61

66

false. Adopting it for the moment, we see that
the smallness of a collection compels descriptions
of identities that in a larger collection are
not compelled. But this is as much as to say
that propositions follow as necessary consequences
from premisses relating to members of smaller collections
when in a larger collection no such conclusion
would follow. If one collection is larger than another
this will invariably be true. From this point of view
you see the immense logical significance of
multitude.

For instance, suppose you want to find out who committed certain murders, who some Jack
the Ripper is. Plainly if you can ascertain will be sure that
he belongs to a certain small collection of persons