第40章
类别:
其他
作者:
佚名字数:5915更新时间:18/12/27 08:44:23
Ofcourse,nothingbutthemostmeagreandsketchiestoutlineofthismatterispracticableinthisplace,andeventhatonlyinitsrelationtothemachineindustryduringthepastonehundredyearsorso。WhatissaidaboveoftheBritishleadinmodernsciencemayperhapsbequestioned,anditisnotnecessaryforthepresentpurposetoinsistonitstruth;butsomuchseemsbeyondhazardasthattheleadinthematerialscienceslaywiththeBritishthroughtheearlymachineage,andthattheprovenanceofthismodernscientificresearchto-daydoesnotextend,inanypronounceddegree,beyondthosecommunitiesthatliewithintheareaofthemodernmachineindustry。
Intimeandspacetheprevalenceofthemodernmaterialisticscienceisroughlyextensivewiththatofthemachineprocess。Itis,nodoubt,relatedtoitbothascauseandaseffect;butthatitsrelationtomodernindustryismorethatofeffectthancauseseemsatleastbroadlysuggestedbythedecaywhichpresentlyovertookscientificresearch,e。g。,inthesouthofEuropewhenthosepeoplesturnedtheirattentionfrommaterialtospiritualandpoliticalaffairs。(28*)
Whatisofimmediateinterestisthechangethathascomeoverthescopeandmethodofscientificresearchsincethedominanceofthemachineprocess,incomparisonwithwhatprecededthecomingofthemachineage。Thebeginningsofmodernscienceareolderthantheindustrialrevolution;theprinciplesofscientificresearch(causalexplanationandexactmeasurement)
antedatetheregimeofthemachineprocess。Butachangehastakenplaceinthepostulatesandanimusofscientificresearchsincemodernsciencefirstbegan,andthischangeinthepostulatesofscientificknowledgeisrelatedtothegrowthofthemachinetechnology。
ItisunnecessaryheretoharkbacktothatscholasticscienceorphilosophythatservedasanintellectualexpressionoftheecclesiasticalandpoliticalcultureoftheMiddleAges。
Itscharacter,ascomparedwithlaterscience,issufficientlynotorious。Bythechangefromscholasticknowledgetomodernscience,totheextenttowhichthechangewascarriedthrough,theprinciple(habitofmind)ofadequatecausewassubstitutedforthatofsufficientreason。Thelawofcausationasitisfoundatwork,inthematurerscienceoftheeighteenthandearlynineteenthcenturies,comprisestwodistinguishablepostulates:
(1)equality(quantitativeequivalence)ofcauseandeffect;and(2)similarity(qualitativeequivalence)ofcauseandeffect。Theformermay,withoutforcingit,bereferredtocommercialaccountancyasitsanalogueinpracticallifeandastheprobableculturalgroundoutofwhichthehabitofinsistingonaninviolablequantitativeequivalencegatheredconsistency。Theascendancyofthelatterseemsinasimilarmannertobereferabletotheprevalenceofhandicraftasitsculturalground。
Statednegatively,itassertsthatnothingappearsintheeffectbutwhatwascontainedinthecause,inamannerwhichsuggeststherulethatnothingappearsintheproductofhandicraftbutwhatwaspresentintheskilloftheartificer。“Naturalcauses,“
whicharemademuchofinthismiddleperiodofmodernscience,areconceivedtoworkaccordingtocertain“naturallaws。“Thesenaturallaws,lawsofthe“normalcourse“ofthings,arefelttotendtoarationalendandtohavesomethingofacoerciveforce。
SothatNaturemakesnomistakes,Naturedoesnothinginvain,Naturetakesthemosteconomicalcoursetoitsend,Naturemakesnojumps,etc。Underthislawofnaturalcausationeveryeffectmusthaveacausewhichresemblesitintheparticularrespectwhichclaimstheinquirer’sattention。Amongotherconsequencesofthisviewitfollowsthat,sincethedetailsaswellasthewholeofthematerialuniverseareconstruedtoshowadaptationtoapreconceivedend,this“naturalorder“ofthingsmustbetheoutcomeofpreexistentdesignresidinginthe“firstcause,“
whichispostulatedbyvirtueofthisimputeddesignandisdesignatedthe“GreatArtificer。“Thereisanelementofconationinthisoriginalmodernpostulateofcauseandeffect。Theshadowoftheartificer,withhisintelligenceandmanualskill,isforeverinthebackgroundoftheconceptsofnaturallaw。The“cause“dealtwithinagivencaseisnotthoughtofasaneffect;andtheeffectistreatedasafinality,notasaphaseofacomplexsequenceofcausation。Whensuchasequenceisunderinquiry;asintheearlier,pre-Darwiniantheoriesofevolution,itisnothandledasacumulativesequencewhosecharactermayblindlychangefrombettertoworse,orconversely,atanypoint;
