The philosophy of mathematics
The philosophy of mathematics PREFACE.INTRODUCTION.ANALYSIS.CHAPTER I.CHAPTER II.CHAPTER III.CHAPTER IV.CHAPTER V.CHAPTER VI.GEOMETRY.CHAPTER I.CHAPTER II.CHAPTER III.FOOTNOTES:Copyright
The philosophy of mathematics
Auguste Comte
PREFACE.
The pleasure and profit which the translator has received
from the great work here presented, have induced him to lay it
before his fellow-teachers and students of Mathematics in a more
accessible form than that in which it has hitherto appeared. The
want of a comprehensive map of the wide region of mathematical
science—a bird's-eye view of its leading features, and of the true
bearings and relations of all its parts—is felt by every thoughtful
student. He is like the visitor to a great city, who gets no just
idea of its extent and situation till he has seen it from some
commanding eminence. To have a panoramic view of the whole
district—presenting at one glance all the parts in due
co-ordination, and the darkest nooks clearly shown—is invaluable to
either traveller or student. It is this which has been most
perfectly accomplished for mathematical science by the author whose
work is here presented.Clearness and depth, comprehensiveness and precision, have
never, perhaps, been so remarkably united as in Auguste Comte. He
views his subject from an elevation which gives to each part of the
complex whole its true position and value, while his telescopic
glance loses none of the needful details, and not only itself
pierces to the heart of the matter, but converts its opaqueness
into such transparent crystal, that other eyes are enabled to see
as deeply into it as his own.Any mathematician who peruses this volume will need no other
justification of the high opinion here expressed; but others may
appreciate the following endorsements of well-known
authorities.Mill, in his "Logic," calls
the work of M. Comte "by far the greatest yet produced on the
Philosophy of the sciences;" and adds, "of this admirable work, one
of the most admirable portions is that in which he may truly be
said to have created the Philosophy of the higher
Mathematics:"Morell, in his "Speculative
Philosophy of Europe," says, "The classification given of the
sciences at large, and their regular order of development, is
unquestionably a master-piece of scientific thinking, as simple as
it is comprehensive;" andLewes, in his
"Biographical History of Philosophy," names Comte "the Bacon of the
nineteenth century," and says, "I unhesitatingly record my
conviction that this is the greatest work of our age."The complete work of M. Comte—his "Cours de
Philosophie Positive"—fills six large octavo volumes,
of six or seven hundred pages each, two thirds of the first volume
comprising the purely mathematical portion. The great bulk of the
"Course" is the probable cause of the fewness of those to whom even
this section of it is known. Its presentation in its present form
is therefore felt by the translator to be a most useful
contribution to mathematical progress in this country. The
comprehensiveness of the style of the author—grasping all possible
forms of an idea in one Briarean sentence, armed at all points
against leaving any opening for mistake or
forgetfulness—occasionally verges upon cumbersomeness and
formality. The translator has, therefore, sometimes taken the
liberty of breaking up or condensing a long sentence, and omitting
a few passages not absolutely necessary, or referring to the
peculiar "Positive philosophy" of the author; but he has generally
aimed at a conscientious fidelity to the original. It has often
been difficult to retain its fine shades and subtile distinctions
of meaning, and, at the same time, replace the peculiarly
appropriate French idioms by corresponding English ones. The
attempt, however, has always been made, though, when the best
course has been at all doubtful, the language of the original has
been followed as closely as possible, and, when necessary,
smoothness and grace have been unhesitatingly sacrificed to the
higher attributes of clearness and precision.Some forms of expression may strike the reader as unusual,
but they have been retained because they were characteristic, not
of the mere language of the original, but of its spirit. When a
great thinker has clothed his conceptions in phrases which are
singular even in his own tongue, he who professes to translate him
is bound faithfully to preserve such forms of speech, as far as is
practicable; and this has been here done with respect to such
peculiarities of expression as belong to the author, not as a
foreigner, but as an individual—not because he writes in French,
but because he is Auguste Comte.The young student of Mathematics should not attempt to read
the whole of this volume at once, but should peruse each portion of
it in connexion with the temporary subject of his special study:
the first chapter of the first book, for example, while he is
studying Algebra; the first chapter of the second book, when he has
made some progress in Geometry; and so with the rest. Passages
which are obscure at the first reading will brighten up at the
second; and as his own studies cover a larger portion of the field
of Mathematics, he will see more and more clearly their relations
to one another, and to those which he is next to take up. For this
end he is urgently recommended to obtain a perfect familiarity with
the "Analytical Table of Contents," which maps out the whole
subject, the grand divisions of which are also indicated in the
Tabular View facing the title-page. Corresponding heads will be
found in the body of the work, the principal divisions being in
small capitals, and the subdivisions
inItalics. For these details the
translator alone is responsible.
