Questions

This is a list of all the questions and their associated study carrel identifiers. One can learn a lot of the "aboutness" of a text simply by reading the questions.

identifier	question
2412	What could be the contrary of any primary substance, such as the individual man or animal?
41838	Then, you state that silk- hats are the promoters and cause of civilization in a community?
41838	For instance, the question once asked a respectable citizen on the witness stand:"Have you stopped beating your mother?"
41838	For instance:"You assert that the more civilized a community, the more silk- hats are to be found in it?"
41838	Upon what grounds do we argue?
41838	What is this mental process?
41838	When Newton saw the apple fall, the anticipatory question flashed through his mind,''Why do not the heavenly bodies fall like this apple?''
41838	Why?
10731	***** How should a man be content so long as he fails to obtain complete unity in his inmost being?
10731	***** If education or warning were of any avail, how could Seneca''s pupil be a Nero?
10731	***** Why should it be folly to be always intent on getting the greatest possible enjoyment out of the moment, which is our only sure possession?
10731	But has any man ever been completely at one with himself?
10731	But when I entered into the other-- how shall I express my astonishment at what I saw?
10731	For example, should he defend suicide, you may at once exclaim,"Why do n''t you hang yourself?"
10731	For, in the first place, what can such a man say?
10731	How is inner unity even possible under such circumstances?
10731	Nay, is not the very thought a contradiction?
10731	Now the question is, What counter- trick avails for the other party?
10731	Should he maintain that Berlin is an unpleasant place to live in, you may say,"Why do n''t you leave by the first train?"
10731	Since this is what happens, where is the value of the opinion even of a hundred millions?
10731	Why is this?
52945	''How do you account for memory?''
52945	All these were essential to the effect-- and what has become of them?
52945	And if not recoverable, where at least and in what form does it exist?
52945	And when the target and flattened bullet have cooled down?
52945	Are they to be expected to see in the hare only the properties common to all the animals reviewed?
52945	But what is the meaning of the emphatic''when only''?
52945	Does he resemble a''successful and patriotic general''--a''benevolent monarch''--a''wise legislator''--a''virtuous man''?
52945	Does the body show any marks or traces of thought that may serve to revive ideas in the absence of objects?
52945	For why?
52945	Has a subject such or such an attribute?
52945	Have they also gone to warm the universe?
52945	How is the equivalence of energy maintained in this case?
52945	How then is it to be further explained?
52945	If a zoologist, for example, were to determine beforehand how many classes of animals there ought to be, would they not say he was acting improperly?
52945	Is there anything analogous to this sort of division in any science or branch of practical thought?
52945	The servant in piteous accents exclaimed,''What is the meaning of this treatment?''
52945	The wife on seeing this said,''What hast thou done with the golden cup?''
52945	To what shall it now be likened?
52945	Under what image is the ego figured that it should be capable of division?
52945	What has become of the force expended?
52945	What has_ place_ to do with the action of a universal law?
52945	What is its function in substantialism?
52945	What is to prevent his hearers from concluding that birds are furred animals and fishes quadrupeds?
52945	What sort of representation can subsist between one concrete stroke and every other concrete stroke?
52945	What then is_ x_?
52945	When the Samradian asked,''Where is the horse?''
52945	Where did the information that the barometer is falling come from?
52945	Which are we to suppose the speaker meant us to understand?
52945	Why not?
52945	Why should a logical method be unsuitable for every sort of subject except those matters of logic that are beyond the mere elements?]
52945	Why then have more classes than these four?
52945	Would logicians themselves sanction such a classification in a natural science?
38141	And, if a system, does it, in particular, present such phases( such relations, categories) as Hegel shows forth? 38141 Anyway,"Dewey says,"before we either abuse or recommend genetic method we ought to have some answers to these questions: Just what is it?
38141	How then does, say, a case of perception with effort differ from a case of''easy''or effortless perception? 38141 What do we mean by individuality?
38141	What is the relation of knowledge, of theory, to that Ought which seems to be the very essence of moral conduct? 38141 [ 106] How do these specific, actual activities come to be called capacities?
38141	[ 188] Why is it necessary to make such a distinction at all? 38141 [ 22] This statement raises the more specific question, what is meaning?
38141	And to what extent would physiology illuminate the problem of the relation of the generic ideas to their appropriate objects?
38141	And why necessary to move back and forth between the two provisional standpoints?
38141	Are the categories of biology fitted to explain mind and spirit?
38141	But how does Dewey propose to improve upon Kant''s position?
38141	But how will this help to bring perception and conception into closer union?
38141	But the question may be asked,"Whence come the ideal elements which give to experience its meaning?"
38141	But what is the correct attitude toward the self?
38141	But where does psychology stand in this classification?
38141	Can it be done?
38141	Does the self merely trace out the meaning already present in reality, or is it a factor in the creation of meaning?
38141	His question is not, What is the best means of accomplishing a given purpose, but, What end is worth attaining?
38141	How apply them correctly to the matter in hand?
38141	How can the inferred reality of the star be established, considering the subjectivity of all perception?
38141	How does it come, then, that this particular method achieves such an effective hegemony over the other modes of reflection?
38141	How does it stand, then, with Dewey''s own account of the knowledge process?
38141	How does the proposition square up with reality or experience?
38141	How, it may be asked, does the''direct descriptive method''escape the limitations which it imposes upon the other forms of reflective thought?
38141	If man is to hold no beliefs except those proved valid by experience, how can there be any to validate?
38141	If the truth or falsity of an idea is not discovered by thought, then by what faculty might it be discovered?
38141	In view of the wider meaning of the self, Dewey asks,"Can the result of the transcendental deduction stand without further interpretation?"
38141	In what sense has the philosophy of the past been misanthropic?
38141	Is the world such a connected system as he holds it to be?
38141	It is well enough to feed and house human bodies, but the paramount question will always be: What kinds of souls are to dwell in these bodies?
38141	Just what is to come of it and how?
38141	Or, to put the question more explicitly, why did he retain as a fundamental assumption Kant''s''manifold of sensations''?
38141	That it comes''after something and for the sake of something,''namely,''direct''experience?
38141	The analysis of action is from the first an analysis of what is to be done; how, then, should it come out excepting with a''this should be done''?
38141	The difference, I repeat, shall be wholly in sensory quale; but in_ what_ sensory quale?
38141	This raises the question, What is theory?
38141	What does it mean to say that a Stoic theory of knowledge holds a monopoly in modern philosophy?
38141	What does the internal evidence prove?
38141	What is to be done with them?
38141	What is to be made of this intermittance of thought?
38141	What might be expected, then, of the essays which are primarily critical?
38141	What relation have ideas about morality to specific moral conduct?
38141	What shall be said, then, with reference to the assertion that thought operates in the interests of the non- cognitive life processes?
38141	What, then, is it?
38141	Which shall be used in dealing with the development of morals?
38141	Why is it that the idealists remain unimpressed by this demonstration?
38141	Why wait upon psychology for confirmation of a truth so obvious and important?
38141	[ 236]_ Ibid._, p. 17?.
38141	_ Is_ Humanism a product of the twentieth century?
38141	_ ad indefinitum_--shall be interpreted simply and entirely as distinctive functions or divisions of labor within the doubt- inquiry process?
6560	''Is Socrates a man?''
6560	''Is it possible for a man who is not writing to write?''
6560	''Well, is not an animal a body?''
6560	''Why?''
6560	''Yes,''''And are you an animal?''
6560	( 4) Is there balm in Gilead?
6560	( 5) Does not his feebleness of character indicate either a bad training or a natural imbecility?
6560	( 5)''Is stone a body?''
6560	A cup, for instance, with precisely the same form, may be composed of very different matter- gold, silver, pewter, horn or what not?
6560	A full answer to the question''What is a Universal?''
6560	All not- B is not- A, and followed by Subalternation?
6560	And again--''Can you carry this, that, and the other?''
6560	And whether, therefore, the third head of indefinite propositions were not as superfluous as the so- called''common gender''of nouns in grammar?
6560	And why not from all?
6560	And why?
6560	Are abstract terms then, it may be asked, singular or common?
6560	Are there then any terms which possess no intension?
6560	Are you a thief and a liar too?''
6560	Are_ you_ a thief and a liar too?''
6560	But logicians anxious for simplification asked, whether a predicate in any given case must not either apply to the whole of the subject or not?
6560	But why, it maybe asked, should not the moods of the first figure equally well be regarded as indirect moods of the fourth?
6560	But, if you were to ask the same person''Do you mean that cows are all the ruminants that there are, or only some of them?''
6560	Can the laws of thought be violated in like manner with the laws of the land?
6560	Do these two principles imply one another?
6560	Fairchild, is this true?
6560	For how could there be action without an agent?
6560	From how many of these propositions can the original one be derived?
6560	Granting the truth of the following propositions, what other propositions can be inferred by opposition to be true or false?
6560	Have you left off beating your mother yet?''
6560	Here is the sort of example that Aristotle gives--''Is Plato different from Socrates?''
6560	If the major term of a syllogism be the predicate of the major premiss, what do we know about the minor premiss?
6560	If the middle term be twice distributed, what mood and figure are possible?
6560	In appearance they can be, and manifestly often are violated- for how else could error be possible?
6560	In what figures is AEE valid?
6560	Is the suppressed premiss in any case disputable on material grounds?
6560	Is the term converse here used in its logical meaning?
6560	Now in which of these two senses are we using the term''laws of thought''?
6560	Or again, that man means a rational, and does not mean a speaking, a religious, or an aesthetic animal, or a biped with two eyes, a nose, and a mouth?
