"
4763( Sounds nice, does n''t it?)
4763( Would n''t THAT be a charming Universe to live in?)
4763( You think I invented that name, now do n''t you?
4763----- Suppose we find it marked like this:--||| 1| What would that tell us?
47635?
47635?
47636?
47636?
47637?
47638?
4763And how are they to work, if they do n''t know anything?
4763And now what am I driving at, in all this long rigmarole?
4763And what name may we give to such a Conclusion?
4763And what then?
4763And what then?"
4763Brown?"
4763But is there any great harm in THAT, so long as you get plenty of amusement?
4763But what''s the good of proving anything to YOU, I should like to know?"
4763But, if they put it the other way, and ask"Can an Attribute exist without any Thing for it to belong to?
4763Can it mean BOTH?"
4763How may we detect a''Fallacious Conclusion''?
4763How may we detect''Fallacious Premisses''?
4763How shall I ever repay such kindness?
4763If you mean that cousins are n''t dolls, who ever said they were?"
4763In marking a pair of Premisses on the larger Diagram, why is it best to mark NEGATIVE Propositions before AFFIRMATIVE ones?
4763In what cases may this be done?
4763In what sense do we use the word''Universe''in this Game?
4763Is it Particular or Universal?
4763It is true we do not know whether its inner portion is empty or occupied: but what does THAT matter?
4763Now what would you make of such a Proposition as"The Cake you have given me is nice"?
4763People have asked the question"Can a Thing exist without any Attributes belonging to it?"
4763Taking the upper half by itself, so that our Subject is"new Cakes", how are we to represent"no new Cakes are wholesome"?
4763The smaller Diagram is now pretty liberally marked:---------| 0| 1||---|---|| 1||------- And now what Conclusion can we read off from this?
4763We must take, as our''Universe'', some class of things which will include Dragons and Scotchmen: shall we say''Animals''?
4763What are the two kinds of''Fallacies''?
4763What are we to make of this, with regard to x and y?
4763What are''Individual''Propositions?
4763What are''Particular''and''Universal''Propositions?
4763What does this mean?
4763What does"some"mean in Logic?
4763What is a''Double''Proposition?
4763What is an''Attribute''?
4763What kinds of Propositions imply, in this Game, the EXISTENCE of their Subjects?
4763What two partial Propositions make up, when taken together,"all x are y"?
4763What would this tell us, with regard to the class of"new Cakes"?
4763What would you make of this, I wonder?
4763What, then, are you to do?
4763When does this happen?
4763When is a class of Things said to be''exhaustively''divided?
4763When is it NOT good sense?
4763When is it good sense to put"is"or"are"between two names?
4763When it is NOT good sense, what is the simplest agreement to make, in order to make good sense?
4763Who can tell?
4763Who should know better?"
4763Why is it of no consequence to us, as Logicians, whether the Premisses are true or false?
4763Would it not tell us that there are SOME of them in the x y- compartment?
4763You never saw"beautiful"floating about in the air, or littered about on the floor, without any Thing to BE beautiful, now did you?
4763You will take its four compartments, one by one, and ask, for each in turn,"What mark can I place HERE?
36801''* But whence is to come''this drop of sound logic?''
36801''Do you want any blood shed for you?''
36801''Does he shed anything for you that you_ do_ want?
36801''Has the reader ever seen Mr. Macready in the character of Macbeth?
36801''Look where we will, do we not find ignorance powerful for every kind of wrong and evil?
36801--and lie for the right?
36801And did you not hear him say that he could have shed his blood for me?
36801And why should we be delighted with Mr. Macready''s delineation, and disgusted with the ranter?
36801Are these the dispensations of Providence, or the dispensations of folly and crime?
36801Ay-- this state- policy?
36801Bishop Berkeley may demonstrate that we are not sure of matter''s existence-- but are we more sure of any thing else?
36801But by what experience did Aristotle discover the centre of the universe, so as to become aware that heavy bodies_ naturally_ tend there?
36801But how would it have been with a cloddish unimaginative fellow, whom nature never intended should understand Shakspere?
36801But if he should still remain in doubt, where is the harm?
36801But what comprehensive reasons are these?
36801But when experience affords no model on which to shape the new conception, how is it possible for us to form it?
36801But why overlooks he pure mathematics-- a much higher science than arithmetic?
36801Can such a proposition have facts for its support?
36801Does he even shed legs of mutton for you in any decent proportion to potatoes and garden stuff?''
36801Does he shed employment for you, instruction for you pocket money for you?
