Perhaps the best way to introduce Mills` methods is an example. Suppose your family went to a buffet dinner together, but when you got home, you started to feel sick and feel stomach pains. How do you determine the cause of the disease? Suppose you create a table of foods taken by each member of the family: Perhaps the best is to consider Mills` methods more modestly than the tools we can use in our efforts to confirm assumptions about the natural world. If we have already made several specific hypotheses about what could be the cause of an observed event, the use of the methods will be useful, as it will often allow us to eliminate most of the possible causes we have identified, which tends to confirm the hypothesis that any remaining circumstance will likely be the real cause. If our main goal in using Mills` methods was to discover the unknown cause of an observed event, they would fail us at the very moment when we need it most. The methods show us how to identify the probable cause from the possibilities we have envisioned in the relevant previous circumstances of this effect. But the most interesting cases will be those where the cause we are looking for is in an unsuspected source, which we have probably excluded from our analysis of the above and irrelevant circumstances. Thus, Thousand`s methods cannot help us discover the causes, unless we already know (approximately) what these causes will be likely. For a property to be a necessary condition, it must always be present when the effect is present.
Since this is the case, we are interested in examining cases where the effect is present and to learning about the characteristics that exist and are absent under the “possible necessary conditions.” Obviously, the properties missing if the effect is present cannot be necessary conditions for effect. This method is also generally described in comparative policy as the most diverse conception of the system. Symbolically, the method of concordance can be presented as: John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) was an English philosopher who wrote on a wide range of subjects ranging from language and science to political philosophy. The so-called “mill” methods are five rules for the search for the causes he has proposed. It has been assumed that some of these rules were in fact discussed by the famous Islamic scientist and philosopher Avicenna (980-1037). In this case, you are the only one who is not sick. The only difference between you and the others is that you didn`t make a salad. It`s probably the cause of other people`s illnesses.
It is an application of the method of difference. This rule says that if you have a situation that leads to an effect, and another that does not, and the only difference is the presence of only one factor in the first situation, we can infer that factor as the cause of the effect. This method is also generally known as the most similar system design in the context of comparative policy. Mills` methods can only reveal evidence of probable causes; they don`t really offer an explanation. The discovery of causalities is an important step towards understanding the world, but it is only part of what we need. We also need to understand how and why some cases of causation work the way they do. The answers to these questions lead us to the possibility of identifying cause-and-effect relationships. We need to develop theories and hypotheses that underpin the scientific argument. “Method of agreement.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/method%20of%20agreement. Access 30 Nov 2020. Suppose four students come to see a woman.