If the development of science has been the most consequential, progressive, development in our history, then Francis Bacon, has a claim on being one of histories most important thinkers.
He was the first to try to systematise what we now call induction, or the scientific method.
Bacon was born in London in 1561. He was an establishment figure born into one of the most powerful families in Britain. He as a member of the house of commons and the house of lords for 37 years, a lawyer, Attorney General, and a member of the Privy Council, the group who advises the monarch. He died of pneumonia after carrying out experiments with ice in 1626.
He was incredibly popular in his day. Voltaire praised him, his influence on the Enlightenment was considerable. Thomas Jefferson commissioned portraits of Bacon, Newton, and Locke.
Bacon is fascinated by the scientific discoveries of his day: the printing press, the compass, gunpowder, and so on.
He’s interested in the question of what is useful, practical, the pursuit of improving our place in the world
He thought that the scholastic philosophy taught at the time was dry, closed off, esoteric, at a dead end.
But before we look at his philosophy its important to understand Bacon’s motivations
MOTIVATIONS
the law
Bacon was, remember, an establishment figure and a lawyer. And before he became more interested in science and philosophy he was interested in the law.
He wanted to reform the legal system of England. He wanted to systemise it, so that its truths could be more easily discovered and interpreted. He thought there was an underlying structure to the legal system could be simplified.
IN other words, he was interested in consolidating and structuring the discovery of truth within an institution.
He said of the Roman Emperor Justinian, for example, and I think this is telling, that ‘having peace in the heart of his empire . . . chose it for a monument and honour of his government, to revisit the Roman laws, and to reduce them from infinite volumes and much repugnancy into one competent and uniform corps of law.’
We’re looking for uniformity.
Bacon’s solution was a collective, central process of trained lawyers organising and categorising reports, records and statues, but importantly, this needs a central authority.
So this is one motivation.
Usefulness
But he’s also looking for what is useful.
He wants to make philosophy more practical, and in this he is against what we calls ‘vain notions’ of scholastic philosophers and the ‘blind experiments’ of the alchemists.
At the time philosophy included natural philosophy. The study of the natural world.
But Bacon looks to the great inventions of his time -the printing press, the compass, gunpowder – and sees they were discovered more by chanced than any philosophical pursuit.
We can see this in a speech he wrote for the Queen in 1594: He syas:
‘And for this purpose I will commend to your majesty four principal works and monuments of yourself: First, the collecting of a most perfect and general library, wherein whatsoever the wit of man hath heretofore committed to books of worth, be they ancient or modern, printed or manuscript, European or of the other parts, of one or other language, may be made contributory to your wisdom. Next, a spacious, wonderful garden, wherein whatsoever plant the sun of divers climates, out of the earth of diverse moulds, either wild or by the culture of man brought forth, may be with that care that appertaineth to the good prospering thereof set and cherished: This garden to be built about with rooms to stable in all rare beasts and to cage in all rare birds; with two lakes adjoining, the one of fresh water the other of salt, for like variety of fishes. And so you may have in small compass a model of universal nature made private. The third, a goodly huge cabinet, wherein whatsoever the hand of man by exquisite art or engin hath made rare in stuff, form, or motion; whatsoever singularity chance and the shuffle of things hath produced; whatsoever Nature hath wrought in things that want life and may be kept; shall be sorted and included. The fourth such a still-house, so furnished with mills, instruments, furnaces, and vessels, as may be a palace fit for a philosopher’s stone.’
So how does he suggest we systematise the pursuit of practical useful knowledge?
IDOLS
He said that the mind was a ‘crooked mirror’, distorted by what he called idols. He wrote:
There are four idols: idols of the tribe, idols of the cave, idols of the marketplace, and idols of the theatre.
Idol of the tribe
By tribe he means humans, and so here he means errors of human nature. There are many we could think of but Bacon points to a few. For example, we all suppose the world is more ordered than it us. In Bacons day, there was the assumption that the orbit of the planets was circular, for example, or that there were 4 elements, and the 4 humors of the body. Another idol of the tribe is that we believe what we want to be true rather than what is, or follow our emotions over our reason.
He writes: ‘Subject to influence from the will and the emotions, a fact that creates fanciful knowledge… in short, emotion marks and stains the understanding in countless ways which are sometimes impossible to perceive.’
Next, we have the idols of the cave. These are personal, individual biases. They arise from the particularity of our education or custom etc. We might have, For example, a fascination with a single subject. He also talks here of the roll chance plays in human affairs.
Then, there are idols of the marketplace. These come from the limitations of communication, what Bacon calls the ‘biggest nuisances of all’. He references the names of things that don’t exist, referring to fiction or concepts in philosophy, while also pointing to how language is vague, and words ill-defined. Adjectives like rare, bright, or heavy, refer to degrees and arent specific enough.
Finally, there are Idols of the Theatre. He is referring here mostly to philosophy and dogmas.
He writes ‘there are also philosophers of another type who have laboured carefully and faithfully over a few experiments, and have had the temerity to tease out their philosophies from them and build them up; the rest they twist to fit that pattern in wonderful ways.
Once we are aware of our own biases, Bacon argues, we can proceed to study the world. The most popular way of finding the truth of some matter at the time was by Syllogism. This was the method advocated by Aristotle.
Syllogism starts with a premise or idea and then proceeds logically.
For example, by syllogism we can say if A is true and B is equal to A then B is true.
All men are mortal. Socrates is a Man. Socrates is Mortal.
It takes general ideas and extrapolates.
But this has its limitations. Say we’re trying to work our what ‘heat’ is.
We might says ‘heat’ is caused by ‘brightness’ as the sun, fire, and light seem to cause heath.
And so by syllogism say heat is caused by brightness, therefore the moon is hot at night.
Or by contrast, heat is caused by brightness, therefore boiling water is not hot.
Clearly there are limitations.
Bacon suggests another way: induction.
He writes: ‘The syllogism consists of propositions, propositions consist of words, and words are counters for notions. Hence if the notions themselves (this is the basis of the matter) are confused and abstracted from things without care, there is nothing sound in what is built on them. The only hope is true induction.’
INDUCTION
Bacon is interested in causation. What causes something to be hot, for example. He’s interested in understanding how natural processes work, in what he calls forms.
Forms are the properties of something: shape, colour, heat, weight, for example. He writes ‘For the form of a nature is such that if it is there, the given nature inevitably follows.’
Instead, though of taking a premise – an idea – about what causes these forms, we start at the other end. We start from scratch.
The Baconian Method starts with simple observations. He said ‘a new beginning has to be made from the lowest foundations.’
Instead of starting at the top, from general ideas, we start from the bottom, from particular observations, and work upwards to ‘general truths’ or axioms.
Take our example of heat, and this is an example Bacon himself uses in the New Organon.
Bacon says we should make a table of presences, absences, and degrees.
So where is heat present?
Now, the next thing to do is to think about where heat is absent. But, its impossible to list all absences. Its too broad, so we look for counter-instances – closely related absences.
He writes: ‘we should attach negatives to our affirmatives, and investigate absences only in subjects which are closely related to others in which a given nature exists and appears.’
By this method, Bacon is led inductively to the theory that heat is the product of motion.
Bacon’s inductive method was a completely new way of approaching philosophy and science; carefully observing the world, with a mind to understanding it, so that it can be made use of. It opened up many questions that led to the rise of enlightenment thought, questions about the production of knowledge, systematisation, and central authority. And he was the first, real, empiricist – the idea that knowledge must come from sensory experience.
So while his ideas seem obvious today, his contribution to philosophy is huge, but if also has its limits. That is what we’ll turn to next time.