Historical law-statements require generalizing away from unique facts

Evidence

Certainly the philosophy of praxis is realised through the concrete study of past history and through present activity to construct new history. But a theory of history and politics can be made, for even if the facts are always unique and changeable in the flux of movement of history, the concepts can be theorised. Otherwise one would not even be able to tell what movement is, or the dialectic, and one would fall back into a new form of nominalism. — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1526 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

It is from these considerations that one must start in order to establish what is meant by “regularity”, “law”, “automatism” in historical facts. It is not a question of “discovering” a metaphysical law of “determinism”, or even of establishing a “general” law of causality. It is a question of bringing out how in historical evolution relatively permanent forces are constituted which operate with a certain regularity and automatism. Even the law of large numbers, 518 although very useful as a model of comparison, cannot be assumed as the “law” of historical events. In order to establish the historical origin of the philosophy of praxis (an element which is nothing less than its particular way of conceiving “immanence”), it will be necessary to study the conception of economic laws put forward by David Ricardo. It is a matter of realising that Ricardo was important in the foundation of the philosophy of praxis not only for the concept of “value” in economics, but was also “philosophically” important and has suggested a way of thinking and intuiting history and life. The method of “supposing that …”, of the premiss that gives a certain conclusion, should it seems to me, be identified as one of the starting points (one of the intellectual stimuli) of the philosophical experience of the founders of the philosophy of praxis. — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1464 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Historical laws are constituted regularities, not metaphysical or causal determinants — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1464; Historical pattern explanations need leveled generality; The legal form of composition fallacies moves from specifics to generalities. — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1219 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

• Historical pattern explanations need leveled generality #expands (0.95)
• Theory of history is possible despite the uniqueness of historical facts #corroborates (0.90) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1526
• Historical laws are constituted regularities, not metaphysical or causal determinants #corroborates (0.85) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1464
• Language requires general terms that cannot be explained purely by particulars #corroborates (0.85) — Bertrand Russell, History of Western Philosophy, 587
• The legal form of composition fallacies moves from specifics to generalities. #exemplifies (0.80) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1219
• A case is precedent only when material facts match exactly #contradicts (0.80) — Ruggero J. Aldisert, Agatha D. Aldisert, Logic for Lawyers- A Guide to Clear…, 1299
• Legal rights require rigid binary categories that reject graded differences #qualifies (0.75) — Talal Asad, Formations of the Secular, 755