1. JOHN STUART MILL
a short biography

2. John Stuart Mill Born May 20, 1806 London, England Died May 8, 1873
Avignon, France

3. John Stuart Mill
Profoundly influenced the shape of nineteenth century British thought and political discourse.
His substantial corpus of works includes texts in logic, epistemology, economics, social and political philosophy, ethics, metaphysics, religion, and current affairs.
Among his most well-known and significant are A System of Logic, Principles of Political Economy, On Liberty, Utilitarianism, The Subjection of Women, Three Essays on Religion, and his Autobiography.

4. John Stuart Mill
Profoundly (greatly, deeply, immensely) influenced the shape of nineteenth century British thought and political discourse.
His substantial corpus of works includes texts in logic, epistemology, economics, social and political philosophy, ethics, metaphysics, religion, and current affairs.
Among his most well-known and significant are A System of Logic, Principles of Political Economy, On Liberty, Utilitarianism, The Subjection of Women, Three Essays on Religion, and his Autobiography.

5. John Stuart Mill
Profoundly (greatly, deeply, immensely) influenced the shape of nineteenth century British thought and political discourse.
His substantial (fundamental, essential, basic, major, significant, important, notable; material) corpus of works includes texts in logic, epistemology, economics, social and political philosophy, ethics, metaphysics, religion, and current affairs.
Among his most well-known and significant are A System of Logic, Principles of Political Economy, On Liberty, Utilitarianism, The Subjection of Women, Three Essays on Religion, and his Autobiography.

6. John Stuart Mill
Profoundly (greatly, deeply immensely) influenced the shape of nineteenth century British thought and political discourse.
His substantial (fundamental, essential, basic, major, significant, important, notable; material) corpus (a collection of written texts; the entire works of a particular author) of works includes texts in logic, epistemology, economics, social and political philosophy, ethics, metaphysics, religion, and current affairs.
Among his most well-known and significant are A System of Logic, Principles of Political Economy, On Liberty, Utilitarianism, The Subjection of Women, Three Essays on Religion, and his Autobiography.

7. John Stuart Mill
Profoundly (greatly, deeply immensely) influenced the shape of nineteenth century British thought and political discourse.
His substantial (fundamental, essential, basic, major, significant, important, notable; material) corpus (a collection of written texts; the entire works of a particular author) of works includes texts in logic, epistemology, economics, social and political philosophy, ethics, metaphysics, religion, and current affairs (events of political or social interest and importance happening in the world at a present time).
Among his most well-known and significant are A System of Logic, Principles of Political Economy, On Liberty, Utilitarianism, The Subjection of Women, Three Essays on Religion, and his Autobiography.

8. John Stuart Mill
Profoundly (greatly, deeply immensely) influenced the shape of nineteenth century British thought and political discourse.
His substantial (fundamental, essential, basic, major, significant, important, notable; material) corpus (a collection of written texts; the entire works of a particular author) of works includes texts in logic, epistemology, economics, social and political philosophy, ethics, metaphysics, religion, and current affairs (events of political or social interest and importance happening in the world at a present time).
Among his most well-known and significant are A System of Logic, Principles of Political Economy, On Liberty, Utilitarianism, The Subjection (repression, suppression, bondage) of Women, Three Essays on Religion, and his Autobiography.

9. John Stuart Mill
Mill’s education at the hands of his imposing father, James Mill, fostered both intellectual development (Greek at the age of three, Latin at eight) and a propensity towards reform.
James Mill and Jeremy Bentham led the “Philosophic Radicals” who advocated for rationalization of the law and legal institutions, universal male suffrage, the use of economic theory in political decision-making, and a politics oriented by human happiness rather than natural rights or conservatism.

10. John Stuart Mill
Mill’s education at the hands of his imposing (impressive, remarkable, awe inspiring) father, James Mill, fostered both intellectual development (Greek at the age of three, Latin at eight) and a propensity towards reform.
James Mill and Jeremy Bentham led the “Philosophic Radicals” who advocated for rationalization of the law and legal institutions, universal male suffrage, the use of economic theory in political decision-making, and a politics oriented by human happiness rather than natural rights or conservatism.

11. John Stuart Mill
Mill’s education at the hands of his imposing (impressive, remarkable, awe inspiring) father, James Mill, fostered (encourage, nurture, stimulate, support) both intellectual development (Greek at the age of three, Latin at eight) and a propensity towards reform.
James Mill and Jeremy Bentham led the “Philosophic Radicals” who advocated for rationalization of the law and legal institutions, universal male suffrage, the use of economic theory in political decision-making, and a politics oriented by human happiness rather than natural rights or conservatism.

