John Stuart Mill

第13章

Thecogencyoftheargumentdependsupontheapplicabilityoftheruletothefact。Ifmenbenotmortal,or,again,ifSocratesbenotaman,theinferenceisnotvalid;andthesetwodistinctissues,theissueoflawandtheissueoffact,mayberaisedinanycase。(27*)Thevalueofthesyllogismisthatitraisestheseissuesdistinctly。Theargumentisthusputinsuchaformastobeabsolutelyconclusiveifthepremisesbethemselvesgranted。

Itthereforeprovidesatestofthevalidityofthelogic。

Grantingthepremises,adenialoftheinferencemustinvolveacontradiction。Thatistheonlytestinpurelogic。Thesyllogismmust,therefore,beinasensetautologous,forotherwiseitcouldnotbeconclusive。Acceptanceo?thepremisesmustbeshownfromtheformofstatementtonecessitatetheadmissionoftheinference。Thisfollows,andthelogicallinkiscompleteandirrefragable,ifthemiddletermbeidenticalinbothpremises,andnototherwise。ThisiswhatMillindicatesbysayingthat’therulesofthesyllogismarerulesforcompellingapersontobeawareofthewholeofwhathemustundertaketodefendifhepersistsinmaintaininghisconclusion。’(28*)Ratiocination,ashesumsuphisviewelsewhere,’doesnotconsistofsyllogisms’;

butthesyllogismisausefulformulaintowhichitcan’translateitsreasonings,’andsoguaranteetheircorrectness。(29*)Ifthisbegranted,wemustconsidertheessentialstepofinferencetobeembodiedin,butnotcreatedby,thesyllogism。Correctreasoningcanalwaysbethrownintothisform。Thesyllogismemergeswhenthereasoningiscomplete。

’Theuseofthesyllogismisnoother,’saysMill,’thantheuseofgeneralpropositionsinreasoning。’Itisasecurityforcorrectgeneralisation。(30*)Wehave,then,stilltoaskwhatisthereasoningprocessforwhichthesyllogismprovidesatest。

Generalisationimpliesclassification。Ourgeneralruleormajorpremisestatessomepropertyofaclasstowhichtheindividualbelongs。Thequestionishowthisreferencetoaclassenablesustodrawinferenceswhichwecouldnotdrawfromtheindividualcase。TothisMillgivesasimpleanswer,whichisalreadyimpliedinhistheoryofpredication。WhenIsaythatSocratesisaman,Isaythathehastheattributesconnotedbythename。Heisarational,featherlessbiped,forexample。ButIalreadyknowbyobservationthatwiththeseattributesgoestheattributeofmortality。Theessenceofthereasoningprocessisthereforethat,fromthepossessionofcertainattributes,Iinferthepossessionofanotherattributewhichhascoexistedwiththempreviously。ThatIdo,infact,reasoninthiswayincountlesscasesisundeniable。Iknowthatacertainquality,saymalleability,goesalongwithotherqualitiesofcolour,shape,andsoforth,bywhichIrecogniseasubstanceasgold。Ican,itmaybe,givenootherreasonforbelievingthefutureconjunctionofthosequalitiesthanthefactoftheirpreviousconjunction。

Thebelief,thatis,isasamatteroffactgeneratedsimplybythepreviouscoincidenceorcorrespondstoconstantassociation。

Whetherthisexhauststhewholelogicalsignificancemaystillbedisputed;but,atanyrate,uponthesetermswecanescapefromthechargeoftautology。Theruleinthemajorpremiseregistersanumberofpreviousexperiencesofcoexistence。Whenwenoticesomeoftheattributesinagivencase,wemakeanadditiontoourknowledgebyapplyingtherule,thatis,byinferringthatanotherattributemaybeaddedtotheobservedattributes。This,then,givesarationalaccountoftheadvanceinknowledgemadethroughthesyllogisminthecasewheretheclasscanbedefinedasasimplesumofattributes。

Butisthisanadequateaccountofthereasoningprocessingeneral?ThereisanotherviewwhichsuggesteddifficultiestoMill。Hissolutionofthesedifficulties,marked,aswelearnfromtheAutobiography,anessentialstageinthedevelopmentofhisdoctrine。Referencetoaclassis,uponhisinterpretation,impliedinthesyllogism;andclassificationimpliesdefinition。

Aclassmeansallthingswhichhaveacertainlistofattributesstatedinthedefinition。Maywenottheninferotherpropertiesfromthedefinition?Maynotmortality,forexample,bededuciblefromtheotherattributesofman?Theassumptionthatwecandosoisconnectedwiththefallacymostcharacteristicofthemisuseofthesyllogism。Itisplainthatwemaycreateasmanyclassesasweplease,andmakenamesforcombinationsofattributeswhichhavenoactual,orevennopossible,existence。

