| In order to understand the
true value and character of the Positive Philosophy, we must
take a brief general view of the progressive course of the
human mind, regarded as a whole; for no conception can be
understood otherwise than through its history.
Law of human progress--From the study of the
development of human intelligence, in all directions, and
through all times, the[re] . . . arises . . . a great
fundamental law. . . . The law is this: that each of our
leading conceptions, --each branch of our knowledge,
--passes successively through three different theoretical
conditions: the Theological, or fictitious; the
Metaphysical, or abstract; and the Scientific, or positive.
In other words, the human mind, by its nature, employs in
its progress three methods of philosophizing, the character
of which is essentially different, and even radically
opposed: viz., the theological method, the metaphysical, and
the positive. Hence arise three philosophies, or general
systems of conceptions on the aggregate of phenomena, each
of which excludes the others. The first is the necessary
point of departure of the human understanding; and the third
is its fixed and definitive state. The second is merely a
state of transition.
First stage. --In the theological state, the human
mind, seeking the essential nature of beings, the first and
final causes (the origin and purpose) of all effects, --in
short, Absolute knowledge, --supposes all phenomena to be
produced by the immediate action of supernatural beings.
Second stage. --In the metaphysical state, which
is only a modification of the first, the mind supposes,
instead of supernatural beings, abstract forces, veritable
entities (that is, personified abstractions) inherent in all
beings, and capable of producing all phenomena. What is
called the explanation of phenomena is, in this stage, a
mere reference of each to its proper entity.
Third stage. --In the final, the positive state,
the mind has given over the vain search after Absolute
notions, the origin and destination of the universe, and
causes of phenomena, and applies itself to the study of
their laws, --that is, their invariable relations of
succession and resemblance. Reasoning and observation, duly
combined, are the means of this knowledge. What is now
understood when we speak of an explanation of facts is
simply the establishment of a connection between single
phenomena and some general facts, the number of which
continually diminishes with the progress of science.
...
Character of the Positive Philosophy . . . [T]he
Positive Philosophy . . . regards all phenomena as subjected
to invariable natural Laws. Our business is, --seeing
how vain is any research into what are called Causes,
whether first or final, --to pursue an accurate discovery of
these Laws, with a view to reducing them to the smallest
possible number. By speculating upon causes, we could solve
no difficulty about origin and purpose. Our real business is
to analyse accurately the circumstances of phenomena, and to
connect them by the natural relations of succession and
resemblance. The best illustration of this is in the case of
the doctrine of Gravitation. We say that the general
phenomena of the universe are explained by it,
because it connects under one head the whole immense variety
of astronomical facts; exhibiting the constant tendency of
atoms towards each other in direct proportion to their
masses, and in inverse proportion to the squares of their
distances; whilst the general fact itself is a mere
extension of one which is perfectly familiar to us, and
which we therefore say that we know; --the weight of bodies
on the surface of the earth. As to what weight and
attraction are, we have nothing to do with that, for it is
not a matter of knowledge at all. Theologians and
metaphysicians may imagine and refine about such questions;
but positive philosophy rejects them. When any attempt has
been made to explain them, it has ended only in saying that
attraction is universal weight, and that weight is
terrestrial attraction; that is, that the two orders of
phenomena are identical; which is the point from which the
question set out. . . .
...
The Positive Philosophy offers the only solid basis for
that Social Reorganization which must succeed the critical
condition in which the most civilized nations are now
living.
It cannot be necessary to prove to anybody . . . that
Ideas govern the world, or throw into chaos; in other words,
that all social mechanism rests upon [mere] Opinions. The
great political and moral crisis that societies are now
undergoing . . . arise[s] out of intellectual anarchy. . . .
Now, the existing disorder is abundantly accounted for by
the [incongruous co-]existence, all at once, of three
incompatible philosophies, --the theological, the
metaphysical, and the positive. Any one of these might alone
secure some sort of social order; but while the three
co-exist, it is impossible. . . . The positive philosophy
has hitherto intervened only to examine both [the
theological and metaphysical philosophies], and both are
abundantly discredited by the process [of this examination].
It is time now to be doing something more effective, without
wasting our forces in needless controversy. It is time to
complete the vast intellectual operation begun by Bacon,
Descartes, and Galileo, by constructing a system of general
ideas which must henceforth prevail among the human race.
This is the way to put an end to the revolutionary crisis
which is tormenting the civilized nations of the world. |
