The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1901-04-02

GeperaIizatiOns.
One of the most dangerous intellectual
habits into which a person can iali is
that of careless generalization. 1t IS,
in nine cases out of ten, born of in
tellectual vanity. 1t sounds well TO
generalize. and for that reason some
people like to do 1t. 1t is so easy TO
make a sweeping statement for the sake
of argument, and then to dispose OF
contradictions with the lofty assertion
that this is an exception" that there
is sort of fascination about the
process.
All the same, it is dangerous habit;
dangerous for this reason: That 1t
obliges one to make many mistakes be-
fore he gets his general laws arranged,
and usually results in more or less I'M
reasoning prejudice. The fact that IN
three-fourths of the people of ones ac-
quaintance certain peculiarities exist is
no warrant for the assertion that they
exist in all humanity, and at any
rate there is always the other one
fourth, the exception, to be reckoned
with: and unless one can easily distin-
guish between the two ones knowledge
is not so very valuable.
Suppose, for example. that a man Is
brought up in a community where the
Church is particularly corrupt, and
where some of the hypocrites would de-
ceive the very elect. He may jump at
the erroneous conclusion that IL Is the
New Testament and not the conditions
of that particular community which
caused the trouble: in which case he is
likely to be robbed of considerable sat
isfaction in life. If, on the contrary.
he had set himself to discover the cause
of the trouble. seriously and without
prejudice, he might in time have found
out how to know hypocrite when he
saw one which would have been
truly valuable thing to know.
There is kind of reasoning some
times called feminine, but often pos
sessed by poets. dramatists. and shrewd
business men, which is intuitive in its
character, and usually considered il
logical. IT is a fact, however, that the
person endowed with this kind of rea-
son is correct in judgment, as rule.
The way in which he arrives at his
conclusions may not be very clear to
him or anybody else, but it is cer-
tain that the conclusions are correct.
There have been many speculations as
to the method pursued by this type of
mind. but it has never been quite set
tied.
1t may be-. however. that the explana-
'tion of il is just this: The ordinary,
glow, logical mind, on coming upon new
conditions. endeavors to explain and
formulate them according to experience
and previously constructed rules. On
meeting a man, for example, such a
mind will seek to pigeonhole him with
his class. Now, as every man is an in
dividuai. with curious little crooks and
turns and contradictions in his makeup
hich are unlike those of other people,
the chances are that no one specimen
viii exactly fit in his class. The in
tuitive mind. instead of wasting time
in classification, looks at the man as he
is, and tries to see him exactly as If
The result is an accurate view, which
omits no details. After this view is
gained. the classification can go on.
1t is safe for men like Darwin, or
Baizac, or Shakespeare, to generalize.
because their data are innumerable; but
for the ordinary, limited, everyday man
il is rather unwise.