6560	Or are they inviolable like the laws of nature?
6560	Roughly it may be said that the Realists sought for the answer to the question''What is a Universal?''
6560	Since every term must be either abstract or concrete, it may be asked-- Are attributives abstract or concrete?
6560	Suppose for a moment that this law did not hold-- then what would become of all our reasoning?
6560	The fact is-- so subtle are the ambiguities of language-- that even such a question as''Is a thing white or not- white?''
6560	The man was exhibiting a blue horse; and the distinguished stranger asked him--''With what did you paint your horse?''
6560	To ask this, is to ask-- Are there any terms which have absolutely no meaning?
6560	To which of the heads of predicables would you refer the following statements?
6560	Under which of the five heads would the predicates in the following propositions fall?
6560	What is the only kind of conclusion that can be drawn in all the figures?
6560	What kind of influence have we here?
6560	What moods are common to all the figures?
6560	What moods are peculiar to the first, second, and third figures respectively?
6560	When the middle term is distributed in both premisses, what must be the quantity of the conclusion?
6560	When, for instance, a thing is half white and half black, are we to say that it is white or black?
6560	When, for instance, we say''If the sky falls, we shall catch larks,''what is it that we really mean to assert?
6560	Where would be the use of establishing conclusions about things, if they were liable to evade us by a Protean change of identity?
6560	Wherein then does the difference lie?
6560	Wherein then lies the difference?
6560	Why are the premisses of Fesapo and Fresison not transposed in reduction like those of the other moods of the fourth figure?
6560	Why can there be no subaltern moods in the third figure?
6560	Why do the premisses EA yield a universal conclusion in the first two figures and only a particular one in the last two?
6560	Why is it sufficient to distribute the middle term once only?
4763	And is it Nature, or Art, that is to have the credit of this happy change?
4763	But why is this?
4763	Do you mean to tell us that all these Logicians are wrong?
4763	So you like a doll better than a cousin? 4763 The Man in the Wilderness asked of me''How many strawberries grow in the sea?''"
4763	Very glad to hear it: and how do you make it out to be so?
4763	Well, some geraniums are red, are n''t they?
4763	Well, who expects to be comfortable, out shopping?
4763	What are you talking about geraniums for? 4763 Why, do n''t you see that it''s absurd to call him a miserly merchant?
4763	Why, how do you make THAT out? 4763 Why, is n''t he very rich?"
4763	( Sounds nice, does n''t it?)
4763	( Would n''t THAT be a charming Universe to live in?)
4763	( You think I invented that name, now do n''t you?
4763	----- Suppose we find it marked like this:--||| 1| What would that tell us?
4763	5?
4763	5?
4763	6?
4763	6?
4763	7?
4763	8?
4763	And how are they to work, if they do n''t know anything?
4763	And now what am I driving at, in all this long rigmarole?
4763	And what name may we give to such a Conclusion?
4763	And what then?
4763	And what then?"
4763	Brown?"
4763	But is there any great harm in THAT, so long as you get plenty of amusement?
4763	But what''s the good of proving anything to YOU, I should like to know?"
4763	But, if they put it the other way, and ask"Can an Attribute exist without any Thing for it to belong to?
4763	Can it mean BOTH?"
4763	How may we detect a''Fallacious Conclusion''?
4763	How may we detect''Fallacious Premisses''?
4763	How shall I ever repay such kindness?
4763	If you mean that cousins are n''t dolls, who ever said they were?"
4763	In marking a pair of Premisses on the larger Diagram, why is it best to mark NEGATIVE Propositions before AFFIRMATIVE ones?
4763	In what cases may this be done?
4763	In what sense do we use the word''Universe''in this Game?
4763	Is it Particular or Universal?
4763	It is true we do not know whether its inner portion is empty or occupied: but what does THAT matter?
4763	Now what would you make of such a Proposition as"The Cake you have given me is nice"?
4763	People have asked the question"Can a Thing exist without any Attributes belonging to it?"
4763	Taking the upper half by itself, so that our Subject is"new Cakes", how are we to represent"no new Cakes are wholesome"?
4763	The smaller Diagram is now pretty liberally marked:---------| 0| 1||---|---|| 1||------- And now what Conclusion can we read off from this?
4763	We must take, as our''Universe'', some class of things which will include Dragons and Scotchmen: shall we say''Animals''?
4763	What are the two kinds of''Fallacies''?
4763	What are we to make of this, with regard to x and y?
4763	What are''Individual''Propositions?
4763	What are''Particular''and''Universal''Propositions?
4763	What does this mean?
4763	What does"some"mean in Logic?
4763	What is a''Double''Proposition?
4763	What is an''Attribute''?
4763	What kinds of Propositions imply, in this Game, the EXISTENCE of their Subjects?
4763	What two partial Propositions make up, when taken together,"all x are y"?
4763	What would this tell us, with regard to the class of"new Cakes"?
4763	What would you make of this, I wonder?
4763	What, then, are you to do?
4763	When does this happen?
4763	When is a class of Things said to be''exhaustively''divided?
4763	When is it NOT good sense?
4763	When is it good sense to put"is"or"are"between two names?
4763	When it is NOT good sense, what is the simplest agreement to make, in order to make good sense?
4763	Who can tell?
4763	Who should know better?"
4763	Why is it of no consequence to us, as Logicians, whether the Premisses are true or false?
4763	Would it not tell us that there are SOME of them in the x y- compartment?
4763	You never saw"beautiful"floating about in the air, or littered about on the floor, without any Thing to BE beautiful, now did you?
4763	You will take its four compartments, one by one, and ask, for each in turn,"What mark can I place HERE?
36801	''* But whence is to come''this drop of sound logic?''
36801	''Do you want any blood shed for you?''
36801	''Does he shed anything for you that you_ do_ want?
36801	''Has the reader ever seen Mr. Macready in the character of Macbeth?
36801	''Look where we will, do we not find ignorance powerful for every kind of wrong and evil?
36801	--and lie for the right?
36801	And did you not hear him say that he could have shed his blood for me?
36801	And why should we be delighted with Mr. Macready''s delineation, and disgusted with the ranter?
36801	Are these the dispensations of Providence, or the dispensations of folly and crime?
36801	Ay-- this state- policy?
36801	Bishop Berkeley may demonstrate that we are not sure of matter''s existence-- but are we more sure of any thing else?
36801	But by what experience did Aristotle discover the centre of the universe, so as to become aware that heavy bodies_ naturally_ tend there?
36801	But how would it have been with a cloddish unimaginative fellow, whom nature never intended should understand Shakspere?
36801	But if he should still remain in doubt, where is the harm?
36801	But what comprehensive reasons are these?
36801	But when experience affords no model on which to shape the new conception, how is it possible for us to form it?
36801	But why overlooks he pure mathematics-- a much higher science than arithmetic?
36801	Can such a proposition have facts for its support?
36801	Does he even shed legs of mutton for you in any decent proportion to potatoes and garden stuff?''
36801	Does he shed employment for you, instruction for you pocket money for you?
36801	How did he ascertain the limits of that which has no limits?
36801	How far may not this Tertsky have proceeded-- What may not he himself too have permitted Himself to do, to snare the enemy, The laws of war excusing?
36801	How is this proved to be the most formidable enemy of tyranny?
36801	How, for example, can we imagine an end to space or time?
36801	I have frequently put the question-- What is consciousness?
36801	If men are silent concerning objects and principles, it is said they have none, and it is impatiently asked''where is their bond of union?''
36801	If reason will not serve us well, will anything serve us better?
36801	Is it; otherwise with the Church?
36801	Need it be added that this knowledge is only to be had by patient observation?
36801	On what facts rest the measurement of the radii from our earth to the boundless circumference of space?
36801	On what grounds are they considered to be true by one who declines investigation?
36801	Said generous Rob,''What need of Books?
36801	Shall he stay on shore or put out to sea?
36801	Shall the young man enter trade or a profession without being vitiated?
36801	Then how many boys ought our''philosopher''to have questioned before making his vast inference?
36801	This is true, but is it true that arithmetic is on_ this account_ to be imitated?
36801	Thus I found that huge reports, inflated as balloons, shrunk like them when pricked by the pin of a question--''Will you answer for it?''
36801	Thus, on any assertion being made, ask-- Why is the assertion true?
36801	To all who told me anything, if I attached importance to it, I made it a rule to ask--''May I mention it to the party with your name?''
36801	To all written communications answer--''Please add your name and address-- and may I publish them if occasion requires?''
36801	Tyranny, says Cobbett, has no enemy so formidable as the pen, Why?
36801	Up springs at every step, to claim a tear, Some little friendship formed and cherished here?
36801	Upon asking the terms of apartments, I was met, in all cases, by several preliminary questions, as for whom were they?
36801	Was it classical in the principal of St. Alban''s College to abandon Euclid and cleave unto Cocker or Walkingame?
36801	What facts support the assertion that Afflictions are dispensations of Providence?''
36801	What he would do?
36801	What investigation would it require to shew that they were valid?
36801	What should be the decision in this case?
36801	What was this, if not imagination?
36801	Where now?
36801	Where should a man''s reputation be safe from suspicion if not in the hands of his friend?
36801	Who is not aware of the failures of calculation when applied to the general business of life-- to statistics, moral and political?
36801	Why better?
36801	Why should I throw away so much time and painful attention upon a thing of so little real use?
36801	Why should not their discourse be expressed in brief, clear sentences?
36801	Why should they, like a certain learned politician on a public occasion, propose, as a sentiment,''The three R''s, Reading,''Riting, and''Rithmetic?
36801	or rather, why is it not to be considered a good?
36801	what number of persons?
