We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 February 2018
That there are two methods by which to approach the study of mind—the one inward and reflective, the other outward and transitive, including more especially the anatomy and physiology of the brain and nervous system—is by high authorities, even in physical and biological science, now generally admitted.
∗ The reader may find this question treated at some length by the author, in an article styled “The Veracity of Consciousness,” in “Mind,” January, 1877.Google Scholar
∗ “Hamilton's Beid,” p. 389.Google Scholar
† “Grammar of Assent,” p. 11, and p. 22.Google Scholar
∗ “Elementary Lessons in Logic,” chapter vi., p. 47.Google Scholar
∗ “Hamilton's Reid,” pp. 878, note, and 934.Google Scholar
† Ibid, p. 327.Google Scholar
∗ 1 2 3 4, mutually differ; a a a a, mutually resemble. The former are in the sphere of the Singular, the latter, of the General.Google Scholar
∗ “Prolegomena Logica,” p. 34.Google Scholar
† Ibid, p. 35Google Scholar
∗ “System of Logic,” Book iii, chap. 3.Google Scholar
† The author's views on this question are given in “Mind,” July, 1878.Google Scholar
eLetters
No eLetters have been published for this article.