Welcome, dear students. In this comprehensive guide, we present the complete Class 12 Logic and Philosophy Chapter 2 Question Answer on Foundation of Induction (also titled Grounds of Induction in the prescribed ASSEB textbook), prepared strictly for the English medium learners of the Assam State School Education Board (ASSEB). This chapter forms the philosophical backbone of inductive reasoning, explaining how the Law of Causation and the Law of Uniformity of Nature together justify the inductive leap from particular instances to universal generalisations. We have arranged a chapter summary, all textbook Very Short, Short and Long answer questions, additional MCQs, fill-in-the-blanks, true/false, matching exercises and a glossary table to help you score full marks in your H.S. Final Examination.
Chapter Summary
Induction is the process of arriving at a general real proposition on the basis of observation of particular instances. But the leap from “some” to “all” — known as the inductive leap — needs a logical justification. This justification is supplied by what logicians call the Grounds (Foundations) of Induction. There are two such foundations:
- The Law of Causation — every event must have a cause.
- The Law of Uniformity of Nature — nature behaves in the same way under similar circumstances.
These two laws are called the formal grounds of induction because they guarantee the formal truth of inductive generalisations. In addition, observation and experiment are termed the material grounds, since they supply the particular instances on which induction is based.
Cause is generally defined as the invariable, unconditional and immediate antecedent of an event. The popular notion treats the cause as that single visible factor which produces the effect, while the scientific notion treats the cause as the sum total of all positive and negative conditions. J.S. Mill defined cause as “the sum total of positive and negative conditions taken together”; Bain treated cause as the “moving power” together with the “collocation” of circumstances; Carveth Read described it as “the immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent of the effect”; and David Hume reduced cause to mere “invariable antecedence” observed through constant conjunction.
The chapter further discusses the Plurality of Causes (the doctrine that the same effect may be produced by different causes in different cases) and Mill’s criticism of it; Aristotle’s Four Causes (material, formal, efficient and final); the qualitative and quantitative marks of cause; the law of conservation of matter and energy; the meaning, scope and criticism of the Uniformity of Nature; the fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc; and Mill’s famous paradox of induction — that the ground of induction is itself a result of induction.
Textbook Questions and Answers
A. Very Short Answer Type Questions (1 Mark)
Q1. How many kinds of grounds of induction are there?
Answer: Two kinds — formal grounds and material grounds.
Q2. What are the two formal grounds of induction?
Answer: The Law of Causation and the Law of Uniformity of Nature.
Q3. What are the two material grounds of induction?
Answer: Observation and Experiment.
Q4. State the Law of Uniformity of Nature in one line.
Answer: Nature behaves in the same way under similar circumstances.
Q5. State the Law of Causation in one line.
Answer: Every event must have a cause.
Q6. Who defined cause as the “sum total of positive and negative conditions”?
Answer: John Stuart Mill (J.S. Mill).
Q7. Who defined cause as the “invariable antecedent of the effect”?
Answer: David Hume.
Q8. Who defined cause as “the immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent of the effect”?
Answer: Carveth Read.
Q9. Who treated cause as “moving power” together with “collocation”?
Answer: Alexander Bain.
Q10. What fallacy arises when any antecedent is taken as the cause merely because it precedes an event?
Answer: The fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc.
Q11. Who said “Observation is finding a fact and experiment is making one”?
Answer: Alexander Bain.
Q12. According to whom do observation and experiment differ only in degree, not in kind?
Answer: W.S. Jevons.
Q13. Name the two fallacies of observation.
Answer: Non-observation and Mal-observation.
Q14. Is the Law of Causation a material ground of induction?
Answer: No. It is a formal ground of induction.
Q15. What is meant by “Plurality of Causes”?
Answer: The doctrine that the same effect may be produced by different causes in different cases.
Q16. Who criticised the doctrine of Plurality of Causes?
Answer: John Stuart Mill.
Q17. Who proposed the doctrine of Four Causes?
Answer: Aristotle.
Q18. Name Aristotle’s four causes.
Answer: Material cause, Formal cause, Efficient cause and Final cause.
Q19. What is the “paradox of induction”?
Answer: The ground of induction (Uniformity of Nature) is itself a result of induction — a contradiction first noted by J.S. Mill.
Q20. Does the Uniformity of Nature deny variety in nature?
Answer: No. It only asserts uniform behaviour under similar circumstances; variety still exists under varying circumstances.
Q21. Fill in the blank: Cause is quantitatively ______ to its effect.
Answer: Equal.
Q22. Which positive science guarantees the quantitative equivalence of cause and effect?