12. John Stuart Mill
Mill’s education at the hands of his imposing (impressive, remarkable, awe inspiring) father, James Mill, fostered (encourage, nurture, stimulate, support) both intellectual development (Greek at the age of three, Latin at eight) and a propensity (tendency, inclination) towards reform.
James Mill and Jeremy Bentham led the “Philosophic Radicals” who advocated for rationalization of the law and legal institutions, universal male suffrage, the use of economic theory in political decision-making, and a politics oriented by human happiness rather than natural rights or conservatism.

13. John Stuart Mill
Mill’s education at the hands of his imposing (impressive, remarkable, awe inspiring) father, James Mill, fostered (encourage, nurture, stimulate, support) both intellectual development (Greek at the age of three, Latin at eight) and a propensity (tendency, inclination) towards reform.
James Mill and Jeremy Bentham led the “Philosophic Radicals” who advocated (publicly recommend or support) for rationalization of the law and legal institutions, universal male suffrage, the use of economic theory in political decision-making, and a politics oriented by human happiness rather than natural rights or conservatism.

14. John Stuart Mill
Mill’s education at the hands of his imposing (impressive, remarkable, awe inspiring) father, James Mill, fostered (encourage, nurture, stimulate, support) both intellectual development (Greek at the age of three, Latin at eight) and a propensity (tendency, inclination) towards reform.
James Mill and Jeremy Bentham led the “Philosophic Radicals” who advocated (publicly recommend or support) for rationalization of the law and legal institutions, universal male suffrage (right to vote), the use of economic theory in political decision-making, and a politics oriented by human happiness rather than natural rights or conservatism.

15. John Stuart Mill
In Parliament, Mill was considered radical because, among other things, advocated public ownership of private resources, equality between the sexes, compulsory education and birth control.

16. John Stuart Mill
In Parliament, Mill was considered radical because, among other things, advocated public ownership of private resources, equality between the sexes, compulsory (obligatory) education and birth control.

17. MILL’S METHODS
Mill devised a set of FIVE careful METHODS (or canons) by means of which to analyze and interpret our observations for the purpose of drawing conclusions about the causal relationships they exhibit.

18. MILL’S METHODS
Mill devised a set of FIVE careful METHODS (or canons) by means of which to analyze and interpret our observations (examination, inspection, viewing) for the purpose of drawing conclusions about the causal relationships they exhibit.

19. MILL’S METHODS
Mill devised a set of FIVE careful METHODS (or canons) by means of which to analyze and interpret our observations (examination, inspection, viewing) for the purpose of drawing conclusions about the causal relationships (correlation between variables; causation indicates that one event is the result of the occurrence of the other event) they exhibit.

20. MILL’S METHODS
Mill devised a set of FIVE careful METHODS (or canons) by means of which to analyze and interpret our observations (examination, inspection, viewing) for the purpose of drawing conclusions about the causal relationships (correlation between variables; causation indicates that one event is the result of the occurrence of the other event) they exhibit (manifest clearly, show, reveal).

21. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
In order to see how each of the five methods work, let's consider their practical application to a specific situation.

22. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
In order to see how each of the five methods work, let's consider their practical application (implementation, use, employment) to a specific situation.

23. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that on an otherwise uneventful afternoon, the College Nurse becomes aware that an unusual number of students are suffering from severe indigestion. Ms. Hayes naturally suspects that this symptom results from something the students ate for lunch, and she would like to find out for sure. The Nurse wants to find evidence that will support a conclusion that "Eating ?xxxx? causes indigestion.“
Mill's Methods can help.

24. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that on an otherwise uneventful afternoon, the College Nurse becomes aware that an unusual number of students are suffering from severe indigestion (pain or discomfort in the stomach associated with difficulty in digesting food). Ms. Hayes naturally suspects that this symptom results from something the students ate for lunch, and she would like to find out for sure. The Nurse wants to find evidence that will support a conclusion that ”Eating ?xxxx? causes indigestion.”
Mill's Methods can help.

25. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that on an otherwise uneventful afternoon, the College Nurse becomes aware that an unusual number of students are suffering from severe indigestion (pain or discomfort in the stomach associated with difficulty in digesting food). Ms. Hayes naturally suspects that this symptom results from something the students ate for lunch, and she would like to find out for sure. The Nurse wants to find evidence (proof, confirmation, verification) that will support a conclusion that ”Eating ?xxxx? causes indigestion.”
Mill's Methods can help.

26. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, coleslaw, orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and french fries, coleslaw, and iced tea.
The third ate pizza and coleslaw and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only french fries, coleslaw, and chocolate cake.

27. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, coleslaw (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and french fries, coleslaw, and iced tea.
The third ate pizza and coleslaw and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only french fries, coleslaw, and chocolate cake.

28. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had PIZZA, coleslaw (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and french fries, coleslaw, and iced tea.
The third ate PIZZA and coleslaw and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only french fries, coleslaw, and chocolate cake.

29. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, coleslaw (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), ORANGE JUICE, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and french fries, coleslaw, and iced tea.
The third ate pizza and coleslaw and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only french fries, coleslaw, and chocolate cake.

30. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, coleslaw (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a HOT DOG and french fries, coleslaw, and iced tea.
The third ate pizza and coleslaw and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only french fries, coleslaw, and chocolate cake.

31. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, coleslaw (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and FRENCH FRIES, coleslaw, and iced tea.
The third ate pizza and coleslaw and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only FRENCH FRIES, coleslaw, and chocolate cake.

32. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, coleslaw (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and french fries, coleslaw, and ICED TEA.
The third ate pizza and coleslaw and drank ICED TEA.
The fourth ate only french fries, coleslaw, and chocolate cake.

33. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, coleslaw (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and french fries, coleslaw, and iced tea.
The third ate pizza and coleslaw and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only french fries, coleslaw, and CHOCOLATE CAKE.

34. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, COLESLAW (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and french fries, COLESLAW, and iced tea.
The third ate pizza and COLESLAW and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only french fries, COLESLAW, and chocolate cake.

35. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Suppose that Ms. Hayes questions each of the four students about what they had for lunch.
The first had pizza, COLESLAW (salad dish of shredded raw cabbage, carrots, and other vegetables mixed with mayonnaise), orange juice, and a cookie.
The second had a hot dog and french fries, COLESLAW, and iced tea.
The third ate pizza and COLESLAW and drank iced tea.
The fourth ate only french fries, COLESLAW, and chocolate cake.

36. A DETECTIVE’S CASE
Ms. Hayes, of course, concludes that "Eating coleslaw caused the indigestion."

37. METHOD OF AGREEMENT
This is an application of Mill's Method of Agreement.
Investigation of the cases in which the effect occurred revealed only one prior circumstance that all of them shared. Our customary notion here is that similar effects are likely to arise from a similar cause, and since everyone who fell ill had eaten coleslaw, it was probably the cause.

38. METHOD OF AGREEMENT
This is an application of Mill's Method of Agreement.
Investigation of the cases in which the effect occurred (take place, happen) revealed only one prior circumstance that all of them shared. Our customary notion here is that similar effects are likely to arise from a similar cause, and since everyone who fell ill had eaten coleslaw, it was probably the cause.

39. METHOD OF AGREEMENT
This is an application of Mill's Method of Agreement.
Investigation of the cases in which the effect occurred (take place, happen) revealed (make known, disclose) only one prior circumstance that all of them shared. Our customary notion here is that similar effects are likely to arise from a similar cause, and since everyone who fell ill had eaten coleslaw, it was probably the cause.

40. METHOD OF AGREEMENT
This is an application of Mill's Method of Agreement.
Investigation of the cases in which the effect occurred (take place, happen) revealed (make known, disclose) only one prior (previous, antecedent) circumstance that all of them shared. Our customary notion here is that similar effects are likely to arise from a similar cause, and since everyone who fell ill had eaten coleslaw, it was probably the cause.

41. METHOD OF AGREEMENT
This is an application of Mill's Method of Agreement.
Investigation of the cases in which the effect occurred (take place, happen) revealed (make known, disclose) only one prior (previous, antecedent) circumstance that all of them shared. Our customary notion here is that similar effects are likely to arise from a similar cause, and since everyone who fell ill had eaten coleslaw, it was probably the cause.

42. METHOD OF DIFFERENCE
On the other hand, suppose that only two students arrive at the Nurse's office. The two are roommates who ate together, but one became ill while the other did not.
The first had eaten a hot dog, french fries, coleslaw, chocolate cake, and iced tea.
The other had eaten a hot dog, french fries, chocolate cake, and iced tea.