INTRODUCTION.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS.Although Mathematical Science is the most ancient and the
most perfect of all, yet the general idea which we ought to form of
it has not yet been clearly determined. Its definition and its
principal divisions have remained till now vague and uncertain.
Indeed the plural name—"The Mathematics"—by which we commonly
designate it, would alone suffice to indicate the want of unity in
the common conception of it.In truth, it was not till the commencement of the last
century that the different fundamental conceptions which constitute
this great science were each of them sufficiently developed to
permit the true spirit of the whole to manifest itself with
clearness. Since that epoch the attention of geometers has been too
exclusively absorbed by the special perfecting of the different
branches, and by the application which they have made of them to
the most important laws of the universe, to allow them to give due
attention to the general system of the science.But at the present time the progress of the special
departments is no longer so rapid as to forbid the contemplation of
the whole. The science of mathematics is now sufficiently
developed, both in itself and as to its most essential application,
to have arrived at that state of consistency in which we ought to
strive to arrange its different parts in a single system, in order
to prepare for new advances. We may even observe that the last
important improvements of the science have directly paved the way
for this important philosophical operation, by impressing on its
principal parts a character of unity which did not previously
exist.To form a just idea of the object of mathematical science, we
may start from the indefinite and meaningless definition of it
usually given, in calling it "The science of
magnitudes," or, which is more definite,
"The science which has for its object the measurement
of magnitudes." Let us see how we can rise from this
rough sketch (which is singularly deficient in precision and depth,
though, at bottom, just) to a veritable definition, worthy of the
importance, the extent, and the difficulty of the
science.THE OBJECT OF MATHEMATICS.Measuring Magnitudes.The question
ofmeasuringa magnitude in itself
presents to the mind no other idea than that of the simple direct
comparison of this magnitude with another similar magnitude,
supposed to be known, which it takes for
theunitof comparison among all others of
the same kind. According to this definition, then, the science of
mathematics—vast and profound as it is with reason reputed to
be—instead of being an immense concatenation of prolonged mental
labours, which offer inexhaustible occupation to our intellectual
activity, would seem to consist of a simple series of mechanical
processes for obtaining directly the ratios of the quantities to be
measured to those by which we wish to measure them, by the aid of
operations of similar character to the superposition of lines, as
practiced by the carpenter with his rule.The error of this definition consists in presenting as direct
an object which is almost always, on the contrary, very indirect.
Thedirectmeasurement of a magnitude, by
superposition or any similar process, is most frequently an
operation quite impossible for us to perform; so that if we had no
other means for determining magnitudes than direct comparisons, we
should be obliged to renounce the knowledge of most of those which
interest us.Difficulties.The force of this general
observation will be understood if we limit ourselves to consider
specially the particular case which evidently offers the most
facility—that of the measurement of one straight line by another.
