Professional Documents
Culture Documents
sentences or propositions. Historically, causal problems were not apportioned to the Iogi-
Methodological Logics. Operations, actions, and methods ab- cal, but rather to the ontological field. Some logicians still declare:
stracted from various manipulations are the building materials "Cause and effect are not logical categories.?" They may add that
of those logics claiming to be methodologies of science. We have cause and effect are "recalcitrant metaphysical ideas.?" In a similar
discussed such systemological products in Chapter mood it is asserted that the analysis of the meaning of causality
is not the logician's task," It is not uncommon, however, to find
1 Eaton, General, p. 5 0 8.
2 Ibid.
S Cohen and Nagel, Introduction, p. 245.
PSYCHOLOGY AND LOGIC INTERBEHAVIORAL LOGIC AND CAUSATION
147
logicians firmly insisting that cause is not an ontological but a mathematics logicians resulted in the evolution of
logical category concerned with the . of means and lo~ical ~eaturing symbol structures, organizations of re-
ends.' Some logicians even declare that inquiry into cause is an Iations, of order, and similar abstractional organizations.
inevitable feature of logic. Thus logi~ians .i~creasingly inclined toward formulating and
The question whether causal problems are at home in logic transforming propositions (sentences) and away from observations
obviously involves more than a simple adjudication of the boun- concerned particular existential occurrences. The latter are
daries set to inquiry. It is a question of the nature of cause itself. even as experiental and intuitive.
Moreover, any answer implies a distinctive logical theory. Whether ('::ause, treated other than as an abstract formal
a logician treats causation, and in what manner, depends also cate~ory, is not :velcome in conventional logic. Certainly, cause
upon his psychological views-his notions of the way individuals envisaged as an Interrelationship of particular happenings has a
operate in causal situations. Those who hold that logic is essen- very place in logical treatises. Methodologians are
tially system building find that causal situations provide scope ... " " ... Ji. ...... u even when they are interested in setting up large gen-
....l.Lv'1.0
in a unique way for logical work. method for scientific work; thus they make cause into
a catego~ to the logical domain. In such a methodologi-
EMERGENCE OF CAUSALITY IN METHODISTIC LOGIC cal t:-eatIse as Dewey's the adjective logical, employed to
To Kant's Copernican revolution and to Mill's renovation of quahfy the cause category, removes cause from the domain of
Inductive Logic we may trace the entrance of causal problems into ""'..0,......,;) ..."-'..........."" and actual things and places it among the constructs.
the logical domain." The synthesis of ontological and logical in- logicians apparently can only assimilate causal
vestigation was initiated when Kant forced objects to conform to problems as as the latter remain detached from concrete
the knower's modes of cognition, which, of course, comprise causal ev~nts, ~lthough sometimes cause is regarded as a leading principle
as well as other categories. which directs contact with existing things. This middle course is
But if Kant originated this tradition, Mill established it by ado~te~ b~cause, like species, essence, purpose, end, and simplicity,
welding logic to the methodology of science. Mill thoroughly onto oglca cause has been interpreted as an objectionable property
of llatur~. We suggest that the fault of contemporary theories
1
incorporated causal problems into logic when he attempted to con-
vert logic, in whole or part, into a science of scientific method." of causation . not ~n their inclination toward ontology or
There is hardly a doubt that Kant and Mill emphasized cause as temology, but In their departure from objective happenings and
a logical problem in to build up an empirical world system, to some culturally influenced attitude. At the
In line with their architectonic interests their logics were designed basis interpretations of causation is the absolutistic
to show how reason operated in ordering actual rather than logical tradition. is this same tradition which accounts for un-
to demonstrate the interrelation of inferential propositions, as in satisfactory ontologies and epistemologies.
traditional Formal Logic. In order to. clarify the causal problem and its relation to logic
The formalistic tradition, however, has never really been sup- we briefly the development of concerning causation.
planted. Certainly the tremendous development of mathematics
CULTURAL BACKGROUND OF CAUSALITY
as a rigid constructional or hypothetico-deductive enterprise has
only served to support and vitalize it. The encouragement which It is an appealing convention. that the technical notion of cause
originated among the Greek scientists who developed it as a re-
4 Cf. Dewey, Logic, pp. placement for ideas of indetermination and chaos. In order here
:>We pass over any claims made for the system of concrete universals. is the declaration of Leucippus:
6 The procedure is to incorporate ampliative induction into logic) and to equate
7 Logic, p. 462.
induction with the search for causes. Cf. Kneale, Probability, Part 2.
