 Judgments are psychical phenomena and they belong therefore not to World 3 but to our real world. Each judgment is an act or event that takes place at a certain time in a certain mind and is herewith part of a causal network. As a part of our real world, each judgment comes into being in time (and will pass away later on). From an epistemological point of view it is of particular relevance whether a judgment is caused or mediated by other judgments or whether this is not the case, i.e., whether the judgment is “immediate” (WL III, 123 ff.). If a judgment \(m\) is caused or mediated by a set \(\mu\) of judgments, Bolzano calls the mind’s transition from \(\mu\) to \(m\) ‘Schluss’ (‘inference’), as distinct from the usage of this term explained in section 3.8. An inference in this sense is a mental process (belonging to World 2) of inferring a judgment \(m\) from a set \(\mu\) of others; we can represent it by \(\langle \mu , m\rangle\). Such an inference — as opposed to an “inference in itself” or an argument — is a causal process, to be clear. Since by each of the judgments involved in an inference — by the members of \(\mu\) as well as by \(m\) — a proposition is uniquely determined (due to \(\mathbf{G})\) as its “material”, by every inference \(\langle \mu , m\rangle\) an argument \(\langle \sigma , s\rangle\) is uniquely determined, for which Bolzano has defined what it means, e.g., that \(s\) is a logical consequence of \(\sigma\), or that \(s\) has a certain logical probability \(\gt \bfrac{1}{2}\) relative to \(\sigma\). (These concepts can then be applied indirectly to the inference \(\langle \mu , m\rangle\) and used for its evaluation, as we will see in the following section 4.5.)