« PreviousContinue »
1 the whole essence
difference property accident. III. A term is predicated as
1 part of the essence attached to the essence or species
1 1 material formal peculiarly contingently 1
1 genus difference. property
accident. IV. Definition is
Etymological, which gives the meaning of the etymological element (i.e.,
of the word).
Real, which gives the meaning of the word itself (i.e., the nature of
physical, by assigning its physical metaphysical, or logical, by assigning (constituent) parts, e.g., tree- the genus and difference, or qualities root, trunk, leaves, &c.
abstracted by the mind. By far the most noteworthy portions of this work—which Sir William Hamilton characterized as one “of no ordinary merit”are contained in the appendices, wherein, leaving the Aldrichian tract, he enters boldly into territories unmarked in his map of logic. These are entitled respectively:-1. “On the connection of language and ideas." This discusses the nature and origin of language, and epitomizes the arguments pro and con of the question “Is lan. guage of human or divine origin;" he concludes that,
“Jo the mind of Nature, ideas and words are connected by a real resemblance, of which some traces yet remain, although the corruption of man has to a great degree destroyed or weakened its completeness. In a perfect language words would be óvolwuura, or exact copies of ideas; but we allow that in language, as we actually find it they are scarcely more than symbols, in the ordinary meaning of the term." On nominalism and realism ;" that great controversy of the
A general account of its more important features is given in a lucid and succinct manner, and the general inclination of the author is towards realism. 3. On Aristotle's views of induction.' The value of this particular section requires more note than either of the others; and we shall proceed to supply some grounds for its proper appreciation,
The theory of induction proposed by Lord Bacon in the Noyum Organon” (Book ii., Aphorism x. et seqq.), had originated a literature of discovery and invention, and given rise to a logical controVersy regarding the merits of reasoning by induction and by deduction. At length logic came to be regarded as a synonym for syllogistic reasoning, and induction was spoken of as a new logic quite antagonistic to the old. Wbately observes, that this mode of talking of the superiority of the inductive to the syllogistic method of seeking truth, as if the two stood opposed to each other; and of the advantage of substituting the Organon' of Bacon for that of Aristotle, “indicates a total misconception of both.” “ This inaccuracy," he says, seems to have arisen from a vagueness in the use of the word Induction, which is sometimes employed to designate the process of investigation and of collecting facts, sometimes the deducing of an inference from these facts. The former of these processes (viz. that of observation and experiment) is undoubtedly distinct from that which takes place in the syllogism; but then it is not a process of argumentation : the latter again is an argumentative process, but then it is, like all other arguments, capable of being syllogistically expressed" ("Logie," book iv., chap. i.). R. D. Hampden, another Oriel thinker," in his paper on Aristotle's philosophy," in the "Encyclopedia Britannica," vol. viii., following Whately's lead, "defends the induction of Aristotle against its disparagement by Lord Bacon." Hinds, Whately's vice-principal at St. Alban's Hall, supported the same view. Sir William Hamilton, in his famous article, attacked the Whatelyan exposition of Aristotle's induction with great force and general acceptance. Hamilton laid it down as a rule, that “to understand Aristotle in any of his works, he must be understood in all, and to be understood in all, he must be long and patiently studied by a mind disciplined to speculation, and familiar with the literature of philosophy." Woolley had read this article, and was led by it to study the whole subject in the original treatises of Aristotle. He did this with such effect as to produce quite a revi. sion of opinion on this topic-with such effect as to influence Sir William Hamilton's mind and induce him to admit, that a change at least in his method of exposition would be advisable. So 5. remarkable was the effect on Sir William Hamilton's mind pro
duced by this brief chapter that, having indicated this appendix by express mention as the cause of his conversion, he says, emphati. cally, by italization,-—“What follows, on the logical doctrine of induction, is, as it has generally been admitted to be, I am convinced, true. I would, however, now evolve it in somewhat different language”. (“Discussions," p. 158). And, again, “I would now express this somewhat differently, though not varying in the doctrine itself.” In this reconsideration of Aristotelic induction, Woolley preceded [Archbishop] Thomson, T. S. Hill, H. L. Mangel, &c., who follow and approve of the system of the Stagyrite ; as well as J. 8. Mill, who disapproves of and repudiates the ancient theory of induction, and who may justly be regarded as the -Aristotle of experimental and observational induction ; for it was early in 1840, when he had but recently completed the twenty
