on laws of mind and character (psychology and ethology). When those
laws are known and the nature of the dependence is explained, when the
determining causes of all the changes constituting the progress are
understood, then the empirical law will be elevated to a scientific law,
then only will it be possible to predict.

Thus Mill asserted that if the advanced thinkers who are engaged on
the subject succeed in discovering an empirical law from the data of
history, it may be converted into a scientific law by deducing it a
priori from the principles of human nature. In the meantime, he argued
that what is already known of those principles justifies the important
conclusion that the order of general human progression will mainly
depend on the order of progression in the intellectual convictions of
mankind.

Throughout his exposition Mill uses "progress" in a neutral sense,
without implying that the progression necessarily means improvement.
Social science has still to demonstrate that the changes determined by
human nature do mean improvement. But in warning the reader of this
he declares himself to be personally an optimist, believing that the
general tendency, saving temporary exceptions, is in the direction of a
better and happier state.

8.

Twenty years later [Footnote: In later editions of the Logic.] Mill was
able to say that the conception of history as subject to general
laws had "passed into the domain of newspaper and ordinary political
discussion." Buckle's HISTORY OF CIVILISATION IN ENGLAND [Footnote: 2
Vol. i. appeared in 1857, vol. ii. in 1861.] which enjoyed an immediate
success, did a great deal to popularise the idea. In this stimulating
work Buckle took the fact of Progress for granted; his purpose was to
investigate its causes. Considering the two general conditions on which
all events depend, human nature and external nature, he arrived at two
conclusions: (1) In the early stage of history the influence of man's
external environment is the more decisive factor; but as time goes on
the roles are gradually inverted, and now it is his own nature that is
principally responsible for his development. (2) Progress is determined,
not by the emotional and moral faculties, but by the intellect;
[Footnote: This was the view of Jouffroy, Comte, and Mill; Buckle
popularised it.] the emotional and moral faculties are stationary, and
therefore religion is not a decisive influence in the onward movement
of human