Ofcourse，nothingbutthemostmeagreandsketchiestoutlineofthismatterispracticableinthisplace，andeventhatonlyinitsrelationtothemachineindustryduringthepastonehundredyearsorso。WhatissaidaboveoftheBritishleadinmodernsciencemayperhapsbequestioned，anditisnotnecessaryforthepresentpurposetoinsistonitstruth；butsomuchseemsbeyondhazardasthattheleadinthematerialscienceslaywiththeBritishthroughtheearlymachineage，andthattheprovenanceofthismodernscientificresearchto-daydoesnotextend，inanypronounceddegree，beyondthosecommunitiesthatliewithintheareaofthemodernmachineindustry。
　　Intimeandspacetheprevalenceofthemodernmaterialisticscienceisroughlyextensivewiththatofthemachineprocess。Itis，nodoubt，relatedtoitbothascauseandaseffect；butthatitsrelationtomodernindustryismorethatofeffectthancauseseemsatleastbroadlysuggestedbythedecaywhichpresentlyovertookscientificresearch，e。g。，inthesouthofEuropewhenthosepeoplesturnedtheirattentionfrommaterialtospiritualandpoliticalaffairs。28*
　　Whatisofimmediateinterestisthechangethathascomeoverthescopeandmethodofscientificresearchsincethedominanceofthemachineprocess，incomparisonwithwhatprecededthecomingofthemachineage。Thebeginningsofmodernscienceareolderthantheindustrialrevolution；theprinciplesofscientificresearchcausalexplanationandexactmeasurement
　　antedatetheregimeofthemachineprocess。Butachangehastakenplaceinthepostulatesandanimusofscientificresearchsincemodernsciencefirstbegan，andthischangeinthepostulatesofscientificknowledgeisrelatedtothegrowthofthemachinetechnology。
　　ItisunnecessaryheretoharkbacktothatscholasticscienceorphilosophythatservedasanintellectualexpressionoftheecclesiasticalandpoliticalcultureoftheMiddleAges。
　　Itscharacter，ascomparedwithlaterscience，issufficientlynotorious。Bythechangefromscholasticknowledgetomodernscience，totheextenttowhichthechangewascarriedthrough，theprinciplehabitofmindofadequatecausewassubstitutedforthatofsufficientreason。Thelawofcausationasitisfoundatwork，inthematurerscienceoftheeighteenthandearlynineteenthcenturies，comprisestwodistinguishablepostulates:
　　1equalityquantitativeequivalenceofcauseandeffect；and2similarityqualitativeequivalenceofcauseandeffect。Theformermay，withoutforcingit，bereferredtocommercialaccountancyasitsanalogueinpracticallifeandastheprobableculturalgroundoutofwhichthehabitofinsistingonaninviolablequantitativeequivalencegatheredconsistency。Theascendancyofthelatterseemsinasimilarmannertobereferabletotheprevalenceofhandicraftasitsculturalground。
　　Statednegatively，itassertsthatnothingappearsintheeffectbutwhatwascontainedinthecause，inamannerwhichsuggeststherulethatnothingappearsintheproductofhandicraftbutwhatwaspresentintheskilloftheartificer。“Naturalcauses，“
　　whicharemademuchofinthismiddleperiodofmodernscience，areconceivedtoworkaccordingtocertain“naturallaws。“Thesenaturallaws，lawsofthe“normalcourse“ofthings，arefelttotendtoarationalendandtohavesomethingofacoerciveforce。
　　SothatNaturemakesnomistakes，Naturedoesnothinginvain，Naturetakesthemosteconomicalcoursetoitsend，Naturemakesnojumps，etc。Underthislawofnaturalcausationeveryeffectmusthaveacausewhichresemblesitintheparticularrespectwhichclaimstheinquirer’sattention。Amongotherconsequencesofthisviewitfollowsthat，sincethedetailsaswellasthewholeofthematerialuniverseareconstruedtoshowadaptationtoapreconceivedend，this“naturalorder“ofthingsmustbetheoutcomeofpreexistentdesignresidinginthe“firstcause，“
　　whichispostulatedbyvirtueofthisimputeddesignandisdesignatedthe“GreatArtificer。“Thereisanelementofconationinthisoriginalmodernpostulateofcauseandeffect。Theshadowoftheartificer，withhisintelligenceandmanualskill，isforeverinthebackgroundoftheconceptsofnaturallaw。The“cause“dealtwithinagivencaseisnotthoughtofasaneffect；andtheeffectistreatedasafinality，notasaphaseofacomplexsequenceofcausation。Whensuchasequenceisunderinquiry；asintheearlier，pre-Darwiniantheoriesofevolution，itisnothandledasacumulativesequencewhosecharactermayblindlychangefrombettertoworse，orconversely，atanypoint；
