26

48

do, is one of the greatest errors of reasoning
that can be made. It is the post hoc ergo
propter hoc fallacy, if so understood. But
if understood to be a process antecedent
to the application of induction, not
intended to test the hypothesis, but intended
to aid in perfecting that hypothesis and
making it more definite, this proceeding
is an essential part of a well-conducted
inquiry.

The other line which our studies of the
relation of the hypothesis to experience may
pursue, consists in directing our attention,
not primarily to the facts, but primarily
to the hypothesis, and in studying out what