Thus the history of the problem in modern times shows a great variety of views concerning the nature and'analy sis of belief. It also reveals the fact that some of the major problems of belief are not carefully differentiated. For example, the ground of belief, or that upon which the belief is established, or built up, is not clearly distinguished from the actual state or process of belief. Another aspect of the same problem is what we may call the logic as Opposed to the psychology of belief. The validity of a belief is one consideration as it is judged by certain standards of truth, but the psychologist is not concerned with this. His interest is iii-analysing thestate or process into its elements. The more recent social psychologists have pointed out the importance of social influence in the making and establishing of belief, and this is a timely emphasis, as it seems to have been over looked by many writers. Moreover, the wide range of the meanings of belief has never been adequately set forth. Belief, Credulity, Confidence and Faith are terms frequently found in literature, and yet a differentiation of the use of these terms in the wide range of the subject is lacking. It seems necessary, there fore, to set to work on a classification of belief, both as to Grounds and Processes, in order to show the wide range of the subject, to attempt to clear up some of the difficulties in the use of terms, and to make distinctions which seemed to be lacking in many treatises on the subject. My thanks are due particularly to Professor G. S. Brett.
{{comment.content}}