The Continental Monthly, Vol. 4, No. 6, December 1863: Devoted to Literature and National PolicyVarious
History
The Continental Monthly, Vol. 4, No. 6, December 1863: Devoted to Literature and National Policy
Various
Literature, Modern -- 19th century -- Periodicals; United States -- Politics and government -- 19th century -- Periodicals
of thought as departments in which _exact_ knowledge was impossible, and
whose intellectual examination was therefore fruitless. The Philosophy
based on this critical Method was denominated by its founder Positivism.
All modern Scientists, with rare exceptions, whether they are disciples
of Comte or not, are theoretical Positivists in their modes of
investigation, in their unwillingness to accept theories not proven, in
their partiality for Facts, and in their devotion to the Inductive
Method, although the nature of _proof_ is still but dimly comprehended
by them as a body, and much laxity creeps into their practical efforts
at demonstration. Under the influence of Positivism, however, the
Scientific field is being rapidly cleared of unestablished theories
which formerly mingled with it, claiming to be an integral part of its
area, and the boundaries of Science are becoming more closely defined.
The Inductive Method is enthusiastically eulogized as the source of the
success of modern Scientific investigators, as the true Scientific
Method, and--except among a few of the most advanced thinkers--as the
final word of wisdom in regard to the manner of establishing definite
and exact knowledge. The Deductive, often called the _a priori_
Method--in which term the Anticipative or Hypothetical and the true
Deductive Method, seen in Mathematical investigations, are not
sufficiently discriminated--is, on the other hand, almost everywhere
denounced as essentially false, the source of all error; and we are
assured that the attempt to work it was the fault of the old world,
prior to Bacon, and the cause of its failure to secure great
intellectual results.
A distinguished thinker, Stephen Pearl Andrews, from whose writings some
of these suggestions concerning Methods have been borrowed, points out
three sources of confusion in the minds even of the learned themselves,
in connection with this subject. First, in the verbal point of view, the
terms Induction and Deduction are applied in a way directly the opposite
of that which their Etymology would indicate: _In_-duction is used for
the _De_-rivation of a Law from Facts, and _De_-duction for the
_Intro_-duction of new Facts under the Law. Secondly, the two terms
Inductive and Deductive, which are alone usually spoken of, are not
enough to designate all the processes involved in the several Scientific
Methods; and, thirdly, these terms are sometimes used to denote
_Processes_ merely, and sometimes to designate Methods which are merely
characterized by the predominance of one or the other of these
Processes.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account