fourth year of his age, that Woolley's: work was published. The foregoing account of the status quæstionis may plane the fol. lowing excerpts on Aristotelic induction before the reader's mind in such a way as to impart'a due sense of their importance in the history of modern thought in regard to logical science. After disonssing "inductive syllogisms," and giving the valid forms of them, he supplies this dictum as that which holds in regard to them, viz., to Whatever may be predicated affirmatively or negatively of all the members which together constitute a class, may be predicated in like manner of the whole class so constituted.” The following are the rules to which they are subject :-1. “The major premiss must be üniversal. 2. The conclusion must be universal. 3. The minor premiss must be an inductive proposition, i.e.; an affirmative proposition, with both its terms distributed. Then follows the Appendix, in which he quotes and expounds the Aristotelic definition of “induction" as * the form of reasoning by which we prove the major of the middle term (ie., those terms which are the major and middle in the deductive syllogism), by means of the minor (i.es, the individuals which in deduction would be the ininor term). After explaining the source of the common misunderstanding of scholastic induction, he proceeds thus to expound his views of the logical
induction of the ancients :box 0974 A logical conclusion cannot assert more than is virtually contained in its premissesthat therefore which is predicated in the conclusion of a whole class, must have been assumed in the premisses of every member of which that class is composed : as a matter of fact, however, it is clear that it is scarcely ever possible to ascertain every member, and in most cases the number of cases which fall under our observation bears no proportion whatever to the whole. In these instances, therefore, it follows, either that induction is founded on a fallacy, and so all reasoning is overthrown, or that there exists some primary law of thought by which we are justified in assuming a whole class, from a limited number on individuals. That the latter alternative is the true one is attested by the tendency to form inductions universally observed in mankind, a 'tendency not derived from experience, but cinnate in as from childhood, and which' experience does not increase, but rather
checks and renders cautious. 1! · Any principle which allows us to assume 78 whole class from any pamber short of the whole, must be founded on an antecedent presumption that they are all governed by a common, immutable principle.
It is therefore clear that for a perfect induction, all that is required is the knowledge of a single fact : that if this one be well ascertained, we are allowed, or rather compelled by a law of our nature, to assuine the agreement of all other members of the same class, and that this law is derived from our ante
belief in the immutability of all nature's operations. This statement, at 9 first sight, appears a paradox ; for it is universally allowed that no induction can I be trasted wbich is not based upon an accurate and extended examination of facts;
but the difficulty will immediately vanish eben we'proceed to investigate the pro38cess by which the mind is enabled to ascertain the fact from which her induction tris derived. 918/b To ascertain a single fact is far from being that easy task
which beforehand we might expect; truth is never laid before us naked and palpable to observation ; and even of those objects which are most familiar, the real essence is generally concealed under a load of accidental circumstances, which it requires great labour and patience to detect and separate. According to the nature of the object matter, there are two methods of arriving at the knowledge of facts. 1. The former and more complete is by direct experim«nt, or analysis : it is pursued chiefly in physical science, and in all cases where the subject of investigation can be brought completely under our control.
For this reason all philosophy is said by Plato to begin by reasoning anò apxūv sig ápxàs-that is, from assumed principles or hypotheses, to real principles, by way of experiment. 2. But there are several kinds of facts wbich do not admit of direct experiment, but elude our analysis; to this class belong moral actions, the principles of taste, and the like. In these cases we are obliged to be conteot with a mere approximation to the truth; but it is to be observed, -(1) that this is only resorted to in consequence of the impracticability of direct analysis, and never when the latter is possible; (2) that its force consists, not, as might be supposed, in authorizing us to infer the remaining instances of the same class, which it does not, but in rendering it probable that the view which we take of the first instance is correct; (3) no universal, and therefore no real principles can be gained in this manner, but only presumptive tests of the presence of a quality stili partially concealed ; hence all practical principles are liable to exception ; not that the number of our examples is insufficient, but that we cannot fully ascertain the real essence of the one; in a complete induction (for instance, the law of gravitation), new examples add nothing to our certainty. All knowledge is built upon faith ; and the synthetic acts of reason, although antecedent to independent analysis, are themselves the result of a previous dependent analysis.”
