FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234  
235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   >>  
every concomitant but one, he would have attained complete proof on the principle of Single Difference. But this being impracticable, he followed a course which approximated to the method of eliminating every circumstance but one from instances of dew, and every circumstance but one in the instances of no-dew. Mill sums up as follows the results of his experiments: "It appears that the instances in which much dew is deposited, which are very various, agree in this, and, _so far as we are able to observe, in this only_, that they either radiate heat rapidly or conduct it slowly: qualities between which there is no other circumstance of agreement than that by virtue of either, the body tends to lose heat from the surface more rapidly than it can be restored from within. The instances, on the contrary, in which no dew, or but a small quantity of it, is formed, and which are also extremely various, agree (_as far as we can observe_) _in nothing except_ in _not_ having this same property. We seem therefore to have detected the characteristic difference between the substances on which the dew is produced, and those on which it is not produced. And thus have been realised the requisitions of what we have termed the Indirect Method of Difference, or the Joint Method of Agreement and Difference." The Canon of this Method is accordingly stated by Mill as follows:-- If two or more instances in which the phenomenon occurs have only one circumstance in common, while two or more instances in which it does not occur have nothing in common save the absence of that circumstance; the circumstance in which alone the two sets of instances differ, is the effect, or the cause, or an indispensable part of the cause, of the phenomenon. In practice, however, this theoretical standard of proof is never attained. What investigators really proceed upon is the presumption afforded, to use Prof. Bain's terms, by Agreement in Presence combined with Agreement in Absence. When it is found that all substances which have a strong smell agree in being readily oxidisable, and that the marsh gas or carbonetted hydrogen which has no smell is not oxidisable at common temperatures, the presumption that oxidation is one of the causal circumstances in smell is strengthened, even though we have not succeeded in eliminating every circumstance but this one from either the positive or the negative instances. So in the following examples g
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   210   211   212   213   214   215   216   217   218   219   220   221   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234  
235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246   247   248   249   >>  



Top keywords:

instances

 

circumstance

 

common

 
Method
 
Agreement
 

Difference

 

observe

 
rapidly
 

phenomenon

 

presumption


oxidisable

 

produced

 

substances

 
attained
 

eliminating

 

standard

 

theoretical

 
investigators
 

afforded

 
proceed

occurs

 
complete
 

differ

 

absence

 
effect
 

practice

 

indispensable

 

Presence

 

circumstances

 

strengthened


causal

 

oxidation

 

temperatures

 

succeeded

 
examples
 

positive

 
negative
 
hydrogen
 
Absence
 

combined


principle

 

carbonetted

 

concomitant

 
strong
 

readily

 

virtue

 

agreement

 
surface
 

method

 
contrary