This comparison, which is certainly the most simple which we can
conceive, can nevertheless scarcely ever be effected directly. In
reflecting on the whole of the conditions necessary to render a
line susceptible of a direct measurement, we see that most
frequently they cannot be all fulfilled at the same time. The first
and the most palpable of these conditions—that of being able to
pass over the line from one end of it to the other, in order to
apply the unit of measurement to its whole length—evidently
excludes at once by far the greater part of the distances which
interest us the most; in the first place, all the distances between
the celestial bodies, or from any one of them to the earth; and
then, too, even the greater number of terrestrial distances, which
are so frequently inaccessible. But even if this first condition be
found to be fulfilled, it is still farther necessary that the
length be neither too great nor too small, which would render a
direct measurement equally impossible. The line must also be
suitably situated; for let it be one which we could measure with
the greatest facility, if it were horizontal, but conceive it to be
turned up vertically, and it becomes impossible to measure
it.The difficulties which we have indicated in reference to
measuring lines, exist in a very much greater degree in the
measurement of surfaces, volumes, velocities, times, forces,
&c. It is this fact which makes necessary the formation of
mathematical science, as we are going to see; for the human mind
has been compelled to renounce, in almost all cases, the direct
measurement of magnitudes, and to seek to determine
themindirectly, and it is thus that it
has been led to the creation of mathematics.General Method.The general method which is
constantly employed, and evidently the only one conceivable, to
ascertain magnitudes which do not admit of a direct measurement,
consists in connecting them with others which are susceptible of
being determined immediately, and by means of which we succeed in
discovering the first through the relations which subsist between
the two. Such is the precise object of mathematical science viewed
as a whole. In order to form a sufficiently extended idea of it, we
must consider that this indirect determination of magnitudes may be
indirect in very different degrees. In a great number of cases,
which are often the most important, the magnitudes, by means of
which the principal magnitudes sought are to be determined, cannot
themselves be measured directly, and must therefore, in their turn,
become the subject of a similar question, and so on; so that on
many occasions the human mind is obliged to establish a long series
of intermediates between the system of unknown magnitudes which are
the final objects of its researches, and the system of magnitudes
susceptible of direct measurement, by whose means we finally
determine the first, with which at first they appear to have no
connexion.Illustrations.Some examples will make clear any
thing which may seem too abstract in the preceding
generalities.1.Falling Bodies.Let us consider,
in the first place, a natural phenomenon, very simple, indeed, but
which may nevertheless give rise to a mathematical question, really
existing, and susceptible of actual applications—the phenomenon of
the vertical fall of heavy bodies.The mind the most unused to mathematical conceptions, in
observing this phenomenon, perceives at once that the
twoquantitieswhich it presents—namely,
theheightfrom which a body has fallen,
and thetimeof its fall—are necessarily
connected with each other, since they vary together, and
simultaneously remain fixed; or, in the language of geometers, that
they are "functions" of each other. The
phenomenon, considered under this point of view, gives rise then to
a mathematical question, which consists in substituting for the
direct measurement of one of these two magnitudes, when it is
impossible, the measurement of the other. It is thus, for example,
that we may determine indirectly the depth of a precipice, by
merely measuring the time that a heavy body would occupy in falling
to its bottom, and by suitable procedures this inaccessible depth
will be known with as much precision as if it was a horizontal line
placed in the most favourable circumstances for easy and exact
measurement. On other occasions it is the height from which a body
has fallen which it will be easy to ascertain, while the time of
the fall could not be observed directly; then the same phenomenon
would give rise to the inverse question, namely, to determine the
time from the height; as, for example, if we wished to ascertain
what would be the duration of the vertical fall of a body falling
from the moon to the earth.In this example the mathematical question is very simple, at
least when we do not pay attention to the variation in the
intensity of gravity, or the resistance of the fluid which the body
passes through in its fall. But, to extend the question, we have
only to consider the same phenomenon in its greatest generality, in
supposing the fall oblique, and in taking into the account all the
principal circumstances. Then, instead of offering simply two
variable quantities connected with each other by a relation easy to
follow, the phenomenon will present a much greater number; namely,
the space traversed, whether in a vertical or horizontal direction;
the time employed in traversing it; the velocity of the body at
each point of its course; even the intensity and the direction of
its primitive impulse, which may also be viewed as variables; and
finally, in certain cases (to take every thing into the account),
the resistance of the medium and the intensity of gravity. All
these different quantities will be connected with one another, in
such a way that each in its turn may be indirectly determined by
means of the others; and this will present as many distinct
mathematical questions as there may be co-existing magnitudes in
the phenomenon under consideration. Such a very slight change in
the physical conditions of a problem may cause (as in the above
example) a mathematical research, at first very elementary, to be
placed at once in the rank of the most difficult questions, whose
complete and rigorous solution surpasses as yet the utmost power of
the human intellect.2.Inaccessible Distances.Let us
take a second example from geometrical phenomena. Let it be
proposed to determine a distance which is not susceptible of direct
measurement; it will be generally conceived as making part of
afigure, or certain system of lines,
chosen in such a way that all its other parts may be observed
directly; thus, in the case which is most simple, and to which all
the others may be finally reduced, the proposed distance will be
considered as belonging to a triangle, in which we can determine
directly either another side and two angles, or two sides and one
angle. Thence-forward, the knowledge of the desired distance,
instead of being obtained directly, will be the result of a
mathematical calculation, which will consist in deducing it from
the observed elements by means of the relation which connects it
with them. This calculation will become successively more and more
complicated, if the parts which we have supposed to be known cannot
