CHAPTER ONE: GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Human beings have conceived ideas as weapons that help to fulfill our desires or interests,

rather than the discovery of truth. Francis Bacon established that, when a man wishes

something were true, the more he readily believes it, the more mankind commonly talks of

the wish as being father to the thought (White 22). Thinkers have always been aware that

there have several obstacles that had impeded their knowledge of the world, however they

who have presumed to dogmatize on nature, as so some well investigated subjects either from

self-conceit or arrogance, and in the professional style, have inflicted the greatest injury on

philosophy and learning. Most of these obstacles are located in the human beings cognitive

capacity itself. With the disintegration of medieval society, a new scientific approach to the

knowledge of nature received impulse and began to supersede scholastic philosophy.

In the way, theoretical contemplation of a hierarchical and sacred world was replaced by a

conception that valued the practical function of thought. The development of trade, money

exchange, secularized education, communities, and cities and so on, led to a new

consideration of knowledge in its social and historical perspective. An accurate and

unprejudiced knowledge of nature is needed for it to be practically mastered, and this became

the irresistible preoccupation of intellectuals. The development of a practice knowledge of

nature has been deeply limited, not just by some theocentric ideas such as the notion that

human beings are essentially unable to conceive the world, but also by some artificial

impediment that had prevented it.

1
Search for this accurate knowledge, together with the appearance of science, was the fight

against all those factors that had been perturbing its development. Likewise, the conception

of science is accompanied by a critique of former methods of cognition.

The first step to protect knowledge from these obstacles was the existential conscience of

these irrational elements that suddenly arise in the mind and make it difficult to discover

reality (Gaukroger 182). Philosophers however have realized that there was a need to create a

new approach to help eradicate those traditional distractions from the acquisition of true

knowledge.

Francis Bacon Novum Organum (1620) and Rene Descartes Discourse de la Methode (1637)

were two such new approach conceived under the need to search for a new method.

The aim of this method was based on the overthrown of the short comings of scholastic

medieval thought. While Descartes remained at a more deductive level, Bacon which is our

main focus in this paper insisted on the role of positive science and its observational

character.

This work is therefore by the fact that the interpretation of nature is the leading idea of

Francis Bacon notion of science. But by contrast with his ideas about methods, induction or

experiment, the significance of the "interpretation of nature has received very little scholarly

attention". Francis Bacon wanted to supersede Aristotle's Organon by a new by a new Organ

on but no longer insisted on the deductive formal logic in the approach of reality but replaced

it with an inductive approach. The kingdom of the human being hence could only be erected

on his knowledge of nature. Man acquired power over nature obeying it and he could obey it

only after he had learned to understand it. Unlike the doctrines of Aristotle and Plato, Bacon

2
placed an emphasis on experimentation and interaction, culminating in "the commerce of the

mind with things". Bacon new scientific method involved gathering data, prudently analyzing

it and performing experiments to observe nature's truth in an organized way. Francis Bacon

believed that when approached this way, science could become a tool for the betterment of

mankind and the human race.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

The source of human knowledge and the interpretation of nature has been a matter of serious

concern to philosophers and even scholars. But prior to the emergence of the scientific

evolutionary movement, philosophers have neglected the matter concerning knowledge and

the interpretation of nature. The pre-socratic philosophers concentrated on the cosmological

aspect of the world, while the scholastic philosopers concentrated on faith and God as the

source of knowledge.

The problem that surrounds this study, when contextualized, seems to be very conspicuous.

The problem of the certainty of our knowledge and the interpretation of nature. Bacon was

convinced that the ages before him had failed to make any visible progress in the sciences

because they lacked the method. As a result of this, man from the ancient era down to the

scholastic era have failed to make new discovery, ideas that will foster development in the

society; man at this point was stagnant in knowledge and had been subjected to nature as

superior to him. However, this research itself was designed to very intentionally with precise

instructions concerning how one might remove thoughts and assumptions or beliefs which

have for recent years been a major problem and obstacle in the knowing process.

We will make a comprehensive exposure of Bacon's notion of science; the method that Bacon

3
claims to have discovered which is the only solution to the problem or dilemma (the dream-

method of a positivist). This for Bacon is a set of rules which allows the understanding 'to

proceed by a true scale and successive steps without breach and interruption from particular

to the lesser axioms, thence to the intermediate (rising one above the other) and lastly, to the

general'. And thus, it allows one to find a real model of the world in the understanding, such

as it is found to be, not such as man's reason has distorted.

