35

Logic 36

shall strike hime as resembling some previous attitude of his thought and which while some shall be logically related to the sentence representing his conclusion in such a way that if the premiss proposition be true the conclusion proposition necessarily or naturally would be true.
That argument is a logical representation of the last part of his thought so far as its logic goes that is that the conclusion would be true supposing the premiss is so.
But the self-observer has absolutely no movement whatever for assuming that that premiss represented an attitude in which thought remained stock-still even for an instant.
If that is to be ascertained at all it must be in some other way probably by the physiologist.
At present such physiological surpise as w can make [?eans].
It should say towards the hypothesis that thought was in continual mutation.
At any rate physiology is not decisively against that