comte, auguste - the positive philosophy vol I (другой вариант)

Positive Philosophy/281

and perseverance to discover the principal phenomena of the science if they had not been constantly stimulated by the unbounded hopes arising from their chimerical notions of the constitution of matter. The complex and doubtful nature of the phenomena, in the first place, and next the difficulty of getting at them, are quite enough to account for the tardy and incomplete positivity of chemical conceptions, in comparison with all others in the inorganic region of nature. If, as we have seen, Physics is defective in several respects, much more must that science be so which, being at once more difficult and more recent, seeks the laws of composition and decomposition. Whichever way we look at it, whether speculatively, as to the value of its explanations, or actively, as to the previsions which they admit of, this science is evidently the least advanced of all the branches of inorganic philosophy. Indeed, it is hardly possible to call chemistry a science at all while it scarcely ever leads to that precise prevision which is the criterion of perfection in speculative knowledge. We can rarely tell what will be the result of the smallest and fewest modifications introduced among the best explored chemical operations; and while that is the case, however important and numerous may be the facts collected, we are in possession of only erudition, and not science. To suppose otherwise is to mistake a quarry for an edifice.

It is not to be hoped that chemistry can ever attain a state of rationality so satisfactory as that of the sciences which relate to phenomena of a more simple character; and especially that of the eternal type of natural philosophy,—Astronomy. But so much of its inferiority seems to be due to a vicious philosophy, and to the defective education of philosophers, that I cannot but hope that a judicious philosophical analysis may contribute to a speedy perfecting of so important a science. This is the conviction that I desire to awaken by the rapid sketch which I propose to offer of chemical philosophy, regarded in all its essential aspects. Little as can be done within the bounds of this section, it is possible that some one inquirer may be impressed by the necessity of submitting to a new and more rational elaboration the fundamental conceptions which constitute the science.

First,—what is the general object of Chemistry? Vast and complex as is its subject, the definition of Chemistry is easier than that of Physics. We are already prepared for it, indeed, by having contrasted that of Physics with it. It is easy to characterize the phenomena of chemistry, in a direct and marked manner; for all indicate an alteration, greater or smaller, in the constitution of bodies: that is, a composition or decompo-

282/Auguste Comte

sition, and generally both, talking into the account the whole of the substances which participate in the action. Thus, at all epochs of scientific development, since chemistry first became an object of speculative study, chemical researches have steadily manifested a remarkable originality, which has prevented their being confounded with other parts of natural philosophy; even while Physics itself was was mixed up, as its title shows, with physiology; which was the case up to a very recent time.— It is by this general character of its phenomena that Chemistry is distinguished from Physics which precedes it, and Physiology which follows it. The three sciences may be considered as having for their object the molecular activity of matter, in all the different modes of which it is susceptible. Each corresponds to one of three successive degrees of activity, which are essentially and naturally distinguished from each other. The chemical action obviously presents something more than the physical action, and something less than the vital. The physical activity modifies the arrangement of particles in bodies; and these modifications are usually slight and transient, and never alter the substance. The chemical activity, on the contrary, besides these alterations in the structure and the state of aggregation, occasions a profound and durable change in the very composition of the particles: the bodies which occurred in the phenomenon are no longer recognizable,—so much has the aggregate of their properties been disturbed.—Again, physiological phenomena show us the molecular activity in a much higher degree of energy; for, as soon as the chemical combination is effected, the bodies become, once more, completely inert; whilst the vital state is characterized, over and above all physical and chemical effects, by a double continuous motion of composition and decomposition, adapted to maintain, within certain limits of variation and of time, the organization of the body by incessantly renewing its substance. This is the Gradation which no sound philosophy can ever confound, of the three modes of molecular activity.

Two more characteristics of this science must be pointed out: one relating to its nature, and the other to its general conditions.