43. METHOD OF DIFFERENCE
On the other hand, suppose that only two students arrive at the Nurse's office. The two are roommates who ate together, but one became ill while the other did not.
The first had eaten a hot dog, french fries, coleslaw, chocolate cake, and iced tea.
The other had eaten a hot dog, french fries, chocolate cake, and iced tea.

44. METHOD OF DIFFERENCE
On the other hand, suppose that only two students arrive at the Nurse's office. The two are roommates who ate together, but one became ill while the other did not.
The first had eaten a hot dog, french fries, COLESLAW, chocolate cake, and iced tea.
The other had eaten a hot dog, french fries, chocolate cake, and iced tea.

45. METHOD OF DIFFERENCE
Again, Ms. Hayes concludes that the COLESLAW is what made the first roommate ill.

46. METHOD OF DIFFERENCE
This reasoning applies Mill's Method of Difference.
Comparison of a case in which the effect occurred and a case in which the effect did not occur revealed that only one prior circumstance was present in the first case but not it the second. In such situations, we commonly suppose that, other things being equal, different effects are likely to arise from different causes, and since only the student who had eaten coleslaw became ill, it was probably the cause.

47. METHOD OF DIFFERENCE
This reasoning applies Mill's Method of Difference.
Comparison of a case in which the effect occurred and a case in which the effect did not occur revealed that ONLY ONE PRIOR CIRCUMSTANCE WAS PRESENT in the first case but not it the second. In such situations, we commonly suppose that, other things being equal, different effects are likely to arise from different causes, and since only the student who had eaten coleslaw became ill, it was probably the cause.

48. JOINT METHOD OF AGREEMENT AND DIFFERENCE
Now put these two situations together by assuming that eight students come to Ms. Hayes: four of them suffered from indigestion, and with each of these four there is another who did not. Each pair of students had exactly the same lunch, except that everyone in the first group ate coleslaw and no one in the second group did. The Nurse arrives at the same conclusion.

49. JOINT METHOD OF AGREEMENT AND DIFFERENCE
This situation is an example of Mill's Joint Method of Agreement and Difference.
The first four students are evidence that everyone who got ill had eaten coleslaw, and the four matching pairs are evidence that only those who got ill had eaten coleslaw. This is a powerful combination of the first two methods, since it tends to support our notion that genuine causes are necessary and sufficient conditions for their effects.

50. METHOD OF CONCOMITANT VARIATION
Change the situation again. Suppose that the Nurse sees five students.
The first ate no coleslaw and feels fine.
The second had one bite of coleslaw and felt a little queasy.
The third had half a dish of coleslaw and is fairly ill.
The fourth ate a whole dish of coleslaw and is violently ill.
The fifth ate two servings of coleslaw and had to be rushed to the hospital.

51. METHOD OF CONCOMITANT VARIATION
Change the situation again. Suppose that the Nurse sees five students.
The first ate no coleslaw and feels fine.
The second had one bite of coleslaw and felt a little queasy.
The third had half a dish of coleslaw and is fairly ill.
The fourth ate a whole dish of coleslaw and is violently ill.
The fifth ate two servings of coleslaw and had to be rushed to the hospital.

52. METHOD OF CONCOMITANT VARIATION
The conclusion is again that COLESLAW caused the indigestion.

53. METHOD OF CONCOMITANT VARIATION
This is an example of Mill's Method of Concomitant Variation.
The evidence appears to show that there is a direct correlation between the degree to which the cause occurred and the degree to which the effect occurred. This conforms to our ordinary supposition that effects are typically proportional to their causes. In effect, this is a sophisticated version of the Joint Method, one in which we notice not just the occurrence or non-occurrence of the causal terms, but the extent to which each of them took place.

54. METHOD OF CONCOMITANT VARIATION
This is an example of Mill's Method of Concomitant (associated, related) Variation.
The evidence appears to show that there is a direct correlation between the degree to which the cause occurred and the degree to which the effect occurred. This conforms to our ordinary supposition that effects are typically proportional to their causes. In effect, this is a sophisticated version of the Joint Method, one in which we notice not just the occurrence or non-occurrence of the causal terms, but the extent to which each of them took place.

55. METHOD OF CONCOMITANT VARIATION
This is an example of Mill's Method of Concomitant (associated, related) Variation.
The evidence appears to show that there is a direct correlation (a mutual relationship or connection between two or more things; association, link, interaction) between the degree to which the cause occurred and the degree to which the effect occurred. This conforms to our ordinary supposition that effects are typically proportional to their causes. In effect, this is a sophisticated version of the Joint Method, one in which we notice not just the occurrence or non-occurrence of the causal terms, but the extent to which each of them took place.