36801	what station, habits, and probable stay?
40794	( 1) Do ideas present themselves except in situations which are doubtful and inquired into?
40794	( 3) Do they have any part to play in the conduct of inquiry?
40794	( 5) And, finally, does validity have anything to do with truth?
40794	And how can it discriminate unless by telling by what road they got into our experience and what they do after they get there?
40794	And if the worlds are all private, pray who judges their likeness or unlikeness?
40794	And is judgment properly more than tentative save as it terminates in a known fact, i.e., a fact present without the intermediary of reflection?
40794	And that means what force shall the thing as means be given?
40794	And, if the latter, does the object, God as defined, or the notion, or the belief( the acceptance of the notion) effect these consequent values?
40794	And, once more, unless there is such a transition, is reasoning possible?
40794	Are they there?
40794	But how can a situation which is incomplete in fact be completely known until it_ is_ complete?
40794	But if the former, why should there be an idea at all, and why should it have to be tested by the fact?
40794	But if thought just accepts its material, how can there be any distinctive aim or activity of thought at all?
40794	But if we are concerned with a matter of serious analysis, one is bound to ask, Whence come these adjectives?
40794	But is smelling a case of knowledge?
40794	But they part company when a fundamental question is raised: Is all organized meaning the work of thought?
40794	But when thinking becomes research, when the doubt- inquiry function comes to its own, the problem is just: What is the fact?
40794	Can a satisfaction dependent on an assumption that an idea is already true be relevant to testing the truth of an idea?
40794	Can we"know that objects of sense, or very similar objects, exist at times when we are not perceiving them?
40794	Do they exist except when judgment is in suspense?
40794	Do they exist side by side with the facts when the facts are themselves known?
40794	Do they not all agree in setting up something fixed outside inquiry, supplying both its material and its limit?
40794	Do they really indicate fire?
40794	Do they serve to direct observation, colligate data, and guide experimentation, or are they otiose?
40794	Do they, therefore, already subsist in some realm of subsistence?
40794	Does this coequal presence guarantee an objectivity?
40794	Does this phase of the moon really mean rain, or does it just happen that the rain- storm comes when the moon has reached this phase?
40794	Except on the basis stated, what is the transition from the function of meaning to_ a_ meaning as an entity in reasoning?
40794	For example, my primary( and ultimate) judgment has to do, say, with buying a suit of clothes: whether to buy and, if so, what?
40794	Has it gained in validity in ceasing to be an independent myth, in becoming an element in systematized myth?
40794	Has not the lesson, however, been so well learned that we can drop reference to experience?
40794	How about that truth upon which we fall back as guaranteeing the credibility of other statements-- how about our major premise?
40794	How about their respective adaptability to the chief wearing use I have in mind?
40794	How can a thing be eaten unless it is, in and of itself, a food?
40794	How can such a standard be known?
40794	How can the former in any sense give a check or test of the value of the latter?
40794	How can this difference be explained?
40794	How can thought compare meanings with existences?
40794	How do their patterns compare?
40794	How do we know the same is not the case with the ideas which are the product of our most deliberate and extended scientific inquiry?
40794	How does it know which to eliminate as irrelevant and which to confirm as grounded?
40794	How does the non- pragmatic view consider that verification takes place?
40794	How does thought know which of the combinations are merely coincident and which are merely coherent?
40794	How far is it possible and legitimate to extend or generalize the results reached to apply to all propositions of facts?
40794	How is it, moreover, that even the act of being aware is describable as"momentary"?
40794	How shall it secure this?
40794	How shall we describe it?
40794	How then can its existence, even if its perception be but momentary, raise a question of"other times"at all?
40794	How then can value be given, as efficiency is given, until the end is chosen?
40794	How, after all, does even the ideally perfect valid thought apply or refer to reality?
40794	How, the implication runs, could reflection become generalized save by elimination of details as irrelevant?
40794	If the goodness of consequences arises from the context of the idea in belief rather than from the idea itself, does it have any verifying force?
40794	If there are, are they like those characters which books on logic talk about?
40794	In the end the one problem holds: How do the specifications of thought as such hold good of reality as such?
40794	Is a difference more than merely one of formulation?
40794	Is it an absolute which transcends and absorbs the difference?
40794	Is it an idea?
40794	Is not the distinction mere hair- splitting unless it is a way of smuggling in a quasi- idealistic dependence upon thought?
40794	Is or is not a personal factor found in truth evaluations?
40794	Is the agreement ultimately a matter of self- consistency of ideas?
40794	Is the photograph, then, to be conceived as a psychical somewhat?
40794	Is the way out now so simple?
40794	Is the_ object_ immediate or is it the object of an immediate noting?
40794	Is this to be taken in a static or in a dynamic way?
40794	It reads:"What difference would it practically make to anyone if this notion rather than that notion were true?
40794	It was hard up against its own dilemma: How can a man inquire?
40794	Just how does such agreement differ from success?
40794	More generally, what is the position of analytic realism about the future?
40794	Not what is the test of thought at large, but what validates and confirms_ this_ thought?
40794	Now is this meaning intended to_ replace_ the meaning of a"seeing force which runs things"?
40794	Now where does the argument stand?
40794	Or does it mean that, irrespective of the existence of any such object, a belief in it has that value?
40794	Or does it merely superadd a value to a meaning already fixed?
40794	Or is it intended to superadd a pragmatic value and validation to that concept of a seeing force?
40794	Or( if the superstition persists as to smell) is gnawing or poking a case of knowledge?
40794	Or, in another mode of statement:"Can the existence of anything other than our own[63] hard data be inferred from the existence of those data?"
40794	Pray what is this room and what defines the position( standpoint and perspective) of the two men and the standpoint"intermediate"between them?
40794	Shall I take it as means to present enjoyment, or as a( negative) condition of future health?
40794	Still the query haunts us: Is this so in truth?
40794	Supposing the individual stands still and attempts to compare his idea with the reality, with what reality is he to compare it?
40794	That is to say: Does it express the fact that a given content or meaning is_ de facto_ presented to the consciousness of all alike?
40794	The more specific question is: How does the particular functional situation termed the reflective behave?
40794	The question is worth asking: Is not the marked aversion on the part of some philosophers to any reference to psychology a Freudian symptom?
40794	The question which I raised in the last paragraph may then be restated in this fashion: Are there such features?
40794	The significance of these may be doubted: Do they_ mean_ real change in the sun or in the earth?
40794	Then what has become of the postulate that truth is agreement of idea with existence beyond idea?
40794	Then, once more, what is the test of any specific judgment?
40794	Truth means, as a matter of course, agreement, correspondence, of idea and fact( p. 198), but what do agreement, correspondence, mean?
40794	Under these conditions we get such questions as the following: What is the relation of rational thought to crude or unreflective experience?
40794	Unless a meaning is an inferred object, detached and fixed as a term capable of independent development, what sort of a ghostly Being is it?
40794	Unless there is some such conception as this, what conception of agreement is possible except the experimental or practical one?
40794	We have them; they exist; now what do they mean?
40794	What about their durability?
40794	What are the prices of given suits?
40794	What are their styles in respect to current fashion?
40794	What are these grounds?
40794	What has become of the correspondence of fact and thought?
40794	What is the barrier which prevents reason from complete penetration into the world of truth?
40794	What is the bearing of this account upon the"empirical datum"?
40794	What is the experience in which the survey of both idea and existence is made and their agreement recognized?
40794	What is the reason for using the term at all in philosophy?
40794	What is the relation of thought to reality?
40794	What is the validity of the various forms of thinking which find expression in the various types of judgment and in the various forms of inference?
40794	What is the value of the pleasure of eating the lobster as compared with the pains of indigestion?
40794	What shall we say of the validity of such processes?
40794	What we have to reckon with is not the problem of, How can I think_ überhaupt_?
40794	What will I have the situation_ become_ as between alternatives?
40794	What_ is_ a thing when it is not yet discovered and yet is tentatively entertained and tested?
40794	Whence does it derive its guaranty?
40794	Which of the three doctrines is to be regarded as the legitimate exponent of the procedure of thought manifested in modern science?
40794	Who are the"we,"and what does"own"mean, and how is ownership established?
40794	Why is there a task of transformation?
40794	Why so uneven, so partial, in your attitude toward ubiquitous relations?
40794	Why, it will be asked, does a man buy a suit of clothes unless that is a value, or at least a proximate means to a further value?
40794	but, How shall I think right_ here and now_?
39964	And where were the others?
39964	Has the plant a soul? 39964 When a woman is strong, is n''t she strong after the same conception and the same strength?
39964	And do you not interchange the portrait for the person itself, without difficulty and misunderstanding?
39964	And how can any single brain assume to acquire all knowledge, to know everything?
39964	And how is a fact proven?
39964	And on the other hand, does not the promotion of our material interests require a penetration on our part of the wonders of creation?
39964	Are not these the concrete content of our material interests?
39964	Are there any stones that do not belong to the category of stones, or any kind of wood which is iron?
39964	Are they not simply substitutes?
39964	At best, will you not merely repeat what has long since been accomplished?
39964	Before, at, or after birth?
39964	But do not beasts, worms, and sensitive plants have that also?
39964	But how do I know what I state in such an offhand manner?
39964	But how is life infused into them?
39964	But how is that to be found?
39964	But how to explain that wonderful_ a priori_ knowledge which exceeds all experience?
39964	But is n''t it a contradiction that a special science wants to be general world wisdom?
39964	But is there anything which is absolutely good?
39964	But look here, has it not always been so?
39964	But the study of the anatomy of the hand can no more solve the question: What is writing?
39964	But was it founded on fact?
39964	But what about the question of the beginning and end of the world, or the question of the existence of God?
39964	But what else does the term material interests mean but the abstract expression of our existence, welfare, and development?