PSYCHOLOGY AND LOGIC
INTERBEHAVIORAL LOGIC AND CAUSATION 14-9
No thing arises without a cause, but everything through determined
agent, as an (4) the end or "that for the sake
grounds and under the stress of necessity. 8
of which" a is the end of walking."
The widely held view that when thinkers adopted the causal more sophisticated conditions cause became an all-em-
notion to account for things they discarded mystic processes and LJ.La,\."Ll.l<':;;:;' Lprinciple or law employed to account for every-
"'"J'<.<.. I--', .... "..: nV.l.J."..
became exclusively occupied with events as caused by other events happened, and to order events within a single system,
is; however, scarcely true. The evolution of the causality construct The scientific problem was construed as the search
did not once and for all establish a mode of thinking concerned or conditions which rise to certain events.
only with laws derived from observed things and events. Actually, were reinforced by the quest for certainty and incon-
the interest in cause in no sense excluded the mystical from the testable knowledge.
explanations natural happenings. Worse, from time to time a somewhat higher of cultural evolution cause became
cause itself was made into a mystical process, for under this rubric a series of conditions requisite for explaining ob-
were placed innumerable magical forces which were presumed to ","--,LLLA..~,- were accordingly regarded as rules of order
.. "",
bring things about in some unknown, and sometimes impossible, or as laws describing, or referring to, events. This
manner. "..",.,'"'+-....' .. peak development when cause was
r.4-.r>.......
Under simple cultural conditions causes have been regarded as problems of predicting and controlling
elementary agencies for producing various objects and events'
not infrequently the term cause refers to acts of personal creation, __ L,~~;""I\.,"I. CAUSAL THEORY
Again, causes are powers exerted by an agent in carrying out some
directly from a cultural matrix. Logi-
.ls;:.J..L.I."'-I\.."",,0
purpose. As is well known, even thinkers of the 17th and early
writers who espouse a single and universal causal
r Sth centuries were not emancipated from such views. the
construct have a range of items from which to
controversy between Leibnizians, who believed the supreme power
They may variously characterize cause as some kind of
so created the universe that it was everlastingly self-operating, and
category, a power, a relation, or an action.
Newtonians, who held that the cosmic mechanism required oc-
the inspection of classical causal constructs we dif-
.... ....,'"'.....L.L ................
20 Ducasse, Nature.
C' Pap, Meaning. :t1 Winn, Nature.
13 Treatise, p. 75.
PSYCHOLOGY AND LOGIC INTERBEHAVIORAL LOGIC AND CAUSATION r
Causes. Change, Wundt declares, is the primary condi- and his
.... ,..A.......... J'v intended to prohibit this kind of equa-
tion of causality. Cause accordingly concerns not things but events." were on the right The search for absolute causes
Obviously, however, even the doctors who differ as to the counter to procedure actually practiced in a
nature of events. For example, it is asserted that causation always I t is doubtless this type abstract and re-
involves transmission of energy from place to place." This mote cause to which Newton referred in connection with . . . . . . . TT'.<~ ....
The assumption is made either that the universe is constructed ..........,.........,',-, ,-"- from the phenomena, and afterwards rendered
on a plan of necessary connection or that scientific explanation de- 28
significant. Even more serious is the fact that it serves to cover consideration which becomes Causal principles are
up inevitable specificity of causal situations. No for- closer approach concrete events.
mula can ever satisfactorily symbolize the complicated concourses to events makes irrelevant any
of events comprising causality. Important only are analyses and formulations that serve
The assumption that the goal of science is to discover universal to connect one event with others in a class. Specific causal formula-
absolute causes is to equate science with metaphysics. Insofar as exclusively enable us to make predictions" and in
vol. I, p. 586.
achieve some experimental control over certain situations.
Winn, Nature, p. 202.
24 Carns, Problem. General Scholium, p. 546.
Schopenhauer, Fourfold, p. 20; li01:sch,alk, Nature. Ibid., 547.
Mercier, Causation. Cf. Schlick, va.I,J,;,a..l..l.LY.
154 PSYCHOLOGY AND LOGIC
INTERBEHAVIORAL LOGIC AND CAUSATION
LOGICAL NECESSITY AND FACTUAL
to differentiate logical (analytic) necessity from
""l,.I- ......LLLj.J\..