1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study is to critically examine Francis Bacon notion of science and also

scrutinize this elusive idea of the "interpretation" of nature and knowledge in the later

sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries. Is it the case that Renaissance investigators of

nature and knowledge prior to Bacon subjected it to "interpretation", or was his use of the

idea instead as original as he liked to suggest? Most generally, what sorts of things were in

fact "interpreted" in the late Renaissance? To answer these questions, the first half of this

study investigates whether the idea of knowledge and "interpretation" nature can be found

across the various different last Renaissance and scholastic eras. The second half then turns to

consider the significance for Bacon of those disciplines, in which "interpretation" certainly

did play an important role. Though Bacon's claim to originality in his conception of the

"interpretation of nature" will turn out to be credible, the study concludes by offering some

suggestions as to its inspiration.

1.4 METHOD OF THE STUDY

The nature of this research delves into the notion of science of Francis Bacon. We shall

however, try to employ expository and analytical method.

4
Moreover, it has to be critical, evaluative, historical, discursive and philosophically

interpretative.

1.5 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

Science is important. But one cannot say for sure that it has all answers to human

predicaments. Fundamentally, this research shall be centered on Francis Bacon's notion of

science. He saw science as the new method and direction for the business of acquiring

knowledge, interpreting and overcoming nature.

This, as a matter of fact, made great thinkers to examine and propound theories on the issues

of science. However, the range of this work embraces other theorists and philosophers who

have said about the notion of science and their views will be discussed also where necessary.

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The significance of this research work is bipolar, firstly, it will serve as assessment of the

much-esteemed notion of science enunciated by Francis Bacon. Secondly, it will serve as a

call for orientation to learning, providing a new direction, organization and method for the

business of acquiring knowledge about the world.

It also emphasis on how Francis Bacon proposed to establish a new engine that would

simplify the art of discovery and lead men quickly to the final truths about nature.

1.7 STRUCTURE OF THE STUDY

This work is structured according to the research study.

Chapter one is fundamentally an introduction which entails; background of the study,

statement of the problem, purpose of the study, method of the study, scope of the study,

significance of the study, structure of the study and finally a brief history of Francis Bacon's

biography.

5
Chapter two is the literature review, thorough scrutiny of the view of different scholars,

scientists and philosophers on the issue of science.

Chapter three gives detailed explanation of the meaning of science, Francis Bacon's natural

philosophy, His conception of matter, theory and cosmology, and finally a critical appraisal of

His notion of science.

Chapter four summarizes and proffers suggestions, critical evaluation, conclusion and

solutions to the study.

1.8 FRANCIS BACON'S BIOGRAPHY

Francis Bacon was born on January 22, 1561 in London, England. Bacon served as attorney

general and lord chancellor of England, resigning amidst charges of corruption. His more

valuable work was philosophical. Beacon took up Aristotelian ideas, arguing for an empirical,

inductive approach, known as the scientific method, which is the foundation of modern

scientific enquiry. His father was Sir Nicolas Bacon and Lady Anne Cooke Bacon, was His

father's second wife and daughter to Sir Anthony Cooke Bacon, a humanist who was Edward

VI's tutor. Francis Bacon's mother was also the sister-in-law of Lord Burghley.

Francis Bacon began attending Trinity college, Cambridge in April 1573, when he was 12

years old. He completed his course of studying at Trinity college in December 1575. The

following year, Bacon enrolled in a law program at Honorable society of Gray's inn, the

school his brother Anthony attended. Finding the curriculum at Gray's inn state and old

fashioned, Bacon latter called his tutors ''men of sharp wits, snup up in their cells if a few

authors, chiefly Aristotle, their dictator ". Bacon favoured the new Renaissance humanism

over Aristotelianism and scholasticism, the more traditional schools of thought in England at

6
the time.