Answer: The Law of Conservation of Matter and Energy.
Q23. What is the inductive leap?
Answer: The leap from observation of some instances to a universal proposition covering all instances.
Q24. What is meant by “condition” in the definition of cause?
Answer: Any necessary factor — positive or negative — required for the production of the effect.
Q25. What is meant by “Conjunction of Causes”?
Answer: The acting together of several causes to produce a single joint effect.
B. Short Answer Type Questions (2-3 Marks)
Q1. What is meant by the Grounds of Induction?
Answer: The laws and processes upon which induction depends to establish a general real proposition are called the grounds of induction. They are of two kinds — formal grounds (the Law of Causation and the Law of Uniformity of Nature) which guarantee the formal validity of induction, and material grounds (observation and experiment) which supply the factual data.
Q2. Why is the Law of Causation called a formal ground of induction?
Answer: The Law of Causation is called a formal ground because the canons of elimination, by which we discover causal connection, are deductively derived from this law. Without the law, no scientific induction is possible. It guarantees the formal truth of inductive generalisations.
Q3. Why are observation and experiment called the material grounds of induction?
Answer: Because induction establishes its general propositions on the examination of particular instances, and these particular instances are supplied to us by observation and experiment. They thus provide the empirical “matter” on which induction works.
Q4. Define “Cause” according to J.S. Mill.
Answer: According to J.S. Mill, “the cause is the sum total of the positive and negative conditions taken together, the whole of the contingencies of every description which being realised, the consequent invariably follows.” A cause is therefore not a single antecedent but the entire complex of conditions.
Q5. Define “Cause” according to Carveth Read.
Answer: Carveth Read defined cause as “the immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent of the effect; qualitatively the cause is equal to the effect quantitatively.” This is regarded as the most complete scientific definition of cause.
Q6. Define “Cause” according to David Hume.
Answer: Hume reduced cause to “the invariable antecedent of the effect” — that which is constantly conjoined with the effect in our sense experience. He denied any necessary connection between cause and effect beyond observed regularity.
Q7. Explain Bain’s view of cause.
Answer: Bain held that the cause of an event consists of two parts — (i) the moving power or active force which initiates the change, and (ii) the collocation or specific arrangement of circumstances under which that force operates. Both are needed for the effect.
Q8. Distinguish between the popular and the scientific notion of cause.
Answer: The popular notion treats the cause as a single visible, immediate antecedent that is striking to the senses (e.g. a spark causes a fire). The scientific notion regards the cause as the sum total of all positive and negative conditions, both seen and unseen, that together produce the effect (e.g. spark + dryness + presence of oxygen + absence of moisture).
Q9. Distinguish between necessary and sufficient conditions.
Answer: A necessary condition is one in whose absence the effect cannot occur; for example, oxygen is a necessary condition of combustion. A sufficient condition is one whose presence by itself is enough to produce the effect. The full cause must be both necessary and sufficient.
Q10. Distinguish between positive and negative conditions.
Answer: Positive conditions are those whose presence is required for the occurrence of the effect (e.g. presence of fuel for fire). Negative conditions are those whose absence is required (e.g. absence of moisture for fire). The total cause includes both.
Q11. What is the doctrine of Plurality of Causes?
Answer: It is the doctrine that the same kind of effect may be produced by several different causes operating in different cases. For instance, death may be caused by old age, disease, accident, suicide or murder. Each of these can independently produce the effect “death”.
Q12. Why did Mill reject the doctrine of Plurality of Causes?
Answer: Mill argued that if the cause is the invariable antecedent of the effect, then the same effect cannot have several causes; otherwise none of them would be invariable. The apparent plurality is due to our loose understanding of “effect” — a more careful analysis would show different effects with different causes.
Q13. State Aristotle’s Four Causes.
Answer: (i) Material cause — the matter or substance from which a thing is made (e.g. clay for a pot). (ii) Formal cause — the form, design or pattern (e.g. the shape of a pot). (iii) Efficient cause — the agent or labour that produces it (e.g. the potter). (iv) Final cause — the end or purpose for which it is made (e.g. holding water).
Q14. What is meant by qualitative mark of cause?
Answer: Qualitatively, the cause is the immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent of the effect. The qualitative marks describe the nature of the relation between cause and effect — antecedence, invariability, immediacy and unconditionality.
Q15. What is meant by quantitative mark of cause?
Answer: Quantitatively, the cause is equal to the effect. According to the law of conservation of matter and energy, neither matter nor energy is created or destroyed; it only changes form. Hence the total quantity present in the cause appears in the effect.
