In the fable found in Luke xviii. 1-5, the proposition to be illustrated is the advantage of perseverance in prayer. But there is no correspondence between the machinery of the fable and the parties to whom reference is made. In fact, the fable derives no small portion of its force from this want of resemblance. It amounts to an a fortiori argument.

The following is an example of the use of Fables:

That eminence in one kind of merit is often associated with deficiency in another, is thus illustrated:

"The Nightingale and the Hawk.”—A mellifluous nightingale was one day pounced upon by a hawk. "As you sing so charmingly," he exclaimed, "how deliciously must you taste!"

The design of fables is to teach us general maxims and propositions, which we are to apply, as we may have occasion, to practical purpose, in our progress through life.

In most of the "Fables of Æsop," actions are attributed to animals, because certain animals are supposed to represent certain characters or dispositions. Thus the lion is the representative of courage and magnanimity; the fox, of cunning; the peacock, of beauty; but there are fables in which no animals are introduced.

Proverbs are often the morals of fables. They are not usually capable of being proved by reasoning. They are proved by observation and experience; but referring chiefly to morals and manners, they possess only a moral universality, and hence it is often easy to point out cases in which they are not realized.

Thus, "The diligent hand maketh rich," "Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it," are sound maxims, but cases occur in which they do not apply. This is no valid objection to them as rules for our guidance. In human affairs we must be contented with a high degree of probability. It is the part of true wisdom to submit our conduct to the guidance of this high degree of probability.

The mode of reasoning from proverbs is by the application of a general principle to an individual case, and falls under the class of genus and species. A fine illustration may be seen in Dr. Franklin's "Poor Richard's Almanac."

LESSON CLVI.

DESCRIPTIVE AND INTERROGATIVE REASONING.

1. Descriptive Reasoning is used when we describe an object with a view to reason about it.

For example: Were a lecturer on anatomy to describe the eye, with the view of showing its construction to his pupils, that would be a description, and nothing more. Were a theologian to describe the eye, in order to show that it must have had an intelligent author, then the description would become a specimen of descriptive reasoning. See Paley's "Natural Theology."

In all our reasonings great use is made of description. When a legislator proposes a new law, he begins with describing the present state of the law, shows what improvement is necessary, and then proposes his remedy. A lawyer opens his address to the jury, by a statement of the case; this statement is descriptive. Descriptions of past events, and of good and bad characters, form a large portion of the addresses from the pulpit.

Practical applications of Descriptive Reasoning:

In tracing the effects of any measure that we desire to have altered or abandoned, the effects are sometimes advantageously described with great minuteness.

In describing acts of injustice or oppression, it is seldom necessary to nave recourse to any forms of reasoning. The description itself will usually produce all the impression that could be obtained by the most profound argumentation. So, also, in regard to abuses, to show that they ought to be corrected, it is enough to describe them.

2. Interrogative Reasoning.-This is a form of reasoning by asking questions. Of this, there are several kinds.

(1.) The Socratical, which is managed by questions and answers, in the form of a common conversation. It is a pleasing method, because the teacher takes the attitude of an inquirer, and the learner seems to convey the information sought.

The reasoning always arises out of something asserted or known in the

previous answer, and so proceeding to inquire after something unknown in the following question, which again makes way for the next answer. For an illustration, see "Watts on the Improvement of the Mind."

(2.) The conversational form. See Mrs. Marcet's "Conversations." It is such a form of reasoning as prevails in common life, and occurs in conversation. It is not by a full syllogism, but by a defective one, called Enthymeme; as, "Diamonds are jewels; therefore they are valuable:" "The human soul is immaterial; consequently it is immortal.”

The occurrence of for, because, therefore, or any similar word, either in conversation or in reading, usually denotes an enthymeme; in other words, denotes a reason or argument expressed naturally, without the formality of scholastic logic.

(3.) Sometimes we ask questions in order to answer them, with the view of removing from the discussion the topics to which they refer. Thus, a writer on agricultural distress commences with questions in the form of inquiries, to which he replies:

"There is no denial, and there can be no doubt, that the whole agriculture of England is menaced with ruin. But what is the cause? Has Heaven stricken the land with barrenness?-the late harvest has been remarkably productive. Has the land been trampled by insurrection ?—it has exhibited a contrast to all Europe in its tranquillity. Has commercial failure driven away its credit?-the panic of 1847 has virtually invigorated, by purifying, speculation. Again we ask, what is the cause? The cause is simply this," &c.

(4). Sometimes we place in the form of questions those objections which our opponents might advance against us. St. Paul often reasons in this way. See the third, fourth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, and eleventh chapters of the Romans.

(5.) The relation of cause and effect is often intimated by interrogations. When a wrong cause, as we think, has been assigned for an effect, and we desire to intimate the true cause, we can do this by asking questions.

"One man pines under a broken constitution. But let us ask him whether he can, fairly and honestly, assign no cause for this, but the unknown decree of Heaven? Has he duly valued the blessing of health, and always observed the rules of virtue and sobriety? Has he been moderate n his life, and temperate ?"

LESSON CLVII.

LAWS OF ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING.

Some of the laws which ought in general to be observed in the presentation of truths to the mind in argumentative discourses, are thus stated by Mr. Neil:

1. Never propose to prove a self-evident proposition.

Proof is impossible. The attempt is irksome, as well as displeasing to the parties addressed: irksome, because they already acknowledge the proposition; and displeasing, because it insinuates a want of capacity in them.

2. Begin with a clear statement of your subject, or with an introduction which will naturally lead to that.

If an introduction is used, it should be striking, appropriate, and proportionate.

3. Observe a regular sequence in your arguments, that each one may naturally lead to the other.

4. Let your chief arguments be few and cogent; and make them bear as directly on the point to be proven as possible.

Superfluous arguments efface stronger ones, exhaust patience, and encourage the idea that where weak arguments are used, the point is weak. If the few are strong, they will be effectual.

5. Express your arguments in as few words as possible, consistent with perspicuity.

6. Illustrations should be so intermingled with arguments, as to relieve and please the mind, and thus produce variety without confusion.

7. Arguments should be arranged in the inverse order of their importance; the least important first, the strongest leading up the rear. They should form a climax.

8. Opposing arguments should be considered in the introduction or exordium; suasive ones in the conclusion.

LESSON CLVIII.

SERMON-WRITING.

Many of the preceding lessons abound in suggestions highly appropriate to this species of writing. Nothing will here be attempted but to present a general view of the various methods of treating a text of Scripture.

1. In the management of a text, the first thing to be considered is, whether there be any thing which requires explanation, and if so to furnish it.

2. The text should always be taken in the precise sense which it bears in connection with the context, and be treated in that view.

3. The context often supplies the most suitable introduction. 4. There are two methods of division-the textual and the topical.

TEXTUAL METHODS OF DIVISION.

I. The Natural Division—following the order in which the words of the text stand; as on Ephes. i. 3, Claude's divisions

are:

1. A grateful acknowledgment—" Blessed be God."

2. The title under which Paul blesses God-"The Father of our Lord Jesus Christ."

8. The reason why he blesses God-"He hath blessed us."

4. The plenitude of this blessing-"With all blessings."

5. The nature or kind of them-" Spiritual blessings."

6. The place where, &c.—"In heavenly places.”

7. In whom he has blessed us-"In Christ Jesus."

II. The Observational Division.

1. When texts are clear in theinselves, there is no need of explication, and observations only should be made on what they teach.

3. Most historical texts must be discussed by observation. Henry's Commentary furnishes admirable examples.