A year after he enrolled at Gray's inn, Bacon left school to work under Sir Amyas Paulet, the

British ambassador to France, during his missions to Paris. Two and a half years later, he was

forced to abandon the mission prematurely and return to England when his Father died

unexpectedly, his meager inheritance left him broke. Bacon turned to his uncle, Lord

Burghley for help in finding a well-paid post as a government official, but Bacon's uncle shot

him down. Still just as a teen, Francis Bacon was scrambling to find a means of earning a

decent living.

Fortunately for Bacon in 1581, he landed a job as a member for Cornwall in the House of

Commons. Bacon was also able to return to Gray's inn and complete his education and was

appointed the position of outer barrister in 1582.

Bacon held his place in Parliament for nearly decades from 1584 to 1617, during which he

was extremely active in politics, law and Royal court. In 1603, three years before he married

Hairess Alice Barnham, Bacon was knighted upon James I's ascension to the British throne.

He continued to work his way swiftly up the legal and political ranks, achieving solicitor

general in 1607 and attorney general six years later. In 1616, his career peaked when he was

invited to join the Privy Council and just a year later, he reached the same position of his

father, Lord Keeper of the General Seal. In 1618, Bacon surpassed his father's achievement

when he was promoted to the lofty title of Lord Chancellor, one of the highest political

offices in England. In 1621, Bacon became Viscount St. Albans.

In 1621, the same year that Bacon became Viscount St. Albans, he was accused of accepting

bribes and impeached by Parliament for corruption. This led to the collapse of his political

7
career. Retired, he was now able to focus on one of his other passions, the philosophy of

science. From the time he had reached adulthood, Bacon was determined to alter the face of

natural philosophy. He strove to create a new outline for the scientific methods (methods that

depended on tangible proof), while developing the basis of applied science.

Unlike the doctrines of Aristotle and Plato, Bacon's approach placed an emphasis on

experimentation and interaction, culminating in the commerce of mind with things.

Bacon new scientific method involved gathering data, prudently analyzing it and performing

experiments to observe nature's truth in an organized way, science could become a tool for

the betterment of mankind.

In March 1626, Bacon was performing a series of experiments with ice. While testing the

effects of cold on the preservation and decay of meat, he stuffed a hen with snow near high

gate England and caught a chill. Ailing Bacon stayed at Lord Arundel's home in London. The

guest room where Bacon resided was cold and musty, he soon developed bronchitis. On April

9th 1626, a week after he had arrived at Lord Arundel's estate, Francis Bacon died.

In the year after, Bacon's death, his theories began to have a major influence on the evolving

field of the 17th century European science.

Today, Bacon is still widely regarded as a major figure in scientific methodology and natural

philosophy during the English Renaissance. Having advocated an organized system of

obtaining knowledge with a humanitarian goal mind, he is largely credited with ushering in

the new early modem era of human understanding.

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW

8
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

The notion of science has engaged humanity since the earliest of time to date. Over the

course of human history, people have developed many interconnected and validated ideas

about the physical, biological, psychological and social worlds. These ideas have enabled

successive generations to achieve an increasingly comprehensive and reliable understanding

of the human species and its environment. The means used to develop these ideas are

particular ways of observing, thinking, experimenting, and validating. These ways represent a

fundamental aspect of the nature of science and reflect how science tends to differ from other

modes of knowing. Our focus in this chapter, is to do a review on the notion of science from

its inception (the Ancient through contemporary times).

Science in early culture refers to the study of proto science in ancient history, prior to the

development of science in the Middle ages. In prehistoric times, advice and knowledge was

passed from generation to generation in an oral tradition. The development of writing enabled

knowledge to be stored and communicated across generations with much greater fidelity.

Combined with the development of agriculture, which allowed for a surplus of food, it

became possible for early civilization to develop and spend more of their time to tasks other

than survival, such as the search for knowledge for knowledge's sake.

The importance of science through Astronomy and Astrology was underscored in Ancient

Egyptian and Babylonian mythology. Astronomy is the science that lends itself to the

recording and studying of observations: the vigorous notings of the motions of the stars,

planets, and the moon are left on thousands of clay tablets created by scribes. Even today,

astronomical periods identified by mesopotamian scientists are still widely used in Western

9
calendars: the solar year, the lunar month and seven day week. Astronomy and astrology were

considered the same thing, as evidenced by the practice of this science in Babylonian by

priests. Indeed, rather than following the modern trend towards rational science, moving

away from superstition and belief, the mesopotamian astronomy conversely became more

astrology based later in the civilization; studying the starscin terms of horoscopes and omens,

which might explain the popularity of the clay tablets.