themselves be determined (as is most frequently the case) except in
an indirect manner, by the aid of new auxiliary systems, the number
of which, in great operations of this kind, finally becomes very
considerable. The distance being once determined, the knowledge of
it will frequently be sufficient for obtaining new quantities,
which will become the subject of new mathematical questions. Thus,
when we know at what distance any object is situated, the simple
observation of its apparent diameter will evidently permit us to
determine indirectly its real dimensions, however inaccessible it
may be, and, by a series of analogous investigations, its surface,
its volume, even its weight, and a number of other properties, a
knowledge of which seemed forbidden to us.3.Astronomical Facts.It is by such
calculations that man has been able to ascertain, not only the
distances from the planets to the earth, and, consequently, from
each other, but their actual magnitude, their true figure, even to
the inequalities of their surface; and, what seemed still more
completely hidden from us, their respective masses, their mean
densities, the principal circumstances of the fall of heavy bodies
on the surface of each of them, &c.By the power of mathematical theories, all these different
results, and many others relative to the different classes of
mathematical phenomena, have required no other direct measurements
than those of a very small number of straight lines, suitably
chosen, and of a greater number of angles. We may even say, with
perfect truth, so as to indicate in a word the general range of the
science, that if we did not fear to multiply calculations
unnecessarily, and if we had not, in consequence, to reserve them
for the determination of the quantities which could not be measured
directly, the determination of all the magnitudes susceptible of
precise estimation, which the various orders of phenomena can offer
us, could be finally reduced to the direct measurement of a single
straight line and of a suitable number of angles.TRUE DEFINITION OF MATHEMATICS.We are now able to define mathematical science with
precision, by assigning to it as its object
theindirectmeasurement of magnitudes, and
by saying it constantly proposesto determine certain
magnitudes from others by means of the precise relations existing
between them.This enunciation, instead of giving the idea of only
anart, as do all the ordinary
definitions, characterizes immediately a
truescience, and shows it at once to be
composed of an immense chain of intellectual operations, which may
evidently become very complicated, because of the series of
intermediate links which it will be necessary to establish between
the unknown quantities and those which admit of a direct
measurement; of the number of variables coexistent in the proposed
question; and of the nature of the relations between all these
different magnitudes furnished by the phenomena under
consideration. According to such a definition, the spirit of
mathematics consists in always regarding all the quantities which
any phenomenon can present, as connected and interwoven with one
another, with the view of deducing them from one another. Now there
is evidently no phenomenon which cannot give rise to considerations
of this kind; whence results the naturally indefinite extent and
even the rigorous logical universality of mathematical science. We
shall seek farther on to circumscribe as exactly as possible its
real extension.The preceding explanations establish clearly the propriety of
the name employed to designate the science which we are
considering. This denomination, which has taken to-day so definite
a meaning by itself signifies simplysciencein general. Such a designation, rigorously exact for the
Greeks, who had no other real science, could be retained by the
moderns only to indicate the mathematics asthescience, beyond all others—the science of
sciences.Indeed, every true science has for its object the
determination of certain phenomena by means of others, in
accordance with the relations which exist between them.
Everyscienceconsists in the
co-ordination of facts; if the different observations were entirely
isolated, there would be no science. We may even say, in general
terms, thatscienceis essentially
destined to dispense, so far as the different phenomena permit it,
with all direct observation, by enabling us to deduce from the
smallest possible number of immediate data the greatest possible
number of results. Is not this the real use, whether in speculation
or in action, of thelawswhich we succeed
in discovering among natural phenomena? Mathematical science, in
this point of view, merely pushes to the highest possible degree
the same kind of researches which are pursued, in degrees more or
less inferior, by every real science in its respective
sphere.ITS TWO FUNDAMENTAL DIVISIONS.We have thus far viewed mathematical science only as a whole,
without paying any regard to its divisions. We must now, in order
to complete this general view, and to form a just idea of the
philosophical character of the science, consider its fundamental
division. The secondary divisions will be examined in the following
chapters.This principal division, which we are about to investigate,
can be truly rational, and derived from the real nature of the
subject, only so far as it spontaneously presents itself to us, in
making the exact analysis of a complete mathematical question. We
will, therefore, having determined above what is the general object
of mathematical labours, now characterize with precision the
principal different orders of inquiries, of which they are
constantly composed.Their different Objects.The complete solution of
every mathematical question divides itself necessarily into two
parts, of natures essentially distinct, and with relations
invariably determinate. We have seen that every mathematical
inquiry has for its object to determine unknown magnitudes,
according to the relations between them and known magnitudes. Now
for this object, it is evidently necessary, in the first place, to
ascertain with precision the relations which exist between the
quantities which we are considering. This first branch of inquiries
constitutes that which I call theconcretepart of the solution. When it is finished, the question
changes; it is now reduced to a pure question of numbers,
consisting simply in determining unknown numbers, when we know what
precise relations connect them with known numbers. This second
branch of inquiries is what I call theabstractpart of the solution. Hence follows the fundamental division
of general mathematical science intotwogreat sciences—ABSTRACT
MATHEMATICS, andCONCRETE
MATHEMATICS.This analysis may be observed in every complete mathematical
question, however simple or complicated it may be. A single example
will suffice to make it intelligible.Taking up again the phenomenon of the vertical fall of a
heavy body, and considering the simplest case, we see that in order
to succeed in determining, by means of one another, the height
whence the body has fallen, and the duration of its fall, we must
commence by discovering the exact relation of these two quantities,
or, to use the language of geometers,
theequationwhich exists between them.