　　butratherasanunfoldingofacertainprimecauseinwhichiscontained，implicitly，allthatpresentlyappearsinexplicitform。
　　Intheconceptionofthecausalrelationasitmaybeseenatworkahundredyearsago，causeandeffectarefelttostandoveragainstoneanother，sothatthecausecontrols，determinestheeffectbytransmittingitsowncharactertoit。Thecauseistheproducer，theeffecttheproduct。Relativelylittleemphasisorinterestfallsupontheprocessoutofwhichtheproductemerges；
　　theinterestbeingcentreduponthelatteranditsrelationtotheefficientcauseoutofwhichithascome。Thetheoriesconstructedundertheguidanceofthisconceptionaregeneralizationsastoanequivalencebetweentheproducingcauseandtheeffect-product。Thecause“makes“theeffect，inmuchthesamesenseasthecraftsmanisapprehendedtomakethearticleonwhichheisengaged。Thereisafeltdistinctionbetweenthecauseandtheenvironingcircumstances，muchasthereisbetweentheworkmanontheonehandandhistoolsandmaterialsontheotherhand。Theinterveningprocessissimplythemanneroffunctioningoftheefficientcause，muchastheworkman’sworkisthefunctioningoftheworkmanintheintervalbetweentheinceptionandthecompletionoftheproduct。Theeffectissubsequenttothecause，astheworkman’sproductissubsequenttoandconsequentuponhisputtingforthhisproductiveefficiency。Itisarelationofbeforeandafter，inwhichtheprocesscomesinforattentionascoveringandaccountingforthetimeintervalwhich，inanalogywithworkmanlikeendeavor，isrequiredforthefunctioningoftheefficientcause。29*
　　Butastimepassesandhabituationtotheexigenciesofthemachinetechnologygainsinrangeandconsistency，thequasi-personal，handicraftconceptionofcausationdecays，-
　　firstandmostnotablyinthosematerial，inorganicsciencesthatstandintheclosestrelationtothemechanicaltechnology，butpresentlyalsointheorganicsciences，andeveninthemoralsciences。Themachinetechnologyisamechanicalormaterialprocess，andrequirestheattentiontobecentreduponthisprocessandtheexigenciesoftheprocess。Insuchaprocessnoonefactorstandsoutasunequivocallytheefficientcauseinthecase，whosepersonalcharacter，sotospeak，istransfusedintotheproduct，andtowhoseworkingstherestofthecomplexofcausesarerelatedonlyassubsidiaryorconditioningcircumstances。Tothetechnologisttheprocesscomesnecessarilytocount，notsimplyastheintervaloffunctioningofaninitialefficientcause，butasthesubstantialfactthatengageshisattention。Helearnstothinkintermsoftheprocess，ratherthanintermsofaproductivecauseandaproductbetweenwhichtheprocessintervenesinsuchamannerastoaffordatransitionfromonetotheother。Theprocessisalwayscomplex；alwaysadelicatelybalancedinterplayofforcesthatworkblindly，insensibly，heedlessly；inwhichanyappreciabledeviationmayforthwithcountinacumulativemanner，thefurtherconsequencesofwhichstandinnoorganicrelationtothepurposeforwhichtheprocesshasbeensetgoing。Theprimeefficientcausefalls，relatively，intothebackgroundandyieldsprecedencetotheprocessasthepointoftechnologicalinterest。
　　Thismachinetechnology，withitsaccompanyingdisciplineinmechanicaladaptationsandobject-lessons，cameongraduallyandrosetoadominatingplaceintheculturalenvironmentduringtheclosingyearsoftheeighteenthandthecourseofthenineteenthcentury；andasfastasmenlearnedtothinkintermsoftechnologicalprocess，theywentonatan。acceleratedpaceinthefurtherinventionofmechanicalprocesses，sothatfromthattimetheprogressofinventionshasbeenofacumulativecharacterandhascumulativelyheightenedthedisciplinaryforceofthemachineprocess。Thisearlytechnologicaladvance，ofcourse，tookplaceintheBritishcommunity，wherethemachineprocessfirstgainedheadwayandwherethedisciplineofaprevalentmachineindustryinculcatedthinkingintermsofthemachineprocess。SoalsoitwasintheBritishcommunitythatmodernsciencefellintothelinesmarkedoutbytechnologicalthinkingandbegantoformulateitstheoriesintermsofprocessratherthanintermsofprimecausesandthelike。Whilesomethingofthiskindisnoticeablerelativelyearlyinsomeoftheinorganicsciences，as，e。g。