Suppose you go into a fruiter's shop, wanting an apple—you take up one, and on biting it you find it is sour you look at it, and see that it is hard and green. You take up another one, and that, too, is hard, green, and sour. The shopman offers you a third but before biting it, you examine it, and you find that it is hard and green, and you immediately say that you will not have it, as it must be sour, like those that you have already tried. Nothing can be simpler than that, you think but if you will take the trouble to analyze and trace out into its logical elements what has been done by the mind, you will be greatly surprised. In the first place you have performed that operation of induction. You find that, in two experiences, hardness and greenness in apples went together with sourness. It was so in the first case, and it was confirmed by the second. True, it is a very small basis, but still it is enough from which to make the induction you generalize the facts, and you expect to find sourness in apples where you get hardness and greenness. You found upon that a general law, that all hard and green apples are sour and that, so far as it goes, is a perfect induction. Well, having got your natural law in this way, when you are offered another apple which you find is hard and green, you say, 'All hard and green apples are sour this apple is hard and green；therefore, this apple is sour.' That train of reasoning is what logicians call a syllogism, and has all its various parts and terms--its major premises, its minor premises, and its conclusion. And, by the help of further reasoning, which, if drawn out, would have to be exhibited in two or three other syllogisms, you arrive at your final determination. 'I will not have that apple.' So that, you see, you have, in the first place, established a law by induction, and reasoned out the special particular case. Well now, suppose, having got your conclusion of the law, that at sometime afterwards, you are discussing the qualities of apple with a friend you will say to him, 'It is a very curious thing, but I find that all hard and green apples are sour!' Your friend says to you, 'But how do you know that?' You at once reply, 'Oh, because I have tried them over and over again, and have always found them to be so.' Well, if we were talking science instead of common sense, we should call that an experimental verification. And, if still opposed, you go further, and say, 'I have heard from people in Somersetshire and Devonshire, where a large number of apples are grown, and in London, where many apples are sold and eaten, that they have observed the same thing. It is also found to be the case in Normandy, and in North America. In short, I find the universal experience of man- kind wherever attention had been directed to the subject.' Whereon your friend, unless he is a very unreasonable man, agrees with you, and is convinced that you are quite right in the conclusion you have drawn. He believes, although perhaps he does not know he believes it, that the more extensive verifications have been made, the more results of the same kind are arrived at--that the more varied the conditions under which the same re- suits are attained, the more certain is the ultimate conclusion, and he disputes the question no further. He sees that the experiment has been tried under all sorts of conditions, as to time, place, and people, with the same result and he says to you, therefore, that the law you have laid down must be a good one, and he must believe it. (654) The writer is probably _______.