Before this first research is completed, every attempt to determine
numerically the value of one of these two magnitudes from the other
would evidently be premature, for it would have no basis. It is not
enough to know vaguely that they depend on one another—which every
one at once perceives—but it is necessary to determine in what this
dependence consists. This inquiry may be very difficult, and in
fact, in the present case, constitutes incomparably the greater
part of the problem. The true scientific spirit is so modern, that
no one, perhaps, before Galileo, had ever remarked the increase of
velocity which a body experiences in its fall: a circumstance which
excludes the hypothesis, towards which our mind (always
involuntarily inclined to suppose in every phenomenon the most
simplefunctions, without any other motive
than its greater facility in conceiving them) would be naturally
led, that the height was proportional to the time. In a word, this
first inquiry terminated in the discovery of the law of
Galileo.When thisconcretepart is
completed, the inquiry becomes one of quite another nature. Knowing
that the spaces passed through by the body in each successive
second of its fall increase as the series of odd numbers, we have
then a problem purely numerical
andabstract; to deduce the height from
the time, or the time from the height; and this consists in finding
that the first of these two quantities, according to the law which
has been established, is a known multiple of the second power of
the other; from which, finally, we have to calculate the value of
the one when that of the other is given.In this example the concrete question is more difficult than
the abstract one. The reverse would be the case if we considered
the same phenomenon in its greatest generality, as I have done
above for another object. According to the circumstances, sometimes
the first, sometimes the second, of these two parts will constitute
the principal difficulty of the whole question; for the
mathematical law of the phenomenon may be very simple, but very
difficult to obtain, or it may be easy to discover, but very
complicated; so that the two great sections of mathematical
science, when we compare them as wholes, must be regarded as
exactly equivalent in extent and in difficulty, as well as in
importance, as we shall show farther on, in considering each of
them separately.Their different Natures.These two parts,
essentially distinct in theirobject, as
we have just seen, are no less so with regard to
thenatureof the inquiries of which they
are composed.The first should be calledconcrete,
since it evidently depends on the character of the phenomena
considered, and must necessarily vary when we examine new
phenomena; while the second is completely independent of the nature
of the objects examined, and is concerned with only
thenumericalrelations which they
present, for which reason it should be
calledabstract. The same relations may
exist in a great number of different phenomena, which, in spite of
their extreme diversity, will be viewed by the geometer as offering
an analytical question susceptible, when studied by itself, of
being resolved once for all. Thus, for instance, the same law which
exists between the space and the time of the vertical fall of a
body in a vacuum, is found again in many other phenomena which
offer no analogy with the first nor with each other; for it
expresses the relation between the surface of a spherical body and
the length of its diameter; it determines, in like manner, the
decrease of the intensity of light or of heat in relation to the
distance of the objects lighted or heated, &c. The abstract
part, common to these different mathematical questions, having been
treated in reference to one of these, will thus have been treated
for all; while the concrete part will have necessarily to be again
taken up for each question separately, without the solution of any
one of them being able to give any direct aid, in that connexion,
for the solution of the rest.The abstract part of mathematics is, then, general in its
nature; the concrete part, special.To present this comparison under a new point of view, we may
say concrete mathematics has a philosophical character, which is
essentially experimental, physical, phenomenal; while that of
abstract mathematics is purely logical, rational. The concrete part
of every mathematical question is necessarily founded on the
consideration of the external world, and could never be resolved by
a simple series of intellectual combinations. The abstract part, on
the contrary, when it has been very completely separated, can
consist only of a series of logical deductions, more or less
prolonged; for if we have once found the equations of a phenomenon,
the determination of the quantities therein considered, by means of
one another, is a matter for reasoning only, whatever the
difficulties may be. It belongs to the understanding alone to
deduce from these equations results which are evidently contained
in them, although perhaps in a very involved manner, without there
being occasion to consult anew the external world; the
consideration of which, having become thenceforth foreign to the
subject, ought even to be carefully set aside in order to reduce
the labour to its true peculiar difficulty.