Anyinferenceswhichwemakeonthestrengthofsuchclassificationmustbenugatoryorsimplytautologous。Ishowthatacertainpropositionfollowsfrommydefinition;butthatgivesnoguaranteeforitsconformitytotherealitiesbehindthedefinition。Your’proof’thatamanismortalmeanssimplythatifheisnotmortalyoudon’tcallhimaman。Thesyllogismtreatedonthatsystembecomessimplyanelaborateseriesofdevicesforbeggingthequestion。Fromsuchmethodsariseallthefutilitiesofscholasticism,andthedoctrineofessenceswhich,thoughLockeconfutedit,(31*)has’neverceasedtopoisonphilosophy。’(32*)Itmay,Isuppose,betakenforgrantedthatthesyllogismwasconstantlyappliedtocoversuchfallacies,andsofarMillisonsafeground。Thetheory,however,leadshimtoacharacteristicpoint。Alreadyintheearlyreview(January1828),hehadcriticisedWhately’saccountofdefinition。A’realdefinition,’asWhatelyhadsaid,’explainsandunfolds“thenature“ofthethingdefined,whereasa“nominaldefinition“onlyexplainsthename。’Whatelygoesontopointoutthattheonlyrealdefinitionsinthissensearethemathematicaldefinitions。

Itisimpossibletodiscoverthepropertiesofathing,aman,oraplantfromthedefinition。Ifitwerepossible,wemightproceedto’evolveacamelfromthedepthsofourconsciousness,’

andnobodynowprofessestobeequaltothatfeat。When,however,we’define’acircleoralineandsoforth,wemakeassertionsfromwhichwecandeducethewholetheoryofgeometry。A

geometricalfigurerepresentsavastcomplexoftruths,mutuallyimplyingeachother,andalldeduciblefromafewsimpledefinitions。Themiddletermisnotthenameofasimplething,orofathingwhichhasacertainsetofcoexistingattributes,butawordexpressiveofawholesystemofreciprocalrelations。

Ifonepropertyentitlesmetosaythatacertainfigureisacircle,Iamvirtuallydeclaringthatithasinnumerableotherproperties,andIamthusabletomakeinferenceswhich,althoughimplicitlygiven,arenotperceivedtillexplicitlystated。Byassigningathingtoaclass,IsayinthiscasethatImaymakeanyoneofanindefinitenumberofpropositionsaboutit,allmutuallyimplyingeachother,andrequiringthehighestfacultiesforcombiningandevolving。Puremathematicsgivetheonegreatexampleofavastbodyoftruthsreachedbypurelydeductiveprocesses。Theyappeartobeevolvedfromcertainsimpleandself-evidenttruths。Canthey,then,beexplainedassimplyempirical?Doweknowthepropertiesofacircleasweknowthepropertiesofgold,simplybycombiningrecordsofpreviousexperience?Orcanweadmitthatthisgreatsystemoftruthisallevolvedoutof’definitions’?

MillscentsinWhately’sdoctrineataintofaprioriassumption,andaccordinglymeetsitbyadirectcontradiction。A

geometricaldefinition,hesays,isnomorea’real’definitionthanthedefinitionofacamel。Nodefinitionwhatevercan’unfoldthenature’ofathing。Hestatesthisinhisreview,thoughitwasatalaterperiod,(33*)whenmeditatinguponapassageofDugaldStewart,thatheperceivedthefullconsequencesofhisownposition。InansweringWhately,hehadsaidthatalldefinitionswere’nominal。’A’realdefinition’

meansthattothedefinitionproperweaddthestatementthatthereisathingcorrespondingtothename。(34*)Thedefinitionitselfisa’mereidenticalproposition,’fromwhichwecanlearnnothingastofacts。Butitmaybeaccompaniedbyapostulatewhich’covertlyassertsafact,’andfromthefactmayfollowconsequencesofanydegreeofimportance。Thisdistinctionbetweenthedefinitionandthepostulatemaybeexhibited,asheremarks,bysubstituting’means’for’is。’Ifwesay:acentaur’means’abeinghalfmanandhalfhorse,wegiveapuredefinition。Ifwesay:aman’is’afeatherlessbiped,ourstatementincludesthedefinition——man’means’featherlessbiped;butifwesaidnomore,noinferencecouldbemadeastofacts。Ifwearereallytoincreaseourknowledgebyusingthisdefinition,wemustaddthe’covert’assertionthatsuchfeatherlessbipedsexist。Themathematicalcaseisidentical,Stewarthadarguedthatgeometricalpropositionsfollowed,notfromtheaxiomsbut,fromthedefinitions。Fromthebareaxiomthatifequalsbeaddedtoequalsthewholesareequal,youcaninfernothing。Youmustalsoperceivetheparticularfigureswhicharecompared。Ofcoursethetruthoftheaxiomsmustbeadmitted;buttheydonotspecifythefirstprinciplesfromwhichgeometryisevolved。Inotherwords,geometryimplies’intuition,’nottheapriori’intuitions’towhichMillobjected,butthedirectperceptionofthespatialrelations。Wemustseethefigureaswellasadmittheself-evidentaxiom。

