COSMIC PHILOSOPHY 



prepare the way for statements which are too 

 general to be accurate. In contrasting physics 

 with astronomy, however, Comte is careful to 

 let us know that he intends to designate that 

 physics which deals with the phenomena of 

 moving masses ; for he tells us that while as- 

 tronomy has been a science since the time of 

 Hipparchos, physics first became a science in 

 the days of Galileo. The slightest consider- 

 ation will show us that this apparent confir- 

 mation of Comte's views rests upon a verbal 

 ambiguity. For what portion of astronomical 

 phenomena had been generalized as early as the 

 time of Hipparchos ? Simply the statical or 

 geometrical portion, namely, the apparent mo- 

 tions of the planets, the great achievement of 

 Hipparchos having been the construction of the 

 theory of epicycles and eccentrics, whereby to 

 formulate these motions. It is needless to add 

 that all the geometrical data used in making 

 this generalization had been obtained from the 

 previous observation of terrestrial phenomena. 

 And what portion of physics was it which was 

 not generalized till the time of Galileo? It 

 was the dynamical portion, since statics had 

 been erected into a science by Archimedes, who 

 lived just a century before Hipparchos. By 

 comparing the statical part of astronomy with 

 the dynamical part of physics, Comte finds it 

 quite easy to establish the precedence of the 



22 