Q16. State the Law of Uniformity of Nature.
Answer: The Law of Uniformity of Nature states that nature behaves in the same way under similar circumstances. Whatever happens once will happen again under exactly the same conditions. This law is the formal guarantee of inductive generalisation.
Q17. What is the scope of the Uniformity of Nature?
Answer: Its scope covers both the uniformity of succession (causal sequences such as fire causing heat) and the uniformity of co-existence (e.g. the properties of gold always going together). It applies to all phenomena of the natural world.
Q18. What is the Inductive Leap?
Answer: The Inductive Leap is the logical jump from “some” observed cases to “all” possible cases — i.e. from particular instances to a universal proposition. This leap is justified by the laws of causation and uniformity of nature.
Q19. What is the fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc?
Answer: It is the fallacy of treating any antecedent as the cause merely because it preceded the event in time. Mere temporal sequence is not causal sequence. Example: a black cat crossed the road before the accident, therefore the cat caused the accident — this is fallacious reasoning.
Q20. What is Mill’s Paradox of Induction?
Answer: Mill says that induction is based on the Uniformity of Nature, but he also says that the Uniformity of Nature is itself an induction from particular instances. This creates a circular reasoning — the ground of induction is itself a result of induction. This contradiction is called the paradox of induction.
Q21. Distinguish between Plurality of Causes and Conjunction of Causes.
Answer: In plurality of causes, several different causes independently produce the same effect on different occasions. In conjunction of causes, several causes act together at the same time to produce a joint effect that no single cause could produce alone.
Q22. Distinguish between Non-observation and Mal-observation.
Answer: Non-observation consists in failing to observe what is actually present (overlooking an essential instance). Mal-observation consists in observing wrongly — wrongly interpreting the data of sense, e.g. mistaking a rope for a snake in the dark.
Q23. Why is observation called active perception?
Answer: Because observation is not mere passive seeing; it is regulated, purposeful and selective perception, accompanied by attention, interest and reasoning. The observer actively concentrates on the relevant aspects and ignores the irrelevant.
Q24. Mention any two advantages of experiment over observation.
Answer: (i) Experiment can multiply instances indefinitely whereas observation depends on natural occurrence. (ii) Experiment can isolate the phenomenon under study from disturbing factors, while observation must take phenomena as they naturally occur.
C. Long Answer Type Questions (5-8 Marks)
Q1. What are the Grounds of Induction? Explain the formal and material grounds.
Answer: The laws and processes upon which induction depends in establishing a general real proposition are called the grounds of induction. Induction proceeds from particular to general, but this leap from “some” to “all” requires a logical justification. The grounds of induction supply this justification.
The grounds are of two kinds:
(i) Formal Grounds: These are the universal laws which give induction its logical validity. They are two — (a) the Law of Causation, which states that every event has a cause, and (b) the Law of Uniformity of Nature, which states that nature behaves in the same way under similar circumstances. The Law of Causation is the formal ground because the canons of elimination — the very tools of inductive enquiry — are deductively derived from it. The Law of Uniformity of Nature is the formal ground because without it we cannot generalise from observed cases to unobserved cases.
(ii) Material Grounds: These are Observation and Experiment. They supply the particular instances which are the raw material of induction. Observation studies phenomena as they naturally occur; experiment studies them under artificially controlled conditions. Without these material grounds, the formal laws would have nothing on which to operate.
Thus the two formal and the two material grounds together constitute the foundation on which the structure of induction rests.
Q2. Define cause. Explain the qualitative (characteristics) marks of cause.
Answer: Cause may be defined, in the words of Carveth Read, as “the immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent of the effect; qualitatively the cause is equal to the effect quantitatively.” This definition contains the principal qualitative marks of cause, which are explained below:
- Cause is an antecedent — the cause must come before the effect in time. Effect always follows the cause.
- Cause is an invariable antecedent — mere antecedence is not enough; only that antecedent which is always followed by the effect, without exception, qualifies as the cause. Day is always followed by night, but day is not the cause of night because the relation breaks down at the poles.
- Cause is an unconditional antecedent — the cause must be sufficient by itself to produce the effect, without depending on any further hidden condition. The cause must contain within itself all the conditions necessary for the effect.
- Cause is the immediate antecedent — only that antecedent which directly precedes the effect, without any intervening cause, is the real cause. Remote antecedents are not causes.
- Cause is a relative term — cause and effect are correlative; we cannot speak of one without the other. They are mutually dependent concepts.
- Cause involves change — both cause and effect are events, that is, changes in the state of things. A static condition is not a cause.
