invincible prejudice, which is of interest as a detail in his intellectual biography but is not otherwise germane to the subject under discussion.
(3) The last point which I will consider is the suggestion made by Mr. Robinson that philosophers might be usefully occupied in analyzing the terms "telepathy," "clairvoyance," "precognition," and others which are used in psychical research. This is accepted by Mr. Mundle, and I do not suppose that Mrs. Kneale would have any objection to it. I heartily agree, on one condition. That is that any philosopher who undertakes this task should prepare himself by a careful study of the relevant literature, as he would certainly do before venturing to analyze and criticize the terminology of any other special science. For these questions have been and are being vigorously discussed by psychical researchers, some of whom at least have had some philosophical training, and a good deal of analysis and clarification has been accomplished. If this condition is not fulfilled, and if philosophers rush in and pontificate de haut en bas on the strength of having hastily skimmed one or two popular books on psychical research they will probably incur and will certainly deserve the accusation of trying to teach their grandmothers to suck eggs.