Among the pupils trained under John Woolley during his tutorship at University College, we may name Dr. George Rawlinson, brother of Sir Henry Rawlinson, K.C.B.,--the former the author, and the latter the editor of the best translation of Herodotus the world has yet seen. Dr. Rawlinson is now professor of ancient history at Oxford.
On Trinity Sunday, 1840, John Woolley took holy orders, and was ordained a clergyman of the Churcb of England, and proved an acceptable preacher, although devoting himself intentionally more to scholastic than to ecclesiastical duty, and looking rather for preferment in the former than in the latter path of life. In 1842, he was appointed head-master of King Edward VI.'s Grammar School, in the ancient, interesting, Wye-washed city of Hereford ; and began a career as a teacher which bade fair to lead him to a topmost place in his profession. His reputation attracted the notice of the managers of the Northern Church of England Schools, established in 1844, at Rossal, about two miles south of Fleetwoodupon-Wyre, on Morecambe Bay, in Lancashire. The council purchased the Rossal estate from Sir P. H. Fleetwood, with the object of founding thereon schools at which the sons of gentlemen might receive a good classical education at a less cost than at the older public schools, allowing at the same time such prominence to the modern languages, mathematics, and natural philosophy, as befitted the requirements of the times. The Rev. John Woolley was invited, in 1846, to accept the head-mastership of that important insti.
tution. In 1846 he became a candidate for the principalship of the university of the island of Corfu, which had been founded in 1824 by Lord Guilford, and was successful in his candidature. In consequence, we believe, of his father's death, and the need thence arising of providing a home for his mother, he respectfully resigned the position, wbich was thereafter conferred upon (now Sir) George F. Bowen, present governor of Queensland, in Australia.
In 1847 a volume of “ Sermons preached at Rossal,” by the Rev. John Woolley, A.M., were published, and at the time attracted more attention than is usually accorded to printed pulpit dis
We have been unable to procure a copy for perusal, and are hence constrained to make this statement on trustworthy hearsay. In 1849, at the request of Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, now Dean of Westminster, * who had been co-fellow with him in University College, he was induced to become head-master of King Edward VI.'s Free Grammar School in Norwich, of which the dean's father, Bishop Stanley, held the patronage. To this position there was attached an endowment of £200 per annum, besides a residence, and the usual income derivable from pupils other than foundationers. In Norwich he became highly popular, taking great interest in all social and religious questions, in the literary and scientific associations of the city, and in the management of the large and valuable libraries which the capital of Norfolk pos
He was rising rapidly in popularity and usefulness, and was recognized by the wealthy as a man of worthy capability and earnestness, and by the poor as a friend and sympathizing benefactor.
In the same year (1849) the establishment of a university at Sydney, in New South Wales, was determined on by the local legislature of Eastern Australia. A charter of incorporation was passed in 1852, and in that year the Rev. John Woolley, M.A., received the appointment of principal and professor of logic and elassics in the University of Sydney.
Of the self-sacrifice involved in his acceptance of this arduous and difficult position, the following opinion has been publicly expressed by a member of the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales, W. C. Windeyer, Esq.:-“ Enjoying a highly honourable and lucrative post in England as master of one of her public schools, one in emolument worth double anything he received here, and with a reputation such as insured him, had he remained there, preferment either in the Church or in that venerable university where his distinguished attainments were well known, he threw up all his home-prospects to emigrate to this colony. In the spirit of a true apostle, without counting the cost of the sacrifice, he gave up the old country for the new, with the exalted ambition of founding a school of learning and of thought in these southern seas." And he accomplished his purpose
Whom we have to thank for kind communication of information.