These six features together describe the qualitative nature of the cause-effect relation.
Q3. Explain the quantitative mark of cause.
Answer: Quantitatively, the cause is equal to the effect. This means that the total quantity of matter and energy present in the cause is exactly the same as that present in the effect. Nothing is created out of nothing, and nothing is destroyed into nothing — only the form changes.
This principle rests on two great laws of physics: the Law of Conservation of Matter and the Law of Conservation of Energy. Together they assert that in any physical or chemical change, the quantity of matter and energy remains constant.
For example, when hydrogen and oxygen combine to form water, the weight of the water produced equals the combined weight of hydrogen and oxygen consumed. Similarly, when a moving body strikes another and stops, its kinetic energy is transferred — appearing as motion, heat or sound — in equal measure to what was lost. Thus, although qualitatively the cause and effect may differ (oxygen + hydrogen are gases, water is a liquid), quantitatively they are exactly equal.
This quantitative equivalence makes scientific calculation possible and is therefore an indispensable mark of cause.
Q4. Distinguish between the popular and the scientific notion of cause.
Answer: Both notions accept that cause produces the effect, but they differ in their analysis of what counts as the cause.
Popular Notion:
- Treats the cause as one single, visible, striking antecedent (e.g. spark causes fire).
- Considers only the active or moving power; ignores the surrounding conditions.
- Notices only positive conditions, not negative ones.
- Is loose, vague and based on common sense.
- Often confuses temporal antecedence with causality, leading to the post hoc fallacy.
Scientific Notion:
- Treats the cause as the sum total of all conditions, positive and negative.
- Considers both moving power and the collocation of circumstances.
- Is exact, precise and based on careful analysis.
- Demands invariable, unconditional and immediate antecedence.
- Avoids the post hoc fallacy by insisting on real causal connection.
For example, the popular mind says “fire is caused by a spark”; the scientific mind says “fire is caused by the spark together with dry fuel, the presence of oxygen, and the absence of moisture.” The scientific notion is therefore wider, deeper and more accurate.
Q5. Explain Mill’s view of cause. State the difficulties of his view.
Answer: J.S. Mill defines cause as “the sum total of positive and negative conditions taken together, the whole of the contingencies of every description, which being realised, the consequent invariably follows.”
By positive conditions Mill means those circumstances whose presence is required for the effect (e.g. fuel, oxygen and ignition for fire). By negative conditions he means those whose absence is required (e.g. absence of moisture). The cause is therefore not any single factor but the totality of these conditions.
Mill insists that the cause is the invariable and unconditional antecedent. Mere invariability is not enough — day invariably precedes night but is not its cause; only invariable AND unconditional antecedence constitutes cause.
Difficulties of Mill’s view:
- It is practically impossible to enumerate all the positive and negative conditions of any event; the list could be endless.
- Mill’s view turns the cause into a vague totality and removes the practical convenience of identifying a single cause.
- It does not bring out the active or productive power of the cause; it merely lists conditions.
- Mill’s own assertion that the cause is “invariable and unconditional” is itself based on induction, leading to the paradox of induction.
Despite these difficulties, Mill’s view is regarded as the most thorough scientific definition of cause and forms the basis of his canons of induction.
Q6. Explain the doctrine of Plurality of Causes. How did Mill criticise it?
Answer: The doctrine of Plurality of Causes states that the same effect may be produced by different causes in different cases. For example, death may be caused by disease, old age, accident, drowning, suicide or murder; light may be produced by the sun, electricity, fire or chemical reaction; heat may be generated by friction, percussion, combustion or compression. According to this doctrine, the same kind of effect can have several alternative causes.
Mill’s Criticism: Mill rejected this doctrine for the following reasons.
- If a cause is defined as the invariable and unconditional antecedent, then it cannot be the case that several different antecedents are each invariably followed by the same effect. Invariability would break down.
- The apparent plurality is due to our loose use of the word “effect”. When we look closely we find that the effects are not really the same. The “death” caused by drowning is not exactly the same as the “death” caused by a bullet — the molecular and physiological processes differ.
- Plurality of causes appears real only at the level of popular description. Scientific analysis dissolves it by showing that each “different cause” is followed by a slightly different effect.
- Plurality of causes weakens the canons of induction (especially the Method of Agreement) and must therefore be eliminated by careful analysis.
Mill therefore concluded that genuine plurality of causes is an illusion and contradicts the very definition of cause.
Q7. Explain Aristotle’s doctrine of Four Causes.