36801How did he ascertain the limits of that which has no limits?
36801How far may not this Tertsky have proceeded-- What may not he himself too have permitted Himself to do, to snare the enemy, The laws of war excusing?
36801How is this proved to be the most formidable enemy of tyranny?
36801How, for example, can we imagine an end to space or time?
36801I have frequently put the question-- What is consciousness?
36801If men are silent concerning objects and principles, it is said they have none, and it is impatiently asked''where is their bond of union?''
36801If reason will not serve us well, will anything serve us better?
36801Is it; otherwise with the Church?
36801Need it be added that this knowledge is only to be had by patient observation?
36801On what facts rest the measurement of the radii from our earth to the boundless circumference of space?
36801On what grounds are they considered to be true by one who declines investigation?
36801Said generous Rob,''What need of Books?
36801Shall he stay on shore or put out to sea?
36801Shall the young man enter trade or a profession without being vitiated?
36801Then how many boys ought our''philosopher''to have questioned before making his vast inference?
36801This is true, but is it true that arithmetic is on_ this account_ to be imitated?
36801Thus I found that huge reports, inflated as balloons, shrunk like them when pricked by the pin of a question--''Will you answer for it?''
36801Thus, on any assertion being made, ask-- Why is the assertion true?
36801To all who told me anything, if I attached importance to it, I made it a rule to ask--''May I mention it to the party with your name?''
36801To all written communications answer--''Please add your name and address-- and may I publish them if occasion requires?''
36801Tyranny, says Cobbett, has no enemy so formidable as the pen, Why?
36801Up springs at every step, to claim a tear, Some little friendship formed and cherished here?
36801Upon asking the terms of apartments, I was met, in all cases, by several preliminary questions, as for whom were they?
36801Was it classical in the principal of St. Alban''s College to abandon Euclid and cleave unto Cocker or Walkingame?
36801What facts support the assertion that Afflictions are dispensations of Providence?''
36801What he would do?
36801What investigation would it require to shew that they were valid?
36801What should be the decision in this case?
36801What was this, if not imagination?
36801Where now?
36801Where should a man''s reputation be safe from suspicion if not in the hands of his friend?
36801Who is not aware of the failures of calculation when applied to the general business of life-- to statistics, moral and political?
36801Why better?
36801Why should I throw away so much time and painful attention upon a thing of so little real use?
36801Why should not their discourse be expressed in brief, clear sentences?
36801Why should they, like a certain learned politician on a public occasion, propose, as a sentiment,''The three R''s, Reading,''Riting, and''Rithmetic?
36801or rather, why is it not to be considered a good?
36801what number of persons?
36801what station, habits, and probable stay?
40794( 1) Do ideas present themselves except in situations which are doubtful and inquired into?
40794( 3) Do they have any part to play in the conduct of inquiry?
40794( 5) And, finally, does validity have anything to do with truth?
40794And how can it discriminate unless by telling by what road they got into our experience and what they do after they get there?
40794And if the worlds are all private, pray who judges their likeness or unlikeness?
40794And is judgment properly more than tentative save as it terminates in a known fact, i.e., a fact present without the intermediary of reflection?
40794And that means what force shall the thing as means be given?
40794And, if the latter, does the object, God as defined, or the notion, or the belief( the acceptance of the notion) effect these consequent values?
40794And, once more, unless there is such a transition, is reasoning possible?
40794Are they there?
40794But how can a situation which is incomplete in fact be completely known until it_ is_ complete?
40794But if the former, why should there be an idea at all, and why should it have to be tested by the fact?
40794But if thought just accepts its material, how can there be any distinctive aim or activity of thought at all?
40794But if we are concerned with a matter of serious analysis, one is bound to ask, Whence come these adjectives?
40794But is smelling a case of knowledge?
40794But they part company when a fundamental question is raised: Is all organized meaning the work of thought?
40794But when thinking becomes research, when the doubt- inquiry function comes to its own, the problem is just: What is the fact?
40794Can a satisfaction dependent on an assumption that an idea is already true be relevant to testing the truth of an idea?
40794Can we"know that objects of sense, or very similar objects, exist at times when we are not perceiving them?
40794Do they exist except when judgment is in suspense?
40794Do they exist side by side with the facts when the facts are themselves known?
40794Do they not all agree in setting up something fixed outside inquiry, supplying both its material and its limit?
40794Do they really indicate fire?
40794Do they serve to direct observation, colligate data, and guide experimentation, or are they otiose?
