Einpirici.sni, Empirism, Empiric. Empiri- cism, in its primary meaning, signifies the method or habit of judging from observation or trial ; and an em- piric is one who forms his conclusions in this manner. Empiricism ma)' thus be employed to denote either in- ductive reasoning, in which observation and experi- nient furnisli the data for tlie conclusions- drawn by the reason, or that unscientific mode of procedure which accepts the ].henomena as they are observed, without analysis or accurate determination. In the former case the term is used in a good sense, and is equivalent to experimental science ; in the latter it is used in a bad sense, and this is its ordinary employ- ment.
The relation of experience to science, and to art
EMPIRICISM
183
EMPIRICISM
or practice, is precise!}' exhibited by Aristotle in the opcniiiy chapter of liis Metaphysics ; but the peculiar terseness of the Aristotelian phraseology renders ex- pansion and restatement of his positions necessarj', in order to adapt them to modern views.
Art, or systematic action, is founded upon observa- tion, but upon observation reduced to theorj', or to consonance with theory. That is to sa}', observation furnishes the facts, but they must be co-ordinated and interpreted in order to constitute valid knowledge (sci- ence), or a reliable rule of action (art). If the obser- vations be indistinct or perplexed, or if they be not sufficiently numerous to establish a general conclu- sion, or if a general conclusion be drawn prematurely, the induction is deceptive, and obnoxious to the cen- sures passed bj' Lord Bacon upon the simple enumera- tion of examples (^Xov. Org. i, aph. Ixix, cv ; Instaur. S,i. Int. toni. ix, p. 14G; JJistr. Op. p. 167, ed. Mon- t'lgti). The true nature of the induction required is briefly stated by Canipanella : " Inductio est argu- mentatio a partibus sufhcienter enumeratis ad suum totum universale." What is a sufficient exposition of the particulars maj' be learned from the Second Book of th" Novum Organon, or more satisfiictorily from AMiewell's Phllosophg oftJie Inductive Sciences, Comte's Political Philosophy, and INIill's Logic.
When the observations are sutKciently multiplied and varied, and when they have been analyzed and sifted so as to eliminate all illusions, and everj'thing which does not bear distinctly upon the point under consideration, then they justify a definite conclusion. Tliis is the ^^ mtd/iplirado et vindemiutio instantianni''' so strenuously urged by Lord Bacon. But, even in this case, the general experience authorizes a universal conclusion onh"^ by. assuming a law latent under each of the concordant instances by which all are governed. In establishing or accepting the conclusion there is ne°d for the introduction of a purely rational clement — if none other, at lenst the principle that nature acts unifornil}', and that what is true of all observed in- stances is true of all similar pdienomena. Thus theory is needed to permit and to complete induction, or infer- ence from observation.
This accumulation, collation, and appreciation of in- stances is disregarded by undisciplined and impatient minds. A few recurrences loosely noted, or a single imdigested observation, is made the foundation for a universal conclusion, without reference to any rational principle. The designation derived from experience and inquiry is still retained, but, in consequence of want of validitj' in the process, and of method, relia- bility, and rationality in the corresponding practice, it receives an unfavoralde import, and empiricism com- monh' denotes that mode of reasoning which is Ijased upon hasty and inadequate observation, and which neglects scientific principle and scientific precision.
This exposition of the derivation and deflection of the meaning is illustrated and confirmed b}' the his- tory of the term. In the middle of the 8d century be- fore Christ a revolution in medical practice was inau- gurated \>y Philinus of Cos and Serapion of Alexan- dria. They revolted against the maxims of the Dog- matists, and repudiated the course pursued by tiie Methodists of treating all cases of disease according to fixed theoretical rules. They observed the symptoms of disorders, and the specific effects of remedial agents ; they considered the idiosyncrasies of their patients as affected by climates and localities ; and they employed the ther.ipeutics which had been found effectual in analogous instances. Thej^ recognised three kinds of experience : chance, experiment, and imitation, l)ut re- lied principally upon the last, which is a sort of blind obsei vation. They tinis introduced into medical prac- tice the whole train of inductive reasoning, and were in conse(iuence designated Empirics. The school flour- ished for nearly five centuries, and its duration attests its merit and success. It had started, however, with
I sundiy hazardous hypotheses, such as the doctrine of ■ Homoeopathy, and in its best period had trusted main- ly to disguised analogies, which were usually obscure, and too often delusive. The Empirics rejected for- mal science ; they contemned theoretical views and rational deductions, and thus drifted into close approx- imation to the Sceptics. Their original doctrine was an extravagance in the manner of its assertion, but it was a wholesome reaction against a more perilous ex- cess. With the succession of generations, however, their cardinal principle of depending exclusively on. observation was pushed so far as to engender the wild- est fantasies. Hence no confidence could be placed in their treatment of diseases. It was thus that the term Empiricism received tiie opprobrious signification which is habituall}' attached to it. The meaning of a word is perpetuated in the last perversion which it has received from popular use.