Copernicus admitted, “It is not necessary that hypotheses should be
true, or even probable; it is sufficient that they lead to results
of calculation which agree with calculations. * * Neither let any
one, so far as hypotheses are concerned, expect anything _certain_
from astronomy; since that science can afford nothing of the kind;
lest, in case he should adopt for truth things feigned for another
purpose, he should leave this study more foolish than he came. * * The
hypothesis of the terrestrial motion was _nothing but an hypothesis_,
valuable only so far as it explained phenomena, and not considered
with reference to absolute truth or falsehood.” The Newtonian and all
other “systems of nature” are little better than the “hypothesis of
the terrestrial motion” of Copernicus. The foundations or premises are
always unproved; no proof is ever attempted; the necessity for it is
denied; it is considered sufficient that the assumptions shall _seem_
to explain the phenomena selected. In this way it is that one theory
supplants another; that system gives way to system as one failure after
another compels opinions to change. This will ever be so; there will
always exist in the mind a degree of uncertainty; a disposition to look
upon philosophy as a vain pretension; a something almost antagonistic
to the highest aspirations in which humanity can indulge, unless the
practice of theorising be given up, and the method of simple inquiry,
the “zetetic” process be adopted. “Nature speaks to us in a peculiar
language; in the language of phenomena, she answers at all times the
questions which are put to her; and such questions are experiments.”[2]
Not experiments only which corroborate what has previously been
_assumed_ to be true; but experiments in every form bearing on the
subject of inquiry, before a conclusion is drawn or premises affirmed.
[2] “Liebig’s Agricultural Chemistry,” p. 39.
We have an excellent example of zetetic reasoning in an arithmetical
operation; more especially so in what is called the “Golden Rule,” or
the “Rule-of-Three.” If one hundred weight of any article is worth a
given sum, what will some other weight of that article be worth? The
separate figures may be considered as the elements or facts of the
inquiry; the placing and working of these as the logical arrangement;
and the quotient or answer as the fair and natural deduction. Hence,
in every zetetic process, the conclusion arrived at is essentially a
quotient, which, if the details be correct, must, of necessity, be true
beyond the reach or power of contradiction.
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