39964	But what good will it do a painter to have his special attention called to this fact?
39964	But what is there of unity that science teaches about them?
39964	But what thing is there that has any effects"in itself?"
39964	But where shall we draw the line in this comparison of images?
39964	But who claims that there are not many straight lines which are crooked at one end, which run straight on for a certain distance and then turn?
39964	But why do we call this the most essential part?
39964	By the help of brown- study from the interior of our brain, from revelation, or from experience?
39964	Can natural science do as much?
39964	Can the world be understood in a hermitage?
39964	Can we see the things themselves?
39964	Can we, by mere deduction through concepts which go beyond experience, arrive at truths?
39964	Could there not be some dogs who lacked the quality of watchfulness, and might not our pug- dog be very unreliable, in spite of all exact deductions?
39964	Do animals arise when the hot and the cold begin to disintegrate, as some claim?
39964	Do you not ask on seeing the portrait of some person unknown to you: Who is this?
39964	Does he not say explicitly that the penetration of the wonders of creation promotes our material interests?
39964	Does not this appear reasonable to you?...
39964	Does that require any explanation?
39964	Everything develops, why should not our intellects do so?
39964	For are not the effects tangible by which reason transforms nature and life?
39964	Has proud philosophy gained nothing since?
39964	Has the earth a soul?
39964	Have I now still to prove that all existence is of the same category?
39964	Have not your thoughts been connected always and everywhere with some worldly or real object?
39964	Have they a soul analogous to that of man?
39964	Have you ever seen a portrait or a copy that did not agree in some respect with the original?
39964	How are we to designate the species, how the genus?
39964	How can a man who is out of touch with the mass of the shifting population feel that he is one with the universe?
39964	How can thinkers who search for truth, being, relative causes, such as naturalists, be idealists?
39964	How can we see everything?
39964	How do we arrive at the knowledge of things which are not accessible to experience?
39964	How do we know that?
39964	How do we prove that a peach is a delicious fruit?
39964	How do we solve this contradiction?
39964	How is understanding possible?
39964	I remember reading in a satirical paper the question:"What is a gentleman?
39964	If the ancient Germans regarded the great oak as sacred and religious, why should not art and science become religious among the modern Germans?
39964	If the function of the heart may be referred to as material, why not the function of the brain?
39964	In certain shows, the clown is asked by the manager:"Clown, where have you been?"
39964	In seeking for an answer to the question: What is philosophy?
39964	In what respect are our material interests different from our mental penetration of things?
39964	Is it an idea?
39964	Is it not necessary, however, to make a distinction between poetry and truth?
39964	Is it the blood, which enables us to think, or the air or the fire?
39964	Is not everything a part, is not every part a thing?
39964	Is not general wisdom that which comprises all knowledge, all special science?
39964	Is not the air or the scent of flowers an ethereal body?
39964	Is not the material world and its understanding as essential as reason, as intellect, which bends to the task of exploring this world?
39964	Is the color of a leaf less of a thing than that leaf itself?
39964	Is the world a concept?
39964	Is this world- god a mere idea?
39964	It is the solution of the riddle of the ancient Eleatic philosophy: How can the one be contained in the many, and the many in one?
39964	It was the famous Kant who posed the question:"How is_ a priori_ knowledge possible?"
39964	May not our modern viewpoint, the category in which our present day science thinks, the category of cause and effect, be equally transitory?
39964	Mind and Matter: Which Is Primary, Which Is Secondary?
39964	Multiplicity, change, motion-- who is to split hairs about them, who will make fine distinctions?
39964	Must I not know everything in order to be world wise?
39964	Must I prove this?
39964	Now I ask: If nature, God, and absolute truth are one and the same thing, have we not learned something about the"final cause of all things?"
39964	Now you are familiar with that student''s song:"What''s Coming from the Heights?"
39964	Now, is this logic or is it theology?
39964	Or are you spiritualists who make a metaphysical distinction between the truth and the phenomenon?
39964	Or does it belong to the infinite and must it exist forever?
39964	Otherwise, how could misunderstandings arise?
39964	Our logic asks: Does wisdom descend mysteriously from the interior of the human brain, or does it come from the outer world like all experience?
39964	Scientists as well as scribes have ever embarrassed one another by the question: What is truth?
39964	Shall it be an idol or a king?
39964	Shall we use the intellect philosophically, or shall we use it empirically?
39964	Should not religion, which according to the words of a German emperor"must be preserved for the people,"also have its bounds in history?
39964	Should not that appear mysterious to it?
39964	Socrates in the market of Athens, and Plato in his dialogues, have probably said better things about the questions:"What is virtue?
39964	The fetish cult, the animal cult, the cult of the ideal and spiritual creator, or the cult of the real human mind?
39964	The great Kant has asked the plain question:"Is metaphysics practicable as a science?"
39964	The human understanding has its limits, why should it not?
39964	The next question is then: By what road do we arrive at its understanding?
39964	The philosophical celebrities and classic authorities are not even in accord on the question: What is philosophy and what is its aim?
39964	The question then arises: Which is the genuine and true division?
39964	The statements: I do, I work, I think, must be completed by an answer to the question: What are you doing, working, thinking?
39964	Thereupon Cebes asks:"Well, and what do you think of this now?"
39964	This book, its leaves, its letters, or their parts, are they units?
39964	Those sciences recognize only the phenomena of things; but where is the understanding which perceives the truth?"
39964	To analyze this idea means to solve the question, what is walking generally considered, what is the general nature of walking?
39964	What are all things?
39964	What can be more evident?
39964	What constitutes, then, this body which is distinguished from its transient form?
39964	What do I know about the shoe industry, if I know that it produces shoes?
39964	What good are all the treasures of Croesus, if health is lacking?
39964	What good is health to us, when we have nothing to bite?
39964	What is a"thing?"
39964	What is it that Lessing says?
39964	What is its beginning, what its end?
39964	What is its positive achievement?
39964	What is justice?
39964	What is justice?
39964	What is meant by political freedom?
39964	What is moral and reasonable?"
39964	What is not an image in the abstract, and what is more than an image in the concrete?
39964	What is the reason for this?
39964	What is the relation of the concrete to the abstract?
39964	What is the use of metaphysics under these circumstances?
39964	What would become of reason and language, if such a thing were to be considered?
39964	What, then, is religion and religious?
39964	Whence comes reason, where do we get our ideas, judgments, conclusions?
39964	Where and how are we to find a positive and definite knowledge of it?
39964	Where are we to begin and where to end?
39964	Where do I begin, where do I stop?
39964	Where do we find any indivisible unit outside of our abstract conceptions?
39964	Where do we find such eternal, imperishable, formless matter?
39964	Where does consciousness begin in the child?
39964	Where does the variety of science, its undecided vacillation end, and when does understanding become stable?
39964	Where is the consistent connection?
39964	Where, then, is the beginning and end, and how can we bring order into these relations?
39964	Where, who, what, is the supreme being to which everything else is subordinate, which brings system, consistency, logic, into our thought and actions?
39964	Who and what are now the objects of philosophy?
39964	Who has not heard the lament about the unreliability of the senses?
39964	Who or what is the intellect, whence does it come from, whither does it lead?
39964	Who will define to us what a line is?
39964	Who will deny that he can feel the force of heat, of cold, of gravitation?
39964	Who would be silly enough to deny that?
39964	Why do you want to be a theist, if you are a naturalist, or a naturalist if you are a theist?
39964	Why is not the"naturalistic"philosopher consistent by recognizing his special object, understanding, as a natural object?
39964	Why should not the action of the brain belong in the same category as the action of the heart?
39964	Why, then, speculate about God, freedom, and immortality, when indubitable knowledge may be obtained by the formal method of exact deductions?
39964	Would any one try to make us believe that there is a great and almighty eye that can look through blocks of metal the same as through glass?
39964	XII MIND AND MATTER: WHICH IS PRIMARY, WHICH SECONDARY?
39964	You know the old question: Which was first, the egg or the hen?
39964	You will probably ask: What has that to do with logic or the art of reasoning?
39964	than the physiological study of the brain can bring us nearer to the solution of the question: What is thought?
40665	Is the correspondence reached between idea and object the precise correspondence that the idea itself intended? 40665 Again must we ask: On what basis is this object in the absolute system selected at all? 40665 And by the time all this is performed what sort of a representation of reality is the idea? 40665 And now, finally, what shall mark the attainment of this purpose of the idea to correspond and representits own completed form"?
40665	And what in their operations marks the difference between truth and error?
40665	Because there could be other cases of counting, and other numbers counted than the present counting process shows you, and why so?
40665	But does not Bosanquet himself point out a pathway which, if followed farther, would reach a more satisfactory view of the realm of knowledge?
40665	But granted that this is all true, what has it to do with the origin of the hypothesis?
40665	But has this distinction between the content of an experience and its existence solved the problem of how we_ know_ reality?
40665	But how can we know that the expression is"fragmentary"unless we have some experience of wholeness?
40665	But how did it happen that it did not take the form:"This is not cake"?
40665	But how do you prove it?
40665	But how does he know that reality is continuous, and that the real world is an organized system?
40665	But how is this possible if reality lies without or beyond our act of judging?
40665	But if all this is admitted, what becomes of the possibility of knowledge?
40665	But if this reconstruction and response were to follow at once, would there be any clearly defined act of judging at all?
