To state a cause of a diseased condition, without the conclusion being formulated by logical reasoning, which should always accompany clinical inquiry, is misleading. When such a statement appears in a journal devoted to scientific thought it is likely to be accepted as authority, especially if the statement emanates from one supposed to have made a study of the etiology of disease within the region referred to in the opinion expressed.
Ability to recognize causes and defend the part they take in producing effects is proportional to knowledge acquired by study and observation. The process of reasoning is the distinguishing of truth from falsehood, the deducing from evidence an understanding of a proposition. To express with exactness is to comprehend in its fulness.
A pathologic condition is an effect; a comprehension of its causes is a result of an appreciation of phenomena associated with the region affected. Pathology has its
LUCKIE SB. FALSE STATEMENTS CONCERNING CAUSES OF ORAL PATHOLOGY.. JAMA. 1908;L(2):94-96. doi:10.1001/jama.1908.25310280010002a