Formalistic logicians separate themselves into two The
necessitv U,""-,"~""''-'',,,,'-L,.:l only in revealing the irrelation of
strictly mathematical logicians remain completely within
formal concrete events.. The formal interrelation of
bounds of mathematical forms. The philosophical formalists in-
sentences can not be with descriptions of specific
cline toward the more contentful systems which articulate with
. . . ~"''' ... ' ..... _ linguistic events can be handled only by nOll-
scientific materials. It is the latter who are confronted with chal- formalistic sentence "TU-.4-r>Vv'\'''''
lenging causal problems. On the one hand, they are concerned
Causal events are clearly different from the
with propositions or sentences implying absolute and ul:iversal
terns with them. Of the latter there are
necessity. On the other, causality implies ev.ents and thel~
types. must choose among systems.
tions-in short, probabilities, specificities, and, in Induc-
logician sensitive to events, and conditions ~11r111\PC'
tive as over against deductive processes. .
as as sentence actual inter-
The way out of this discrepancy is found, of course, In the very
relations of components. But few ..LV~;"",\"""",~",.l.v
fact of formalism itself-that is, sententiality. Thus the
that they are objective happenings; thus are
construct logical necessity. For the most part, this sort of neces-
inevitably limited to abstruse sentences. I t is significant,
sity consists simply of assertions-"Every event must ha,,:e a
logicians attempt to at least so to events
cause," "Order is the essence of nature." Formal comprises,
the relationship between formal and
.....V.l,.I.u....,...&...... .I. implica-
in fact a stock of sentences containing the word cause--sentences
which 'have no connection with the interrelations of things, their
an event standpoint the logically possible consists a
properties, and relations in concrete event systems. . _
(factors). The are . . . . . c.:.00>f>''1f'"
cause of an event we seek the reason "why" this event, and not
-.r,....... v .... 'le ... v .L .. it has been thought, must be an essentially effec-
.L \-V.l..L~.J.
On this basis it is . . "flo,~
.......11-/.1. .......,;;1.....,.1../.,\.......,. _r-..
some other logically possible one, is occurring. It chiefly the
consist of things or persons, which, in COffi-
linguistic influence which fortifies the belief that a causal i
.L ........ \.,'J"', V
dons. His operation with causal problems is examined a Causal we indicated (p. 149), always and
particular type of situation-a fact which is true, of course, . an~ maintain as part a comprehensive cultural \.-\...I ..... J....-'J."-'_"...
thing he investigates. Operational cause can only be studied In This means that the many intellectual counterparts to cause
connection with problems localizable in a certain domain-chem- we find a psychological theory. Outstanding variants of causal
istry, biology, physics, and so on. The operations consist asses~- theory are associated with corresponding psychological
or . with their varying on the baSIS of monistic or monadic mind. For instance, a rational-
of developed techniques and available materials in order to istic and a causal theory correlates with a doctrine of unitary
at some answer to a particular question. As a rule, the mind, an empirical and a posteriori notion fits into a mona-
answers are stated in the form of propositions indicating the distic or mind theory. To consider some ex-
relationship of event factors. Whether or not general cau.ses amples, an adherent of unified mind as Kant naturally enter-
and why, are questions falling outside the scientist's field of tained a theory to which necessity was a
terest. ing condition the of events, while ......... '.. . .
J.JL""'
According to our hypothesis that causal processes ~nd ,-,..u"~."'J.V'''''''v atomism had necessity among things
constitute in event fields, causal elements consist objects, their it is psychistic psychology which
their combinations and relations particular systems. All things vides to who must differentiate between the abstrac-
existing as parts or features of a certain pattern of happenings may tion of and the of existence.
to participate as factors in that particular causal field. In recent writing on causal problem centers around
some causal events there are few factors, in others many. In case IJ.J.i~)IL.l\... psychology
a.0vV\.,.U;.l"l,..J. .... and Mill. Scholars are in-
there are many we find variations in the proportion of those fluenced by psychology when they (I) adopt the
factors that appear more prominent than the remaindel~. Again, . Mill pronouncements on cause, (2,) modify them in detail or )
in some events there may be no outstanding factors at all. Whether oppose entirely. of causation, around
there are many or few, the factors may be either s~quenti~l or the immediate spatial contiguity of antecedent and
coordinate in time. Causal situations must further be differentiated consequent or necessary connection, as well as inevitable
on the basis of the relative availability of the factors for observa- tion, definitely reflect the Hume-Mill reduction of psychological
tion and experimental manipulation. In some instances the factors events to appearance and reappearance of psychic states as
can only be hypothetically named and enumerated. crete tied together by habit and custom, or by the gentle
160 PSYCHOLOGY AND LOGIC INTERBEHAVIORAL LOGIC AND CAUSATION
rationalism rampant in his time. But it is questionable whether is to be according to interbehavioral psy-
his own type of sensationism, which, of course, is not ~\-..I..l
(,.4..Lvv.s;;. ... ...,..I. term to the combination of concretr
different from rationalism though of another order, should be a causal situation. In no case, however, are we dealing
allowed to confound the study of causal problems. remote
v.llAi,LJ.\../.l.1.0 actual things, for, obviously, from ar
Certainly, cause is no quality, as Hume's "impressions" are point of relations are only abstracted frorr
presumed to be. Nor are objects reducible to psychic so of objects or events.
