162 This first example of a train of reasoning is still extremely simple, the series consisting of only two syllogisms. The following is somewhat more complicated: No government, which earnestly seeks the good of its subjects, is likely to be overthrown; some particular government earnestly seeks the good of its subjects, therefore it is not likely to be overthrown. The major premise in this argument we shall suppose not to be derived from considerationsa priori, but to be a generalization from history, which, whether correct or erroneous, must have been founded on observation of governments concerning whose desire of the good of their subjects there was no doubt. It has been found, or thought to be found, that these were not easily overthrown, and it has been deemed that those instances warranted an extension of the same predicate to any and every government which resembles them in the attribute of desiring earnestly the good of its subjects. But does the government in question thus resemble them? This may be debated pro and con by many arguments, and must, in any case, be proved by another induction; for we can not directly observe the sentiments and desires of the persons who carry on the government. To prove the minor, therefore, we require an argument in this form: Every government which acts in a certain manner, desires the good of its subjects; the supposed government acts in that particular manner, therefore it desires the good of its subjects. But is it true that the government acts in the manner supposed? This minor also may require proof; still another induction, as thus: What is asserted by intelligent and disinterested witnesses, may be believed to be true; that the government acts in this manner, is asserted by such witnesses, therefore it may be believed to be true. The argument hence consists of three steps. Having the evidence of our senses that the case of the government under consideration resembles a number of former cases, in the circumstance of having something asserted respecting it by intelligent and disinterested witnesses, we infer, first, that, as in those former instances, so in this instance, the assertion is true. Secondly, what was asserted of the government being that it acts in a particular manner, and other governments or persons having been observed to act in the same manner, the government in question is brought into known resemblance with those other governments or persons; and since they were known to desire the good of the people, it is thereupon, by a second induction, inferred that the particular government spoken of, desires the good of the people. This brings that government into known resemblance with the other governments which were thought likely to escape revolution, and thence, by a third induction, it is concluded that this particular government is also likely to escape. This is still reasoning from particulars to particulars, but we now reason to the new instance from three distinct sets of former instances: to one only of those sets of instances do we directly perceive the new one to be similar; but from that similarity we inductively infer that it has the attribute by which it is assimilated to the next set, and brought within the corresponding induction; after which by a repetition of the same operation we infer it to be similar to the third set, and hence a third induction conducts us to the ultimate conclusion. How doyou know? Irvine shot the question at him. The trooper turned the crank, raised the receiver to his ear. Almost instantly the voice of a waiting trooper said,Hello, Larry, what is it? 164 Shes changed a bit, my old pal, in the past fifteen years, with the help of a wig, make-up and glasses. But hey, haven’t we all? Fooled you so easily — you must be slipping in your old age! But here’s the thing, Detective Superintendent — my, how you’ve been promoted in the years since we met — you were just a humble DetectiveSergeant, then. You and I have a score to settle. All those years in thebig house. You thought that was the end of me and Monica, didn’t you? Did you count on us being out so soon for good behaviour? I don’t think so.’ He drove down to the station and neither of us said a word until we were inside. Len McIntosh was in the Chiefs office, waiting for us, and he drawled out:Hello, Connell! I said hello and took my usual seat. Kirby took his and started out with: “I tried to give you a break, Connell, and one for myself along with you. You dont want to play it that way, hunh? Lester said, in an awed voice:Why shes hardly more than a child. A change in a thing, not amounting to its total removal, that is, a change which leaves it still the same thing it was, must be a change either in its quantity, or in some of its variable relations to other things, of which variable relations the principal is its position in space. In the previous example, the modification which was produced in the antecedent was an alteration in its quantity. Let us now suppose the question to be, what influence the moon exerts on the surface of the earth. We can not try an experiment in the absence of the moon, so as to observe what terrestrial phenomena her annihilation would put an end to; but when we find that all the variations in theposition of the moon are followed by corresponding variations in the time and place of high water, the place being always either the part of the earth which is nearest to, or that which is most remote from, the moon, we have ample evidence that the moon is, wholly or partially, the cause which determines the tides. It very commonly happens, as it does in this instance, that the variations of an effect are correspondent, or analogous, to those of its cause; as the moon moves farther toward the east, the high-water point does the same: but this is not an indispensable condition, as may be seen in the same example, for along with that high-water point there is at the same instant another high-water point diametrically opposite to it, and which, therefore, of necessity, moves toward the west, as the moon, followed by the nearer of the tide waves, advances toward the east: and yet both these motions are equally effects of the moons motion. It is necessary to distinguishgeneral from collective names. A general name is one which can be predicated of each individual of a multitude; a collective name can not be predicated of each separately, but only of all taken together. The 76th regiment of foot in the British army, which is a collective name, is not a general but an individual name; for though it can be predicated of a multitude of individual soldiers taken jointly, it can not be predicated of them severally. We may say, Jones is a soldier, and Thompson is a soldier, and Smith is a soldier, but we can not say, Jones is the 76th regiment, and Thompson is the 76th regiment, and Smith is the 76th regiment. We can only say, Jones, and Thompson, and Smith, and Brown, and so forth (enumerating all the soldiers), are the 76th regiment. He opened the door and started to get in the car, but the patrolman, notebook in hand, was walking towards him once more.Hate to bother you when youre having trouble, he said, smiling affably, “but since we’re already stopped, I’ll just make a check on your driving license. I like to make a routine check every so often. I resent that, Irvine said. Ive consistently endeavored to protect your interests in a way that... She nods. Makes a slight moue. The facial expression says eitherI know youre being nice, or “I know I look tired, or simply “Who cares what you think anymore? which would put us on an equal footing. It is so sad. It is so fucking sad, really. 169 Deny it, the lawyer said to Rob Trenton. Deny it specifically and categorically..