Answer: The Greek philosopher Aristotle held that to give a complete account of any thing or event, four different causes must be specified. They are:
- Material Cause — the matter or substance out of which a thing is made. The material cause of a statue is the marble; of a chair, the wood; of a pot, the clay.
- Formal Cause — the form, shape, design or pattern according to which the matter is shaped. The formal cause of the statue is the figure that the sculptor wishes to give to the marble.
- Efficient Cause — the agent, labour, skill or active force that brings the thing into being. The efficient cause of the statue is the sculptor; of the pot, the potter.
- Final Cause — the end, goal or purpose for the sake of which the thing is made. The final cause of the statue is to beautify the temple; of the pot, to hold water.
Of these four, modern logic and science recognise only the efficient cause as the cause in the strict sense. The material and formal causes are regarded as conditions, while the final cause is regarded as a motive belonging to the agent rather than to the event itself. Yet Aristotle’s analysis is still valued for its completeness and is widely cited in metaphysics.
Q8. Explain the Law of Uniformity of Nature. State its criticisms.
Answer: The Law of Uniformity of Nature states that “Nature behaves in the same way under similar circumstances.” Whatever happens once under given conditions will happen again whenever those same conditions are reproduced. This law is the foundation of all scientific prediction and inductive generalisation.
Its scope covers two kinds of uniformity:
- Uniformity of Succession — the same cause is always followed by the same effect (fire always burns, water always flows downwards).
- Uniformity of Co-existence — the same properties always co-exist in the same kind of thing (gold is always yellow, heavy and malleable).
Criticisms:
- Paradox of Induction — Mill himself pointed out that the Uniformity of Nature is supposed to be the ground of induction, yet it is itself reached by induction. The ground is thus a conclusion, leading to circular reasoning.
- Hume’s Criticism — Hume argued that we never observe any necessary connection between cause and effect; we only observe constant conjunction. Hence the law of uniformity is only a habit of expectation, not a rationally proved truth.
- Limited Verification — we have observed nature only in a small region of space and a tiny stretch of time; we cannot prove that nature is uniform everywhere and forever.
- Variety in Nature — the law is sometimes accused of denying the immense variety of nature. (Defenders reply that it asserts uniformity only under similar circumstances, not absolute sameness.)
- Modern Physics — discoveries in quantum mechanics and probability suggest that some natural processes are statistical rather than strictly uniform.
In spite of these criticisms, the law of uniformity is indispensable in practice; without it neither science nor everyday life would be possible.
Q9. What is the Inductive Leap? How is it justified by the two foundations of induction?
Answer: Induction proceeds from observation of particular instances to a general proposition. From “this fire burns, that fire burns, the other fire burns” we conclude “all fires burn.” This jump from “some” to “all” — from observed to unobserved cases — is called the Inductive Leap.
The leap is logically wider than the evidence; the conclusion goes beyond the premises. How then is it justified? It is justified by the two foundations of induction:
- The Law of Causation assures us that every event has a cause and that effects depend on causes. So if we have discovered a real causal connection in some instances, we can be sure that the same causal connection holds in all instances of the same kind.
- The Law of Uniformity of Nature assures us that nature behaves in the same way under similar circumstances. So a cause that produced a certain effect yesterday will produce the same effect today and tomorrow under similar circumstances.
Together, these two laws bridge the logical gap of the inductive leap and provide the formal guarantee that an inductive generalisation, when properly founded on causal analysis, is universally valid. Without these laws, induction would be a mere illogical jump; with them, it becomes a scientific procedure.
Q10. Explain the fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc with examples.
Answer: The Latin phrase Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc means “after this, therefore because of this.” It is the fallacy of taking mere temporal antecedence for causal connection — that is, regarding any event simply because it precedes another in time as the cause of that other event.
This fallacy violates the requirement that the cause must be the invariable and unconditional antecedent. A chance antecedent that happens to occur once before the effect is not the cause.
Examples:
- A black cat crossed the road and shortly afterwards a man met with an accident; therefore the cat caused the accident. This is fallacious — there is no causal link.
- The cock crows before sunrise; therefore the cock causes the sun to rise. Mere temporal sequence has been mistaken for causation.
- A doctor enters a hospital and a patient dies shortly after; therefore the doctor’s entry caused the death. Plainly absurd.
- The patient took a medicine and recovered next day; therefore the medicine cured him — this may be true or it may be a post hoc fallacy if recovery would have occurred without the medicine.
To avoid this fallacy, we must establish that the antecedent is invariable, unconditional and immediate — only then is it the genuine cause.
Q11. Distinguish between Observation and Experiment.
