FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358  
359   360   361   362   363   364   365   366   367   368   369   370   371   372   373   374   375   376   377   378   379   380   381   382   383   >>   >|  
tion, though carried on by aid of recalled experience instead of by locomotion, still resembles finding the way out of a maze with many blind alleys. In short, reasoning may be called a trial and error process in the sphere of mental reactions. {465} The reader familiar with geometry, which is distinctly a reasoning science, can readily verify this description. It is true that the demonstrations are set down in the book in a thoroughly orderly manner, proceeding straight from the given assumption to the final conclusion; but such a demonstration is only a dried specimen and does not by any means picture the living mental process of reasoning out a proposition. Solving an "original" is far from a straight-forward process. You begin with a situation (what is "given") involving a problem (what is to be proved), and, studying over this lay-out you notice a certain fact which looks like a clue; this recalls some previous proposition which gives the significance of the clue, but often turns out to have no bearing on the problem, so that you shift to another clue; and so on, by what is certainly a trial and error process, till some fact noted in the situation plus some knowledge recalled by this fact, taken together, reveal the truth of the proposition. Reasoning Culminates in Inference When you have described reasoning as a process of mental exploration, you have told only half the story. The successful reasoner not only seeks, but finds. He not only ransacks his memory for data bearing on his problem, but he finally "sees" the solution clearly. The whole exploratory process culminates in a perceptive reaction. What he "sees" is not presented to his senses at the moment, but he "sees that something _must_ be so". This kind of perception may be called _inference_. To bring out distinctly the perceptive reaction in reasoning, let us cite a few very simple cases. Two freshmen in college, getting acquainted, ask about each other's fathers and find that both are alumni of this same college. "What class was your father in?" "In the class of 1900. And {466} yours?" "Why, he was in 1900, too. Our fathers were in the same class; they must know each other!" Here two facts, one contributed by one person and the other by another person, enable both to perceive a third fact which neither of them knew before. Inference, typically, is a response to two facts, and the response consists in perceiving a third fact that is bound u
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   334   335   336   337   338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358  
359   360   361   362   363   364   365   366   367   368   369   370   371   372   373   374   375   376   377   378   379   380   381   382   383   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

process

 

reasoning

 
mental
 

proposition

 

problem

 
straight
 
Inference
 
bearing
 

college

 

reaction


situation
 

perceptive

 

fathers

 
called
 
recalled
 
response
 
person
 

distinctly

 

culminates

 
exploratory

typically

 

father

 

perceive

 

moment

 

senses

 
presented
 

solution

 

reasoner

 

successful

 

ransacks


finally

 

consists

 
perceiving
 

memory

 

enable

 

freshmen

 

acquainted

 
simple
 

perception

 

inference


contributed

 

alumni

 

demonstrations

 

description

 

science

 
readily
 
verify
 

conclusion

 

demonstration

 

assumption