[122] [Reprinted from the Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, vol. iii, No. 26, December 20, 1906; and ibid., vol. iv, No. 4, February 14, 1907, where the original is entitled “A Reply to Mr. Pitkin.” Ed.]
[123] [W. B. Pitkin: “A Problem of Evidence in Radical Empiricism,” ibid., vol. iii, No. 24, November 22, 1906. Ed.]
[125] [“In Reply to Professor James,” Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods, vol. iv, No. 2, January 17, 1907. Ed.]
[126] Mr. Pitkin inserts the clause: ‘by reason of the very nature of experience itself.’ Not understanding just what reason is meant, I do not include this clause in my answer.
[127] [See above, p. [193]. Ed.]
[128] [Elsewhere, in speaking of ‘reality’ as “conceptual or perceptual experiences,” the author says: “This is meant merely to exclude reality of an ‘unknowable’ sort, of which no account in either perceptual or conceptual terms can be given. It includes, of course, any amount of empirical reality independent of the knower.” Meaning of Truth, p. 100, note. Ed.]