，Geology，thestrikinganddecisivemoveinthisdirectionwastakentowardthemiddleofthecenturybyDarwinandhiscontemporaries。30*Withoutmuchpreliminaryexpositionandwithoutfeeinghimselftobeoutoftouchwithhiscontemporaries，Darwinsettoworktoexplainspeciesintermsoftheprocessoutofwhichtheyhavearisen，ratherthanoutoftheprimecausetowhichthedistinctionbetweenthemmaybedue。31*DenyingnothingastothesubstantialservicesoftheGreatArtificerinthedevelopmentofspecies，hesimplyandnaivelyleftHimoutofthescheme，because，asbeingapersonalfactor，Hecouldnotbestatedandhandledintermsofprocess。SoDarwinofferedatentativeaccountofthedescentofman，withoutrecoursetodivineorhumandirectiveendeavorandwithoutinquiryastowhencemanultimatelycameandwhy，orastowhatfortunewouldultimatelyovertakehim。Hisinquirycharacteristicallyconfinesitselftotheprocessofcumulativechange。Hisresults，aswellashisspecificdeterminationofthefactorsatworkinthisprocessofcumulativechange，havebeenquestioned；perhapstheyareopentoallthecriticismslevelledagainstthemaswellastoafewmorenotyetthoughtof；butthescopeandmethodgiventoscientificinquirybyDarwinandthegenerationwhosespokesmanheishassubstantiallynotbeenquestioned，exceptbythatdiminishingcontingentofthefaithfulwhobyforceofspecialtrainingorbynativegiftarenotamenabletothedisciplineofthemachineprocess。Thecharacteristicallymodernsciencedoesnotinquireaboutprimecauses，designinnature，desirabilityofeffects，ultimateresults，oreschatologicalconsequences。
　　Ofthetwopostulatesofearliermodernscience，-thequantitativeequivalenceandthequalitativeequivalenceofcauseandeffect，-theformerhascomepracticallytosignifythebalancedarticulationoftheprocessofcumulativechange；theendeavorofthePositiviststoerectthiscanonofquantitativeequivalenceintothesolecanonofscientifictruth，andsotoreducescientifictheorytoasystemofaccountancy，havingfailed。Thelatterthesis，thatlikecausesproducelikeeffects，orthattheeffectis，insomesense，ofthesamecharacterasthecause，hasfallenintodecayasholdingtrueonlyinsuchtenuouslygeneraltermsastoleaveitwithoutparticularforce。
　　Thescientistsarelearningmoreandmoreconsistentlytothinkintheopaque，impersonaltermsofstrains，mechanicalstructures，displacement，andthelike；termswhichareconvertibleintotheworkingdrawingsandspecificationsofthemechanicalengineer。
　　Theolderpreconceptionsare，ofcourse，notwhollyeliminatedfromtheintellectualapparatusofscientificresearchandgeneralization。Theculturalsituationwhosedisciplinegivestheoutcomeismadeupofinheritedtraditionalnotionsatleastasmuchasofthenotionsbroughtinbythemachineprocess。Evenamongthescientificadeptstherehasbeennocompletebreakwiththepast；necessarilynot，sincetheyare，afterall，creaturesoftheirowngeneration。Manyofthem，butmoreespeciallythosewhoareengagedinupholdingtheauthenticresultsofscientificresearch，aresomewhatpronetomakemuchofthedefinitiveresultsachieved，ratherthanoftheprocessofresearchinwhichtheseresultsareprovisionalappliancesofwork。Andmanyofthese，together。withthegreatpartofthosewell-meaningpersonswhoexploitthesciencesforpurposesofedification，suchasclergymenandnaturalisticmyth-makers，stillpersonifytheprocessofcauseandeffectandfindinitawell-advisedmeliorativetrend。Butthatworkofresearchwhicheffectuallyextendsthebordersofscientificknowledgeisnearlyalldoneundertheguidanceofhighlyimpersonal，mechanical，morallyandaestheticallycolorlessconceptionsofcausalsequence。Andthisscientificworkiscarriedoutonlyinthosecommunitieswhichareinduecontactwiththemodernmechanicallyorganizedindustrialsystem，-onlyundertheshadowofthemachinetechnology。
　　Inthenatureofthecasetheculturalgrowthdominatedbythemachineindustryisofasceptical，matter-of-factcomplexion，materialistic，unmoral，unpatriotic，undevout。Thegrowthofhabitsofthought，intheindustrialregionsandcentresparticularly，runsinthisdirection；buthithertotherehasenoughoftheancientnormsofWesternChristendomremainedintacttomakeaveryrespectableprotestagainstthatdeteriorationoftheculturaltissueswhichthefermentofthemachineindustryunremittinglypusheson。Themachinediscipline。