INDUCTIONS IMPROPERLY SO CALLED. 181 



this process of colligation from Iridvulion properly so called : and that 

 the distinction may be made clearer, it is well to advert to a curions 

 and interesting remark of Mr. Whewcll, which is as strikingly true of 

 the former operation, as it is vineqviivocally false of the latter. 



In different stages of the progress of knowledge, philosophers have 

 employed, for the colligation of the same order of facts, difterent con- 

 ceptions. The early and rude observations of the heavenly bodies, in 

 which minitte precision was neither attained nor sought, presented no- 

 thing inconsistent with the representation of the path of a planet as an 

 exact circle, having the earth for its centre. As observations increased 

 in accuracy, and facts were disclosed which were not reconcilable 

 with this simple supposition, fw the colligation of those additional 

 facts, the supposition was varied ; and vaiied again and again as facts 

 became more numerous and precise. The earth was removed fi-om 

 the centi'e to some other point within the circle ; the planet was sup- 

 posed to revolve in a smaller circle called an epicycle, round an im- 

 aginary point which revolved in a circle round the earth : in proportion 

 as observation elicited fresh facts contradictory to these representations, 

 other epicycles and other eccentrics were added, producing additional 

 complication ; until at last Kepler swept all these circles away, and 

 substituted the conception of an exact ellipse. Even this is found not 

 to represent with complete coiTectness the accurate observations of 

 the present day, which disclose many slight deviations from an orbit 

 exactly elliptical. Now Mr. Whewell has remarked that tliese suc- 

 cessive general expressions, though apparently so conflicting, were all 

 correct : they all answered the purpose of colligation : they all enabled 

 the mind to represent to itself with facility, and by a simultaneous 

 glance, the whole body of facts at that time ascertained ; each in its 

 tuni served as a correct des.criptioYi of the phenomena, so far as the 

 senses had up to that time taken cognizance of them. If a necessity 

 afterwards arose for discarding one of these general descriptions of 

 the planet's orbit, and fi-aming a different imaginary line, by which to 

 express the series of observed positions, it was because a number of 

 new facts had now been added, which it was necessary to combine 

 with the old facts into one general description. But this did not affect 

 the coiTectness of the former expression, considered as a general state- 

 ment of the only facts which it was intended to represent. And so 

 true is this, that, as is well remarked by M.'Comte, these ancient gen- 

 eralizations, even the rudest and most imperfect of them, that of uni- 

 fonn movement in a circle, ai'e so far from being entirely false, that 

 they are even now habitually employed by astronomers when oYily a 

 rough approximation to correctness is required. " L'astronomie mo- 

 derne, en detruisant sans retour Ics hypotheses primitives, envisagees 

 comme lois reelles du monde, a soigneusement maintenu leur valeuiv 

 positive et permanentc, la ]n-opriete de representer commodement les 

 phenome'.nes quand il s'agit d'une premiere ebauche. Nos ressources 

 a cet egard sent meme bien plus etendues, precisement a caiise quie 

 nous ne nous faisons ancune illusion sur la realite des hypotheses ; ce 

 qui nous permet d'employer sans scrupule, en chaque cas, celle que 

 nous jugeons la plus avantageuso."* 



Mr. Wliewell's remark, therefore, is as just as it is interesting. Suc- 



*■ CoMTE, Cours de Philosophie Positive, vol, ii., p. 202, 