Mill,onconsideringthisargument,thoughtthatStewarthadstoppedatahalftruth。(35*)Heoughttohavegotridofthedefinitionsaswellastheaxioms。EverydemonstrationinEuclid,saysMill,mightbecarriedonwithoutthem。Whenwearguefromadiagraminwhichthereisacircle,wedonotreallyrefertocirclesingeneral,butonlytotheparticularcirclebeforeus。

Ifitsradiibeequalorapproximatelyequal,theconclusionsaretrue。Weafterwardsextendourreasoningtosimilarcases;butonlyoneinstanceisdemonstrated。Thedefinitionismerelya’noticetoourselvesandothers,’statingwhatassumptionswethinkourselvesentitledtomake;andinthiswayitresemblesthemajorinthesyllogism。Thedemonstrationdoesnot’dependupon’it,thoughifwedenyit,thedemonstrationfails。Bythisargument,Millconceivesthatthecaseofmathematicsisputonalevelwithothercases。Wealwaysarguefromfacts,andmoreoverfrom’particularfacts,’notfromdefinitions。Westartfromanobservationofthisparticularcircle——asensible’thing’orobject,asinarguingaboutnaturalhistorywestartfromobservationofthecamel。Hencewemaylaydownthegeneralproposition,applicabletogeometryaswellastoallordinaryobservation,that,allinferenceisfromparticularstoparticulars。’(36*)Thisisthe’foundation’bothofInduction,whichis’popularlysaid’toreasonfromparticularstogenerals,andofDeduction,whichissupposedtoreasonfromgeneralstoparticulars。(37*)ThissumsupMill’scharacteristicposition。

III。MATHEMATICALTRUTHS

ThisattempttobringallreasoningtothesametypeforcesMilltoignorewhattoothersseemstobeoftheessenceofthecase。Thereare,hesays,twostatements:’Theremayexistafigureboundedbythreestraightlines’;thatisthefruitfulstatementoffacts。’Thisfigureiscalledatriangle’;thatisthemerelynominaldefinitionorexplanationofwords。Moreover,ashesays,wemaydropthedefinitionbysubstitutingtheequivalentwordsorsimplylookingatthething。Itdoesnotfollowthatwecandispensewiththemodeofapprehensionimpliedbythedefinition。Whetherweusethewordtriangle,orthewords,’threelinesenclosingaspace,’ornowordsatall,wemustequallyhavetheconceptionsorintuitionsoflinesandspace。Alldemonstrationingeometryconsistsinmentallyrearrangingacombinationoflinesandanglessoastoshowthatonefiguremaybemadetocoincideabsolutelywithanotherfigure。Theoriginalfactremainsunaltered,butthewaysofapprehendingthefactareinnumerable。NewtonandhisdogDiamondmightbothseethesamecircularthing;buttoDiamondthecirclewasasimpleroundobject;toNewtonitwasalsoacomplexsystemofrelatedlines,capableofbeingsoregardedastoembodyavastvarietyofelaborateformulae。(38*)Geometry,asMillundeniablysays,dealswithfacts。NewtonandDiamondhavepreciselythesamefactbeforethem。Itremainsthesame,whetherwestopatthesimpleststageorproceedtothemostcomplexevolutionofgeometry。ThedifferencebetweentheobserversisnotthatNewtonhasseennewfacts,butthatheseesmoreinthesamefact。Thechangeisnotinthethingsbutinthemind,which,bygroupingthethingsinthewaypointedoutbythedefinitions,isabletodiscovercountlessnewrelationsinvolvedinthesameperception。Thisagainmaysuggestthateventhefactrevealedtosimpleperceptionisnotabare’fact,’something,asMillputsit,’externaltothemind,’butisinsomesenseitselfconstitutedbythefacultyofperception。Itcontainsalreadythegermofthewholeintellectualevolution。Thechangeisnotinthethingperceived,butinthemodeofperceiving。And,therefore,again,wedonotacquirenewknowledge,asweacquireitinthephysicalsciences,byobservingnewfacts,discoveringresemblancesanddifferences,andgeneralisingfromthepropertiescommontoall;butbycontemplatingthesamefact。Allgeometryisinanyparticularspace——ifonlywecanfindit。Wedonotproceedbycomparinganumberofdifferentregionsofspaces,andinquirewhetherFrenchtriangleshavethesamepropertiesasEnglishtriangles。ToMill,however,thestatementthatgeometrydealswithfactleadstoanotherconclusion。Wemustdealwiththesefactsaswithotherfacts,andfollowthemethodofothernaturalsciences。Wereallyproceedinthesamewaywhetherweareinvestigatingthepropertiesofanellipseoracamel。Ineithercasewemustdiscovertruthbyexperience。

字体大小
背景颜色