Answer: Both observation and experiment are the material grounds of induction; both supply particular instances. But they differ in important respects, as shown below:
| Point of Difference | Observation | Experiment |
|---|---|---|
| Nature | Study of phenomena as they occur naturally | Study of phenomena under artificially produced conditions |
| Control of Conditions | Conditions are beyond the control of the observer | Conditions are deliberately controlled and varied by the experimenter |
| Multiplication of Instances | Limited to natural occurrences; cannot be increased at will | Instances can be multiplied indefinitely |
| Isolation of Phenomenon | Phenomenon is mixed with surrounding factors | Phenomenon can be isolated from disturbing influences |
| Direction of Reasoning | Both from cause to effect and from effect to cause | Mainly from cause to effect |
| Time and Place | Depends on the time and place where the event occurs | Can be performed at chosen time and place |
| Applicability | Only practical method in astronomy, sociology, history etc. | Possible in physics, chemistry, biology etc. |
| Example | Watching the eclipse of the sun | Mixing acid and alkali to study neutralisation |
Bain expresses the distinction in a famous saying: “Observation is finding a fact; experiment is making one.” Jevons however held that “observation and experiment do not differ in kind but only in degree” — both are forms of perception in the service of induction.
Q12. What are the fallacies of Observation? Explain them.
Answer: Observation is purposeful, regulated perception; but it is liable to two main fallacies which vitiate the data of induction:
- Non-observation — the failure to notice what is actually present. We overlook some essential fact or some essential instance.
- Non-observation of instances — only favourable cases are noticed, contrary cases are ignored. Example: a man notes only the dreams that come true and forgets those that do not.
- Non-observation of essential circumstances — we observe the event but miss an important condition. Example: noticing that a patient recovered after taking a medicine but failing to notice that he also rested and ate well.
- Mal-observation — observing wrongly; misinterpreting the data of sense. The senses report A but we read them as B.
- Example: in the dim light, a coil of rope is mistaken for a snake.
- Example: a stick partly immersed in water appears bent though it is straight.
- Example: hearing a faint noise as the voice of a friend.
To avoid these fallacies the observer must be unbiased, attentive, mentally alert and trained, and must repeat observations under varied conditions.
Additional Practice Questions
D. Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)
Q1. The grounds of induction are of —
(a) one kind (b) two kinds (c) three kinds (d) four kinds
Answer: (b) two kinds.
Q2. The Law of Causation is a —
(a) material ground (b) formal ground (c) real ground (d) verbal ground
Answer: (b) formal ground.
Q3. Observation and experiment are the —
(a) formal grounds (b) material grounds (c) verbal grounds (d) none
Answer: (b) material grounds.
Q4. “Cause is the sum total of positive and negative conditions” — said by
(a) Hume (b) Mill (c) Bain (d) Aristotle
Answer: (b) Mill.
Q5. “Cause is the invariable antecedent of the effect” — said by
(a) Carveth Read (b) Mill (c) David Hume (d) Bain
Answer: (c) David Hume.
Q6. “Observation is finding a fact and experiment is making one” — said by
(a) Mill (b) Bain (c) Jevons (d) Carveth Read
Answer: (b) Bain.
Q7. The “moving power” and “collocation” theory of cause is associated with —
(a) Bain (b) Mill (c) Aristotle (d) Hume
Answer: (a) Bain.
Q8. The fallacy of treating any antecedent as a cause is called —
(a) Ad hominem (b) Post hoc ergo propter hoc (c) Petitio principii (d) Ignoratio elenchi
Answer: (b) Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Q9. The doctrine of Plurality of Causes was rejected by —
(a) Hume (b) Bain (c) Mill (d) Carveth Read
Answer: (c) Mill.
Q10. Aristotle’s four causes do NOT include —
(a) Material (b) Formal (c) Efficient (d) Empirical
Answer: (d) Empirical.
Q11. The two fallacies of observation are —
(a) Hasty generalisation and post hoc (b) Non-observation and Mal-observation (c) Cause and effect (d) Plurality and conjunction
Answer: (b) Non-observation and Mal-observation.
Q12. Quantitatively, the cause is — to the effect.
(a) Greater (b) Less (c) Equal (d) Unrelated
Answer: (c) Equal.
Q13. The paradox of induction was pointed out by —
(a) Bain (b) Mill (c) Hume (d) Jevons
Answer: (b) Mill.
Q14. According to Jevons, observation and experiment differ in —
(a) Kind (b) Degree (c) Quality (d) Quantity
Answer: (b) Degree.