Chemistry would not be classed among the inorganic sciences unless its phenomena were general; that is, unless every substance were susceptible of chemical action, more or less. And it is because chemistry is thus radically different from physiology that it ranks as the last of the inorganic sciences,—physiological phenomena being, by their nature, peculiar to certain substances, organized in certain modes. Nevertheless, it is incontestable that chemical phenomena present, in every

Positive Philosophy/283

case, something specific, or, to use Bergmann’s energetic expression, elective. Not only does each material element produce chemical effects which are altogether peculiar to it, but it is the same with their innumerable combinations of different orders, among the most analogous of which certain fundamental differences are observable, even so as to be adopted as their characteristics. While therefore physical differences among different bodies are those of degree only, chemical properties are specific. Physical properties afford the common foundation of material existence; and it is by chemical properties that individuality is manifested.

The other characteristic relates to the mode of chemical action. The immediate contact of antagonistic particles is absolutely necessary to chemical action; and therefore one at least of the substances concerned must be fluid or gaseous. When this condition does not already exist, it must be artificially procured by liquefying the substance. It is the earliest axiom in the science, that combination cannot take place, except under this condition; and there is not an in stance upon record of chemical action between two solids unless at a temperature which obscures the true state of aggregation of substances; and the action is never so powerful as when both substances are liquid. These facts establish the eminently molecular character of chemical effects, and especially in comparison with physical effects. The distinction from physiological effects is, though less marked, as real, the latter requiring, as we shall see here after, the junction of solids with fluids.

The definition of Chemistry, then, is that it relates to the laws of the phenomena of composition and decomposition, which result from the molecular and specific mutual action of different substances natural or artificial.

It will be long, we must fear, before a more precise definition than this can be given. Meantime, however incomplete, the most rational that can as yet be offered is of importance as far as it goes. In this view, and connecting, as usual, the consideration of science with that of prevision, the aim proposed should be this:—the characteristic properties of substances, simple or compound, being given, and those properties being placed in a chemical relation in well-defined circumstances, to determine in what their action will consist, and what will be the chief properties of the new products. This problem is, at all events, determinate; and nothing contained in it could be omitted without its ceasing to be so; and the formula therefore contains nothing superfluous. On the other hand,

284/Auguste Comte

if we could obtain such solutions as are indicated, the application of chemistry to the three great objects, vital phenomena the natural history of the globe, and industrial operations, would be rationally organized, instead of being, as now, the almost accidental result of the spontaneous development of science. leach question would at once be referred to our formula, the data of which would be supplied by the circumstances peculiar to the application. her distant as we are from being able thus to conduct our inquiries, this is the end to be kept in view: and chemists all puree that the roost advanced portions of their science are those few and simple questions in which this aim has been more or less completely attained.

By a continued application of this method, all the data must finally be reducible to the knowledge of the essential properties of simple substances, which would lead to that of the different immediate principles: and consequently, to the most complex and remote combination. As for the study of the elements, that must, of course, be a matter of direct, experimental elaboration, divided into as many part, as there are undecomposed substances. Whether or not it may be possible to discover by rational methods, relations between the chemical properties of each element and its aggregate physical properties, we must lay down as indispensable a direct exploration of the chemical characters of each element. This general basis once obtained from experiment, all other chemical problems must be susceptible of a rational solution, under a small number of invariable laws.

The classes of combinations naturally divide themselves into two, according, first, to the simplicity, or the greater or less degree in which the immediate principles are compounded: and, secondly, the number of elements combined. Chemical action is observed to become more difficult the more substances are compounded: the greater part of compound atoms belong to the first two orders; and beyond the third their composition seems almost impossible: and, in the same way, in regard to the number of elements, combinations lose their stability in proportion as the elements are multiplied: there are usually only two; and scarcely any body involves more than four. Thus, the number of chemical classes must always be very small in regard to the distinction under notice: and each of them must have a corresponding law of combination according to which the result might be certainly anticipated through a knowledge of the data. This would be the scientific perfection of chemistry. Our prodigious remoteness from such a state is ascribable to the feebleness

Positive Philosophy/285

of our faculties, and, in an accessory way, to their vicious direction. We must remember that the great aim has begun to be fulfilled in one secondary department of chemical research—the study of proportions, as we shall see hereafter. What has been done in that one category makes us ask why an analogous perfection should not be attained in other departments. We may sum up this account of the requisites, with the fully rational definition of Chemistry, that it has for its object,—the properties of all simple bodies being given, to find those of all the compound bodies which may be formed from them. Every science falls short of its definition: but a real deli nition is the first evidence that a science has attained some consistence: it then measures its own advancement from one epoch to another, and it always keeps inquirers in a right direction, and supports them in a philosophic progress.

