252 THE GROUNDWORK OF SCIENCE

a repetition of part of the major premiss. Here then, they

say, we have no true " inference " at all, but merely a restate-

ment. We do not " conclude " that Socrates is mortal, but

only say over again, with the use of his name, what was

said before without the use of his name.

Now, of course, the mortality of Socrates, and the

mammary glands of the freshly-caught female whale, were

implicitly included in what was previously known about

" all men " and " all female whales." Unless they were

thus " implicit," they could never be seen to follow as explicit

consequences in the conclusions of the respective syllogisms.

But the syllogism really does afford fresh knowledge to the

mind, and often very important knowledge, by making

truths explicit and manifest, so that they can be most

clearly recognized, which before were merely implicit, and so

were not necessarily obvious.

There is, indeed, a very great difference between implicit

and explicit knowledge. To cause a knowledge which we

only possess "implicitly" to become "explicitly" present

to our minds, may often be, in effect, to give us fresh

knowledge altogether to practically give us a knowledge

of something whereof we had before no available or con-

scious knowledge at all.

Let us suppose that a youth has learned by heart the

characters which respectively distinguish the four classes

of backboned animals beasts, birds, reptiles, and fishes

but that he has seen and knows very little about specimens

of different kinds. It would be by no means wonderful

if such a youth should consider a porpoise to be a kind

of fish. But his teacher might remind him that all creatures

possessing certain characters of brain and heart were beasts.

He might thus come to see that the porpoise which he

took to be a fish must, since it has those characters, really be

a beast.

a repetition of part of the major premiss. Here then, they

say, we have no true " inference " at all, but merely a restate-

ment. We do not " conclude " that Socrates is mortal, but

only say over again, with the use of his name, what was

said before without the use of his name.

Now, of course, the mortality of Socrates, and the

mammary glands of the freshly-caught female whale, were

implicitly included in what was previously known about

" all men " and " all female whales." Unless they were

thus " implicit," they could never be seen to follow as explicit

consequences in the conclusions of the respective syllogisms.

But the syllogism really does afford fresh knowledge to the

mind, and often very important knowledge, by making

truths explicit and manifest, so that they can be most

clearly recognized, which before were merely implicit, and so

were not necessarily obvious.

There is, indeed, a very great difference between implicit

and explicit knowledge. To cause a knowledge which we

only possess "implicitly" to become "explicitly" present

to our minds, may often be, in effect, to give us fresh

knowledge altogether to practically give us a knowledge

of something whereof we had before no available or con-

scious knowledge at all.

Let us suppose that a youth has learned by heart the

characters which respectively distinguish the four classes

of backboned animals beasts, birds, reptiles, and fishes

but that he has seen and knows very little about specimens

of different kinds. It would be by no means wonderful

if such a youth should consider a porpoise to be a kind

of fish. But his teacher might remind him that all creatures

possessing certain characters of brain and heart were beasts.

He might thus come to see that the porpoise which he

took to be a fish must, since it has those characters, really be

a beast.