There have been many studies in America of the (1) and behavior of university lecturers and professors, and of well-known “free ” or public thinkers who are not (2) to a university or other (3) , which show that those who are recognized as being more successful or productive as scholars in their field, or are at the best universities, are much more likely to have critical opinions. That is to say that they are more likely to hold liberal views – in the American use of that word -than those of their (4) who are less creative or who have less of a (5) The better a university is, as measured by the test results of its students or by the prestige of its (6) , the more likely it has been that there will be student unrest and a relatively left-of-center faculty.

However simple or complex the chain of events in any given situation, when looked into it usually reveals a train of (1) relationships – they are seen to be (2) in some way. The methods of analysis aim to establish these relationships and provide a solid background for useful (3) based on what at first appear to be separate events. The first step in this process is to collect facts and then see if any particular (4) emerge. If they do, it then becomes possible to form theories related to the facts, and this type of empirical theory forms a useful basis for (5) and prediction. However, on its own this theory is not enough; the essential second step is to test it by collecting more facts and by checking predictions against events. These new facts may mean you have to (6) the theory, bearing in mind that new facts can only either disprove or (7) a theory – they cannot prove it to be right.

It is difficult to know how to place Montesquieu – if you’re the kind of person who likes to (1) Historian, political philosopher, (2) , jurist or, if you think the Persian Letters a novel, a novelist – he was all these things. Perhaps, as some have, he could be placed among that almost extinct species, the man of (3) The books that make up The Spirit of the Laws have had the most (4) on later thinkers, and in them, as in his equally great Considerations on che Causes of the Grandeur and Decadence of the Romans, he makes his underlying purpose clear. It is to make the random, apparently meaningless variety of events understandable; he wanted to find out what the historical truth was. His starting point then was this almost endless variety of morals, (5) , ideas, laws and institutions and to make some sense out of them. He believed it was not chance that ruled the world, and that, beyond the chaos of accidents, there must be underlying causes that (6) for the apparent madness of things.