Vietnam or Thailand ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
Updated: June 15, 2025
Uniformities there are, as well of coexistence as of succession, among effects; but these must in all cases be a mere result either of the identity or of the coexistence of their causes: if the causes did not coexist, neither could the effects.
It needs scarcely be observed, that,—if direct observation and collation of instances have furnished us with any empirical laws of the effect, whether true in all observed cases or only true for the most part,—the most effectual verification of which the theory could be susceptible would be, that it led deductively to those empirical laws; that the uniformities, whether complete or incomplete, which were observed to exist among the phenomena, were accounted for by the laws of the causes—were such as could not but exist if those be really the causes by which the phenomena are produced.
We have therefore to distinguish the fact that past uniformities cause expectations as to the future, from the question whether there is any reasonable ground for giving weight to such expectations after the question of their validity has been raised.
In zoology, for example, there is an immense number of uniformities ascertained, some of co-existence, others of succession, to many of which, notwithstanding considerable variations of the attendant circumstances, we know not any exception: but the antecedents, for the most part, are such as we can not artificially produce; or if we can, it is only by setting in motion the exact process by which nature produces them; and this being to us a mysterious process, of which the main circumstances are not only unknown but unobservable, we do not succeed in obtaining the antecedents under known circumstances.
What are the fewest general propositions from which all the uniformities existing in nature could be deduced? The laws, thus explained or resolved, are sometimes said to be accounted for; but the expression is incorrect, if taken to mean anything more than what has been already stated.
Many of the uniformities existing among phenomena are so constant, and so open to observation, as to force themselves upon involuntary recognition.
We do not know the essence of phenomena, and just as little their first causes and ultimate ends; we know by means of observation, experiment, and comparison only the constant relations between phenomena, the relations of succession and of similarity among facts, the uniformities of which we call their laws.
Uniformities cannot be proved by the Method of Agreement alone to be laws of causation; they must be tested by the Method of Difference, or explained deductively. But laws of causation themselves are either ultimate or derivative. Consequently they come under the definition of Empirical Laws, equally with uniformities not known to be laws of causation.
Certain causes being given, that is, certain antecedents which are unconditionally followed by certain consequents; the mere co-existence of these causes will give rise to an unlimited number of additional uniformities.
In short, every advance in a science takes us farther away from the crude uniformities which are first observed, into greater differentiation of antecedent and consequent, and into a continually wider circle of antecedents recognised as relevant. The principle "same cause, same effect," which philosophers imagine to be vital to science, is therefore utterly otiose.
Word Of The Day
Others Looking