........ ..LU,'-J.\.<'J.J.0.L.lJ.&.-'0
which we refer to as Smith's death by arsenic. As products the if one grants the occurrence of such events. Assuming
data, or stimulus objects, comprise propositions, allegations, or correctness of the hypothesis that causation consists of a ~"",ft-a"~T"1
events or alleged events. of Clll',,\P'r)"P't'\t'c or event we find a continuous of inter-
Because data are secondary-that is, come to the observer with such events. simplest level is that of every-
by means of a person's (Jones') intermediating action it. may well "commonsense" Here simple are
happen that no arsenic death has actually transpired. Jones' belief goal of the inquiry is a practical outcome of the inter-
may be delusory, his assertion mistaken or false. In such cases we events. On the scientific level more questions
assume that he is responding to substitute stimulation, not to the with a correspondingly greater capacity on the
direct Smith-arsenic-death event. Substitute stimuli, of course, to the interacting factors; hence, a more
can stand for mystic and magical apparitions as well as for actual" t-".U........,LJ.'-~~_ ..... '-+ procedure of events. scientist,
events. of this latter possibility we TInay regard Jones' . . ., . . . . .,"-"""'.......,.. . . . experimental for the .
interaction with the substitute stimulus object as an ,.,rf1"'~"'::'rlr'lr _ '-v ~i..J.. reassociation of factors in order to discover
.LJ..lJ.. l\....
This point is illustrated by Russell's assertion that there is no comprises the of the event components.
such things as cause and that the classical law of causality is un-- can observed to occur through the addition and subtraction}
scientific and false." Scientists are never interested, Russell separation and contiguation of the factors. Certain chemical com-
in necessary succession, but in functional relations among variables. pVJl.lv.lLl,.,.). are and only a temperature or . . . +"'L:>C'cn'.~n
The causal data of philosophers, or what they interbehave with, en
rl11n.-o
is for a new chemical state to ensue. a
to him consist of sentences-in our terms, substitute chemical reaction may speeded up by another com-
stimulus objects. who causality as a characteristic pound or varying temperature or pressure. If, while
of natural asserts that Russell is not talking about causality our of an event we refer to OUf' observation, this
at all, but about physicists' expressions of natural law," These ex- to do with the event itself; its factorial combinations
pressions refer to observations of correlations. constitute of our observation or ,.;0':"1"+"'',.......,..,"'''''
Pepper is probably correct is indicated by the following: psychological terms, combinations and recombinations
The essential business of physics is the discovery of "causal Iaws" and events are independent stimulus objects with which
by which I mean any principles which, if enable us to infer some- the observer interacts.
thing about a certain region of space-time from something about some in sorne cases it may be legitimate to describe one
other region or regions." causal, or key, it may be the factor required to
example, when a person facilitates
Substitute stimulus objects may correspond to authentic causa-
or . . . . . . ,,/ . . . . . . . the occurrence of an event by switching on the current
v
Notion.
npt"pc,C''1f'''-';T for an explosion. behavior must be regarded as a
How.
37 Russell, Reply, p. 7 1 "-'-'J.Jl."~V.I..I.""""'.I.\.. of system. It operates like any other
PSYCHOLOGY AND LOGIC INTERBEHAVIORAL LOGIC AND CAUSATION
factor necessary to complete a particular kind of event combina- acts the use products. ,~ .....'....v
in so many other
................ ..........
tion, and thus constitutes a part of the causal data. mythical subject matter is possible means
Interbehavioral data of both the construct and event type must of . . . . . . . . = ....... "~ .I."'".... u. It is possible to construct real
d .... VI..,;.1. n."I:T1,.,f-o'nr"0
be sharply distinguished from everything pertaining to psycho- temic and determiners of all sorts without
physical philosophy. This admonition is necessary because a adequately acts and stimulus objects. \Ve that
similarity in the use of terms. The terms construct and construction the elimination traditional mind constructions clarifies the
frequently been employed since Russell formulated "the I"'r...-."'.f- ... " and inferential situation and enables us to make
...... .f-.""'....... I
relations between mythical sensations and sensibilia of externally The behavior of operator mentioned in the agentive illustra-
caused mental states and the products of purely psychic opera- tion constitutes a first-order operation. His activity belongs
tions of the mind. This is the case even when writers do not accept within pattern of a system.
