Level II

At Level II, the encajamientos appear for trial

that link to each other in terms of conceptual objects
their common properties (predicates). These judgments are
hence the origin of concepts, each
one in ~ Loban various objects, although it is still
only concepts or judgments that are not related
together by inferential encajamientos, hence
the redundant questions and lack of deduction
possible or graduation in assessing sufficiency
or not the information. However, questions
regarding predicates recognized as common (squares,
blue, etc.) and therefore at elevated encajamientos.
mental.
At level III trials are coordinated between -yes
32
and therefore leading subordinate to inferences
intersections and no longer only encajamientas
Partial level II. In a word law
composition of predicates leads to inferences
It is: predicates agglomerates ~ conceptual objects;
~ recent meeting concepts based on judgments;
coordinating the last ~ inferences in
yes, they are higher encajamientos origin (inter sections).
But if one hand this building encajamientas
thus proceeds by composition wholes
based on the organization of its elements or
parties, on the other hand intervenes correlative one

set of operations reverse, descending

Ja.s you wholes of the parties and that justify and
interparciales enriched with new bonds that have not been
given in the ascending process and completing their meanings
by subordination to the wholes that encompass.
So the truth of all judgment is based on
inferences: for example if "this animal is a cat," is
because it has: mustaches, triangular head, etc. In our
case, when Pat discovers that the drawing is searched round
and brown, she concludes: "Well then it must be
this; or this one (large) or this (small) ". Here inference
It leads to a trial that is the conclusion and offers
two possibilities among which you have to choose. Respect
the trials, it is these that ensure warranty
encajamientos conceptual level II, to highlight
the quality common to several of the objects and exclude
both objects without it.
Finally the conceptual level I object involves
action concepts predicates, as each
the latter is not a unique quality in
while isolable but a common property to other
previously familiar objects: the color "blue"
It is not indeed special for the element sought
but known by the color of the sky, certain flowers,
etc., and actually it means "Co-blue", which means
a relationship that links the observable current multiple
above.
It can be seen that, despite the arrangement of the drawings
in rows and columns from the beginning po-

33
nen out all the possible encajamientos, the
reactions of subjects according to three levels
They are very similar to those of Section I and indeed consist
structuring observable exogenous including
the contents of endogenous fonnas origins understanding
the encajamientos, albeit the latter seem
already be exposed beforehand in the device.
It should be noted two other analogy: s: One is that
at each level I and III is a circle between two components,
one of which depends on the other: the elementary predicates
and the conceptual object 1, concepts and
II trials, and these inferences III. This does not preclude
the total circle, concepts predicates ~ ~ judgments
~ Inferences, diachronically just described,
level by level, intervenes synchronously from
the principle but implicitly, or is without elaborations
intentional by the subject; which equals
to say that from level I of conceptual objects
the observer can see in action judgments and
inferences that the subject used without being aware of
this: choose a conceptual object, including through
false hypothesis, and believe it is possible and oppose it to other
and even say as Sybille (6, 4) in 1: "As the
others are not this, so I think it is this "is inferred
its uniqueness among 20 possible. Or when Pie passes (in their
questions) small square white to blue and then
to brown, what it does is infer without explaining that if
square must be white, blue or brown. Thus

at all levels and implied no judgment inferences

which reinforces or at least prepares interdependence
of these different cognitive instruments.
The dialectical circularity of predicates, concepts,
judgments and inferences with its double upward movement
composition and downward propagating possible
and justification of the necessary connections tends
by their nature to enrich theory encajarnientos
by overcoming of reality (which limited
ascending) composkiones in the double direction
possible and necessary (descending retroactions).
If we limit ourselves to the real, it is well known that the
richer the engagement extension (number of
3. 4
the poorer objects included) it is in understanding
(Number of common qualities). Indeed, inclusion
A = B rests on the involvement lf XE A = XE B1, which
It represents the inverse proportion of the extension and
understanding. On the contrary if we consider the possible
and possible necessarily have B = A V A ';
e = B V B ', etc., where (XE B) = (XE AV XE A') and
(Xe B) V (xE B ') and if (V = o):
(Xc: A1 B) V (XE A'1 B) V (xE B 'A2) V (xe: B' A'2} V, etc.
That is to say: 1) that the longer in
(And poor understanding) extension is the encasement
considered possible subencajamientos behave more
(Example in zoology: a genus ~ several species, a
family ~ various genres; an "Order" ~ family,
etc.). A "joint" -) and many more

subencajamientos possible.