58

Logic 58

which psychologists have obtained concerning abstraction and concerning association would be a wasteful proceeding.
It is also maintained that precepts setting forth how we ought to reason can have no rathional basis except the science of the laws which describe how we must reason and that in fact if this latter part of logic which is at the same thime a part of psychology be dropped out the purely normative part which remains is nothing but an ancillary practical art.
The general answer to all this is that it only illustrated the dire confusion brought into both sciences when they are not so understood as to be widely distinct from one another.
The logicians of the period from Descartes to Kant cannot be much blamed for seeing little distinction between psychology and logic in as much as the psychology of their days whether rational or empirical consisted in little else than a