ABSTRACT
The problem with which I propose to deal is the logical analysis of what may be called by any of the terms judgment, belief, or assertion. Suppose I am at this moment judging that Cæsar was murdered: then it is natural to distinguish in this fact on the one side either my mind, or my present mental state, or words or images in my mind, which we will call the mental factor or factors, and on the other side either Cæsar, or Cæsar’s murder, or Cæsar and murder, or the proposition Cæsar was murdered, or the fact that Cæsar was murdered, which we will call the objective factor or factors; and to suppose that the fact that I am judging that Cæsar was murdered consists in the holding of some relation or relations between these mental and objective factors. The questions that arise are in regard to the nature of the two sets of factors and of the relations between them, the fundamental distinction between these elements being hardly open to question.