40665	But if thought just accepts its material, how can there be any distinctive aim or activity of thought at all?
40665	But if we do test it, is not such test enough?
40665	But is it a question of merest chance which of these various possibilities is actualized?
40665	But is this necessary?
40665	But just where does our contact with the real occur?
40665	But the question to be answered first is: When would such a"statement"occur in the course of our experience?
40665	But they part company when a fundamental question is raised: Is all organized meaning the work of thought?
40665	But what precisely is the form and seat of the aphasia?
40665	But whence comes this restlessness and dissatisfaction?
40665	But why should this activity get into a condition to be described as"indefinite restlessness"and dissatisfaction?
40665	But why?
40665	But, as the first statement of internal meaning implies, how can one have a purpose to sing the melody except in and through the idea?
40665	Did he, then, either contribute to the proof of a general law or discover further characteristics of things already known in a more general way?
40665	Does this coequal presence guarantee an objectivity?
40665	Does this mean that the"idea"is wholly independent of the"image"?
40665	Does this phase of the moon really mean rain, or does it just happen that the rain- storm comes when the moon has reached this phase?
40665	Has it diagnosed the case properly, and is it therefore one in and through which these activities can operate and come to unity again?
40665	Has it gained in validity in ceasing to be an independent myth, in becoming an element in systematized myth?
40665	Has it not disarmed itself?
40665	How can conceptualism prevent the union?
40665	How can one maintain that in a literal and concrete physical sense gold in process of solution is the"same"as gold entering into chemical combination?
40665	How can the former in any sense give a check or test of the value of the latter?
40665	How can thought compare its own contents with that which is wholly outside itself?
40665	How can we ever be sure that the fact which we have discovered will stand the test of further thought- constructions?
40665	How do we know the same is not the case with the ideas which are the product of our most deliberate and extended scientific inquiry?
40665	How does it know which to eliminate as irrelevant and which to confirm as grounded?
40665	How does the real world get representation in experience, and what is the guarantee that the representation, when obtained, is correct?
40665	How does thought know which of the combinations are merely coincident and which are merely coherent?
40665	How otherwise can we explain, for example, the action of an expert ball- player?
40665	How shall it secure this?
40665	How shall we describe it?
40665	How, after all, does even the ideally perfect valid thought apply or refer to reality?
40665	How, the implication runs, could reflection become generalized save by elimination of details as irrelevant?
40665	How, then, can it serve as the subject of a judgment?
40665	How, then, does it obtain its characteristic of universality?
40665	How, then, does this fact of past assignment to uses still recognized as desirable figure in the situation?
40665	If it is essential, then how explain the fact that its parts do not fall outside one another in time?
40665	If it is not essential, then how explain the evident fact that the judgment as an intellectual process does have duration?
40665	If so, what is this something else?
40665	If the experiment with the pendulum only substituted exactness for inexactness, did the Copernican theory do anything different in_ kind_?
40665	In other words, what does this restlessness mean?
40665	In other words, what is the significance of the demand for the particular judgment?
40665	In the end the one problem holds: How do the specifications of thought as such hold good of reality as such?
40665	In the introduction we have been told, as a matter of description, that the internal meanings do seek the external meaning, but why do they?
40665	In the last analysis the problem always is: What is to be done here and now with the actual material at hand, under the present conditions?
40665	In what sense, with reference to what, is it incomplete and fragmentary?
40665	Is it a general claim which thought_ qua_ thought puts forth, or is it the claim of the content of some particular thought?
40665	Is it begging the question to speak of consciousness as exercising a selective function with reference to stimuli?
40665	Is the reality we now have the same that we had to begin with?
40665	Is this thinking?
40665	Is this to be taken in a static or in a dynamic way?
40665	Just what are we to understand by this"fragmentary"and"indeterminate"character of the internal meaning?
40665	Mr. Bosanquet raises the question: Are there at all ideas which are not symbolic?...
40665	Must we not here fall back on something like a pre- established harmony?
40665	Must you not just dogmatically say that that world must agree with your negations?
40665	Not what is the test of thought at large, but what validates and confirms_ this_ thought?
40665	Now, any idea that is affirmed is referred to reality, but do ideas exist which are not being affirmed?
40665	Now, at what point does this act begin?
40665	Now, how shall we discriminate the ethical and the economic aspects of the situation which we have described?
40665	On the other hand, if truth is to be found in the immediate experience, can it here be preserved from the blighting effects of thought?
40665	Or, in a word: What is the"jurisdiction"of the economic point of view?
40665	Perhaps some one has been startled, and asks:"What is this noise?"
40665	So that our question now becomes: What is the significance of this factor of restless, dissatisfied consciousness in activity?
40665	Still the query haunts us: Is this so in truth?
40665	That is to say, at this point the question is: Does the plan apply to the activities actually involved in the unrest?
40665	That is to say: Does it express the fact that a given content or meaning is_ de facto_ presented to the consciousness of all alike?
40665	The more specific question is: How does the particular functional situation termed the reflective behave?
40665	The purposive character of experience is of course very manifest, but what is the significance of this purposing in experience as a whole?
40665	The question remains: Why, if there is no opposition, should there be any uncertainty?
40665	The significance of these may be doubted: Do they_ mean_ real change in the sun or in the earth?
40665	Under these conditions we get such questions as the following: What is the relation of rational thought to crude or unreflective experience?
40665	Under what circumstances, then, are we conscious of stimuli in their capacity of guides or incentives or grounds of conduct?
40665	Under what conditions, then, is this suspense and uncertainty possible?
40665	We can lay out alternative courses beforehand, but the point of difficulty lies here:"But just which is he?"
40665	What alliance, or_ mésalliance_, may they not form, one with the other?
40665	What can we mean, then, by calling some of our ideas true and others false?
40665	What does this mean save that judgment is developmental, transitive, in effect and purport?
40665	What have you, then, but an elementary and primitive type of reflex action?
40665	What here becomes of the distinction between immediate and mediating experience?
40665	What is meant by"further research shows universally, perhaps, that No A is B"?
40665	What is the agent''s apprehension of the matter?
40665	What is the barrier which prevents reason from complete penetration into the world of truth?
40665	What is the function, then, of the representative image?
40665	What is the matter?
40665	What is the relation between it and the immediate experience?
40665	What is the relation of thought to reality?
40665	What is the relative value of each in experience as a whole?
40665	What is the significance and basis of universality and necessity as confined merely to the realm of internal meaning?
40665	What is the source and the material of the purposes?
40665	What is the test of the reality of the bread, and the truth of the judgment?
40665	What is the validity of the various forms of thinking which find expression in the various types of judgment and in the various forms of inference?
40665	What is their relation to truth and error?
40665	What is to be done?
40665	What is, however, the ground of distinction between the presented objects?
40665	What kind of"research,"internal or external, can show this?
40665	What predicate-- so we may formulate their question-- should be given to the subject?
40665	What shall we say of the validity of such processes?
40665	What then is the nature and source of this apprehension of end or means as valuable?
40665	What we have to reckon with is not the problem of, How can I think_ überhaupt_?
40665	What, then, in this action already going on is responsible for this restlessness?
40665	What, then, is the real difference between hypothesis and expectation?
40665	When is the correspondence and representation true?
40665	When is this purpose of the idea to correspond with its absolute, final, and completed form fulfilled, or partially fulfilled?
40665	When we ask,"What rains?"
40665	Why does it seek an object?
40665	Why does it want to cross the chasm?
40665	Why have we to reckon with it at all?
40665	Why is there a task of transformation?
40665	Why should not we also enjoy an original relation to the universe?
40665	Why should not we have a poetry and philosophy of insight and not of tradition, and a religion by revelation to us and not the history of theirs?"
40665	Why suppose that by distorting reality we get it in shape to affirm_ of_ reality?
40665	Why would they not all remain in conflict and continue to check any positive result?
40665	Why, then, should there be a demand for the external meaning, for a further object?
40665	Why?
40665	Will it enable me to support and educate my family?
40665	Will it permit me to devote sufficient attention to their present care and training?
40665	Will this life of social agitation really be quite"respectable,"and befitting the character of a sober and industrious man?
40665	[ 186] But what is it that we"experience within"which makes us call this judgment necessary?
40665	[ 198] If at this point one asks: Whence this absolute system of ideas?
40665	_ The predicate as hypothesis._--Suppose, then, the hypothesis is a predicate; is the predicate necessarily a hypothesis?
40665	but, How shall I think right_ here and now_?
31796	An honest man''s the noblest work of God: Z is an honest man: therefore, he is-- what?
31796	Are good administrators always good speakers?
31796	But you have admitted that it is possible for Socrates not to fly?
31796	Can you tell me in the face of chronology,a leading statesman once asked,"that the Crimes Act of 1887 did not diminish disorder in Ireland?"
31796	Do? 31796 Doing what, did you say?
31796	Has the practice of excessive drinking ceased in your part of the country?
31796	Have all ratepayers a vote?
31796	Have you left off beating your father?
31796	How do I feel? 31796 How do you do?"
31796	I mean, how do you feel?
31796	Is it possible for Socrates to fly?
31796	Is it possible for him to walk?
31796	Is not the honourable honourable, and the base base?
31796	No, no; I mean, how do you find yourself?
31796	Then why did you not say so? 31796 When you say that it is possible for a man to do anything do you not believe that it is possible for him to do it?"
31796	( 1)_ Are they properly called Syllogisms?_ This is purely a question of Method and Definition.