Babylonian astronomy was the first and highly successful attempt at giving a refined science

as a mathematical description of astronomical phenomenon.

Significant advance of science in ancient Egypt included astronomy, mathematics and

medicine. Egypt was a centre of alchemical research for much of the Western world.

Edwin Smith "paprus" is one of the first medical documents still extent, and perhaps the

earliest document that attempts to describe and analyze the Brain; it might seem to be the

very beginning of modern Neuroscience. However, while Egyptian medicine had some

effective practices that was not without its ineffective and sometimes harmful practices,

medical historians belief that ancient Egyptian pharmacology, for example, was largely

ineffective. Nevertheless, it applies the following components: examination, diagnosis,

treatment, and prognosis, to the treatment of disease, which display strong parallels to the

basic empirical method of science and G. E. R. Lloyd played a significant role in the

development of this methodology.

The above analysis underscores the role of science through astronomy and astrology in

civilization and the popularity of society.

Science or scientific thought in classical antiquity becomes tangible from the 6th century B.C

10
in pre- Socratic philosophy. In classical antiquity, the inquiry into the workings of the

universe took place both in investigation aimed at such practical goals as establishing a

reliable calendar or determining how to cure a variety of illnesses and in those abstract

investigations known as natural philosophy. The ancient people who are considered the first

scientists may have thought of themselves as natural philosophers, as practitioners of a skilled

profession.

The earliest Greek philosophers, known as the pre-socratic, provided competing answers to

the question found in the myths of their neighbours: "How did the ordered cosmos in which

we live come to be? The pre-socratic philosopher Thales, dubbed the father of science", was

the first to postulate non-supernatural explanations for natural phenomenon such as lighting

and earthquakes. Pythagoras of Samos founded the Pythagorean school, which investigated

mathematics as a science for its own sake, and was the first to postulate that the earth is

spherical in shape.

A philosopher of repute that delve into the issue of science was Aristotle who in his notion of

Science, produced the first systematic discussion of natural philosophy, which did much to

shape later investigations of nature. His science was based on the development of deductive

reasoning which was of particular importance and usefulness to later scientific inquiry.

The importance legacy of this period included substantial advances in factual knowledge,

especially in anatomy, zoology, botany, geography, mathematics and astronomy; thus creating

an awareness of the importance of certain scientific problems, especially those related to the

problem of change and its causes, and a recognition of the methodological importance of

11
applying mathematics to natural phenomenon and of undertaking empirical research. Thus,

clear unbroken lines of influence lead from ancient Greek and Hellenistic philosophers, to

medieval philosophers, to the European Renaissance and enlightenment, to the secular

science of the modern day. Neither reason nor inquiry began with the Ancient Greeks, but the

Socratic method did, along with the ideas of forms, logic, astronomy, geometry and the

natural science.

In the modern period, science, not religious dogma, was seen as the mode of explaining

natural phenomenon, including social relationship, unlike earlier times were religious dogma

lay down a complete system, covering human morality, hopes, and the past and the future

history of the universe.

Another philosopher was Piere Duhem's views on the notion of science which are explicated

in his 1906 work The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. In this work, he opposed

Newton's statement that the Principia's law of universal mutual gravitation was deduced from

'phenomena', including Kepler's second and third laws. Newton's claims in this regard had

already been attacked by critical proof-analyses of the German logician Leibniz and then

most famously by Immanuel Kant, following Hume's logical critique of induction. But the

novelty of Duhem's work was his proposal that Newton's theory of universal mutual gravity

flatly contradicted Kepler's Laws of planetary motion because the interplanetary mutual

gravitational perturbations caused deviations from Keplerian orbits. Since no proposition can

be validly logically deduced from any it contradicts, according to Duhem, Newton must not

have logically deduced his law of gravitation directly from Kepler's Laws.

Duhem's name is given to the underdetermination or Duhem–Quine thesis, which holds that

12
for any given set of observations there is an innumerably large number of explanations. It is,

in essence, the same as Hume's critique of induction: all three variants point at the fact that

empirical evidence cannot force the choice of a theory or its revision. Possible alternatives to

induction are Duhem's instrumentalism and Popper's thesis that we learn from falsification.