40794Do they, therefore, already subsist in some realm of subsistence?
40794Does this coequal presence guarantee an objectivity?
40794Does this phase of the moon really mean rain, or does it just happen that the rain- storm comes when the moon has reached this phase?
40794Except on the basis stated, what is the transition from the function of meaning to_ a_ meaning as an entity in reasoning?
40794For example, my primary( and ultimate) judgment has to do, say, with buying a suit of clothes: whether to buy and, if so, what?
40794Has it gained in validity in ceasing to be an independent myth, in becoming an element in systematized myth?
40794Has not the lesson, however, been so well learned that we can drop reference to experience?
40794How about that truth upon which we fall back as guaranteeing the credibility of other statements-- how about our major premise?
40794How about their respective adaptability to the chief wearing use I have in mind?
40794How can a thing be eaten unless it is, in and of itself, a food?
40794How can such a standard be known?
40794How can the former in any sense give a check or test of the value of the latter?
40794How can this difference be explained?
40794How can thought compare meanings with existences?
40794How do their patterns compare?
40794How do we know the same is not the case with the ideas which are the product of our most deliberate and extended scientific inquiry?
40794How does it know which to eliminate as irrelevant and which to confirm as grounded?
40794How does the non- pragmatic view consider that verification takes place?
40794How does thought know which of the combinations are merely coincident and which are merely coherent?
40794How far is it possible and legitimate to extend or generalize the results reached to apply to all propositions of facts?
40794How is it, moreover, that even the act of being aware is describable as"momentary"?
40794How shall it secure this?
40794How shall we describe it?
40794How then can its existence, even if its perception be but momentary, raise a question of"other times"at all?
40794How then can value be given, as efficiency is given, until the end is chosen?
40794How, after all, does even the ideally perfect valid thought apply or refer to reality?
40794How, the implication runs, could reflection become generalized save by elimination of details as irrelevant?
40794If the goodness of consequences arises from the context of the idea in belief rather than from the idea itself, does it have any verifying force?
40794If there are, are they like those characters which books on logic talk about?
40794In the end the one problem holds: How do the specifications of thought as such hold good of reality as such?
40794Is a difference more than merely one of formulation?
40794Is it an absolute which transcends and absorbs the difference?
40794Is it an idea?
40794Is not the distinction mere hair- splitting unless it is a way of smuggling in a quasi- idealistic dependence upon thought?
40794Is or is not a personal factor found in truth evaluations?
40794Is the agreement ultimately a matter of self- consistency of ideas?
40794Is the photograph, then, to be conceived as a psychical somewhat?
40794Is the way out now so simple?
40794Is the_ object_ immediate or is it the object of an immediate noting?
40794Is this to be taken in a static or in a dynamic way?
40794It reads:"What difference would it practically make to anyone if this notion rather than that notion were true?
40794It was hard up against its own dilemma: How can a man inquire?
40794Just how does such agreement differ from success?
40794More generally, what is the position of analytic realism about the future?
40794Not what is the test of thought at large, but what validates and confirms_ this_ thought?
40794Now is this meaning intended to_ replace_ the meaning of a"seeing force which runs things"?
40794Now where does the argument stand?
40794Or does it mean that, irrespective of the existence of any such object, a belief in it has that value?
40794Or does it merely superadd a value to a meaning already fixed?
40794Or is it intended to superadd a pragmatic value and validation to that concept of a seeing force?
40794Or( if the superstition persists as to smell) is gnawing or poking a case of knowledge?
40794Or, in another mode of statement:"Can the existence of anything other than our own[63] hard data be inferred from the existence of those data?"
40794Pray what is this room and what defines the position( standpoint and perspective) of the two men and the standpoint"intermediate"between them?
40794Shall I take it as means to present enjoyment, or as a( negative) condition of future health?
40794Still the query haunts us: Is this so in truth?
40794Supposing the individual stands still and attempts to compare his idea with the reality, with what reality is he to compare it?
40794That is to say: Does it express the fact that a given content or meaning is_ de facto_ presented to the consciousness of all alike?
40794The more specific question is: How does the particular functional situation termed the reflective behave?
40794The question is worth asking: Is not the marked aversion on the part of some philosophers to any reference to psychology a Freudian symptom?
40794The question which I raised in the last paragraph may then be restated in this fashion: Are there such features?
40794The significance of these may be doubted: Do they_ mean_ real change in the sun or in the earth?
40794Then what has become of the postulate that truth is agreement of idea with existence beyond idea?