Q15. The Law of Uniformity of Nature states that nature behaves —
(a) Differently every time (b) Same way under similar circumstances (c) Randomly (d) None
Answer: (b) Same way under similar circumstances.
Q16. The “immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent” definition of cause was given by —
(a) Bain (b) Mill (c) Carveth Read (d) Hume
Answer: (c) Carveth Read.
Q17. The matter from which a thing is made is called —
(a) Formal cause (b) Material cause (c) Efficient cause (d) Final cause
Answer: (b) Material cause.
Q18. The end or purpose of a thing is called —
(a) Material cause (b) Formal cause (c) Efficient cause (d) Final cause
Answer: (d) Final cause.
Q19. The agent or skill that produces a thing is called —
(a) Material cause (b) Formal cause (c) Efficient cause (d) Final cause
Answer: (c) Efficient cause.
Q20. Mistaking a rope for a snake in dim light is an example of —
(a) Non-observation (b) Mal-observation (c) Post hoc (d) Plurality
Answer: (b) Mal-observation.
E. Fill in the Blanks
Q1. The grounds of induction are of ______ kinds.
Answer: Two.
Q2. The Law of ______ states that every event must have a cause.
Answer: Causation.
Q3. The Law of ______ of Nature states that nature behaves in the same way under similar circumstances.
Answer: Uniformity.
Q4. According to Mill, cause is the sum total of ______ and ______ conditions.
Answer: Positive, negative.
Q5. According to Hume, cause is the ______ antecedent of the effect.
Answer: Invariable.
Q6. Bain held that cause consists of moving power and ______.
Answer: Collocation.
Q7. Quantitatively the cause is ______ to the effect.
Answer: Equal.
Q8. The two fallacies of observation are non-observation and ______.
Answer: Mal-observation.
Q9. The Latin phrase ______ describes the fallacy of treating any antecedent as cause.
Answer: Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
Q10. The four causes of Aristotle are material, formal, efficient and ______.
Answer: Final.
Q11. The doctrine that the same effect may be produced by different causes is called ______ of causes.
Answer: Plurality.
Q12. The acting together of several causes to produce a joint effect is called ______ of causes.
Answer: Conjunction.
Q13. ______ said “Observation is finding a fact and experiment is making one.”
Answer: Bain.
Q14. ______ said observation and experiment differ in degree, not in kind.
Answer: Jevons.
Q15. The leap from “some” to “all” in induction is called the ______ leap.
Answer: Inductive.
F. True or False
Q1. The Law of Causation is a material ground of induction.
Answer: False. It is a formal ground.
Q2. Observation and experiment are the material grounds of induction.
Answer: True.
Q3. Mill defined cause as the invariable antecedent of the effect.
Answer: False. That is Hume’s definition. Mill defined it as the sum total of positive and negative conditions.
Q4. According to Bain, cause has two parts — moving power and collocation.
Answer: True.
Q5. The Law of Uniformity of Nature denies variety in nature.
Answer: False. It only asserts uniformity under similar circumstances.
Q6. Cause is quantitatively equal to its effect.
Answer: True.
Q7. The post hoc fallacy is committed when temporal sequence is mistaken for causal sequence.
Answer: True.
Q8. Aristotle’s four causes are material, formal, efficient and natural.
Answer: False. The fourth is “final,” not “natural.”
Q9. Mill accepted the doctrine of Plurality of Causes.
Answer: False. Mill rejected it.
Q10. The paradox of induction was pointed out by Mill.
Answer: True.
Q11. Mistaking a rope for a snake is an example of non-observation.
Answer: False. It is mal-observation.
Q12. According to Jevons, observation and experiment differ in kind.
Answer: False. They differ only in degree.
Q13. The Inductive Leap is the jump from particular to universal.
Answer: True.
Q14. Negative conditions are those whose presence is required for the effect.
Answer: False. Negative conditions are those whose absence is required.
Q15. Carveth Read defined cause as “the immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent of the effect.”
Answer: True.
G. Match the Following
Q1. Match the following thinkers with their views of cause:
| Thinker (A) | View of Cause (B) |
|---|---|
| 1. J.S. Mill | a. Invariable antecedent of the effect |
| 2. David Hume | b. Sum total of positive and negative conditions |
| 3. Carveth Read | c. Moving power plus collocation |
| 4. Alexander Bain | d. Immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent |
| 5. Aristotle | e. Material, formal, efficient and final |
Answer: 1-b, 2-a, 3-d, 4-c, 5-e.
