Novum organon renovatum: Being the second part of the philosophy of the inductive sciencesWhewell, William
Philosophy
Novum organon renovatum: Being the second part of the philosophy of the inductive sciences
Whewell, William
Science -- Philosophy
IN fixing the meaning of the Technical Terms which form the
Terminology of any science, at least of the descriptive Terms, we
necessarily fix, at the same time, the perceptions and notions which
the Terms are to convey to a hearer. What do we mean by
_apple-green_ or _French grey_? It might, perhaps, be supposed that,
in the first example, the term _apple_, referring to so familiar an
object, sufficiently suggests the colour intended. But it may easily
be seen that this is not true; for apples are of many different hues
of green, and it is only by a conventional selection that we can
appropriate the term to one special shade. When this appropriation
is once made, the term refers to the sensation, and not to the parts
of this term; for these enter into the compound merely as a help to
the memory, whether the suggestion be a natural connexion as in
'apple-green,' or a casual one as in 'French grey.' In order to
derive due advantage from technical terms of this kind, they must be
associated _immediately_ with the perception to which they belong;
and not connected with it through the vague usages of common
language. The memory must retain the sensation; and the technical
word must be understood as directly as the most familiar word, and
more distinctly. When we find such terms as _tin-white_ or
_pinchbeck-brown_, the metallic colour so denoted ought to start up
in our memory without delay or search. {315}
This, which it is most important to recollect with respect to the
simpler properties of bodies, as colour and form, is no less true
with respect to more compound notions. In all cases the term is
fixed to a peculiar meaning by convention; and the student, in order
to use the word, must be completely familiar with the convention, so
that he has no need to frame conjectures from the word itself. Such
conjectures would always be insecure, and often erroneous. Thus the
term _papilionaceous_, applied to a flower, is employed to indicate,
not only a resemblance to a butterfly, but a resemblance arising
from five petals of a certain peculiar shape and arrangement; and
even if the resemblance to a butterfly were much stronger than it is
in such cases, yet if it were produced in a different way, as, for
example, by one petal, or two only, instead of a 'standard,' two
'wings,' and a 'keel' consisting of two parts more or less united
into one, we should no longer be justified in speaking of it as a
'papilionaceous' flower.
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