31796	Ailing?
31796	All at once or step by step?
31796	An experiment is a proof or trial: of what?
31796	And is not, therefore, the proper form of proposition Some S is P?
31796	And who is to instruct us in the full meaning?
31796	And why is there this complete agreement?
31796	Are we to include it in the Predicate term or in the Subject term?
31796	But according to what differences?
31796	But any logical advantage-- any help to thinking?
31796	But do they hang together?
31796	But do we in reality conclude it from the proposition, All men are mortal?"
31796	But how, it may be asked, can the concept remain the same?
31796	But is this principle really all that we assume?
31796	But there are cases where friends are deceived for their own good: are these cases of injustice?
31796	But what of propositions that the plain man would at once recognise as Verbal?
31796	But who was the founder of the New Logic?
31796	But why did Aristotle consider it necessary to lay down a principle so obvious?
31796	But why did he desire to concatenate this with the old Logic?
31796	But why is it that a man can not get rid of an idea?
31796	But, Whately argued, how do we know that this, that and the other-- the individuals we have examined-- constitute the whole class?
31796	CAN ALL PROPOSITIONS BE REDUCED TO THE SYLLOGISTIC FORM?
31796	Calling this unity, this one in the many, the Universal(_ Universale_,[ Greek: to pan]), what is the Universal_ ontologically_?
31796	Can a fallacy in argument be detected at once?
31796	Can it be accounted for most probably by supposing the event stated to have really occurred with all the circumstances alleged?
31796	Can the definition be that a man who deceives his friends is unjust?
31796	Can the leopard change his spots?
31796	Can those degrees be measured numerically?
31796	Common nouns are put in the First Category because they are predicated in answer to the question, What is this?
31796	Do we not assume that what belongs to the individuals examined belongs to the whole class?
31796	Do what?"
31796	Does Logic shelter the quibbler who trades upon it?
31796	Does any analogous use for the Syllogism remain?
31796	Does common- sense inspect the argument in a lump or piecemeal?
31796	Does he admit this?
31796	Does it help to prevent error, to clear up confusion?
31796	Does it lead to firmer conceptions of the truth?
31796	Does the ox ruminate?
31796	Does this mean that it is not possible for Socrates to fly, or that it is possible for Socrates not to fly?
31796	Does this not come to the same thing?
31796	Does this theory not do away with all possibility of defining and fixing concepts?
31796	E 5 concentric circles of S and P- P in centre I?]
31796	Each of them probably works some fraction of the total change observable, but how are they to be disentangled?
31796	Especially to the presence of lime or magnesia?
31796	For example, what is the meaning of injustice?
31796	For what purpose?
31796	Ginger- aleing?"
31796	Given perplexity as to the cause of any phenomenon, what is our natural first step?
31796	Good seed was sown: whence, then, come the tares?
31796	Has the unity that it represents among individuals no existence except in the mind?
31796	Have such names a connotation?
31796	His question was, When is a Respondent bound to admit a general conclusion?
31796	How are men to be brought to accept loyally the judgment of the expert in public affairs?
31796	How did the Aristotelian Logic originate?
31796	How do we know that the nineteen moods are the only possible forms of valid syllogism?
31796	How do you proceed?
31796	How is it conceived?
31796	How is it continued?
31796	How is it to be averted?
31796	How is its signification conceived?
31796	How is the unity maintained?
31796	How then, do we ordinarily proceed in conceiving, if we can not picture the common attributes alone and apart from particulars?
31796	How would it proceed?
31796	How?
31796	How?
31796	If we refuse the name of Induction to the general proposition of fact, what are we to call it?
31796	If you admit the first two, are you bound in consistency to admit the third?
31796	If, proceeding on this, I go on to ask:"Then they are paved with granite or asphalt, or this or that?"
31796	In how many ways may this relation be established through a third term?
31796	In ignoring this implication, does Logic oppose this implication as erroneous?
31796	In the case of Mill''s system we have to ask: What first moved him to formulate the methods of scientific investigation?
31796	In what circumstances did Aristotle invent these?
31796	In what circumstances did it originate?
31796	In what form would it be so?
31796	Is Logic then really useless, or even misleading, inasmuch as it ignores the definite implication of negatives in ordinary thought and speech?
31796	Is S in or out of P, and is it wholly in or wholly out or partly in or partly out?
31796	Is common- sense sufficient?
31796	Is it a copy of some particular impression, or a confused blur or blend of many?
31796	Is it good then to be disillusioned?
31796	Is it one of that class?
31796	Is it the case that no man can live without sleep?
31796	Is it, then, impossible to decide between these alternative possibilities of causation?
31796	Is the explanation then to be found in some special adaptability of the religious system to the character of the people?
31796	Is the predicate applicable to All victories or only to Some?
31796	Is the subject of the conclusion contained in the subject of the general principle when the two have identical predicates?
31796	Is the truth of the conclusion a necessary consequence of the truth of the premisses?
31796	Is there a place for it as a safeguard against error in modern debate?
31796	Is there any advantage in this?
31796	Is there then no way of ascertaining historical fact?
31796	Is this not, it may be asked, to confuse thought and being, to resolve Socrates into a string of words?
31796	Is war one of the things that increase taxation?
31796	It is to be observed that for this operation we do not practically use the syllogistic form All S is P. We do not raise the question Is All S, P?
31796	Must we reject history as altogether unworthy of credit?
31796	Now the psychological question about the Universal is, What is this conception?
31796	Occam himself speaks of the subject as the primary signification, and the attribute as the secondary, because the answer to"What is white?"
31796	Passing by these remoter questions, we may give the answers of the three extreme schools to the ontological question, What is a Universal?
31796	Psychologically, then, the theory is sound: what is its logical value?
31796	Put the question"Is Socrates wise?"
31796	Romeo must be in love: for is he not seventeen?
31796	Should he coin new names, or should he take old names and try to fit them with new definitions?
31796	Should this be expressed as A or I?
31796	Such a decrease took place_ post hoc_; was it_ propter hoc_?
31796	Suppose a man deceives his enemies, is there any injustice in that?
31796	Suppose we doubt whether a given agent is or is not capable of producing a certain effect in certain circumstances, how do we put it to the proof?
31796	Suppose we want to know whether a particular conclusion is consistent with our memorandum, what have we to look to?
31796	Suppose yourself the Questioner, where did he profess to help you with his mechanism?
31796	The categories are exhaustive, but do they fulfil another requisite of a good division-- are they mutually exclusive?
31796	The first thing that an inquirer naturally asks when confronted by numerous instances of a phenomenon is, What have they in common?
31796	The goat?
31796	The logical question is, Has the view any advantage for logical purposes?
31796	The psychological question is, Is this a correct theory of how men actually think when they make propositions?
31796	The question has been raised, For how long can oral tradition be trusted?
31796	The question has sometimes been asked, Where should we begin in Logic?
31796	The question, Who are to be placed together?
31796	The sheep?
31796	The statement at least is extant: our first question is, What is the most rational way of accounting for it?
31796	The type of a general proposition in Syllogistic terminology is the Major Premiss, All M is P. What is the type of the particulars that it sums up?
31796	To raise the question: What is the proper form for a Modal of Possibility, A or I?
31796	Was it due to the character of the drinking- water?
31796	Was it due to the geological formation?
31796	We may ask, further, What is there in nature that the general name signifies?
31796	We see the nature of the proof relied upon when we ask, How far must elimination be carried in order to attain proof of causal connexion?
31796	What about the selection of the names?
31796	What are the exact attributes signified by the names?
31796	What cat''s averse to fish?
31796	What corresponds to it in the real world?
31796	What does a general name signify?
31796	What follows?
31796	What is a belief?
31796	What is he ailing?
31796	What is implied in saying"No"to such propositions put interrogatively?
31796	What is in the mind when we employ a general name?
31796	What is its relation to reality?
31796	What is meant by giving the answer"No"to a proposition put interrogatively?
31796	What is the Universal psychologically?
31796	What is the conclusion, and in what Figure and Mood may the argument be expressed?
31796	What is the interpretation of"No"?
31796	What is the respondent committed to thereby?
31796	What is the signification_ psychologically_?
31796	What is there in our minds corresponding to the general name when we utter it?
31796	What is this concept in thought?
31796	What meanings of"custom"and of"sensibility"will reconcile these apparently conflicting examples?
31796	What principle of sound conclusion was involved in it?
31796	What use did he contemplate for them?
31796	What will be the issue of a coming war?
31796	When are propositions incompatible?
31796	When do they imply one another?
31796	When do two imply a third?
31796	When is the opponent bound to admit that all horned animals ruminate?
31796	When is this inductive argument complete?
31796	When it is said that"Victories may be gained by accident,"is the predicate made concerning All victories or Some only?
31796	When we say,"This is a man,"do we not declare what sort of a thing he is?
31796	Whence did he derive his materials?
31796	Where did Aristotle begin?
31796	Where did the founder of Logic begin?
31796	Where does the common pattern come from?
31796	Where is the fixed scheme of division there?
31796	Which party will win in the next election?
31796	Why are things essentially like one another?
31796	Why describe Logic as a system of defence against error?
31796	Why did he give his scientific method the form of a supplement to the old Aristotelian Logic?
31796	Why do we believe more confidently in some uniformities than in others?
31796	Why do we dip our pens in ink, and expect the application of them to white paper to be followed by a black mark?
31796	Why do we not look for it in another wall?
31796	Why does it force itself upon him as a belief?
31796	Why is it endemic in some localities and not in others?
31796	Why is this?
31796	Why lay down principles so obvious, in some interpretations, and so manifestly sophistical in others?
31796	Why not rather say, as is now usual, that its end is the attainment of truth?
31796	Why say that its main end and aim is the organisation of reason against confusion and falsehood?
31796	Why would a reported breach of one be regarded with more incredulity than that of another?
31796	Will a patient in the crisis of a given disease recover or not?
31796	Would you call these men unjust?
31796	Would you say that the man who cheats or deceives is unjust?
31796	You know how each of them lies toward the third: when can you tell from this how S lies towards P?
31796	_ Best_ for what purpose?
