Now the first glance at a proposition shows that it is formed by putting together two names. A proposition, according to the common simple definition, which is sufficient for our purpose, is, _discourse_, _in which something is affirmed or denied of something_. Thus, in the proposition, Gold is yellow, the quality _yellow_ is affirmed of the substance _gold_. In the proposition, Franklin was not born in England, the fact expressed by the words _born in England_ is denied of the man Franklin.
Every proposition consists of three parts: the Subject, the Predicate, and the Copula. The predicate is the name denoting that which is affirmed or denied. The subject is the name denoting the person or thing which something is affirmed or denied of. The copula is the sign denoting that there is an affirmation or denial; and thereby enabling the hearer or reader to distinguish a proposition from any other kind of discourse. Thus, in the proposition, The earth is round, the Predicate is the word _round_, which denotes the quality affirmed, or (as the phrase is) predicated: _the earth_, words denoting the object which that quality is affirmed of, compose the Subject; the word _is_, which serves as the connecting mark between the subject and predicate, to show that one of them is affirmed of the other, is called the Copula.
Dismissing, for the present, the copula, of which more will be said hereafter, every proposition, then, consists of at least two names; brings together two names, in a particular manner. This is already a first step towards what we are in quest of. It appears from this, that for an act of belief, _one_ object is not sufficient; the simplest act of belief supposes, and has something to do with, _two_ objects: two names, to say the least; and (since the names must be names of something) two _nameable things_. A large class of thinkers would cut the matter short by saying, two _ideas_. They would say, that the subject and predicate are both of them names of ideas; the idea of gold, for instance, and the idea of yellow; and that what takes place (or a part of what takes place) in the act of belief, consists in bringing (as it is often expressed) one of these ideas under the other. But this we are not yet in a condition to say: whether such be the correct mode of describing the phenomenon, is an after consideration. The result with which for the present we must be contented, is, that in every act of belief _two_ objects are in some manner taken cognizance of; that there can be no belief claimed, or question propounded, which does not embrace two distinct (either material or intellectual) subjects of thought; each of them capable or not of being conceived by itself, but incapable of being believed by itself.