40794Then, once more, what is the test of any specific judgment?
40794Truth means, as a matter of course, agreement, correspondence, of idea and fact( p. 198), but what do agreement, correspondence, mean?
40794Under these conditions we get such questions as the following: What is the relation of rational thought to crude or unreflective experience?
40794Unless a meaning is an inferred object, detached and fixed as a term capable of independent development, what sort of a ghostly Being is it?
40794Unless there is some such conception as this, what conception of agreement is possible except the experimental or practical one?
40794We have them; they exist; now what do they mean?
40794What about their durability?
40794What are the prices of given suits?
40794What are their styles in respect to current fashion?
40794What are these grounds?
40794What has become of the correspondence of fact and thought?
40794What is the barrier which prevents reason from complete penetration into the world of truth?
40794What is the bearing of this account upon the"empirical datum"?
40794What is the experience in which the survey of both idea and existence is made and their agreement recognized?
40794What is the reason for using the term at all in philosophy?
40794What is the relation of thought to reality?
40794What is the validity of the various forms of thinking which find expression in the various types of judgment and in the various forms of inference?
40794What is the value of the pleasure of eating the lobster as compared with the pains of indigestion?
40794What shall we say of the validity of such processes?
40794What we have to reckon with is not the problem of, How can I think_ überhaupt_?
40794What will I have the situation_ become_ as between alternatives?
40794What_ is_ a thing when it is not yet discovered and yet is tentatively entertained and tested?
40794Whence does it derive its guaranty?
40794Which of the three doctrines is to be regarded as the legitimate exponent of the procedure of thought manifested in modern science?
40794Who are the"we,"and what does"own"mean, and how is ownership established?
40794Why is there a task of transformation?
40794Why so uneven, so partial, in your attitude toward ubiquitous relations?
40794Why, it will be asked, does a man buy a suit of clothes unless that is a value, or at least a proximate means to a further value?
40794but, How shall I think right_ here and now_?
40665Is the correspondence reached between idea and object the precise correspondence that the idea itself intended? 40665 Again must we ask: On what basis is this object in the absolute system selected at all? 40665 And by the time all this is performed what sort of a representation of reality is the idea? 40665 And now, finally, what shall mark the attainment of this purpose of the idea to correspond and representits own completed form"?
40665And what in their operations marks the difference between truth and error?
40665Because there could be other cases of counting, and other numbers counted than the present counting process shows you, and why so?
40665But does not Bosanquet himself point out a pathway which, if followed farther, would reach a more satisfactory view of the realm of knowledge?
40665But granted that this is all true, what has it to do with the origin of the hypothesis?
40665But has this distinction between the content of an experience and its existence solved the problem of how we_ know_ reality?
40665But how can we know that the expression is"fragmentary"unless we have some experience of wholeness?
40665But how did it happen that it did not take the form:"This is not cake"?
40665But how do you prove it?
40665But how does he know that reality is continuous, and that the real world is an organized system?
40665But how is this possible if reality lies without or beyond our act of judging?
40665But if all this is admitted, what becomes of the possibility of knowledge?
40665But if this reconstruction and response were to follow at once, would there be any clearly defined act of judging at all?
40665But if thought just accepts its material, how can there be any distinctive aim or activity of thought at all?
40665But if we do test it, is not such test enough?
40665But is it a question of merest chance which of these various possibilities is actualized?
40665But is this necessary?
40665But just where does our contact with the real occur?
40665But the question to be answered first is: When would such a"statement"occur in the course of our experience?
40665But they part company when a fundamental question is raised: Is all organized meaning the work of thought?
40665But what precisely is the form and seat of the aphasia?
40665But whence comes this restlessness and dissatisfaction?
40665But why should this activity get into a condition to be described as"indefinite restlessness"and dissatisfaction?
40665But why?
40665But, as the first statement of internal meaning implies, how can one have a purpose to sing the melody except in and through the idea?
40665Did he, then, either contribute to the proof of a general law or discover further characteristics of things already known in a more general way?
40665Does this coequal presence guarantee an objectivity?
40665Does this mean that the"idea"is wholly independent of the"image"?
40665Does this phase of the moon really mean rain, or does it just happen that the rain- storm comes when the moon has reached this phase?
40665Has it diagnosed the case properly, and is it therefore one in and through which these activities can operate and come to unity again?
40665Has it gained in validity in ceasing to be an independent myth, in becoming an element in systematized myth?
40665Has it not disarmed itself?
40665How can conceptualism prevent the union?