butratherasanunfoldingofacertainprimecauseinwhichiscontained,implicitly,allthatpresentlyappearsinexplicitform。
Intheconceptionofthecausalrelationasitmaybeseenatworkahundredyearsago,causeandeffectarefelttostandoveragainstoneanother,sothatthecausecontrols,determinestheeffectbytransmittingitsowncharactertoit。Thecauseistheproducer,theeffecttheproduct。Relativelylittleemphasisorinterestfallsupontheprocessoutofwhichtheproductemerges;
theinterestbeingcentreduponthelatteranditsrelationtotheefficientcauseoutofwhichithascome。Thetheoriesconstructedundertheguidanceofthisconceptionaregeneralizationsastoanequivalencebetweentheproducingcauseandtheeffect-product。Thecause“makes“theeffect,inmuchthesamesenseasthecraftsmanisapprehendedtomakethearticleonwhichheisengaged。Thereisafeltdistinctionbetweenthecauseandtheenvironingcircumstances,muchasthereisbetweentheworkmanontheonehandandhistoolsandmaterialsontheotherhand。Theinterveningprocessissimplythemanneroffunctioningoftheefficientcause,muchastheworkman’sworkisthefunctioningoftheworkmanintheintervalbetweentheinceptionandthecompletionoftheproduct。Theeffectissubsequenttothecause,astheworkman’sproductissubsequenttoandconsequentuponhisputtingforthhisproductiveefficiency。Itisarelationofbeforeandafter,inwhichtheprocesscomesinforattentionascoveringandaccountingforthetimeintervalwhich,inanalogywithworkmanlikeendeavor,isrequiredforthefunctioningoftheefficientcause。(29*)
Butastimepassesandhabituationtotheexigenciesofthemachinetechnologygainsinrangeandconsistency,thequasi-personal,handicraftconceptionofcausationdecays,-
firstandmostnotablyinthosematerial,inorganicsciencesthatstandintheclosestrelationtothemechanicaltechnology,butpresentlyalsointheorganicsciences,andeveninthemoralsciences。Themachinetechnologyisamechanicalormaterialprocess,andrequirestheattentiontobecentreduponthisprocessandtheexigenciesoftheprocess。Insuchaprocessnoonefactorstandsoutasunequivocallytheefficientcauseinthecase,whosepersonalcharacter,sotospeak,istransfusedintotheproduct,andtowhoseworkingstherestofthecomplexofcausesarerelatedonlyassubsidiaryorconditioningcircumstances。Tothetechnologisttheprocesscomesnecessarilytocount,notsimplyastheintervaloffunctioningofaninitialefficientcause,butasthesubstantialfactthatengageshisattention。Helearnstothinkintermsoftheprocess,ratherthanintermsofaproductivecauseandaproductbetweenwhichtheprocessintervenesinsuchamannerastoaffordatransitionfromonetotheother。Theprocessisalwayscomplex;alwaysadelicatelybalancedinterplayofforcesthatworkblindly,insensibly,heedlessly;inwhichanyappreciabledeviationmayforthwithcountinacumulativemanner,thefurtherconsequencesofwhichstandinnoorganicrelationtothepurposeforwhichtheprocesshasbeensetgoing。Theprimeefficientcausefalls,relatively,intothebackgroundandyieldsprecedencetotheprocessasthepointoftechnologicalinterest。
Thismachinetechnology,withitsaccompanyingdisciplineinmechanicaladaptationsandobject-lessons,cameongraduallyandrosetoadominatingplaceintheculturalenvironmentduringtheclosingyearsoftheeighteenthandthecourseofthenineteenthcentury;andasfastasmenlearnedtothinkintermsoftechnologicalprocess,theywentonatan。acceleratedpaceinthefurtherinventionofmechanicalprocesses,sothatfromthattimetheprogressofinventionshasbeenofacumulativecharacterandhascumulativelyheightenedthedisciplinaryforceofthemachineprocess。Thisearlytechnologicaladvance,ofcourse,tookplaceintheBritishcommunity,wherethemachineprocessfirstgainedheadwayandwherethedisciplineofaprevalentmachineindustryinculcatedthinkingintermsofthemachineprocess。SoalsoitwasintheBritishcommunitythatmodernsciencefellintothelinesmarkedoutbytechnologicalthinkingandbegantoformulateitstheoriesintermsofprocessratherthanintermsofprimecausesandthelike。Whilesomethingofthiskindisnoticeablerelativelyearlyinsomeoftheinorganicsciences,as,e。g。