Sunday, March 26, 2006


Two minds think about the same problem with the same data. One catches the essential key to solution and the other does not. Why? Because one is more intelligent than the other? Some perverse cleverness or fertility that goes off in dazzling disregard of fact? No. Thought controlled by the necessities of the case. Random and heterogeneous analogies cause thought to drift through various associations. The less random and heterogenous they are, the more necessary they become.The universal connection discovered should be the right one. Newton, in contemplating planets and apples, must light on the concept of falling as leading to the force he seeks. Darwin must select from people and racehorses the feature that is essential to improvement of the type. The suggestion of an undiscovered star must come to Leverrier. Shakespeare must be carried, with or without analogies, to the last speech of Othello. All of these things are explainable in only one way. The ideal order which their thinking tries to realize has produced something new in them.The issue begins to form in their minds, parts or aspects are connected, hidden affinities come to light, not because they wanted it, but because they went beyond more people in recognizing a necessity that is within us and also beyond us.The ability to use analogies to pass quickly from one topic to another is an expression of logic itself. The eye that can trace the lines of necessity and single out the relevant from the more common irrelevant associations is guided by the invisible purpose of ideal rationality. The influence of ideal rationality is felt stronger in some minds rather than others. Ideal rationality organizes the chaos of experience into fixed categories. In inquiring minds these categories form themselves more readily and in closer alignment, as logic gains control and prepares to create a new synthesis.

No comments: