THE 



CLASSIFICATION OF THE SCIENCES. 



IN an essay on &quot; The Genesis of Science,&quot; originally 



published in 1854*1 endeavoured to show that the 



% 



Sciences cannot be rationally arranged in serial order. 

 Proof was given that neither the succession in which 

 the Sciences are placed by M. Comte (to a criticism of 

 whose scheme the essay was in part devoted), nor any 

 other succession in which the Sciences can be placed, 

 represents either their logical dependence or their his 

 torical dependence. To the question How may their 

 relations be rightly expressed ? I did not then attempt 

 any answer. This question I propose now to con 

 sider. 



A true classification includes in each class, those 

 objects which have more characteristics in common 

 with one another, than any of them have in common 

 with any objects excluded from the class. Further, 

 the characteristics possessed in common by the colli 

 gated objectSj and not possessed by other objects, arc 

 more radical than any characteristics possessed in 

 common with other objects involve more numerous 



* Contained in the &quot; Illustrations of Universal Progress.&quot; 