31796	_ Examples for Analysis._ Scarlet flowers have no fragrance: this flower has no fragrance: does it follow that this flower is of a scarlet colour?
31796	do we not declare his Quality?
31796	or"Is this paper white?"
1598	''And are you an ox because you have an ox present with you?''
1598	''And dictation is a dictation of letters?''
1598	''And do they learn,''said Euthydemus,''what they know or what they do not know?''
1598	''And he is not wise yet?''
1598	''And what did you think of them?''
1598	''And you acquire that which you have not got already?''
1598	''And you know letters?''
1598	''And you see our garments?''
1598	''But are there any beautiful things?
1598	''But,''retorts Dionysodorus,''is not learning acquiring knowledge?''
1598	''Cleinias,''says Euthydemus,''who learn, the wise or the unwise?''
1598	''Crito,''said he to me,''are you giving no attention to these wise men?''
1598	''Do they know shoemaking, etc?''
1598	''Do you see,''retorts Euthydemus,''what has the quality of vision or what has not the quality of vision?''
1598	''Is a speaking of the silent possible?
1598	''What did I think of them?''
1598	''What does the word"non- plussed"mean?''
1598	''What was that?''
1598	''You want Cleinias to be wise?''
1598	A noble man or a mean man?
1598	A weak man or a strong man?
1598	All letters?
1598	Am I not right?
1598	Am I not right?
1598	Amid the dangers of the sea, again, are any more fortunate on the whole than wise pilots?
1598	And a coward would do less than a courageous and temperate man?
1598	And a slow man less than a quick; and one who had dull perceptions of seeing and hearing less than one who had keen ones?
1598	And an indolent man less than an active man?
1598	And are not good things good, and evil things evil?
1598	And are not health and beauty goods, and other personal gifts?
1598	And are not the scribes most fortunate in writing and reading letters?
1598	And are not these gods animals?
1598	And are those who acquire those who have or have not a thing?
1598	And are you an ox because an ox is present with you, or are you Dionysodorus, because Dionysodorus is present with you?
1598	And being other than a stone, you are not a stone; and being other than gold, you are not gold?
1598	And can any one do anything about that which has no existence, or do to Cleinias that which is not and is nowhere?
1598	And can he vault among swords, and turn upon a wheel, at his age?
1598	And clearly we do not want the art of the flute- maker; this is only another of the same sort?
1598	And did you always know this?
1598	And did you not say that you knew something?
1598	And do all other men know all things or nothing?
1598	And do the Scythians and others see that which has the quality of vision, or that which has not?
1598	And do they speak great things of the great, rejoined Euthydemus, and warm things of the warm?
1598	And do you know of any word which is alive?
1598	And do you know stitching?
1598	And do you know things such as the numbers of the stars and of the sand?
1598	And do you know with what you know, or with something else?
1598	And do you please?
1598	And do you really and truly know all things, including carpentering and leather- cutting?
1598	And do you suppose that gold is not gold, or that a man is not a man?
1598	And doing is making?
1598	And gudgeons and puppies and pigs are your brothers?
1598	And have not other Athenians, he said, an ancestral Zeus?
1598	And have you no need, Euthydemus?
1598	And have you not admitted that those who do not know are of the number of those who have not?
1598	And have you not admitted that you always know all things with that which you know, whether you make the addition of''when you know them''or not?
1598	And he has puppies?
1598	And he is not wise as yet?
1598	And he who says that thing says that which is?
1598	And he who tells, tells that thing which he tells, and no other?
1598	And if a man does his business he does rightly?
1598	And if a person had wealth and all the goods of which we were just now speaking, and did not use them, would he be happy because he possessed them?
1598	And if there are such, are they the same or not the same as absolute beauty?''
1598	And if we knew how to convert stones into gold, the knowledge would be of no value to us, unless we also knew how to use the gold?
1598	And if you were engaged in war, in whose company would you rather take the risk-- in company with a wise general, or with a foolish one?
1598	And if you were ill, whom would you rather have as a companion in a dangerous illness-- a wise physician, or an ignorant one?
1598	And in telling a lie, do you tell the thing of which you speak or not?
1598	And is Patrocles, he said, your brother?
1598	And is he not yours?
1598	And is that fair?
1598	And is that something, he rejoined, always the same, or sometimes one thing, and sometimes another thing?
1598	And is this true?
1598	And knowing is having knowledge at the time?
1598	And may a person use them either rightly or wrongly?
1598	And may there not be a silence of the speaker?
1598	And not knowing is not having knowledge at the time?
1598	And now answer: Do you always know with this?
1598	And now, O son of Axiochus, let me put a question to you: Do not all men desire happiness?
1598	And philosophy is the acquisition of knowledge?
1598	And please to tell me whether you intend to exhibit your wisdom; or what will you do?
1598	And seeing that in war to have arms is a good thing, he ought to have as many spears and shields as possible?
1598	And should we be any the better if we went about having a knowledge of the places where most gold was hidden in the earth?
1598	And should we be happy by reason of the presence of good things, if they profited us not, or if they profited us?
1598	And so Chaeredemus, he said, being other than a father, is not a father?
1598	And speaking is doing and making?
1598	And surely, in the manufacture of vessels, knowledge is that which gives the right way of making them?
1598	And tell me, I said, O tell me, what do possessions profit a man, if he have neither good sense nor wisdom?
1598	And that is a distinct thing apart from other things?
1598	And that is impossible?
1598	And that which is not is nowhere?
1598	And the business of the cook is to cut up and skin; you have admitted that?
1598	And the dog is the father of them?
1598	And they are the teachers of those who learn-- the grammar- master and the lyre- master used to teach you and other boys; and you were the learners?
1598	And to have money everywhere and always is a good?
1598	And was Sophroniscus a father, and Chaeredemus also?
1598	And were you not just now saying that you could teach virtue best of all men, to any one who was willing to learn?
1598	And were you wise then?
1598	And what does that signify?
1598	And what is your notion?
1598	And what knowledge ought we to acquire?
1598	And what other goods are there?
1598	And what things do we esteem good?
1598	And when you were learners you did not as yet know the things which you were learning?
1598	And who has to kill and skin and mince and boil and roast?
1598	And who would do least-- a poor man or a rich man?
1598	And whose the making of pots?
1598	And why should you say so?
1598	And would not you, Crito, say the same?
1598	And would they profit us, if we only had them and did not use them?
1598	And would you arm Geryon and Briareus in that way?
1598	And would you be able, Socrates, to recognize this wisdom when it has become your own?
1598	And would you be happy if you had three talents of gold in your belly, a talent in your pate, and a stater in either eye?''
1598	And yet, perhaps, I was right after all in saying that words have a sense;--what do you say, wise man?
1598	And you admit gold to be a good?
1598	And you admitted that of animals those are yours which you could give away or sell or offer in sacrifice, as you pleased?
1598	And you also see that which has the quality of vision?
1598	And you say that gentlemen speak of things as they are?
1598	And your mother, too, is the mother of all?
1598	And your papa is a dog?
1598	Are the things which have sense alive or lifeless?
1598	Are you not ashamed, Socrates, of asking a question when you are asked one?
1598	Are you not other than a stone?
1598	Are you prepared to make that good?
1598	Are you saying this as a paradox, Dionysodorus; or do you seriously maintain no man to be ignorant?
1598	At any rate they are yours, he said, did you not admit that?
1598	Bravo Heracles, or is Heracles a Bravo?
1598	But are you quite sure about this, Dionysodorus and Euthydemus?
1598	But can a father be other than a father?
1598	But can we contradict one another, said Dionysodorus, when both of us are describing the same thing?
1598	But can wisdom be taught?
1598	But did you carry the search any further, and did you find the art which you were seeking?
1598	But how can I refute you, if, as you say, to tell a falsehood is impossible?
1598	But how, he said, by reason of one thing being present with another, will one thing be another?
1598	But if he can not speak falsely, may he not think falsely?
1598	But if you were not wise you were unlearned?
1598	But suppose, I said, that we were to learn the art of making speeches-- would that be the art which would make us happy?
1598	But what need is there of good fortune when we have wisdom already:--in every art and business are not the wise also the fortunate?
1598	But when I describe something and you describe another thing, or I say something and you say nothing-- is there any contradiction?
1598	But when the teacher dictates to you, does he not dictate letters?
1598	But when you speak of stones, wood, iron bars, do you not speak of the silent?
1598	But why should I repeat the whole story?
1598	CRITO: And did Euthydemus show you this knowledge?
1598	CRITO: And do you mean, Socrates, that the youngster said all this?
1598	CRITO: And were you not right, Socrates?
1598	CRITO: But, Socrates, are you not too old?
1598	CRITO: How did that happen, Socrates?
1598	CRITO: Well, and what came of that?
1598	CRITO: What do you say of them, Socrates?
1598	CRITO: Who was the person, Socrates, with whom you were talking yesterday at the Lyceum?
1598	CRITO: Why not, Socrates?
1598	Can there be any doubt that good birth, and power, and honours in one''s own land, are goods?
1598	Certainly; did you think we should say No to that?
1598	Ctesippus, here taking up the argument, said: And is not your father in the same case, for he is other than my father?
