Thought Culture

104
inductive fallacies, if it be even possible, in the formal process
of induction . It is certain, however, that in respect to the
subject-matter of the conclusion in inductive reasoning there
are some very definite limitations upon the right to transcend
the premises. We cannot infer anything we please from any
premises we please. We must conform to certain definite rules
or principles. Any violation of them will be a fallacy. These rules
are the same as those for material fallacies in deduction, so that
the fallacies of induction, whether they are ever formal or not,
are at least material; that is they occur whenever equivocation
and presumption are committed. There are, then, two simple
rules which should not be violated. (1) The subject-matter in
the conclusion should be of the same general kind as in the
premises. (2) The facts constituting the premises must be
accepted and must not be fictitious.
One may develop his faculty or power of Deductive Reasoning
by pursuing certain lines of study. The study of Mathematics,
particularly in its branch of Mental Arithmetic is especially
valuable in this direction. Algebra and Geometry have long
been known to exercise an influence over the mind which
gives to it a logical trend and cast. The processes involved in
Geometry are akin to those employed in Logical reasoning, and
must necessarily train the mind in this special direction. As
Brooks says: So valuable is geometry as a discipline that many
lawyers and others review their geometry every year in order to
keep the mind drilled to logical habits of thinking. The study
of Grammar, Rhetoric and the Languages, are also valuable
in the culture and development of the faculty of Deductive
Reasoning. The study of Psychology and Philosophy have value
in this connection. The study of Law is very valuable in creating
logical habits of thinking deductively.
But in the study of Logic we have possibly the best exercise in
the development and culture of this particular faculty. As Brooks
well says: The study of Logic will aid in the development of the
power of deductive reasoning. It does this first by showing the
Reasoning
105
method by which we reason. To know how we reason, to see
the laws which govern the reasoning process, to analyze the
syllogism and see its conformity to the laws of thought, is not
only an exercise of reasoning, but gives that knowledge of the
process that will be both a stimulus and a guide to thought. No
one can trace the principles and processes of thought without
receiving thereby an impetus to thought. In the second place,
the study of logic is probably even more valuable because it
gives practice in deductive thinking. This, perhaps, is its principal
value, since the mind reasons instinctively without knowing how
it reasons. One can think without the knowledge of the science
of thinking, just as one can use language correctly without a
knowledge of grammar; yet as the study of grammar improves
one s speech, so the study of logic cannot but improve one s
thought.
The study of the common fallacies, such as Begging the
Question, Reasoning in a Circle, etc., is particularly important
to the student, for when one realizes that such fallacies exist,
and is able to detect and recognize them, he will avoid their use
in framing his own arguments, and will be able to expose them
when they appear in the arguments of others.

The fallacy of Begging the Question consists in assuming

as a proven fact something that has not been proven, or is not
accepted as proven by the other party to the argument. It is
a common trick in debate. The fact assumed may be either
the particular point to be proved, or the premise necessary to
prove it. Hyslop gives the following illustration of this fallacy:
Good institutions should be united; Church and State are good
institutions; therefore, Church and State should be united. The
above syllogism seems reasonable at first thought, but analysis
will show that the major premise Good institutions should
be united is a mere assumption without proof. Destroy this
premise and the whole reasoning fails.
Another form of fallacy, quite common, is that called
Reasoning in a Circle, which consists in assuming as proof of a
Thought Culture