Q2. Match the four causes of Aristotle with their meaning:
| Cause (A) | Meaning (B) |
|---|---|
| 1. Material cause | a. Purpose for which a thing is made |
| 2. Formal cause | b. Substance from which a thing is made |
| 3. Efficient cause | c. Form, shape or pattern |
| 4. Final cause | d. Agent, labour or skill |
Answer: 1-b, 2-c, 3-d, 4-a.
Q3. Match the term with its description:
| Term (A) | Description (B) |
|---|---|
| 1. Formal ground of induction | a. Observation and experiment |
| 2. Material ground of induction | b. Law of causation, law of uniformity of nature |
| 3. Post hoc ergo propter hoc | c. Same effect from different causes |
| 4. Plurality of causes | d. Mistaking temporal sequence for causation |
| 5. Conjunction of causes | e. Several causes acting together for a joint effect |
Answer: 1-b, 2-a, 3-d, 4-c, 5-e.
Glossary of Important Terms
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Induction | The process of arriving at a general real proposition on the basis of observation of particular instances. |
| Inductive Leap | The logical jump from observed particular cases to a universal proposition covering all cases. |
| Grounds of Induction | The laws and processes upon which induction depends to establish a general proposition; of two kinds — formal and material. |
| Formal Grounds | The Law of Causation and the Law of Uniformity of Nature. |
| Material Grounds | Observation and Experiment. |
| Law of Causation | Every event must have a cause. |
| Law of Uniformity of Nature | Nature behaves in the same way under similar circumstances. |
| Cause | The immediate, unconditional, invariable antecedent of the effect; quantitatively equal to the effect. |
| Effect | The event which invariably follows the cause. |
| Antecedent | That which precedes another event in time. |
| Invariable Antecedent | An antecedent which is always followed by the effect, without exception. |
| Unconditional Antecedent | An antecedent which produces the effect without depending on any further hidden condition. |
| Immediate Antecedent | An antecedent which directly precedes the effect with no intervening cause. |
| Positive Condition | A factor whose presence is required for the effect to occur. |
| Negative Condition | A factor whose absence is required for the effect to occur. |
| Necessary Condition | One in whose absence the effect cannot occur. |
| Sufficient Condition | One whose presence by itself is enough to produce the effect. |
| Moving Power | (Bain) The active force which initiates the change. |
| Collocation | (Bain) The arrangement of circumstances under which the moving power operates. |
| Plurality of Causes | The doctrine that the same effect may be produced by different causes in different cases; rejected by Mill. |
| Conjunction of Causes | The acting together of several causes to produce a joint effect. |
| Material Cause | (Aristotle) The matter or substance from which a thing is made. |
| Formal Cause | (Aristotle) The form, shape or pattern of a thing. |
| Efficient Cause | (Aristotle) The agent, labour or skill that produces a thing. |
| Final Cause | (Aristotle) The end or purpose for which a thing is made. |
| Qualitative Mark of Cause | The features describing the nature of cause — invariable, unconditional, immediate antecedence. |
| Quantitative Mark of Cause | The principle that cause and effect are equal in quantity of matter and energy. |
| Conservation of Matter and Energy | The scientific law that matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed; they only change form. |
| Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc | “After this, therefore because of this” — the fallacy of mistaking temporal sequence for causal sequence. |
| Paradox of Induction | Mill’s contradiction: the ground of induction (Uniformity of Nature) is itself a result of induction. |
| Uniformity of Succession | Same cause is always followed by same effect. |
| Uniformity of Co-existence | Same properties always co-exist in the same kind of thing. |
| Observation | Purposeful, regulated, selective perception of phenomena as they naturally occur. |
| Experiment | Study of phenomena under deliberately controlled and varied conditions. |
| Non-observation | Failure to notice an essential instance or essential circumstance. |
| Mal-observation | Wrong interpretation of the data of sense perception. |
| Constant Conjunction | (Hume) The repeated togetherness of two events in our experience, which we call cause and effect. |
| Canons of Elimination | The five methods of inductive enquiry deduced from the Law of Causation (to be studied in Chapter 3). |
This concludes the comprehensive Question and Answer guide for Class 12 Logic and Philosophy Chapter 2 — Foundation of Induction (Grounds of Induction) for ASSEB English Medium learners. Practice every question carefully, memorise the definitions of the major thinkers (Mill, Bain, Hume, Carveth Read, Aristotle), and master the distinction between formal and material grounds. With clarity on the Law of Causation, the Law of Uniformity of Nature, and the fallacy of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc, you will be fully prepared to score top marks. Best wishes for your H.S. Final Examination from your friends at HSLC GURU.