• TABLE III.
• CONCRETE SCIENCE.
• Universal laws of the continuous re-distribution of Matter and Motion; which results in Evolution where there is a predominant integration of Matter and dissipation of Motion, and which results in Dissolution where there is a predominant absorption of Motion and disintegration of Matter.
• Laws of the redistributions of Matter and Motion actually going on
• among the celestial bodies in their relations to one another as masses: comprehending (ASTRONOMY)
• the dynamics of our solar system. (Planetary Astronomy.)
• the dynamics of our stellar universe. (Sidereal Astronomy.)
• among the molecules of any celestial mass; as caused by
• the actions of these molecules on one another (ASTROGENY)
• resulting in the formation of compound molecules. (Solar Mineralogy.)
• resulting in molecular motions and genesis of radiant forces.9
• resulting in movements of gases and liquids. (Solar Meteorology.10)
• the actions of these molecules on one another, joined with the actions on them of forces radiated by the molecules of other masses: (GEOGENY)
• as exhibited in the planets generally.
• as exhibited in the Earth
• causing composition and of decomposition of inorganic matters. (Mineralogy.)
• causing re-distributions of gases and liquids. (Meteorology.)
• causing re-distributions of solids. (Geology.)
• causing organic phenomena; which are (Biology)
• those of structure (Morphology)
• general.
• special.
• those of function
• in their internal relations (Physiology)
• general.
• special.
• in their external relations (Psychology)
• general
• special
• separate.
• combined. (Sociology.11)
That these great groups of Sciences and their respective sub-groups, fulfil the definition of a true classification given at the outset, is, I think, tolerably manifest. The subjects of inquiry included in each primary division, have essential attributes in common with one another, which they have not in common with any of the subjects contained in the other primary divisions; and they have, by consequence, a greater number of attributes in which they are severally like the subjects they are grouped with, and unlike the subjects otherwise grouped. Between Sciences which deal with relations apart from realities, and Sciences which deal with realities, the distinction is the widest possible; since Being, in some or all of its attributes, is common to all Sciences of the second class, and excluded from all Sciences of the first class. And when we divide the Sciences which treat of realities, into those which deal with their component phenomena considered in ideal separation and those which deal with their component phenomena as actually united, we make a profounder distinction than can exist between the Sciences which deal with one or other order of the components, or than can exist between the Sciences which deal with one or other order of the things composed. The three groups of Sciences may be briefly defined as – laws of the forms; laws of the factors; laws of the products. When thus defined, it becomes manifest that the groups are so radically unlike in their natures, that there can be no transitions between them; and that any Science belonging to one of the groups must be quite incongruous with the Sciences belonging to either of the other groups, if transferred. How fundamental are the differences between them, will be further seen on considering their functions. The first, or abstract group, is instrumental with respect to both the others; and the second, or abstract-concrete group is instrumental with respect to the third or concrete group. An endeavour to invert these functions will at once show how essential is the difference of character. The second and third groups supply subject-matter to the first, and the third supplies subject-matter to the second; but none of the truths which constitute the third group are of any use as solvents of the problems presented by the second group; and none of the truths which the second group formulates can act as solvents of problems contained in the first group.
Concerning the sub-divisions of these great groups, little remains to be added. That each of the groups, being co-extensive with all phenomena, contains truths that are universal and others that are not universal, and that these must be classed apart, is obvious. And that the sub-divisions of the non-universal truths, are to be made according to their decreasing generality in something like the manner shown in the Tables, is proved by the fact that when the descriptive words are read from the root to the extremity of any branch, they form a definition of the Science constituting that branch. That the minor divisions might be otherwise arranged, and that better definitions of them might be given, is highly probable. They are here set down merely for the purpose of showing how this method of classification works out.
I will only further remark that the relations of the Sciences as thus represented, are still but imperfectly represented: their relations cannot be truly shown on a plane, but only in space of three dimensions. The three groups cannot rightly be put in linear order as they have here been. Since the first stands related