Theabstractpart of mathematics is then
purely instrumental, and is only an immense and admirable extension
of natural logic to a certain class of deductions. On the other
hand, geometry and mechanics, which, as we shall see presently,
constitute theconcretepart, must be
viewed as real natural sciences, founded on observation, like all
the rest, although the extreme simplicity of their phenomena
permits an infinitely greater degree of systematization, which has
sometimes caused a misconception of the experimental character of
their first principles.We see, by this brief general comparison, how natural and
profound is our fundamental division of mathematical
science.We have now to circumscribe, as exactly as we can in this
first sketch, each of these two great sections.CONCRETE MATHEMATICS.Concrete Mathematicshaving for its object the
discovery of theequationsof phenomena,
it would seem at first that it must be composed of as many distinct
sciences as we find really distinct categories among natural
phenomena. But we are yet very far from having discovered
mathematical laws in all kinds of phenomena; we shall even see,
presently, that the greater part will very probably always hide
themselves from our investigations. In reality, in the present
condition of the human mind, there are directly but two great
general classes of phenomena, whose equations we constantly know;
these are, firstly, geometrical, and, secondly, mechanical
phenomena. Thus, then, the concrete part of mathematics is composed
of Geometry and Rational Mechanics.This is sufficient, it is true, to give to it a complete
character of logical universality, when we consider all phenomena
from the most elevated point of view of natural philosophy. In
fact, if all the parts of the universe were conceived as immovable,
we should evidently have only geometrical phenomena to observe,
since all would be reduced to relations of form, magnitude, and
position; then, having regard to the motions which take place in
it, we would have also to consider mechanical phenomena. Hence the
universe, in the statical point of view, presents only geometrical
phenomena; and, considered dynamically, only mechanical phenomena.
Thus geometry and mechanics constitute the two fundamental natural
sciences, in this sense, that all natural effects may be conceived
as simple necessary results, either of the laws of extension or of
the laws of motion.But although this conception is always logically possible,
the difficulty is to specialize it with the necessary precision,
and to follow it exactly in each of the general cases offered to us
by the study of nature; that is, to effectually reduce each
principal question of natural philosophy, for a certain determinate
order of phenomena, to the question of geometry or mechanics, to
which we might rationally suppose it should be brought. This
transformation, which requires great progress to have been
previously made in the study of each class of phenomena, has thus
far been really executed only for those of astronomy, and for a
part of those considered by terrestrial physics, properly so
called. It is thus that astronomy, acoustics, optics, &c., have
finally become applications of mathematical science to certain
orders of observations.[1]But
these applications not being by their nature rigorously
circumscribed, to confound them with the science would be to assign
to it a vague and indefinite domain; and this is done in the usual
division, so faulty in so many other respects, of the mathematics
into "Pure" and "Applied."ABSTRACT MATHEMATICS.The nature of abstract mathematics (the general division of
which will be examined in the following chapter) is clearly and
exactly determined. It is composed of what is called
theCalculus,[2]taking
this word in its greatest extent, which reaches from the most
simple numerical operations to the most sublime combinations of
transcendental analysis. TheCalculushas
the solution of all questions relating to numbers for its peculiar
object. Itsstarting pointis, constantly
and necessarily, the knowledge of the precise
relations,i.e., of
theequations, between the different
magnitudes which are simultaneously considered; that which is, on
the contrary, thestopping pointof
concrete mathematics. However complicated, or however indirect
these relations may be, the final object of the calculus always is
to obtain from them the values of the unknown quantities by means
of those which are known. Thisscience,
although nearer perfection than any other, is really little
advanced as yet, so that this object is rarely attained in a manner
completely satisfactory.Mathematical analysis is, then, the true rational basis of
the entire system of our actual knowledge. It constitutes the first
and the most perfect of all the fundamental sciences. The ideas
with which it occupies itself are the most universal, the most
abstract, and the most simple which it is possible for us to
conceive.This peculiar nature of mathematical analysis enables us
easily to explain why, when it is properly employed, it is such a
powerful instrument, not only to give more precision to our real
knowledge, which is self-evident, but especially to establish an
infinitely more perfect co-ordination in the study of the phenomena
