CHAPTER IV.

LAWS OF NATURE.

The uniformity of the course of nature is a complex fact made up of all

the separate uniformities in respect to single phenomena. Each of these

separate uniformities, if it be not a mere case of and result from

others, is a law of nature; for, though _law_ is used for any general

proposition expressing a uniformity, _law of nature_ is restricted to

cases where it has been thought that a separate act of creative will is

necessary to account for the uniformity. Laws of nature, in the

aggregate, are the fewest general propositions from which all the

uniformities in the universe might be deducted. Science is ever tending

to resolve one law into a higher. Thus, Kepler's three propositions,

since having been resolved by Newton into, and shown to be cases of the

three laws of motion, may be indeed called laws, but not laws of nature.

Since every correct inductive generalisation is either a law of nature,

or a result from one, the problem of inductive logic is to unravel the

web of nature, tracing each thread separately, with the view, 1, of

ascertaining what are the _several_ laws of nature, and, 2, of following

them into their results. But it is impossible to frame a scientific

method of induction, or test of inductions, unless, unlike Descartes, we

start with the hypothesis that some trustworthy inductions have been

already ascertained by man's involuntary observation. These spontaneous

generalisations must be revised; and the same principle which common

sense has employed to revise them, correcting the narrower by the wider

(for, in the end, experience must be its own test), serves also, only

made more precise, as the real type of scientific induction. As

preliminary to the employment of this test, nature must be surveyed,

that we may discover which are respectively the invariable and the

variable inductions at which man has already arrived unscientifically.

Then, by connecting these different ascertained inductions with one

another through ratiocination, they become mutually confirmative, the

strongest being made still stronger when bound up with the weaker, and

the weakest at least as strong as the weakest of those from which they

are deduced (as in the case of the Torricellian experiment) while those

leading deductively to incompatible consequences become each other's

test, showing that one must be given up (e.g. the old farmers' bad

induction that seed never throve if not sown during the increase of the

moon). It is because a survey of the uniformities ascertained to exist

in nature makes it clear that there are certain and universal

uniformities serving as premisses whence crowds of lower inductions may

be deduced, and so be raised to the same degree of certainty, that a

logic of induction is possible.

Analysis of Mr. Mill's System of Logic · 第 4 / 21 章