40665How can one maintain that in a literal and concrete physical sense gold in process of solution is the"same"as gold entering into chemical combination?
40665How can the former in any sense give a check or test of the value of the latter?
40665How can thought compare its own contents with that which is wholly outside itself?
40665How can we ever be sure that the fact which we have discovered will stand the test of further thought- constructions?
40665How do we know the same is not the case with the ideas which are the product of our most deliberate and extended scientific inquiry?
40665How does it know which to eliminate as irrelevant and which to confirm as grounded?
40665How does the real world get representation in experience, and what is the guarantee that the representation, when obtained, is correct?
40665How does thought know which of the combinations are merely coincident and which are merely coherent?
40665How otherwise can we explain, for example, the action of an expert ball- player?
40665How shall it secure this?
40665How shall we describe it?
40665How, after all, does even the ideally perfect valid thought apply or refer to reality?
40665How, the implication runs, could reflection become generalized save by elimination of details as irrelevant?
40665How, then, can it serve as the subject of a judgment?
40665How, then, does it obtain its characteristic of universality?
40665How, then, does this fact of past assignment to uses still recognized as desirable figure in the situation?
40665If it is essential, then how explain the fact that its parts do not fall outside one another in time?
40665If it is not essential, then how explain the evident fact that the judgment as an intellectual process does have duration?
40665If so, what is this something else?
40665If the experiment with the pendulum only substituted exactness for inexactness, did the Copernican theory do anything different in_ kind_?
40665In other words, what does this restlessness mean?
40665In other words, what is the significance of the demand for the particular judgment?
40665In the end the one problem holds: How do the specifications of thought as such hold good of reality as such?
40665In the introduction we have been told, as a matter of description, that the internal meanings do seek the external meaning, but why do they?
40665In the last analysis the problem always is: What is to be done here and now with the actual material at hand, under the present conditions?
40665In what sense, with reference to what, is it incomplete and fragmentary?
40665Is it a general claim which thought_ qua_ thought puts forth, or is it the claim of the content of some particular thought?
40665Is it begging the question to speak of consciousness as exercising a selective function with reference to stimuli?
40665Is the reality we now have the same that we had to begin with?
40665Is this thinking?
40665Is this to be taken in a static or in a dynamic way?
40665Just what are we to understand by this"fragmentary"and"indeterminate"character of the internal meaning?
40665Mr. Bosanquet raises the question: Are there at all ideas which are not symbolic?...
40665Must we not here fall back on something like a pre- established harmony?
40665Must you not just dogmatically say that that world must agree with your negations?
40665Not what is the test of thought at large, but what validates and confirms_ this_ thought?
40665Now, any idea that is affirmed is referred to reality, but do ideas exist which are not being affirmed?
40665Now, at what point does this act begin?
40665Now, how shall we discriminate the ethical and the economic aspects of the situation which we have described?
40665On the other hand, if truth is to be found in the immediate experience, can it here be preserved from the blighting effects of thought?
40665Or, in a word: What is the"jurisdiction"of the economic point of view?
40665Perhaps some one has been startled, and asks:"What is this noise?"
40665So that our question now becomes: What is the significance of this factor of restless, dissatisfied consciousness in activity?
40665Still the query haunts us: Is this so in truth?
40665That is to say, at this point the question is: Does the plan apply to the activities actually involved in the unrest?
40665That is to say: Does it express the fact that a given content or meaning is_ de facto_ presented to the consciousness of all alike?
40665The more specific question is: How does the particular functional situation termed the reflective behave?
40665The purposive character of experience is of course very manifest, but what is the significance of this purposing in experience as a whole?
40665The question remains: Why, if there is no opposition, should there be any uncertainty?
40665The significance of these may be doubted: Do they_ mean_ real change in the sun or in the earth?
40665Under these conditions we get such questions as the following: What is the relation of rational thought to crude or unreflective experience?
40665Under what circumstances, then, are we conscious of stimuli in their capacity of guides or incentives or grounds of conduct?
40665Under what conditions, then, is this suspense and uncertainty possible?
40665We can lay out alternative courses beforehand, but the point of difficulty lies here:"But just which is he?"
40665What alliance, or_ mésalliance_, may they not form, one with the other?
40665What can we mean, then, by calling some of our ideas true and others false?
40665What does this mean save that judgment is developmental, transitive, in effect and purport?
40665What have you, then, but an elementary and primitive type of reflex action?
40665What here becomes of the distinction between immediate and mediating experience?