Looking now at our means of investigation, we shall find that in chemistry the law holds good that the complication of phenomena coincides with the extension of our means of inquiry.

Here Observation begins to find its full development. Up to this time if has been more or less partial. In astronomy, it is confined to the sense of sight: in physics we use hearing and touch also; and chemistry employs, besides these, taste and smell. How much is thus gained we may know by imagining what would become of chemistry, if we were without taste and smell, which are often the only means by which we can recognize effects produced. The important thing to observe under this head is that there is nothing accidental, nor even empirical, in such a correspondence; for, as we shall hereafter see, the sound physiological theory of sensations shows that the apparatus of taste and smell. unlike that of the other senses, operates in a chemical manner, and thus shows these two senses to be specially adapted for the perception of phenomena of composition and decomposition.

As for Experiment, it is enough to say that the greater number of chemical phenomena, and especially the most instructive, are of artificial production. Still, we must remember that the essential character of experimentation consists in the institution, or the choice of the circumstances of the phenomenon, in order to a more evident and decisive investigation. This process is more difficult in chemistry than in physics, because it is more difficult to institute two parallel cases, undisturbed by the intrusion of irrelevant influences, and yet this is the fundamental condition of experimentation. On this account, I dissent from the ordinary supposition that the experimental method is more appropriate

286/Auguste Comte

to chemical than to physical researches. Though this is my view, and though the greater advancement of physics gives it the advantage over chemistry, in the use of experiment, I can have no doubt of the powerful influence of experimentation in chemistry, independently of its having supplied new subjects of observation. From the early days of the science, the immortal series of Priestley’s experiments, and yet more, those of Lavoisier, have offered admirable models. Almost comparable to the most perfect researches in physics and quite enough to prove that there is nothing in the nature of chemical phenomena to prevent the extended and luminous employment of the experimental method.

The third means, Comparison, which we have before seen to be inapplicable in Astronomy, and of especial use in Phvsology, begins to have a real use in Chemistry. The essential condition of this valuable method is that there shall be an extended series of cases, analogous but distinct, in which a phenomenon shall be modified more and more, whether by successive simplifications or gradations. It is evident that this can take place fully only with regard to vital phenomena; accordingly, it is only by physiological analysis that a clear idea of its value can be obtained. But chemical phenomena approach those of physiology nearly enough, not only to demand this method, but to indicate th at without it the science can never find the road to perfection. The existence at natural families in chemistry is now admitted by the best inquirers: but the classification remains to be made. The need of the classification must lead to the use of the omparative method, both being based on the common consideration of the uniformity of certain preponderant phenomena in a long series of different bodies. There is even such a connection between the two orders of ideas that the construction of a natural chemical classification is impossible without a large application of the comparative art, as the physiologists understand it; and conversely comparative ehenuistry cannot be regularly cultivated with out the guidance of some sketch of a natural classification Chemistry is at present only a nascent science; general methods are as yet scarcely recognized in connection with it. and only a very few researches afford example of the comparative method; but I am persuaded not only of the fundamental suitability of that method in chemistry, but of its application, before very long, to the perfecting of the science. Such an anticipation, somewhat preceding the spontaneous development of any science, may be a contribution to its actual progress.