56. METHOD OF CONCOMITANT VARIATION
This is an example of Mill's Method of Concomitant (associated, related) Variation.
The evidence appears to show that there is a direct correlation (a mutual relationship or connection between two or more things; association, link, interaction) between the degree to which the cause occurred and the degree to which the effect occurred. This conforms to our ordinary supposition that effects are typically proportional to their causes. In effect, this is a sophisticated version of the Joint Method, one in which we notice not just the occurrence or non-occurrence of the causal terms, but the extent to which each of them took place.

57. METHOD OF RESIDUES
Finally, suppose that Ms. Hayes, during prior investigations of student illness, has already established that pizza tends to produce a rash and iced tea tends to cause headaches. Today, a student arrives at the Nurse's office complaining of headache, indigestion, and a rash; this student reports having eaten pizza, coleslaw, and iced tea for lunch. Since she can account for most of the student's symptoms as the effects of known causes, Ms. Hayes concludes that the additional effect of indigestion must be caused by the additional circumstance of eating coleslaw.

58. METHOD OF RESIDUES
Finally, suppose that Ms. Hayes, during prior investigations of student illness, has already established that pizza tends to produce a rash and iced tea tends to cause headaches. Today, a student arrives at the Nurse's office complaining of headache, indigestion, and a rash; this student reports having eaten pizza, coleslaw, and iced tea for lunch. Since she can account (consider, think) for most of the student's symptoms as the effects of known causes, Ms. Hayes concludes that the additional effect of indigestion must be caused by the additional circumstance of eating coleslaw.

59. METHOD OF RESIDUES
This pattern of reasoning exemplifies Mill's Method of Residues.
Many elements of a complex effect are shown to result, by reliable causal beliefs, from several elements of a complex cause; whatever remains of the effect must then have been produced by whatever remains of the cause. Notice that if we suppose the truth of all of the causal relationships involved, this method becomes an application of deductive reasoning.

60. METHOD OF RESIDUES
As a general qualification on the reliability of these Methods, notice that the issue of relevance is again crucial. Our Nurse began with the assumption that what students had eaten for lunch was relevant to their digestive health in the afternoon. That's a reasonable guess, but of course the real cause could have been something else entirely, something about which the Nurse never thought to ask. No matter how much evidence we gather, inductive reasoning cannot achieve perfect certainty.

61. METHOD OF RESIDUES
As a general qualification on the reliability of these Methods, notice that the issue of relevance is again crucial. Our Nurse began with the assumption that what students had eaten for lunch was relevant to their digestive health in the afternoon. That's a reasonable guess, but of course the real cause could have been something else entirely, something about which the Nurse never thought to ask. No matter how much evidence we gather, inductive reasoning cannot achieve perfect certainty.

62. METHOD OF RESIDUES
As a general qualification on the reliability of these Methods, notice that the issue of relevance is again crucial. Our Nurse began with the assumption that what students had eaten for lunch was relevant to their digestive health in the afternoon. That's a reasonable guess, but of course the real cause could have been something else entirely, something about which the Nurse never thought to ask. NO MATTER HOW MUCH EVIDENCE WE GATHER, INDUCTIVE REASONING CANNOT ACHIEVE PERFECT CERTAINTY.

63. METHOD OF RESIDUES
NO MATTER HOW MUCH EVIDENCE WE GATHER, INDUCTIVE REASONING CANNOT ACHIEVE PERFECT CERTAINTY.

64. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
Although Mill's Methods are an important component of serious investigation of natural phenomena, they have significant limitations. Careful application of these methods succeeds only when every relevant antecedent circumstance is taken into account, and that is impossible to guarantee in advance.

65. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
Although Mill's Methods are an important component of serious investigation of natural phenomena (natural phenomenon is an observable event which is not man-made), they have significant limitations. Careful application of these methods succeeds only when every relevant antecedent circumstance is taken into account, and that is impossible to guarantee in advance.

66. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
Although Mill's Methods are an important component of serious investigation of natural phenomenA (natural phenomenON is an observable event which is not man-made), they have significant limitations. Careful application of these methods succeeds only when every relevant antecedent circumstance is taken into account, and that is impossible to guarantee in advance.

67. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If our chief aim in applying Mill's Methods were to discover the unknown cause of some observed event, then they would fail us precisely when we need them most. The Methods show us how to identify the likely cause from among those possibilities that we have considered among the relevant antecedent circumstances of this effect. But the most interesting cases will be those in which the cause we seek lies in some unsuspected source, which we have probably excluded from our analysis of the antecedent circumstances as irrelevant.

68. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
IF our chief aim in applying Mill's Methods WERE to discover the unknown cause of some observed event, then they would fail us precisely when we need them most. The Methods show us how to identify the likely cause from among those possibilities that we have considered among the relevant antecedent circumstances of this effect. But the most interesting cases will be those in which the cause we seek lies in some unsuspected source, which we have probably excluded from our analysis of the antecedent circumstances as irrelevant.

69. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If our chief aim in applying Mill's Methods were to discover the unknown cause of some observed event, then they would fail us precisely when we need them most. The Methods show us how to identify THE LIKELY CAUSE from among those possibilities that we have considered among the relevant antecedent circumstances of this effect. But the most interesting cases will be those in which the cause we seek lies in some unsuspected source, which we have probably excluded from our analysis of the antecedent circumstances as irrelevant.

70. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
THUS, MILL'S METHODS CAN'T HELP US TO DISCOVER CAUSES UNLESS WE ALREADY KNOW (ROUGHLY) WHAT THOSE CAUSES ARE LIKELY TO BE.

71. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If the goal of using Mill's Methods were to prove that one event is the cause of another, we would fare even worse. Our inability to consider every possible circumstance (even those that seem irrelevant to us) will often lead us to mistake the true cause of an event. What is more, the Methods encourage the identification of single causes, overlooking the fact that many interesting effects may result from some complex combination of partial causes.

72. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If the goal of using Mill's Methods were to prove that one event is the cause of another, we would fare (get on, proceed, progress, do, manage, succeed, prosper) even worse. Our inability to consider every possible circumstance (even those that seem irrelevant to us) will often lead us to mistake the true cause of an event. What is more, the Methods encourage the identification of single causes, overlooking the fact that many interesting effects may result from some complex combination of partial causes.

73. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If the goal of using Mill's Methods were to prove that one event is the cause of another, we would fare (get on, proceed, progress, do, manage, succeed, prosper) even worse. Our INABILITY TO CONSIDER EVERY POSSIBLE CIRCUMSTANCE (even those that seem irrelevant to us) will often lead us to mistake the true cause of an event. What is more, the Methods encourage the identification of single causes, overlooking the fact that many interesting effects may result from some complex combination of partial causes.

74. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If the goal of using Mill's Methods were to prove that one event is the cause of another, we would fare (get on, proceed, progress, do, manage, succeed, prosper) even worse. Our inability to consider every possible circumstance (even those that SEEM IRRELEVANT to us) will often lead us to mistake the true cause of an event. What is more, the Methods encourage the identification of single causes, overlooking the fact that many interesting effects may result from some complex combination of partial causes.

75. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If the goal of using Mill's Methods were to prove that one event is the cause of another, we would fare (get on, proceed, progress, do, manage, succeed, prosper) even worse. Our inability to consider every possible circumstance (even those that seem irrelevant to us) will often lead us to MISTAKE THE TRUE CAUSE of an event. What is more, the Methods encourage the identification of single causes, overlooking the fact that many interesting effects may result from some complex combination of partial causes.

76. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If the goal of using Mill's Methods were to prove that one event is the cause of another, we would fare (get on, proceed, progress, do, manage, succeed, prosper) even worse. Our inability to consider every possible circumstance (even those that seem irrelevant to us) will often lead us to mistake the true cause of an event. What is more, the Methods encourage the IDENTIFICATION OF SINGLE CAUSES, overlooking the fact that many interesting effects may result from some complex combination of partial causes.

77. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
If the goal of using Mill's Methods were to prove that one event is the cause of another, we would fare (get on, proceed, progress, do, manage, succeed, prosper) even worse. Our inability to consider every possible circumstance (even those that seem irrelevant to us) will often lead us to mistake the true cause of an event. What is more, the Methods encourage the identification of single causes, overlooking the fact that many interesting EFFECTS MAY RESULT FROM SOME COMPLEX COMBINATION OF PARTIAL CAUSES.

78. DISCOVERY OR PROOF?
At best, Mill's Methods can only help us to establish the presence of a correlation between the occurrences of distinct events, leaving any question about the reality of a causal connection unanswered. USED AS PROOF, INDUCTIVE REASONING GENERALLY CANNOT OFFER THE SAME CERTAINTY THAT VALID DEDUCTIVE REASONING PROVIDES.