Russell's view that objects of everyday circumstances and of tech- The second-order analyzes the work of the first op-
nical physics consist of logical constructions made up of the crude erator as part of the data before him. is c.C'~,or."
data of sense. ... JL""'''''' ..,.....
''-d.in interaction of the experimenter as he unravels the
Such problems and solutions belong to a philosophical system l _'~, '~IL<.IL\...J'-.I., threads he finds among the materials with which he
......
interrelations of things by means of manual (drawings) and vocal tein), sugar (carbohydrates), and obtained
behavior. In each case the constructing activities consist of concrete oat and In addition, he fed one group 2 c.c.
interactions of the individual with his stimulus objects on the milk day. The milk-fed rats increased in weight normal.ly,
basis of problem presented, motivation) expertness, and other while the control group without milk feeding began to
concrete factors . after 10 to 15 days.
Central to the constructional problem is the nature of linguistic lJ.JL~ that the operations are well controlled and the re-
J...1.v''':>"J..LJ..
construct propositions concerning them. Convenient terms for the investigator's 1ft't'O .... ,OC'f"
c. Constructions IS between an
Descriptions and interpretations of causal occurrences naturally with in his attempt
differ on the basis of the type of crude datum upon which they are understand. a certain or how X-rays are diffracted-a
constructed. Causal theories based on construct data are very dif- an individual attempting to set up a generalized r i r d........,. . 4-.
from those based on independent event data. in the possible causes. latter procedure can not yield any s
case of independent event data, theory constructions may show result, and the acceptance or rejection of such a
divergences. One may set up descriptions and laws of causal events 'Io.,A.'-'U\..,~J.'-.l-,:, upon
,J .... .LA...... J..L.LIA. formulator's caprice.
which are altogether independent human agency, such as the is a place to point out again that interact)
tidal relationships between the moon and earth. Other construc- concrete events is vastly different from interacting with v
tions of causal factors involve the activities of the agent or in- propositional substitutes for such events. construct:
vestigator who deliberately produces certain changes in the crude propositions achieves a certain degree
data. account of concrete situations.
Cause and E !feet. Faithful to the traditional relation concep- ....... ,..r<,....,,~.,. ... BUILDING
tion, writers on cause have maintained in their descriptions two
related factors, cause and effect. Critics of such a notion as neces- ~L<. events as
...... 'LL' occurrences are completely independ.
sary or inevitable relation have pointed out that it is impossible activity. Accordingly such events far
to keep two distinct. Since we are dealing with event from logical or system-building behavior. f
patterns, the terms cause and effect must serve specific descriptive cause and building may be brought very togeth
purposes. Accordingly, when they refer to stimulus objects, first place, causation is essentially systematic. Causal sitt
terms to prior and subsequent combinations of factors. Cause as we have seen, comprise interrelations of t
and as constructive terms serve only to isolate particular is system. Again, human behavior occupies an """"""',~,...,.r."".",,,,
stages of observed events. as an in causal systems, as all C'r1~:.nf"1hf"
Causes and Conditions. we have seen (p. 152), writers on mentation testifies. Those who as system
causation regard the term cause as standing for a single and unique in a favorable position to conjoin
or agency. From the standpoint of field theory, instead of basis logic can be closely connected with cau
rv ... T"'.f- ............ ,.., """ I
ranged or governed by necessity or law," "nature is uniform and and existential happenings, it is quite possible to
recurrent," "invariant relations exist," "every event has a cause."
