debate, they frequently manifest an express concern for 
simplification”:

          Hooykaas makes less of Ramus’ talk about 
     ‘induction’ than of his enthusiasm for usus , that is, 
     classroom practice or exercise, in establishing the 
     relationship of Ramus’ educational aims and procedures 
     to bourgeois culture. The break with older ways both 
     among burghers generally and among Ramists in 
     particular consisted more in an interest in pupil activity 
     than in anything we should recognize today as 
     experimentation or ‘induction’. These points Hooykas 
     makes are valid and follow recent lines of thinking in 
     discerning a certain intellectual fertility in the meeting of 
     the artisan and academic minds during the sixteenth and 
     seventeenth centuries. (53)