FORE:Think back, said Sandy. When school vacations started and we began to stay around the new Floyd Bennett airport that had opened on Barren Island, Jeff had his crate there to take people around the sky for short sight-seeing hops, didnt he?Disjunction is, in truth, the primordial form of all reasoning, out of which the other forms are successively evolved; and, as such, it is common to man with the lower animals. You are taking a walk in the country with your dog. You come to a stream and jump over it. On measuring the distance with his eye, the animal is afraid to follow you. After waiting a little, he first runs up stream in search of a crossing, and, finding none, returns to look for one in the opposite direction. Failing there also, he comes back once more, and either ventures on the leap or makes his way home by some other route. Now, on considering the matter a little more382 closely, we shall find that hypothetical reasoning takes its rise from the examination of each separate alternative presented by a disjunctive premise. A plurality of courses being open to us, we consider what will ensue on the acceptance or rejection of each. The dog in our illustration thinks (after a canine fashion) that if he jumps he may fall in; if he does not, he will be left behind. Hector will not take refuge within the walls, because, if he does, Polydamas will triumph over him; nor will he offer terms of peace, because, if he does, Achilles will refuse them. Once more, categorical reasoning is developed out of hypothetical reasoning by the necessity of deducing consequences from a general rule. Hector must have argued from the known characters of Polydamas and Achilles, that in certain circumstances they would act after a certain manner. We may add, that this progress of conscious reasoning is a reproduction of the unconscious logic according to which life itself is evolved. All sorts of combinations are spontaneously produced, which, in consequence of the struggle for existence, cannot all survive. Those adapted to the conditions of life are selected, on trial, at the expense of the rest; and their adaptation or non-adaptation is determined in accordance with categorical laws. Furthermore, the framing of a disjunctive proposition necessitates the systematic distribution of possibilities under mutually exclusive heads, thus involving the logical processes of definition, division, and classification. Dialectic, as Plato understood it, consisted almost entirely in the joint performance of these operations;a process which Aristotle regards as the immediate but very imperfect precursor of his own syllogistic method.276 You cannot, he says, prove anything by dividing, for instance, all living things into the two classes, mortal and immortal; unless, indeed, you assume the very point under discussionto which class a particular species belongs. Yet this is how he constantly reasons himself; and even demonstrative reason383ing, as he interprets it, implies the possession of a ready-made classification. For, according to him, it consists exclusively of propositions which predicate some essential attribute of a thingin other words, some attribute already included in the definition of the subject; and a continuous series of such definitions can only be given by a fixed classification of things.
FORE:In planing and turning, the tools require no exact form; they can be roughly made, except the edge, and even this, in most cases, is shaped by the eye. Such tools are maintained at a trifling expense, and the destruction of an edge is a matter of no consequence. The form, temper, and strength can be continually adapted to the varying conditions of the work and the hardness of material. The line of division between planing and milling is fixed by two circumstancesthe hardness and uniformity of the material to be cut, and the importance of duplication. Brass, clean iron, soft steel, or any homogeneous metal not hard enough to cause risk to the tools, can be milled at less expense than planed, provided there is enough work of a uniform character to justify the expense of milling tools. Cutting the teeth of wheels is an example where milling is profitable, but not to the extent generally supposed. In the manufacture of small arms, sewing machines, clocks, and especially watches, where there is a constant and exact duplication of parts, milling is indispensable. Such manufactures are in some cases founded on milling operations, as will be pointed out in another chapter.If the earliest of Platos enquiries, while they deal with the same subjects and are conducted on the same method as those cultivated by Socrates, evince a breadth of view surpassing anything recorded of him by Xenophon, they also exhibit traces of an influence disconnected with and inferior in value to his. On more than one occasion121 Plato reasons, or rather quibbles, in a style which he has elsewhere held up to ridicule as characteristic of the Sophists, with such success that the name of sophistry has clung to it ever since.186 Indeed, some of the verbal fallacies employed are so transparent that we can hardly suppose them to be unintentional, and we are forced to conclude that the young despiser of human wisdom was resolved to maintain his thesis with any weapons, good or bad, which came to hand. And it seems much more likely that he learned the eristic art from Protagoras or from his disciples than from Socrates. Plato spent a large part of his life in opposing the Sophiststhat is to say, the paid professors of wisdom and virtue; but in spite of, or rather perhaps because of, this very opposition, he was profoundly affected by their teaching and example. It is quite conceivable, although we do not find it stated as a fact, that he resorted to them for instruction when a young man, and before coming under the influence of Socrates, an event which did not take place until he was twenty years old; or he may have been directed to them by Socrates himself. With all its originality, his style bears traces of a rhetorical training in the more elaborate passages, and the Sophists were the only teachers of rhetoric then to be found. His habit of clothing philosophical lessons in the form of a myth seems also to have been borrowed from them. It would, therefore, not be surprising that he should cultivate their argumentative legerdemain side by side with the more strict and severe discipline of Socratic dialectics.
FORE:The second plan of boring by means of a bar mounted on points or centres is one by which the greatest accuracy is attainable; it is like chuck-boring a lathe operation, and [138] one for which no better machine than a lathe has been devised, at least for the smaller kinds of work. It is a problem whether in ordinary machine fitting there is not a gain by performing all boring in this manner whenever the rigidity of boring bars is sufficient without auxiliary supports, and when the bars can pass through the work. Machines arranged for this kind of boring can be employed in turning or boring as occasion may require.
THREE:Plato had, in truth, a conception of science which no knowledge then attainedperhaps one may add, no knowledge ever attainablecould completely satisfy. Even the rigour of mathematical demonstration did not content him, for mathematical truth itself rested on unproved assumptions, as we also, by the way, have lately discovered. Perhaps the Hegelian system would have fulfilled his requirements; perhaps not even that. Moreover, that the new order which he contemplated might be established, it was necessary to begin by making a clean sweep of all existing opinions. With the urbanity of an Athenian, the piety of a disciple, and the instinct of a great dramatic artist, he preferred to assume that this indispensable task had already been done by another. And of all preceding thinkers, who was so well qualified for the undertaking as Socrates? Who else had wielded the weapons of negative dialectic with such consummate dexterity? Who had assumed such a critical attitude towards the beliefs of his contemporaries? Who had been so anxious to find a point of attachment for every new truth in the minds of his interlocutors? Who therefore could, with such116 plausibility, be put forward in the guise of one who laid claim to no wisdom on his own account? The son of Phaenaret seemed made to be the Baptist of a Greek Messiah; but Plato, in treating him as such, has drawn a discreet veil over the whole positive side of his predecessors teaching, and to discover what this was we must place ourselves under the guidance of Xenophons more faithful report.
THREE:Aeternas quoniam poenas in morte timendum.158