A prominent feature of general structurization behavior con- illustration of linguistic systemization
sists in applying these principles to things. This procedure Inay causal methods which he regards as
be described as defining and interpreting operations. Certain things only possible modes experimental inquiry. Because this
are asserted to cause or produce other things as effects or results. so admirably exemplifies linguistic causal systemization we presen
Causes are invariably antecedent to effects. Events which occur in full items which he names methods and canons.
under precisely the same circumstances must cause or produce the I. Method of Agreement
same effect. First Canon. If two or more instances of the under investizatio
From this sort of activity issues a product which may consist of have one circumstance in common, the circumstance in which alone th
instances agree, is the cause of the
systems actual things and events or systems of arguments, sym-
bols, sentences or propositions, or a combination of The Method of Difference
following examples from event, language, and forrnalistic levels Second Canon. If an instance in which the under investizatio
occurs, and an instance in which it does not occur, have every circumstance i
illustrate the processes employed in the structurization of causal common save one, that one occurring only in the former; the circumstance i
materials. which the two instances is the or the cause, or an
(a) Event Level. Things, conditions, and combinations things part of the cause, of the phenomenon.
may be conjoined for many different purposes. Naturally, system o. Joint Method of Agreement and Difference
builders are motivated in diverse ways, and thus employ all sorts Third Canon. If two or more instances in which the occurs
criteria. Concomitantly, the system products assume every pos- one circumstance in common, while two or more instances in which it dor
not occur have nothing in common save the absence of that circumstance; th
sible grade of quality. circumstance in which alone the two sets of instances differ, is the effect, or th
Generally speaking, causal situations are systemized on either cause, or an indispensable part of the cause, of the phenomenon.
an analytic or a synthetic plan. In the former case, a situation is
3. Method of Residues
chosen which is regarded as causational, and an organization of Fourth Canon. Subduct from any such part as is known b
the factors is then made. Synthetic systemization, on the other inductions to be the effect of certain antecedents, and the residue of th
hand, stresses the organization of factors for some purpose. The phenomenon is the effect of the remaining antecedents.
-I-a.-,4-''1'1''')'0 of a situation not immediately apprehended as causal are
4. Method of Concomitant Variations
creatively connected in order to demonstrate causal Fifth Canon. Whatever varies in any manner whenever anothe
The aim may be description, explanation, or prediction. phenomenon varies in some manner, is either a cause or an
of that or is connected with it some fact of causatior
of events are ordered as sequential or coexistent, more or
proximate or overlapping. Favoring such logical or system-build- (5) experimental methods stand out starkly 1:
ing procedures is our hypothesis that causation consists of inter- nudity.. AII the more so perhaps because he ~\..'-'.I.,J.~'-" .L'.L.
even the of differentiable factors becomes reduced to "post hoc opposite, "Every effect has a cause,"
the simple abstractive common absence and presence of formalized "Same cause same As we have indicated,
circumstances. the assumption is made that maxims are related to data, but
Mill and hosts of logicians after him, have clearly recognized the enormous differences between specific events and generalized
the many difficulties and insufficiencies of the system of experi- formulae are su to nullify the assumption.
mental methods. This fact is illustrated by the following points. Another example is the causal principle alleged to
( I) Mill was troubled by the problem of plurality of caus~s exist in identical structures." The causal system here is character-
which negated considerably his simplicity of approach. For this ized by the possible content. An assertion is
reason the method of agreement, originally regarded as coordinate made about basic interrelations of things and events on the ab-
with the method of difference, had to be devalued. (2.) Again, stract ground of sameness of structure. Causal connection is as-
Mill realized that his system was not as elaborate as it appeared, serted both on ground that structural identity in different
since the methods of agreement and difference were basic to the things implies a common causal ancestry and that items in
others. Later writers have charged that treating the formulations successive structures cause or produce the ones.
as so many separate methods seriously darkened the subject of
induction;" Furthermore, it has been pointed out that the methods B. as Specific Causal Instruments
are essentially Their function is to eliminate combina- On the locale of to used as instruments
tions of factors which do not meet the causal conjunction criterion. in studying is the field of scientific investigation.
Conventional criticisms, however, do not really focus on the When the study is the discovery or explanation of
fundamental objection that these formulae and systems are essen- specific events, local are constructed as definite instru-
tially incongruous with actual events. To describe methods of dis- ments of Aside from the fact that instrumental causal
covering causal relations implies taking some account of the vast are constructed for the solution of specific problems, they
number of contacts an investigator must have with things. So are kept close influenced by, the events they are designed
as Mill's methods went, his idea that they were inductive sy110- to elucidate. can not assume the proportions of
gisms or, at least, similar sorts of schema indicates that he dimly abstract grand-scale systems.
realized he was concerned with an enormous job of linguistic con- In one sense we may say that every specific scientific . . pc,p""l1t"'t"'h