CHAPTER VI.

OF EXEMPLIFICATION.

§ 99. EXEMPLIFICATION is that process of explanaation which exhibits the theme through one of its *specific parts.

This process differs from Division in this, that instead of presenting all the specific parts that make up the theme, it presents only one. The logical validity of the process is seen at once in the very nature of a class or a generic form of thought, as shown in the previous chapter on Division. This form of thought, as there shown, arises by combining more or less subjects of different judgments having the same predicate, or what amounts to the same thing, by combining more or less individual objects having a common attribute. Every individual in the class, or, to speak generally, the whole class consequently have this common attribute, the whole generic form of the thought must have this common predicate. By taking, therefore, any individual of the class and indicating the attribute in that which has constituted the common base in forming the class, we explain the class. Exemplification, accordingly, is founded on the same relationship in thought as Division - the relationship of a logiIcal whole to its parts. But the movement of thought is in the opposite direction, as we look here at the whole from the part; there, at the parts from the whole.

Exemplification is one of the most interesting and effective processes of Explanation, and at the same time one of the most familiar and common. Instruction in Natural

History and Experimental science is chiefly given through this process. The naturalist in explaining any class of objects in Nature as substances, exhibits one of the class as a specimen. The botanist explains a whole genus, a species, a variety of plants by showing the one property in an individual plant which is the common property of the class. The whole class is known when that generic property which was the base of the classification, which as such characterizes the class, when that common attribute is known. In like manner, in experimental science, the nature of an object as a cause, in other words, the working of a force or power, is explained by exhibiting a single instance of its working in an experiment. The chemist explains thus the nature of heat as a cause or force expanding material bodies, by exhibiting the working the influence of heat on the length or the diameter of an iron rod. The experiment here does in reference to the object as cause, what the specimen does in natural history in reference to the object as substance. The exhibition of a quality in one of a class of substances, explains the whole class of substances combined on the basis of that quality; and the exhibition of an action, a force acting, in an object viewed as cause, explains the whole class of objects as causes combined on the basis of that acting force. The range and extent of this process are commensurate with the classifications possible to human thought. Whatever can be viewed as generic, as a class, can be explained through it. It is the earliest process of instruction. Nature, Providence, man, all teach through example, and begin their teachings with it after the first knowledge both rude and crude, both unscientific and incomplete, which mere perception and intuition impart.

§100. THE THEME in Exemplification is ever a generic form of thought, -a class, as in Division.

It is either simple, that is outward and sensible, or abstract, that is internal and spiritual.

The first thing, accordingly, to be done in exemplification, is to seize firmly in thought the theme as a generic object or class, and then to view it as that which is to be explained by the common attribute of the class as found in an individual specimen or experiment.

It is obvious that the process is equally applicable to spiritual and abstract objects as to material and sensible; to objects classed in respect to attributes of condition and of relation as to those classed in respect to attributes of quality and action.

In exemplification, thus, a general principle of conduct is explained by the exhibition of a particular act in which it was manifested. The principle of patriotism is exemplified in the self-devotion of a Spartan hero; of justice, in the stern decision of a Brutus; of Christian heroism, in the martyr at the stake.

General truths, also, are exemplified by some particular truth which they comprehend. That virtue is its own reward is exemplified, thus, in the elevated peace and happiness which follow a particular deed of self-denying benevolence. General facts, likewise, are exemplified in some particular instance. The circulation of the sap in vegetation is explained by an exhibition of it in a single plant.

§ 101. The Law of Unity in Exemplification requires singleness in the theme as a class, and also singleness in the individual part which is taken as the example.

This law, like all the others applied to this and the other processes of explanation, must of course be interpreted as applied to a single process. Nothing forbids repeating the process in the same discourse. We may accordingly, in perfect consistency with rhetorical unity, in the same discourse introduce divers examples in explanation of the same theme. But the law forbids, alike, using the example, except incidentally and subserviently, to explain any other theme than

the one proposed for the discourse; and also forbids mingling together two or more examples to explain the theme. If, for illustration, the theme fortitude were to be explained by exemplification in the case of Regulus, and the exhibition of the attribute in the story of Regulus were to run off into the presentation of manners and customs prevalent in Rome or Carthage, however well exemplified in the story, the first part of the law of unity, which requires singleness in the theme, would be violated. And the second part, requiring singleness in the example, would be violated, if other instances of fortitude, although partaking of common characteristics, were adduced besides that of Regulus. If other such examples are to be given, they should be treated as distinct exemplifications, or confusion and distraction must result.

one or more

It is to be observed that not uncommonly the theme, as a class, is to be explained only in respect to a part of the composite attribute that characterizes the class, of the component attributes that make up this common classcharacter. In this case, the principle of unity requires that the example be exhibited only as having that one of these component attributes. It would be in violation of unity, thus, in explaining gold in respect of the general property of specific gravity, to present the specimens for the purpose of showing its ductility or other property.

§ 102. The law of Selection in Exemplification requires that that one of the class constituting the theme be taken as the example, which shall best exhibit in the circumstances of the discourse the common attribute of the class.

In the application of this law, reference being ever had in it to the object of the discourse, the mind addressed must needs be consulted. What will engage the attention and excite the interest of an immature mind and be within its capacity to comprehend, might be of no interest to a mind informed and disciplined. The occasion, also, the various cir

cumstances of condition, will need to be consulted in the selection of the particular example; as well as, also, the writer's own intellectual command of his theme, and the individual objects through which it may be exemplified.

§ 103. The Law of Method in Exemplification applies to the arrangement either when more than one example is introduced, where the method in Division is to be observed, or when more than a single attribute is to be exhibited, where the method in Partition is to be observed.

In all processes of explanation applied to logical wholes,the artificial wholes of thought, the two logical laws of coördination and subordination in subject wholes, that is in extensive quantity, constitute the principles of method; while in attribute-wholes, that is in comprehensive quantity, the analogous laws of coördination and involution give the principles of method. Inasmuch as we may exemplify a class through one or more individuals of the class and also in respect to one or more of the attributes of the class, we can at once recognize the grounds of the twofold character of the law of method. If more than one example be presented, the laws of coördination and subordination apply; if the exemplification be extended beyond a single attribute, the laws of coördination and involution have application.

§ 104. The Law of Completeness in Exemplification requires that all the examples and all the component attributes be presented which are necessary to exhibit the entire composite attribute characterizing the theme as a class.

No illustration either of this law or of that of method seems to be necessary. The distinct and formal mention of them is given that they may be ever kept before the mind in performing the exercise. The general remark may be repeated here that in training to the construction of discourse, all the