History of the inductive sciences, from the earliest to the present timeWhewell, William
History
History of the inductive sciences, from the earliest to the present time
Whewell, William
Science -- History
THAT firm and entire possession of certain clear and distinct
general ideas which is necessary to sound science, was the character
of the minds of those among the ancients who created the several
sciences which arose among them. It was indispensable that such
inventors should have a luminous and steadfast apprehension of
certain general relations, such as those of space and number, order
and cause; and should be able to apply these notions with perfect
readiness and precision to special facts and cases. It is necessary
that such scientific notions should be more definite and precise
than those which common language conveys; and in this state of
unusual clearness, they must be so familiar to the philosopher, that
they are the language in which he thinks. The discoverer is thus led
to doctrines which other men adopt and follow out, in proportion as
they seize the fundamental ideas, and become acquainted with the
leading facts. Thus Hipparchus, conceiving clearly the motions and
combinations of motion which enter into his theory, saw that the
relative lengths of the seasons were sufficient data for determining
the form of the sun's orbit; thus Archimedes, possessing a steady
notion of mechanical pressure, was able, not only to deduce the
properties of the lever and of the centre of gravity, but also to
see the truth of those principles respecting the distribution of
pressure in fluids, on which the science of hydrostatics depends.
With the progress of such distinct ideas, the inductive sciences
rise and flourish; with the decay and loss of such distinct ideas,
these sciences become stationary, languid, and retrograde. When men
merely repeat the terms of science, without attaching to them any
clear conceptions;--when their apprehensions become vague and
dim;--when they assent to scientific doctrines as a matter of
tradition, rather than of conviction, on trust rather than on
sight;--when science is considered as a collection of opinions,
rather than a record of laws by which the universe is really
governed;--it must inevitably happen, that men will lose their hold
on the knowledge which the great discoverers who preceded them have
brought to light. They are not able to push forwards the truths on
which they lay so {187} feeble and irresolute a hand; probably they
cannot even prevent their sliding back towards the obscurity from
which they had been drawn, or from being lost altogether. Such
indistinctness and vacillation of thought appear to have prevailed
in the stationary period, and to be, in fact, intimately connected
with its stationary character. I shall point out some indications of
the intellectual peculiarity of which I speak.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account