40665What is meant by"further research shows universally, perhaps, that No A is B"?
40665What is the agent''s apprehension of the matter?
40665What is the barrier which prevents reason from complete penetration into the world of truth?
40665What is the function, then, of the representative image?
40665What is the matter?
40665What is the relation between it and the immediate experience?
40665What is the relation of thought to reality?
40665What is the relative value of each in experience as a whole?
40665What is the significance and basis of universality and necessity as confined merely to the realm of internal meaning?
40665What is the source and the material of the purposes?
40665What is the test of the reality of the bread, and the truth of the judgment?
40665What is the validity of the various forms of thinking which find expression in the various types of judgment and in the various forms of inference?
40665What is their relation to truth and error?
40665What is to be done?
40665What is, however, the ground of distinction between the presented objects?
40665What kind of"research,"internal or external, can show this?
40665What predicate-- so we may formulate their question-- should be given to the subject?
40665What shall we say of the validity of such processes?
40665What then is the nature and source of this apprehension of end or means as valuable?
40665What we have to reckon with is not the problem of, How can I think_ überhaupt_?
40665What, then, in this action already going on is responsible for this restlessness?
40665What, then, is the real difference between hypothesis and expectation?
40665When is the correspondence and representation true?
40665When is this purpose of the idea to correspond with its absolute, final, and completed form fulfilled, or partially fulfilled?
40665When we ask,"What rains?"
40665Why does it seek an object?
40665Why does it want to cross the chasm?
40665Why have we to reckon with it at all?
40665Why is there a task of transformation?
40665Why should not we also enjoy an original relation to the universe?
40665Why should not we have a poetry and philosophy of insight and not of tradition, and a religion by revelation to us and not the history of theirs?"
40665Why suppose that by distorting reality we get it in shape to affirm_ of_ reality?
40665Why would they not all remain in conflict and continue to check any positive result?
40665Why, then, should there be a demand for the external meaning, for a further object?
40665Why?
40665Will it enable me to support and educate my family?
40665Will it permit me to devote sufficient attention to their present care and training?
40665Will this life of social agitation really be quite"respectable,"and befitting the character of a sober and industrious man?
40665[ 186] But what is it that we"experience within"which makes us call this judgment necessary?
40665[ 198] If at this point one asks: Whence this absolute system of ideas?
40665_ The predicate as hypothesis._--Suppose, then, the hypothesis is a predicate; is the predicate necessarily a hypothesis?
40665but, How shall I think right_ here and now_?
31796An honest man''s the noblest work of God: Z is an honest man: therefore, he is-- what?
31796Are good administrators always good speakers?
31796But you have admitted that it is possible for Socrates not to fly?
31796Can you tell me in the face of chronology,a leading statesman once asked,"that the Crimes Act of 1887 did not diminish disorder in Ireland?"
31796Do? 31796 Doing what, did you say?
31796Has the practice of excessive drinking ceased in your part of the country?
31796Have all ratepayers a vote?
31796Have you left off beating your father?
31796How do I feel? 31796 How do you do?"
31796I mean, how do you feel?
31796Is it possible for Socrates to fly?
31796Is it possible for him to walk?
31796Is not the honourable honourable, and the base base?
31796No, no; I mean, how do you find yourself?
31796Then why did you not say so? 31796 When you say that it is possible for a man to do anything do you not believe that it is possible for him to do it?"
31796( 1)_ Are they properly called Syllogisms?_ This is purely a question of Method and Definition.
31796Ailing?
31796All at once or step by step?
31796An experiment is a proof or trial: of what?
31796And is not, therefore, the proper form of proposition Some S is P?
31796And who is to instruct us in the full meaning?
31796And why is there this complete agreement?
31796Are we to include it in the Predicate term or in the Subject term?
31796But according to what differences?
31796But any logical advantage-- any help to thinking?
31796But do they hang together?
31796But do we in reality conclude it from the proposition, All men are mortal?"
31796But how, it may be asked, can the concept remain the same?
31796But is this principle really all that we assume?
31796But there are cases where friends are deceived for their own good: are these cases of injustice?
31796But what of propositions that the plain man would at once recognise as Verbal?
31796But who was the founder of the New Logic?
31796But why did Aristotle consider it necessary to lay down a principle so obvious?
31796But why did he desire to concatenate this with the old Logic?
31796But why is it that a man can not get rid of an idea?
31796But, Whately argued, how do we know that this, that and the other-- the individuals we have examined-- constitute the whole class?
