TWO:219It is remarkable that Aristotle, after repeatedly speaking of induction as an ascent from particulars to generals, when he comes to trace the process by which we arrive at the most general notions of any, does not admit the possibility of such a movement in one direction only. The universal and the individual are, according to him, combined in our most elementary sense-impressions, and the business of scientific393 experience is to separate them. Starting from a middle point, we work up to indivisible predicates on the one hand and down to indivisible subjects on the other, the final apprehension of both extremes being the office, not of science, but of Nous. This theory is equally true and acute. The perception of individual facts is just as difficult and just as slowly acquired as the conception of ultimate abstractions. Moreover, the two processes are carried on pari passu, each being only made possible by and through the other. No true notion can be framed without a firm grasp of the particulars from which it is abstracted; no individual object can be studied without analysing it into a group of common predicates, the idiosyncrasy of whichthat is, their special combinationdifferentiates it from every other object. What, however, we wish to remark is the illustration incidentally afforded by this striking aper?u of Aristotles analytical method, which is also the essentially Greek method of thought. We saw that, for our philosopher, syllogism was not the subsumption of a particular case under a general law, but the interpolation of a mean between two extremes; we now see that his induction is not the finding of a law for the particular phenomenon, but its analysis into two elementsone universal and the other individuala solution of the mean into the extremes. And the distinctive originality of his whole system was to fix two such extremes for the universea self-thinking thought in absolute self-identity at one end of the scale, and an absolutely indeterminate matter at the other; by combining which in various proportions he then re-constructed the whole intermediate phenomenal reality. In studying each particular class of facts, he follows the same method. The genus is marked by some characteristic attribute which one speciesthe prerogative species, so to speakexhibits in its greatest purity, while the others form a graduated scale by variously combining this attribute with its opposite or privation. Hence his theory, since revived by Goethe, that394 the colours are so many different mixtures of light and darkness.
TWO:It will be well for an apprentice to begin at once, as soon as he commences a shop course, to note the manner of handling material, watching the operation of cranes, hoists, trucks, tackle, rollers; in short, everything that has to do with moving and handling. The machinery and appliances in ordinary use are simple enough in a mechanical sense, but the principles of handling material are by no means as plain or easy to understand. The diversity of practice seen in various plans of handling and lifting weights fully attests the last proposition, and it is questionable whether there is any other branch of mechanical engineering that is treated less in a scientific way than machinery of this class. I do not allude to the mechanism of cranes and other devices, which are usually well proportioned and generally well arranged, but to the adaptation of such machinery with reference to special or local conditions. There are certain inherent difficulties that have to be encountered in the construction and operation of machinery, for lifting and handling, that are peculiar to it as a class; among these difficulties is the transmission of power to movable mechanism, the intermittent and irregular application of power, severe strains, also the liability to accidents and breakage from such machinery being controlled by the judgment of attendants.
