The Construction of Theories by Moritz Schlick
Theoretical science, as is obvious from its
name, consists of theories -- that is, of
systems of propositions. Propositions constitute
a system when they are related to one another
through being concerned with the same objects;
or even when they can be deduced from one
another. The process of formulating a law
of nature is, fundamentally, always the same.
It consists, in the first place, of recording
the observations of a natural process in
a table which always contains the relevant
measured values of those variable magnitudes
which characterize the process. The next
step is to discover a function which will
represent in a single formula the distribution
of values in this table. This formula is
then considered to be the law describing
the process as long as all new observations
are in agreement with it. Inasmuch as the
formula always contains more than what is
actually observed, and also because it must
hold for all processes of a similar kind,
the formulation of any law involves a generalization,
or a so-called induction. There is no such
thing as a logically valid deduction going
from the particular to the general: the latter
can only be conjectured, but never logically
inferred. Thus, the universal validity, or
truth, of laws must always remain hypothetical.
All laws of nature have the character of
hypotheses: their truth is never absolutely
certain. Hence, natural science consists
of a combination of brilliant guesses and
exact measurements. . . .
In the same way as a special law is the result
of a series of single observations, a general
law is the consequence of the inductive combination
of several individual laws, until finally
a relatively small number of general propositions
which include the totality of natural laws
is obtained. Thus today, for instance, all
chemical laws can, in principle, be reduced
to physical laws; and the dividing line between
the different domains of physics which used
to be externally related to one another (mechanics,
acoustics, optics, theory of heat, etc.)
has long since completely disappeared. At
the present time, only mechanics and electrodynamics
are left; and these are nowise independent
of each other, hut interpenetrate everywhere.
Whether biology will continue to remain a
special province, or whether it also will
become incorporated in the domain of physics,
is a question that will be discussed in due
course.
In order to obtain a concrete description
of nature (i. e., of nature as it really
is), it is not sufficient to formulate laws:
the abstract laws must, as it were, be given
content. And in addition to these abstract
laws, the constellation of reality (at the
time of consideration), to which the formulas
can be applied, must be stated. Such constellations
are called by physicists boundary or initial
conditions; and mathematically, they are
expressed by the introduction of constants.
Here, we are considering the system of laws
in itself, independently of all applications
-- that is to say, we are only studying general,
and not particular, propositions. We can
thus select out of this system, a group of
the most general propositions from which
all the others are derivable. This derivation
is a purely logical deduction which can be
undertaken without knowledge of the meaning
of the symbols which occur in the laws. Hence,
we will disregard, not only all application
to individual cases, but also the meaning
of all words and symbols -- until the system
is reduced to a purely formal structure,
or empty framework which does not consist
of actual propositions, but only of their
forms (in logic, these are known as prepositional
functions). A system of this kind, which
does not represent nature in actuality, but
all the possibilities in nature, or in other
words, its most general form -- is known
as a hypothetico-deductive system (Fieri).
The propositions forming a group at the apex
of this system, are called axioms; and the
choice as to which propositions shall be
taken as axioms is, to a certain extent,
arbitrary. We may regard any proposition
as an axiom, so long as we fulfil one condition,
which is that all the other propositions
in the system be derivable from the chosen
group of axioms. Thus, the quality of being
an axiom is not only in any sense a natural,
intrinsic attribute or characteristic of
a law; the only reason for choosing certain
propositions as axioms, are those of their
expediency or convenience. In the propositions
derived from these axioms, further symbols,
other than those used in the axioms, are
introduced by definition. A definition consists
of the introduction of new symbols, or signs,
for the purpose of abbreviation. The choice
as to which of these signs shall be regarded
as fundamental symbols and which as derived
from the latter by definition, is likewise
arbitrary.
Examples:
E = 1/2mv2 M = mv Definition of Energy Definition
of Momentum But instead of mass and velocity,
we can also write:
Energy
Momentum : v = 2E
M
Thus, it is immaterial which magnitudes or
quantities occur in the axioms.
Hence, the structure of a theory consists
of: 1) axioms; 2) derived propositions and
3) definitions. In the symbolic representation
of natural science, whether by means of words
or of mathematical symbols, the three structural
elements cannot be outwardly distinguished
from one another.
The symbolic representation of a theory consists
of sentences which in their turn are constituted
of certain series of spoken or written signs:
the theory itself consists primarily of "propositions."
The question as to whether a sentence represents
a true proposition or only a definition for
example depends on the interpretations which
explain it and give it its meaning. These
do not form part of the symbolic representation
itself, but are added to it -- that is, they
are added to a hypothetico-deductive system
-- from outside as it were, for example,
in the form of ostensive definitions. They
constitute the rules of the application of
the sentences and are conclusive for the
philosophical interpretation of the latter.
It is, after all, necessary to refer to a
reality which is described by the system
of signs or symbols since, at some time or
another, we must break out from their system.
Only those sentences which, by virtue of
their interpretation, represent genuine propositions,
can communicate something about nature; the
others are merely internal rules for signs
and consequently are definitions.
Excerpted from Philosophy of Nature, by Moritz
Schlick