31796CAN ALL PROPOSITIONS BE REDUCED TO THE SYLLOGISTIC FORM?
31796Calling this unity, this one in the many, the Universal(_ Universale_,[ Greek: to pan]), what is the Universal_ ontologically_?
31796Can a fallacy in argument be detected at once?
31796Can it be accounted for most probably by supposing the event stated to have really occurred with all the circumstances alleged?
31796Can the definition be that a man who deceives his friends is unjust?
31796Can the leopard change his spots?
31796Can those degrees be measured numerically?
31796Common nouns are put in the First Category because they are predicated in answer to the question, What is this?
31796Do we not assume that what belongs to the individuals examined belongs to the whole class?
31796Do what?"
31796Does Logic shelter the quibbler who trades upon it?
31796Does any analogous use for the Syllogism remain?
31796Does common- sense inspect the argument in a lump or piecemeal?
31796Does he admit this?
31796Does it help to prevent error, to clear up confusion?
31796Does it lead to firmer conceptions of the truth?
31796Does the ox ruminate?
31796Does this mean that it is not possible for Socrates to fly, or that it is possible for Socrates not to fly?
31796Does this not come to the same thing?
31796Does this theory not do away with all possibility of defining and fixing concepts?
31796E 5 concentric circles of S and P- P in centre I?]
31796Each of them probably works some fraction of the total change observable, but how are they to be disentangled?
31796Especially to the presence of lime or magnesia?
31796For example, what is the meaning of injustice?
31796For what purpose?
31796Ginger- aleing?"
31796Given perplexity as to the cause of any phenomenon, what is our natural first step?
31796Good seed was sown: whence, then, come the tares?
31796Has the unity that it represents among individuals no existence except in the mind?
31796Have such names a connotation?
31796His question was, When is a Respondent bound to admit a general conclusion?
31796How are men to be brought to accept loyally the judgment of the expert in public affairs?
31796How did the Aristotelian Logic originate?
31796How do we know that the nineteen moods are the only possible forms of valid syllogism?
31796How do you proceed?
31796How is it conceived?
31796How is it continued?
31796How is it to be averted?
31796How is its signification conceived?
31796How is the unity maintained?
31796How then, do we ordinarily proceed in conceiving, if we can not picture the common attributes alone and apart from particulars?
31796How would it proceed?
31796How?
31796How?
31796If we refuse the name of Induction to the general proposition of fact, what are we to call it?
31796If you admit the first two, are you bound in consistency to admit the third?
31796If, proceeding on this, I go on to ask:"Then they are paved with granite or asphalt, or this or that?"
31796In how many ways may this relation be established through a third term?
31796In ignoring this implication, does Logic oppose this implication as erroneous?
31796In the case of Mill''s system we have to ask: What first moved him to formulate the methods of scientific investigation?
31796In what circumstances did Aristotle invent these?
31796In what circumstances did it originate?
31796In what form would it be so?
31796Is Logic then really useless, or even misleading, inasmuch as it ignores the definite implication of negatives in ordinary thought and speech?
31796Is S in or out of P, and is it wholly in or wholly out or partly in or partly out?
31796Is common- sense sufficient?
31796Is it a copy of some particular impression, or a confused blur or blend of many?
31796Is it good then to be disillusioned?
31796Is it one of that class?
31796Is it the case that no man can live without sleep?
31796Is it, then, impossible to decide between these alternative possibilities of causation?
31796Is the explanation then to be found in some special adaptability of the religious system to the character of the people?
31796Is the predicate applicable to All victories or only to Some?
31796Is the subject of the conclusion contained in the subject of the general principle when the two have identical predicates?
31796Is the truth of the conclusion a necessary consequence of the truth of the premisses?
31796Is there a place for it as a safeguard against error in modern debate?
31796Is there any advantage in this?
31796Is there then no way of ascertaining historical fact?
31796Is this not, it may be asked, to confuse thought and being, to resolve Socrates into a string of words?
31796Is war one of the things that increase taxation?
31796It is to be observed that for this operation we do not practically use the syllogistic form All S is P. We do not raise the question Is All S, P?
31796Must we reject history as altogether unworthy of credit?
31796Now the psychological question about the Universal is, What is this conception?
31796Occam himself speaks of the subject as the primary signification, and the attribute as the secondary, because the answer to"What is white?"
31796Passing by these remoter questions, we may give the answers of the three extreme schools to the ontological question, What is a Universal?
31796Psychologically, then, the theory is sound: what is its logical value?
31796Put the question"Is Socrates wise?"
