|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Home : Other Subjects : Philosophy Study Guides : John Stuart Mill : A System of Logic: Raciocinative and Inductive
A System of Logic: Raciocinative and Inductive
Summary
A System of Logic was first published
in 1843 and immediately enjoyed a wide circulation, going through
numerous editions. Mill himself made substantial changes in the
third edition, published in 1850, and the eighth edition, published
in 1872, a year before his death. This book is Mill’s most comprehensive
and systematic philosophical work, elaborating his inductive method,
which helped to free the empirical sciences from the rigidity of
analysis by way of syllogisms. Syllogisms are arguments grounded
in general principles, in which two premises are used to deduce
a third premise, or conclusion. In A System of Logic,
Mill breaks away from this age-old practice and instead proposes
the use of a form of logic derived from the principles of the natural
sciences. He uses his method to address questions of language and
logic, induction, the relativity of knowledge, the structure of
the scientific method, the structure of arithmetic and geometry,
and the principles of the moral sciences. In effect, Mill provides
a solid, scientific methodology for reasoning and for philosophy,
derived from science and mathematics.
The introduction discusses the role and purpose of logic
in human understanding. Logic is the art and science of reasoning,
a means for the pursuit of truth. However, logic is only concerned with
making inferences from observed phenomena, not with intuitive truths.
Logic does not produce new evidence, but it can determine whether
something offered as evidence is valid. Logic judges but does not
observe, invent, or discover. Logic serves a purpose in some larger
project of inquiry that gives it meaning. Fundamentally, logic is
a method of evaluating evidence.
Book I defines logic as a method of proof. Proof always
involves an assertion or proposition that must be proven. A proposition
is a discourse that either affirms or denies something about some
other thing. Thus, a proposition is a belief that depends on the
ability to attach a name to something. When two names are joined
together by a copula (“the sun is bright”), they form the proposition.
Mill proceeds to examine the nature of predicates, which are properties that
can be said to be possessed by substances. Predicates include such
things as joy, fear, sound, smell, taste, pain, pleasure, thought, judgment,
and conception. Mill suggests that feelings or states of consciousness
are realities; that is, they are neither substances nor attributes.
Mill proceeds to examine volition and action, substance and attribute,
body, mind, quality, relation, resemblance, quantity, states of
consciousness, and attributes of mind.
Book II discusses the place of logic within the field
of knowledge, specifically denying that logic is related to metaphysics
and stating that preconceived notions and speculative thought are
foreign to the workings of logic, since they suggest that logic
be reduced to consistency rather than truth. In book II, Mill opens
up logic to include the various fields of science and knowledge
and denies logic any kind of restrictive structure.
Book III introduces Mill’s inductive method. An inductive inquiry
begins with the analysis of things according to their elements.
The first step in induction is the separation of a thing into its various
elements through a process of experimentation and observation. Mill
proceeds to examine the relationship between cause and effect and
concludes that one effect may have several causes. Mill distinguishes
between complex and compound effects, which brings him to examine
the nature of generalizations and probable evidence, operations
which, he says, are more useful in life than in science.
Book IV discusses the need for a philosophical language
that would further the practice of induction by helping us to accurately observe,
record, and communicate. Such a language must have a steady and
determinate meaning for every general name, since names often have
unclear connotations. Book V deals with various fallacies that must
be resolved before logic can be firmly grounded. These include the
fallacies of confusion; of ambiguous words; and the petitio
principii, which states that the premise either appears
to be the same as the conclusion or is proved from the conclusion.
Mill concludes that this argument is a fallacy because it is nothing
more than a circular argument, since the attempt is to prove two
propositions reciprocally from one another leads nowhere.
Book VI argues that the “moral sciences,” meaning the
study of ethics and human nature, require the same logical structure
as the physical sciences. A discussion of the concepts of liberty,
causation, and necessity as they apply to human affairs leads Mill
to conclude that human nature is governed by scientific principles
that logic can lay bare and that can be used to promote happiness.
Mill argues that human psychology and behavior are governed by universal
laws, as is the formation of each person’s ethical character. However,
these laws cannot be studied directly, through experiment and observation,
but can only be known deductively. Mill considers various scientific
methods and the extent to which they may be applied to the social
sciences. Although many of the methods of the natural sciences do
not work for the social sciences, the methods of induction may still
be applied to understand causes and effects, such as the effects
of a given policy or legislative act. The social sciences can also be
approached deductively, by starting with a priori laws of human nature
and reasoning based on them. Mill divides the social sciences into
two branches: those in which the causes and effects of human behavior
are studied in a context that is assumed to be stable, and those
sciences that examine progress and historical change. Analysis
The most innovative aspect of A System of Logic is
its rigorous, systematic explanation of induction. This explanation
is a particularly impressive accomplishment given how unscientific
and unsystematic induction seems to be at first glance, especially
in comparison with the certainty of a deduction or syllogism. For
example, in the famous syllogism, “All men are mortal. Socrates
is a man. Socrates must be mortal,” if you know for certain that
all men are mortal and that Socrates is a man, you can be very certain
of your conclusion—that Socrates will die at some point. However,
if you work in the reverse direction, which induction requires you
to do, you get a much less certain answer. Socrates died, and Socrates
was a man, so perhaps all men are mortal—but maybe not. The fact
that Socrates’ friends Diabetes and Bursitis also died can be offered
as further evidence that all men are mortal, but it still doesn’t
prove it. Nevertheless, for those who believe that all our ideas
come from experience, induction is the source of every general principle
that we think we know, so induction is the foundation on which deduction
is based. |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions | About
©2006 SparkNotes LLC, All Rights Reserved.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||