(4) The class is unable to solve the following problem: “I sell my house for $12,000, which is a gain of 25% on the cost. Find the cost.” What is the trouble? State the problem so that some connection is apparent.
(5) “Two-thirds of my salary is $2,400. What is my salary?” A child solves this by dividing $2,400 by two and multiplying this result by three. Illustrate a plan for establishing right connections.
(6) May a judgment express a general notion? Illustrate.
(8) Show the illogic of dividing notions into individual, general and abstract.
(9) Show that goodness is a general notion.
(11) Prove that a mental image is always an individual notion.
(12) “In sensation is there implicit thinking?” Argue both sides of the question.
(13) Show that the concept, the judgment and the inference are products of the thinking mind.
(14) Show by illustration where perception ceases and conception begins.
(15) Is there actually any difference between thinking and judging? Illustrate.
(16) “Reasoning is controlled thought.” Explain.
(17) Of the three stages in thinking which one most concerns the teacher? Illustrate.
The elemental form of evolved thought is the judgment. The laws or axioms of thought may, therefore, be discovered by studying the judgment.
Judging is the process of conjoining and disjoining notions. When these notions are conjoined the judgment is affirmative; when disjoined the judgment is negative. To illustrate: “Some men are wise,” is an affirmative judgment, while “Some men are not wise,” is a negative judgment. All judgments are either affirmative or negative and this suggests that there may be but two fundamental laws or axioms underlying judging or all forms of developed thinking. One law would condition the affirmative judgment; the other the negative. Such is actually the case. The law which permits the affirmative judgment is called the _law of identity_, while the law which allows a negative judgment is known as the _law of contradiction_. There is a third law termed the _law of excluded middle_, which is in reality a combination of the other two.
In general the law of identity implies a certain permanency throughout the material world. That door is a door and always will be a door till the conditions change. If it were not for this law, that everything is permanently identical with itself, it would be impossible to think at all. For example: Take away the notion of permanency from the door and thought becomes at once ridiculous. Suppose that while we are asserting that the object is a door, it changes to a tree, and while we insist that the object is now a tree, it changes to a cow, etc. We can readily see that it would hardly be worth while to think at all.