all the others of the class planets, as shining by reflected light, revolving round the Sun, etc. But unity would be destroyed by varying either the theme or the object or group of objects with which the theme is compared or contrasted.

§ 110. The Law of Selection in Comparison and Contrast requires that such object or objects in the class to which the theme belongs, and such attributes of resemblance or difference be selected as will best accomplish the end of the discourse.

This law, as in the case of the other processes, looking to the end or object of the discourse, or the regulative principle in the selection, embraces the consideration of the writer's capacity, the capacity of the mind addressed, and the occasion of the discourse.

In applying the law, it may be suggested here, those objects in the same class as the theme which are most unlike it should generally be selected in comparison; while in contrast, those most like it are to be preferred. The reason is, that when there are relatively but few points of resemblance in comparison, or of difference in contrast, the attention is more easily fastened upon them and is less distracted and embarrassed than if the great multitude of attributes were crowded at the same time upon it.

§ 111. The Law of Method in Comparison and Contrast requires that the more specific processes by exhibition of resemblances in Comparison, and of differences in Contrast, and also of attributes of property in Direct, and of those of relation in Analogical Comparison and Contrast, be distinctly presented.

This law does not forbid presenting together both the direct resemblances and indirect, in regard to the same attribute, or even the resemblances and differences as to any one attribute, instead of invariably presenting all the direct resemblances in respect of all the points of comparison, and

then all the direct differences. But where direct and analogical resemblances and differences are exhibited together, they should be presented in such a way that there shall be no liability to confusion or mistake.

§ 112. The Law of Completeness in Comparison and Contrast requires that so many resemblances and differences, direct and analogical, be presented, as shall be necessary fully to explain the theme.

EXERCISES IN COMPARISON AND CONTRAST.

1. Compare in respect of properties or attributes of quality and action, electricity and magnetism.

2. Compare in respect of essential attributes, the British Parliament and the Congress of the United States.

3. Compare music and painting.

4. Compare reason and instinct.
5. Compare hope and fear.

6. Compare a state and a family.
7. Compare wisdom and learning.
8. Compare science and art.

9. Compare logic and ethics.

10. Contrast each of the above pairs of objects.

11. Compare and contrast plant-life and animal life; air and water; heat and light; desire and will; imagination and taste; architecture and sculpture; Judaism and Christianity; Homer and Dante; Chaucer and Gower; Spenser and Milton; Pope and Cowper; Schiller and Goethe; talent and genius.

CHAPTER VIII.

OF THE INTRODUCTION AND PERORATION IN EXPLANATORY

DISCOURSE.

§ 113. THE EXPLANATORY INTRODUCTION, § 62, will often be useful in this species of discourse for the purpose of bringing the theme more directly before the mind, or for facilitating the ready apprehension of the discussion itself.

In a history of Greece it may be necessary, in order to exhibit more distinctly to the reader of what people the history is to treat, to describe the country itself geographically which the people inhabit. Such a geographical description may also help the reader to understand the narrative itself. The introduction might also properly explain the mode of constructing the history.

In a description of the virtue of "discretion," an explanatory introduction may usefully indicate the relation of this to other virtues, or exhibit an occasion of its exercise for the purpose of a more explicit statement of the theme. It may appropriately, also, so far exhibit the light in which the theme is to be contemplated, or explain the particular mode of practicing the virtue, as that the whole description shall be more fully and correctly understood.

§ 114. THE INTRODUCTION CONCILIATORY will respect the occasion of the discourse, the theme itself, the mode of discussing it, or the speaker personally; as it is evident that from these various sources either a favor

able or an unfavorable disposition may arise in the minds of the hearers.

It is less often the case in explanatory than in any other species of discourse that this kind of introduction is necessary. Still it will be well ever to inquire whether from any of the sources enumerated there can arise any feeling or opinion unfavorable to the full understanding of the discussion, or any interest to be awakened from any one of them that shall secure a more earnest attention.

§ 115. THE PERORATION in explanatory discourse may be in any of the particular forms enumerated in § 64.

The peroration explanatory will apply the representation either to some particular theme contained in the more general one that has been discussed, or to some kindred subject.

The peroration confirmatory will be in the form of an inference readily deduced from the view that has been given.

The peroration excitatory will apply the general theme or some view taken of it to the excitement of the appropriate feelings.

The peroration persuasive will address the theme or some view taken of it to the will as an inducement to some act.

§ 116. If various forms of the peroration be employed, the principle laid down in § 51 requires that the respective forms employed succeed each other in the order in which they are stated in the preceding section.

PART II.-CONFIRMATION.

CHAPTER I.

GENERAL INTRODUCTORY VIEW.

§ 117. IN CONFIRMATION, the object of discourse is to convince; in other words, to lead to a new belief or judgment, or to modify one already existing in the mind.

Here lies the essential difference between explanation and confirmation. While both processes address the understanding, the former seeks to produce a new or different notion or conception, the latter, a new or different belief or judgment.

§ 118. As a judgment is ever expressed in a logical proposition, the theme in Confirmation must ever be such as will admit of being expressed in the form of a logical proposition, the truth of which is to be established in the mind of the hearer.

In this respect confirmatory discourse differs from all other kinds, as in those the theme is always a notion or conception.

It may be observed here that while the theme in confirmation must always admit of being expressed in the form of a logical proposition, having subject, predicate, and copula, and so far as stated must imply this, it is not necessary always that it be actually expressed in discourse in the strict technical form of such a proposition. Thus the theme of a discourse, the object of which is to prove that "the soul is im