20

πλ
20

says I." The ground of my objection was that the argument
fails to show that the dialogic structure is anything more
than a special character of the human mind, and leaves open
the possibility that other minds may reason otherwise. I
firmly believe, however, for my own part, that there is no such
possibility. Imagine that a man in the midst of a mathematical
investigation, just as an illuminative idea has occurred to
him, happens to touch a live wire, and instantly becomes
extinct. Surely, that last idea of his is unfinished;
for thought that does not lead to thought, what is it? The
very essential form of thought, its Idea and design, is that
it should determine a habit of thought (if not also of conduct,
as we pragmatists contend). Now what is a habit that in