,Geology,thestrikinganddecisivemoveinthisdirectionwastakentowardthemiddleofthecenturybyDarwinandhiscontemporaries。(30*)Withoutmuchpreliminaryexpositionandwithoutfeeinghimselftobeoutoftouchwithhiscontemporaries,Darwinsettoworktoexplainspeciesintermsoftheprocessoutofwhichtheyhavearisen,ratherthanoutoftheprimecausetowhichthedistinctionbetweenthemmaybedue。(31*)DenyingnothingastothesubstantialservicesoftheGreatArtificerinthedevelopmentofspecies,hesimplyandnaivelyleftHimoutofthescheme,because,asbeingapersonalfactor,Hecouldnotbestatedandhandledintermsofprocess。SoDarwinofferedatentativeaccountofthedescentofman,withoutrecoursetodivineorhumandirectiveendeavorandwithoutinquiryastowhencemanultimatelycameandwhy,orastowhatfortunewouldultimatelyovertakehim。Hisinquirycharacteristicallyconfinesitselftotheprocessofcumulativechange。Hisresults,aswellashisspecificdeterminationofthefactorsatworkinthisprocessofcumulativechange,havebeenquestioned;perhapstheyareopentoallthecriticismslevelledagainstthemaswellastoafewmorenotyetthoughtof;butthescopeandmethodgiventoscientificinquirybyDarwinandthegenerationwhosespokesmanheishassubstantiallynotbeenquestioned,exceptbythatdiminishingcontingentofthefaithfulwhobyforceofspecialtrainingorbynativegiftarenotamenabletothedisciplineofthemachineprocess。Thecharacteristicallymodernsciencedoesnotinquireaboutprimecauses,designinnature,desirabilityofeffects,ultimateresults,oreschatologicalconsequences。
Ofthetwopostulatesofearliermodernscience,-thequantitativeequivalenceandthequalitativeequivalenceofcauseandeffect,-theformerhascomepracticallytosignifythebalancedarticulationoftheprocessofcumulativechange;theendeavorofthePositiviststoerectthiscanonofquantitativeequivalenceintothesolecanonofscientifictruth,andsotoreducescientifictheorytoasystemofaccountancy,havingfailed。Thelatterthesis,thatlikecausesproducelikeeffects,orthattheeffectis,insomesense,ofthesamecharacterasthecause,hasfallenintodecayasholdingtrueonlyinsuchtenuouslygeneraltermsastoleaveitwithoutparticularforce。
Thescientistsarelearningmoreandmoreconsistentlytothinkintheopaque,impersonaltermsofstrains,mechanicalstructures,displacement,andthelike;termswhichareconvertibleintotheworkingdrawingsandspecificationsofthemechanicalengineer。
Theolderpreconceptionsare,ofcourse,notwhollyeliminatedfromtheintellectualapparatusofscientificresearchandgeneralization。Theculturalsituationwhosedisciplinegivestheoutcomeismadeupofinheritedtraditionalnotionsatleastasmuchasofthenotionsbroughtinbythemachineprocess。Evenamongthescientificadeptstherehasbeennocompletebreakwiththepast;necessarilynot,sincetheyare,afterall,creaturesoftheirowngeneration。Manyofthem,butmoreespeciallythosewhoareengagedinupholdingtheauthenticresultsofscientificresearch,aresomewhatpronetomakemuchofthedefinitiveresultsachieved,ratherthanoftheprocessofresearchinwhichtheseresultsareprovisionalappliancesofwork。Andmanyofthese,together。withthegreatpartofthosewell-meaningpersonswhoexploitthesciencesforpurposesofedification,suchasclergymenandnaturalisticmyth-makers,stillpersonifytheprocessofcauseandeffectandfindinitawell-advisedmeliorativetrend。Butthatworkofresearchwhicheffectuallyextendsthebordersofscientificknowledgeisnearlyalldoneundertheguidanceofhighlyimpersonal,mechanical,morallyandaestheticallycolorlessconceptionsofcausalsequence。Andthisscientificworkiscarriedoutonlyinthosecommunitieswhichareinduecontactwiththemodernmechanicallyorganizedindustrialsystem,-onlyundertheshadowofthemachinetechnology。
Inthenatureofthecasetheculturalgrowthdominatedbythemachineindustryisofasceptical,matter-of-factcomplexion,materialistic,unmoral,unpatriotic,undevout。Thegrowthofhabitsofthought,intheindustrialregionsandcentresparticularly,runsinthisdirection;buthithertotherehasenoughoftheancientnormsofWesternChristendomremainedintacttomakeaveryrespectableprotestagainstthatdeteriorationoftheculturaltissueswhichthefermentofthemachineindustryunremittinglypusheson。Themachinediscipline。