Mill's notion of logic allows for the definition of certain predicates that signify features that are not present in things we obtain through ordinary experience. These types of predicates have no sense in themselves, and any proposition regarding their existence appears false. Mill also struggled with the logic of subject terms possess definite meaning, but do not specifically symbolize something. Mill's argument seems to be that language's purpose is to state matters of fact about the world. He believes in both logical terms, such as ?is' or ?is not' or ?and', and non-logical terms. The subject and predicate terms of propositions, some of which are ancient to this language, construct non-logical terms. Mill follows that these are the ones that are not are defined on the basis of these primitive terms, while all others are somehow defined by them. Thus, meanings result from the connection of subject terms and predicate terms to things and their attributes. Despite this observation, Mill remains unclear on the specific relations between such things. It is through Mill's empiricism that these things and attributes to which the primitive terms of language are connected and presented to us in ordinary experience, either through sensory experience or inner awareness of our own states of consciousness.
For Mill, subject terms and predicate terms construct propositions together. As Mill assumes thoughts themselves to be propositional, it is thus the propositions themselves that set the limits of thought. In other words, Mill's conception of empiricism establishes the limits of what is thinkable. It follows that all knowledge is relative to us, or rather to our own consciousness. As there are inevitably parts of t ...