31796Romeo must be in love: for is he not seventeen?
31796Should he coin new names, or should he take old names and try to fit them with new definitions?
31796Should this be expressed as A or I?
31796Such a decrease took place_ post hoc_; was it_ propter hoc_?
31796Suppose a man deceives his enemies, is there any injustice in that?
31796Suppose we doubt whether a given agent is or is not capable of producing a certain effect in certain circumstances, how do we put it to the proof?
31796Suppose we want to know whether a particular conclusion is consistent with our memorandum, what have we to look to?
31796Suppose yourself the Questioner, where did he profess to help you with his mechanism?
31796The categories are exhaustive, but do they fulfil another requisite of a good division-- are they mutually exclusive?
31796The first thing that an inquirer naturally asks when confronted by numerous instances of a phenomenon is, What have they in common?
31796The goat?
31796The logical question is, Has the view any advantage for logical purposes?
31796The psychological question is, Is this a correct theory of how men actually think when they make propositions?
31796The question has been raised, For how long can oral tradition be trusted?
31796The question has sometimes been asked, Where should we begin in Logic?
31796The question, Who are to be placed together?
31796The sheep?
31796The statement at least is extant: our first question is, What is the most rational way of accounting for it?
31796The type of a general proposition in Syllogistic terminology is the Major Premiss, All M is P. What is the type of the particulars that it sums up?
31796To raise the question: What is the proper form for a Modal of Possibility, A or I?
31796Was it due to the character of the drinking- water?
31796Was it due to the geological formation?
31796We may ask, further, What is there in nature that the general name signifies?
31796We see the nature of the proof relied upon when we ask, How far must elimination be carried in order to attain proof of causal connexion?
31796What about the selection of the names?
31796What are the exact attributes signified by the names?
31796What cat''s averse to fish?
31796What corresponds to it in the real world?
31796What does a general name signify?
31796What follows?
31796What is a belief?
31796What is he ailing?
31796What is implied in saying"No"to such propositions put interrogatively?
31796What is in the mind when we employ a general name?
31796What is its relation to reality?
31796What is meant by giving the answer"No"to a proposition put interrogatively?
31796What is the Universal psychologically?
31796What is the conclusion, and in what Figure and Mood may the argument be expressed?
31796What is the interpretation of"No"?
31796What is the respondent committed to thereby?
31796What is the signification_ psychologically_?
31796What is there in our minds corresponding to the general name when we utter it?
31796What is this concept in thought?
31796What meanings of"custom"and of"sensibility"will reconcile these apparently conflicting examples?
31796What principle of sound conclusion was involved in it?
31796What use did he contemplate for them?
31796What will be the issue of a coming war?
31796When are propositions incompatible?
31796When do they imply one another?
31796When do two imply a third?
31796When is the opponent bound to admit that all horned animals ruminate?
31796When is this inductive argument complete?
31796When it is said that"Victories may be gained by accident,"is the predicate made concerning All victories or Some only?
31796When we say,"This is a man,"do we not declare what sort of a thing he is?
31796Whence did he derive his materials?
31796Where did Aristotle begin?
31796Where did the founder of Logic begin?
31796Where does the common pattern come from?
31796Where is the fixed scheme of division there?
31796Which party will win in the next election?
31796Why are things essentially like one another?
31796Why describe Logic as a system of defence against error?
31796Why did he give his scientific method the form of a supplement to the old Aristotelian Logic?
31796Why do we believe more confidently in some uniformities than in others?
31796Why do we dip our pens in ink, and expect the application of them to white paper to be followed by a black mark?
31796Why do we not look for it in another wall?
31796Why does it force itself upon him as a belief?
31796Why is it endemic in some localities and not in others?
31796Why is this?
31796Why lay down principles so obvious, in some interpretations, and so manifestly sophistical in others?
31796Why not rather say, as is now usual, that its end is the attainment of truth?
31796Why say that its main end and aim is the organisation of reason against confusion and falsehood?
31796Why would a reported breach of one be regarded with more incredulity than that of another?
31796Will a patient in the crisis of a given disease recover or not?
31796Would you call these men unjust?
31796Would you say that the man who cheats or deceives is unjust?
31796You know how each of them lies toward the third: when can you tell from this how S lies towards P?
31796_ Best_ for what purpose?
31796_ Examples for Analysis._ Scarlet flowers have no fragrance: this flower has no fragrance: does it follow that this flower is of a scarlet colour?
31796do we not declare his Quality?
31796or"Is this paper white?"