1598	Did we not agree that philosophy should be studied?
1598	Do those, said he, who learn, learn what they know, or what they do not know?
1598	Do you agree with me?
1598	Do you agree?
1598	Do you know something, Socrates, or nothing?
1598	Do you not know letters?
1598	Do you not remember?
1598	Do you suppose the same person to be a father and not a father?
1598	Do you, Dionysodorus, maintain that there is not?
1598	Does it not supply us with the fruits of the earth?
1598	Does not your omniscient brother appear to you to have made a mistake?
1598	Euthydemus answered: And that which is not is not?
1598	Euthydemus proceeded: There are some whom you would call teachers, are there not?
1598	Euthydemus replied: And do you think, Ctesippus, that it is possible to tell a lie?
1598	For example, if we had a great deal of food and did not eat, or a great deal of drink and did not drink, should we be profited?
1598	For example, would a carpenter be any the better for having all his tools and plenty of wood, if he never worked?
1598	For tell me now, is not learning acquiring knowledge of that which one learns?
1598	For then neither of us says a word about the thing at all?
1598	Here Ctesippus was silent; and I in my astonishment said: What do you mean, Dionysodorus?
1598	How can he who speaks contradict him who speaks not?
1598	I can not say that I like the connection; but is he only my father, Euthydemus, or is he the father of all other men?
1598	I did, I said; what is going to happen to me?
1598	I said, and where did you learn that?
1598	I should have far more reason to beat yours, said Ctesippus; what could he have been thinking of when he begat such wise sons?
1598	I turned to the other, and said, What do you think, Euthydemus?
1598	Is not that your position?
1598	Is not the honourable honourable and the base base?
1598	Is not this the result-- that other things are indifferent, and that wisdom is the only good, and ignorance the only evil?
1598	Is that your difficulty?
1598	Is there no such thing as error, ignorance, falsehood?
1598	Let me ask you one little question more, said Dionysodorus, quickly interposing, in order that Ctesippus might not get in his word: You beat this dog?
1598	Look at the matter thus: If he did fewer things would he not make fewer mistakes?
1598	May we not answer with absolute truth-- A knowledge which will do us good?
1598	Nay, said Ctesippus, but the question which I ask is whether all things are silent or speak?
1598	Nay, take nothing away; I desire no favours of you; but let me ask: Would you be able to know all things, if you did not know all things?
1598	Neither did I tell you just now to refute me, said Dionysodorus; for how can I tell you to do that which is not?
1598	Now Euthydemus, if I remember rightly, began nearly as follows: O Cleinias, are those who learn the wise or the ignorant?
1598	Now in the working and use of wood, is not that which gives the right use simply the knowledge of the carpenter?
1598	Of their existence or of their non- existence?
1598	Of what country are they, and what is their line of wisdom?
1598	Or a speaking of the silent?
1598	Or when neither of us is speaking of the same thing?
1598	Or would an artisan, who had all the implements necessary for his work, and did not use them, be any the better for the possession of them?
1598	Perhaps you may not be ready with an answer?
1598	Poseidon, I said, this is the crown of wisdom; can I ever hope to have such wisdom of my own?
1598	Quite true, I said; and that I have always known; but the question is, where did I learn that the good are unjust?
1598	SOCRATES: And does the kingly art make men wise and good?
1598	SOCRATES: And in what will they be good and useful?
1598	SOCRATES: And surely it ought to do us some good?
1598	SOCRATES: And what does the kingly art do when invested with supreme power?
1598	SOCRATES: And what of your own art of husbandry, supposing that to have supreme authority over the subject arts-- what does that do?
1598	SOCRATES: And what would you say that the kingly art does?
1598	SOCRATES: And will you on this account shun all these pursuits yourself and refuse to allow them to your son?
1598	SOCRATES: Are you incredulous, Crito?
1598	SOCRATES: But then what is this knowledge, and what are we to do with it?
1598	SOCRATES: O Crito, they are marvellous men; but what was I going to say?
1598	SOCRATES: There were two, Crito; which of them do you mean?
1598	SOCRATES: Well, and do you not see that in each of these arts the many are ridiculous performers?
1598	SOCRATES: What, all men, and in every respect?
1598	Shall we not be happy if we have many good things?
1598	Shall we say, Crito, that it is the knowledge by which we are to make other men good?
1598	Tell me, he said, Socrates and the rest of you who say that you want this young man to become wise, are you in jest or in real earnest?
1598	Tell me, then, you two, do you not know some things, and not know others?
1598	That makes no difference;--and must you not, if you are knowing, know all things?
1598	That will do, he said: And would you admit that anything is what it is, and at the same time is not what it is?
1598	Then Dionysodorus takes up the ball:''Who are they who learn dictation of the grammar- master; the wise or the foolish boys?''
1598	Then are they not animals?
1598	Then do you see our garments?
1598	Then he is the same?
1598	Then if you know all letters, he dictates that which you know?
1598	Then in every possession and every use of a thing, knowledge is that which gives a man not only good- fortune but success?
1598	Then tell me, he said, do you know anything?
1598	Then the good speak evil of evil things, if they speak of them as they are?
1598	Then there is no such thing as false opinion?
1598	Then there is no such thing as ignorance, or men who are ignorant; for is not ignorance, if there be such a thing, a mistake of fact?
1598	Then those who learn are of the class of those who acquire, and not of those who have?
1598	Then we must surely be speaking the same thing?
1598	Then what are they professing to teach?''
1598	Then what is the inference?
1598	Then why did you ask me what sense my words had?
1598	Then, I said, a man who would be happy must not only have the good things, but he must also use them; there is no advantage in merely having them?
1598	Then, I said, you know all things, if you know anything?
1598	Then, after a pause, in which he seemed to be lost in the contemplation of something great, he said: Tell me, Socrates, have you an ancestral Zeus?
1598	Then, my dear boy, I said, the knowledge which we want is one that uses as well as makes?
1598	Then, my good friend, do they all speak?
1598	Then, said he, you learn what you know, if you know all the letters?
1598	Then, said the other, you do not learn that which he dictates; but he only who does not know letters learns?
1598	Upon what principle?
1598	Very true, said Ctesippus; and do you think, Euthydemus, that he ought to have one shield only, and one spear?
1598	Very well, I said; and where in the company shall we find a place for wisdom-- among the goods or not?
1598	Well, Cleinias, but if you have the use as well as the possession of good things, is that sufficient to confer happiness?
1598	Well, I said; but then what am I to do?
1598	Well, but do rhetoricians, when they speak in the assembly, do nothing?
1598	Well, but, Euthydemus, I said, has that never happened to you?
1598	Well, have not all things words expressive of them?
1598	Well, said he, and so you say that you wish Cleinias to become wise?
1598	Were they other than the beautiful, or the same as the beautiful?
1598	What am I to do with them?
1598	What can make you tell such a lie about me and the others, which I hardly like to repeat, as that I wish Cleinias to perish?
1598	What can they see?
1598	What do I know?
1598	What do you mean, Dionysodorus?
1598	What do you mean, I said; do you know nothing?
1598	What do you mean?
1598	What followed, Crito, how can I rightly narrate?
1598	What is that?
1598	What is that?
1598	What knowledge is there which has such a nature?
1598	What marvellous dexterity of wit, I said, enabled you to acquire this great perfection in such a short time?
1598	What of that?
1598	What proof shall I give you?
1598	What then do you say?
1598	What then is the result of what has been said?
1598	What, I said, are you blessed with such a power as this?
1598	What, before you, Dionysodorus?
1598	What, he said, do you think that you know what is your own?
1598	What, of men only, said Ctesippus, or of horses and of all other animals?
1598	What, replied Dionysodorus in a moment; am I the brother of Euthydemus?
1598	What, said Ctesippus; then all things are not silent?
1598	What, said he, is the business of a good workman?
1598	When you and I describe the same thing, or you describe one thing and I describe another, how can there be a contradiction?''
1598	When you are silent, said Euthydemus, is there not a silence of all things?
1598	When you were children, and at your birth?
1598	Whither then shall we go, I said, and to what art shall we have recourse?
1598	Why do you laugh, Cleinias, I said, at such solemn and beautiful things?
1598	Why do you say so?
1598	Why not?
1598	Why, Ctesippus, said Dionysodorus, do you mean to say that any one speaks of things as they are?
1598	Why, Socrates, said Dionysodorus, did you ever see a beautiful thing?
1598	Will you let me see you explaining to the young man how he is to apply himself to the study of virtue and wisdom?
1598	Will you not cease adding to your answers?
1598	Will you not take our word that we know all things?
1598	Will you tell me how many teeth Euthydemus has?
1598	With what I know; and I suppose that you mean with my soul?
1598	Would a man be better off, having and doing many things without wisdom, or a few things with wisdom?
1598	Yes, he said, and you would mean by animals living beings?
1598	Yes; and your mother has a progeny of sea- urchins then?
1598	You admit that?
1598	You agree then, that those animals only are yours with which you have the power to do all these things which I was just naming?
1598	You remember, I said, our making the admission that we should be happy and fortunate if many good things were present with us?
1598	You then, learning what you did not know, were unlearned when you were learning?
1598	You think, I said, that to act with a wise man is more fortunate than to act with an ignorant one?
1598	You wish him to be what he is not, and no longer to be what he is?
1598	You wish him, he said, to become wise and not, to be ignorant?
1598	and if he had fewer misfortunes would he not be less miserable?
1598	and teach them all the arts,--carpentering, and cobbling, and the rest of them?
1598	and was not that our conclusion?
1598	and will you explain how I possess that knowledge for which we were seeking?
1598	for you admit that all things which have life are animals; and have not these gods life?
1598	has he got to such a height of skill as that?
1598	if he made fewer mistakes would he not have fewer misfortunes?
1598	or are you the same as a stone?
1598	tell me, in the first place, whose business is hammering?