lways so because it
happened to be so in the few cases that have come under our observation. A
broader experience frequently shows that the hastily made generalization
will not hold.

Some people are led to lose faith in all humanity because one or two of
their acquaintances have shown themselves unworthy of their trust. Others
are ready to pronounce a merchant dishonest because some article purchased
at his store has not proved to be so good as it was expected to be. There
are those who are superstitious concerning the wearing of opals, claiming
that these jewels bring the wearer ill luck, because they have heard of
some instances where misfortune seemed to follow the wearing of that
particular stone. What may seem to be causes and effects at first may,
upon further investigation or inquiry, prove to be merely chance
coincidences. In your work in argument, whether for the class room or
outside, be careful about this point. Remember that your induction will be
weak or even worthless if you draw conclusions from too few examples.

Often one example seems sufficient to cause belief. We might believe that
all giraffes have long necks, even though we had seen but one; but such a
belief would exist because, by many examples of other animals, we have
learned that a single specimen will fairly represent all other specimens
of the same class. On the other hand, if this one giraffe should possess
one brown eye and one white eye, we should not expect all other giraffes
to have such eyes, for our observation of many hundreds of animals teaches
us that the eyes of an animal are usually alike in color. In order to
establish a true generalization, the _essential_ characteristics must be
selected, and these cannot be determined by rule, but rather by common
sense.

+177. Deductive Reasoning.+--When once a general principle has been
established, we may demonstrate the truth of a specific proposition by
showing that the general principle applies to it. We see a gold ring and
say, "This ring is valuable," because we believe the general proposition,
"All articles made of gold are valuable." Expressed in full, the process
of reasoning would be--

_A._ All articles made of gold are valuable.
_B._ This ring is made of gold.
_C._ Therefore this ring is valuable.

A series of statements such as the above is called a syllogism. It
consists of a major premise (_A_), a minor premise (_B_), and a conclusion
(_C_).

Of course we sha