In physics and chemistry no perfect rational systems have been
established hitherto, but there are many systems approaching the ideal
type in different departments of these sciences. The chemical type of
the monohydric saturated alcohols, for instance, is given by the formula
C_nH_{2n+1}OH, and in this formula we not only have an expression of
the law of composition which all possible alcohols are to follow,--but,
since we know empirically the law of quantitative relation between
*n* and various physical properties, we also possess in our formula a
general statement with respect to the totality of the properties of any
primary alcohol that may be discovered or prepared in the future. But
chemistry has still higher aims with regard to its systematics: all of
you know that the so-called “periodic law of the elements” was the first
step towards a principle that may some day give account of the relation
of all the physical and chemical properties of any so-called element
with its most important constant, the atomic weight, and it seems to be
reserved for the present time to form a real fundamental system of the
“elements” on the basis of the periodic law by the aid of the theory
of electrons. Such a fundamental system of the elements would teach us
that there can only be so many elements and no more, and only of such a
kind. In crystallography a similar end has been reached already by means
of certain hypothetic assumptions, and systematics has here accounted
for the limited number and fixed character of the possible forms of
crystalline symmetry.
It is not difficult to understand the general logical type of all
rational systems, and logic indeed can discover it without appealing
to concrete sciences or to geometry. Rational systematics is always
possible whenever there exists any fundamental concept or proposition
which carries with it a principle of division; or to express it somewhat
differently, which would lead to contradictions, if division were to
be tried in any but one particular manner. The so-called “genus,” as
will easily be perceived, then embraces all its “species” in such a
manner that all peculiarities of the species are represented already in
properties of the genus, only in a more general form, in a form which
is still unspecified. The genus is both richer in content and richer in
extent than are the species, though it must be added that its richness
in content is, as it were, only latent: but it may come into actuality
by itself and without any help from without.
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