All the means employed are subject,—especially, but not solely in

Positive Philosophy/287

chemistry,—to a thesis. verification by the precise collation of the two procedures of analysis and synthesis;—or, (as these terms have been corrupted by metaphysical uses) composition and decomposition.—Every substance which has been decomposed must evidently be capable of recomposition, whether the process be otherwise practicable or not. If the inverse operation reproduces precisely the primitive substance, the chemical demonstration is complete. Unfortunately, the vast extension of chemical resources in this century has had a much stronger bearing on analytical powers than synthetical means; so that there is at present little proportion and harmony between the two methods.—Such harmony is indispensable to the establishment of certainty in some cases, as we see when we duly distinguish two widely differing kinds of chemical analysis: the preliminary, consisting of the simple separation of the immediate principles, and the final, leading to the determination of the elements, properly so called. Though both are essential to chemical research, the first is of the most important and extensive use. The elementary analysis might be spared a synthetical verification,—because the composition of the reacting substances may be compared with the results obtained, thus indicating the composition of the proposed substance, the different elements of which will in this way have been in some sort separated. The impossibility of recombining the elements, to reproduce the primitive body, ought not to throw any doubt on the solution, unless there is some special reason for suspecting the simplicity of any one of the elements. Synthesis can, in this case, only add a valuable confirmation to what was before not doubtful. But the case is very different when we have to determine only the immediate principles. As the elements concerned can produce combinations of different orders, we can never be sure that one or more of the supposed immediate principles obtained does not result from the reactions caused by the analysis itself. It is only synthesis which, by reconstructing the proposed substance with the materials concerned, can decide the question conclusively, though in some cases of feeble agency in the reactives, and strong analogical induction, there is no room left for reasonable doubt. In immediate analysis of great complexity, when the agreement of various analytical means strongly corroborates the conclusions obtained, we cannot rely on real chemical demonstration without the synthetical confirmation. This maxim of chemical philosophy is abundantly exemplified in the analysis of mineral waters, and yet more of organic substances.—It is noticeable that synthesis is easiest where it is most necessary and would be most

288/Auguste Comte

difficult in the case of elementary analysis. where it can, as we have seen, be dispensed witll. This is owing to the combinations becoming less tenacious as the order of composition of the constituent particles is higher; and if the decomposition is easy, so is the re-composition. The cases of immediate analysis require only feeble antagonisms offering no great obstacles to the synthetical operations indispensable for their demonstration.

We have next to consider the encyclopedical position of Chemistry to justify the rank assigned to it in our scale. It is from no vain and arbitrary consideration that Chemistry is placed between Physics and Physiology in our scale. By the important series of electro-chemical phenomena Chemistry becomes, as it were, a prolongation of Physics: and at its other extremity, it lays the foundations of physiology by its research into organic combinations. These relations are so real that it has sometimes happened that chemists, untrained in the philosophy of science, have been uncertain whether a particular subject lay within their department, or ought to be referred either to physics or to physiology.

The phenomena of Chemistry are more complex than those of Physics, and are certainly dependent on them. Their degree of generality is inferior,—chemical effects requiring a much more extended concurrence of varied conditions. Physical properties belong not only to all substances, but, with simple modifications, to all the states of aggregation, and even of combination, of each of them: whereas, it is only in a more or less determined and restricted condition that each body manifests its chemical properties. In a word, nature often shows us physical effects apart from the chemical, while there can be no chemical effects apart from certain physical phenomena. Thus Chemistry cannot be rationally studied without a previous knowledge of physics. Besides, the most powerful chemical agents are derived from physics, which presents, in its different orders of phenomena, the first distinctive characters of different substances. It is impossible in our day to conceive of scientific chemistry without giving it the whole of physics for its basis: and thus is its first relation in the scale established. And, as physics is dependent on astronomy and mathematics, so must its own dependent be. But it must be owned that, with regard to doctrine, the connection of Chemistry with the first two sciences is neither extensive nor very important.