which admit of that application; for, our conceptions having been
so generalized and simplified that a single analytical question,
abstractly resolved, contains theimplicitsolution of a great number of diverse physical questions, the
human mind must necessarily acquire by these means a greater
facility in perceiving relations between phenomena which at first
appeared entirely distinct from one another. We thus naturally see
arise, through the medium of analysis, the most frequent and the
most unexpected approximations between problems which at first
offered no apparent connection, and which we often end in viewing
as identical. Could we, for example, without the aid of analysis,
perceive the least resemblance between the determination of the
direction of a curve at each of its points and that of the velocity
acquired by a body at every instant of its variable motion? and yet
these questions, however different they may be, compose but one in
the eyes of the geometer.The high relative perfection of mathematical analysis is as
easily perceptible. This perfection is not due, as some have
thought, to the nature of the signs which are employed as
instruments of reasoning, eminently concise and general as they
are. In reality, all great analytical ideas have been formed
without the algebraic signs having been of any essential aid,
except for working them out after the mind had conceived them. The
superior perfection of the science of the calculus is due
principally to the extreme simplicity of the ideas which it
considers, by whatever signs they may be expressed; so that there
is not the least hope, by any artifice of scientific language, of
perfecting to the same degree theories which refer to more complex
subjects, and which are necessarily condemned by their nature to a
greater or less logical inferiority.THE EXTENT OF ITS FIELD.Our examination of the philosophical character of
mathematical science would remain incomplete, if, after having
viewed its object and composition, we did not examine the real
extent of its domain.Its Universality. For this purpose it is
indispensable to perceive, first of all, that, in the purely
logical point of view, this science is by itself necessarily and
rigorously universal; for there is no question whatever which may
not be finally conceived as consisting in determining certain
quantities from others by means of certain relations, and
consequently as admitting of reduction, in final analysis, to a
simple question of numbers. In all our researches, indeed, on
whatever subject, our object is to arrive at numbers, at
quantities, though often in a very imperfect manner and by very
uncertain methods. Thus, taking an example in the class of subjects
the least accessible to mathematics, the phenomena of living
bodies, even when considered (to take the most complicated case) in
the state of disease, is it not manifest that all the questions of
therapeutics may be viewed as consisting in determining
thequantitiesof the different agents
which modify the organism, and which must act upon it to bring it
to its normal state, admitting, for some of these quantities in
certain cases, values which are equal to zero, or negative, or even
contradictory?The fundamental idea of Descartes on the relation of the
concrete to the abstract in mathematics, has proven, in opposition
to the superficial distinction of metaphysics, that all ideas of
quality may be reduced to those of quantity. This conception,
established at first by its immortal author in relation to
geometrical phenomena only, has since been effectually extended to
mechanical phenomena, and in our days to those of heat. As a result
of this gradual generalization, there are now no geometers who do
not consider it, in a purely theoretical sense, as capable of being
applied to all our real ideas of every sort, so that every
phenomenon is logically susceptible of being represented by
anequation; as much so, indeed, as is a
curve or a motion, excepting the difficulty of discovering it, and
then ofresolvingit, which may be, and
oftentimes are, superior to the greatest powers of the human
mind.Its Limitations. Important as it is to
comprehend the rigorous universality, in a logical point of view,
of mathematical science, it is no less indispensable to consider
now the great reallimitations, which,
through the feebleness of our intellect, narrow in a remarkable
degree its actual domain, in proportion as phenomena, in becoming
special, become complicated.Every question may be conceived as capable of being reduced
to a pure question of numbers; but the difficulty of effecting such
a transformation increases so much with the complication of the
phenomena of natural philosophy, that it soon becomes
insurmountable.This will be easily seen, if we consider that to bring a
question within the field of mathematical analysis, we must first
have discovered the precise relations which exist between the
quantities which are found in the phenomenon under examination, the
establishment of these equations being the necessary starting point
of all analytical labours. This must evidently be so much the more
difficult as we have to do with phenomena which are more special,
and therefore more complicated. We shall thus find that it is only
ininorganic physics