[Frogma] R, as a "NEW STEP IN THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, " attended

[Them]

In my mind. But the logician will say that this reasoning is on the
invalid mode of the second figure, from which you can never draw an
affirmative conclusion. Precisely so, if you mean a necessary
conclusion. But sense-perception uses affirmative modes of the second
figure and derives probable knowledge therefrom. I make probable
knowledge more certain by verifying the inference or correcting it. I go
to the garden and pick up the object, and see the threads and fiber of
the wool. Or perhaps I find it was a piece of red paper. But whatever it
was, at the end I can say what I have seen, only in so far as I have
recognized or identified it. Recognition proceeds by the second figure,
and has chiefly the non-valid modes. But it may use the valid modes,
though in a still less conscious manner. For instance, I recognized that
the object was not an elephant by this valid form; every elephant is
larger than a tin can; this object is not larger than a tin can;
therefore, this object is necessarily not an elephant; or, by this other
valid form, no elephant is as small as a tomato can; this object is just
the size of a tomato can; hence this object is not an elephant. Had some
one told me to look out and see an elephant, my perception would
unconsciously have taken one of these forms. The scarlet is recognized
as such only as it is identified with a previous impression of scarlet.
Here is our th
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: felicific.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 9832 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://list.pvv.org/pipermail/frogma/attachments/20090824/c89974e2/attachment.jpg