A priori objections to the new theory

On the other hand, by pushing such fear too far, some fall into the opposite

mistake. ‘Your principles’ they say to the followers of the new science, ‘are not true in an absolute way, therefore your conclusions are not worthy of credit,

and we do not care about them.’

We do not believe that to state that the mathematical method does not have

to be subject to experience is an appropriate answer to this objection.

* Physicists who study the theory of light would avoid a great deal of hard

work, if they could do without having to confirm their deductions through

experience.13 The theory of vibrations in ether tells us that in an anisotropic

elastic environment, every plane wave gives rise to three types of vibrations

parallel to the axes of the polarization ellipsoid. Experience confirms the

existence of two of these types of vibrations, but the third cannot be found.

No geometrician has ever entertained the thought of dominating experience

with his theories. On the contrary, all have looked for ways to change the

theory, in order to obtain exactly what experience provides. This is why the

theory of light is still imperfect, and it would not be surprising if the time

should come when the ether hypothesis were abandoned. But if this hypothesis

is to survive in the world of science, it will only be by having all of its

conclusions justified by experience.

The right answer for those who condemn the new science a priori is to

remark that such an objection could be levelled at any science. Even in

mathematics, the doubt arises whether the three-dimensional space we know

is the only one that exists! The principles of no science are true in an absolute

way, and even if one wishes to argue about this matter, one must discuss

it in general terms, but there is no reason specifically to target Political

Economy.

Value

Object of a theory of value

The real facts which we can observe are the sales of some commodities for

which certain prices are paid. The object of a theory of value cannot consist

in anything but explaining these facts, connecting them, and showing them as

a consequence of one or a few principles.

The empirical path is the one that would lead us to gather a great amount

of data on the prices, to put them together, and to see if it is possible to infer

any law from them. We agree that by using this method, which Mill calls

chemical,14 it is not possible to achieve any truly rational law, although it is

still always very useful to have such data and the empirical laws, which can be

of assistance as a first step in the search for truth.

The geometrical or abstract method15 does not care about those facts; it

sets certain axioms on the nature of men and it infers how the phenomenon

of value must follow. Not even through this path do we believe that it is

possible to achieve the truth; on the contrary, we judge it more fallacious than

the previous one.

Considerations, I, May 1892 11

Date: 2015-12-24; view: 871