titutes the reminiscences of our actual experience in this. These
ideas of experience are furnished by the memory, which enables us not
only to recall individual facts and events witnessed by ourselves, but
also to collate them with one another, thereby discovering their
resemblances and their differences. Our induction becomes the more
certain as our facts are more numerous, our experience larger. "Art
commences when, from a great number of experiences, one general
conception is formed which will embrace all similar cases." "If we
properly observe celestial phenomena, we may demonstrate the laws which
regulate them." With Plato, philosophy arises from faith in the past;
with Aristotle, reason alone can constitute it from existing facts.
Plato is analytic, Aristotle synthetic. The philosophy of Plato arises
from the decomposition of a primitive idea into particulars, that of
Aristotle from the union of particulars into a general conception. The
former is essentially an idealist, the latter a materialist.

[Sidenote: The results of Platonism and Aristotelism.]

From this it will be seen that the method of Plato was capable of
producing more splendid, though they were necessarily more unsubstantial
results; that of Aristotle was more tardy in its operation, but much
more solid. It implied endless labour in the collection of facts, the
tedious resort to experiment and observation, the application of
demonstration. In its very nature it was such that it was impossible for
its author to carry by its aid the structure of science to completion.
The moment that Aristotle applies his own principles we find him
compelled to depart from them through want of a sufficient experience
and sufficient precision in his facts. The philosophy of Plato is a
gorgeous castle in the air, that of Aristotle is a solid structure,
laboriously, and, with many failures, founded on the solid rock.

[Sidenote: Aristotle's logic]

Under Logic, Aristotle treats of the methods of arriving at general
propositions, and of reasoning from them. His logic is at once the art
of thinking and the instrument of thought. The completeness of our
knowledge depends on the extent and completeness of our experience. His
manner of reasoning is by the syllogism, an argument consisting of three
propositions, such that the concluding one follows of necessity from the
two premises, and of which, indeed, the whole theory of demonstration is
only an example. Regarding logi