Every attempt to refer chemical questions to mathematical doctrines must be considered, now and always, profoundly irrational, as being

Positive Philosophy/289

contrary to the nature of the phenomena. In the case of physics, the mischief would be, as we have seen; merely from the misuse of an instrument which, properly directed, may be of admirable efficacy: but if the employment of mathematical analysis should ever become so preponderant in chemistry (an aberration which is happily almost impossible) it would occasion vast and rapid retrogradation, by substituting vague conceptions for positive ideas, and an easy algebraic verbiage for a laborious investigation of facts. The direct subordination of chemistry to astronomy is also slight, but more marked.

It is almost insensible in regard to abstract chemistry, which alone is cultivated in our day. But when the time shall come for the development of concrete chemistry,—that is, the methodical application of chemical knowledge to the natural history of the globe,—astronomical considerations will no doubt enter in where now there seems no point of contact between the two sciences. Geology, immature as it is. hints to us such a future necessity, some vague instinct of which was probably in the minds of philosophers in the theological age,. when they were fancifully and yet obstinately bent on uniting astrology and alchemy. It is, in fact, impossible to conceive of the great intestinal operations of the globe as radically independent of its planetary conditions.—Inconsiderable as are the relations of chemistry with mathematics and astronomy in regard to doctrine, it is far otherwise with regard to method. It is easy to see how the perfection of chemistry might be secured and hastened by the training of the minds of chemists in the mathematical spirit and astronomical philosophy. Besides that mathematical study is the necessary foundation of all positive science, it has a special use in chemistry in disciplining the mind to a wise severity in the conduct of analysis: and daily observation shows the evil effects of its absence. Yet, it can never be said that chemists have so much need of a mathematical education as physicists, because they do not need it as an instrument in daily use. but as an intellectual preparation for the rational study of nature. As to astronomy, we have seen that it constitutes the most perfect type of the study of nature; and this at once establishes its relation of superiority to chemistry. The more complex the phenomena, the more important is the influence of such a model; and it is only by having always before their eves suck an exemplification of the true spirit of natural philosophy, that chemists can rightly estimate the inanity of the metaphysical explanations which vitiate their doctrine, and can acquire an adequate sense of the true character, conditions and destiny of chemical science. Under

290/Auguste Comte

this point of view astronomy is more useful to chemists than even physics, in proportion to the superiority of its method.

So much for the sciences which precede chemistry. As for those that follow, physiology depends upon chemistry both as a point of departure and as a principal means of investigation. If we separate the phenomena of life, properly so called, from those of animality, it is clear that the first, in the double intestinal movement which characterizes them, are essentially chemical. The processes which result from organization have peculiar characteristics; but apart from such modifications, they are necessarily subjected to the general laws of chemical effects. Even in studying living bodies under a simply statical point of view, chemistry is of indispensable use in enabling us to distinguish with precision the different anatomical elements of any organism.—We shall see hereafter that the new science of Social Physics is subordinated to chemical science. In the first place, it depends on it by its immediate and manifest connection with physiology: but, besides that, as social phenomena are the most complex and particular of all, their laws must be subject to those of all the preceding orders, each of which manifests, in social science, its own peculiar influence. In regard to Chemistry especially, it is evident that among the conditions of man’s social existence several chemical harmonies between man and external circumstances are involved. Even if individual existence could be sustained, society could not, if these harmonies were destroyed, or even only somewhat dis- turbed,—as by changes in the atmospheric medium, or in the waters or the soil.

The position of Chemistry among the sciences being thus determined, the next inquiry is about the degree of scientific perfection that its nature admits, in comparison with others. As for the method, if physics suffers from the intrusion of hypotheses, we may say that chemistry has been their absolute prey, through its more difficult and tardy development. The doctrine of Affinities appears to me more ontological than that of fluids and imaginary ethers. If the electric fluid and the luminous ether are, as I called them before, materialized entities, affinities are at bottom pure entities, as vague and indeterminate as those of the scholastic philosophy of the Middle Age. The pretended solutions that they yield are of the usual character of metaphysical explanations,—a mere reproduction, in abstract terms, of the statement of the phenomenon. The advance of chemical knowledge which must at last discredit for ever such vain philosophy has as yet only modified it, so far as to dis-