1. The Method of Induction. The natural way to discover the meaning of a word in our native language is the method of induction.1 We hear a word, e.g. oppression, repeated in a certain context in such a way as to give us, as we think, some approximate notion of its meaning, say, nolence; then we hear it again in different context, and pereive that it cannot mean exactly violence; it seems to mean njustice: but again some further mention of the word makes t evident that, though oppression is always unjust, yet it is ot identical with injustice. If we live in society where the Tord is often and correctly used, or if we read the works of ccurate authors, we shall in course of time reject incorrect otions of the word, and arrive at its exact meaning. This rocess of rejection may be technically called elimination. he process by which, by introducing the different instances which a word occurs, we arrive at the meaning which e word has in every instance, is called "The Method of duction." - Suppose the squa A, B, C, D, to represent our first notion of a word. Wh we reject or eliminate some part of this notion as bei inaccurate, we contract our square; we draw the boundar more closely; in other words, we define. This process of elimination is unconsciously used in t discovery of the meaning of the simplest word in our nati language. The following example should be studied a reproduced with the diagram. square When being daries in the native d and D1 How does a child discover what is meant by white? 2 He perhaps hears that sugar is white, and he hence infers that white has something to do with sugar. Let the square A, B, C1 D1 represent this quality of sugar, what particular quality of sugar does white represent? Perhaps 'sweet.' But presently he hears that "salt is white." Then white can have nothing to do with 'sweetness,' since salt is not 'sweet.' Hence the child eliminates 'sweetness,' which is peculiar to sugar, and narrows the square to A, B2 C2 D2. "Whiteness is something common to sugar and salt." What is this common quality? Both sugar and salt are good to eat. Perhaps then white means 'good to eat.' But he finds snow called white, and snow is not 'good to eat.' Hence he eliminates the quality of 'edibility,' and narrows the square a second time to A, B, C, D, which represents qualities common to sugar, salt, and snow. Sugar, salt, and snow all melt in water. Perhaps then white means 'able to melt.' But, lastly, paper is called white, and paper cannot melt. The last elimination of 'solubility' is therefore made, and the square is narrowed to A, B, C, D, which represents qualities common to sugar, salt, snow, and paper. These qualities (those at least that are obvious to a child) are so few that in all probability the child would now hit upon the most obvious of them, whiteness. 4 4 4 4 4 This process of induction and elimination, though it draws the boundaries closer round the thing to be defined, does not completely define it in the case above mentioned and in many other cases. A B C D includes whiteness, but it also includes visibility, tangibility, and other qualities common to sugar, salt, snow, and paper. It would have been a final definition if we had said, "whiteness is the color of snow," for that definition would not have included any thing beside whiteness. |