As popular as the Duhem–Quine thesis may be in the philosophy of science, in reality Pierre

Duhem and Willard Van Orman Quine stated very different theses. Pierre Duhem believed

that experimental theory in physics is fundamentally different from fields like physiology and

certain branches of chemistry. Also, Duhem's conception of theoretical group has its limits,

since not all concepts are connected to each other logically. He did not include at all a priori

disciplines such as logic and mathematics within these theoretical groups in physics which

can be tested experimentally. Quine, on the other hand, conceived this theoretical group as a

unit of a whole human knowledge. To Quine, even mathematics and logic must be revised in

light of recalcitrant experience, a thesis that Duhem never held.

Duhem's philosophy of science was criticized by one of his contemporaries, Abel Rey, in part

because of what Rey perceived as influence on the part of Duhem's Catholic faith.

Duhem argues that physics is subject to certain methodological limitations that do not affect

other sciences. In his The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory (1914), Duhem critiqued the

Baconian notion of "crucial experiments". According to this critique, an experiment in

physics is not simply an observation, but rather an interpretation of observations by means of

a theoretical framework. Furthermore, no matter how well one constructs one's experiment, it

is impossible to subject an isolated single hypothesis to an experimental test. Instead, it is a

whole interlocking group of hypotheses, background assumptions, and theories that is tested.

13
This thesis has come to be known as confirmation holism. This inevitable holism, according

to Duhem, renders crucial experiments impossible. More generally, Duhem was critical of

Newton's description of the method of physics as a straightforward "deduction" from facts

and observations.

In the appendix to The Aim and Structure, entitled "Physics of a Believer," Duhem draws out

the implications that he sees his philosophy of science as having for those who argue that

there is a conflict between physics and religion. He writes, "metaphysical and religious

doctrines are judgments touching on objective reality, whereas the principles of physical

theory are propositions relative to certain mathematical signs stripped of all objective

existence. Since they do not have any common term, these two sorts of judgments can neither

contradict nor agree with each other". Nonetheless, Duhem argues that it is important for the

theologian or metaphysician to have detailed knowledge of physical theory in order not to

make illegitimate use of it in speculations.

Besides, Thomas Kuhn in this book The Structure of Scientific Revolution argued that science

does not progress via a linear accumulation of new knowledge, but undergoes periodic

revolutions, also called "paradigm shifts" (although he did not coin the phrase, he did

contribute to its increase in popularity), in which the nature of scientific inquiry within a

particular field is abruptly transformed. In general, science is broken up into three distinct

stages. Prescience, which lacks a central paradigm, comes first. This is followed by "normal

science", when scientists attempt to enlarge the central paradigm by "puzzle-solving". Guided

by the paradigm, normal science is extremely productive: "when the paradigm is successful,

the profession will have solved problems that its members could scarcely have imagined and

14
would never have undertaken without commitment to the paradigm".

In regard to experimentation and collection of data with a view toward solving problems

through the commitment to a paradigm, Kuhn states: "The operations and measurements that

a scientist undertakes in the laboratory are not 'the given' of experience but rather 'the

collected with difficulty.' They are not what the scientist sees—at least not before his research

is well advanced and his attention focused. Rather, they are concrete indices to the content of

more elementary perceptions, and as such they are selected for the close scrutiny of normal

research only because they promise opportunity for the fruitful elaboration of an accepted

paradigm. Far more clearly than the immediate experience from which they in part derive,

operations and measurements are paradigm-determined. Science does not deal in all possible

laboratory manipulations. Instead, it selects those relevant to the juxtaposition of a paradigm

with the immediate experience that that paradigm has partially determined. As a result,

scientists with different paradigms engage in different concrete laboratory manipulations."

During the period of normal science, the failure of a result to conform to the paradigm is seen

not as refuting the paradigm, but as the mistake of the researcher, contra Popper's

falsifiability criterion. As anomalous results build up, science reaches a crisis, at which point

a new paradigm, which subsumes the old results along with the anomalous results into one

framework, is accepted. This is termed revolutionary science.

Another prominent philosopher of science that talked about science was Carl Hempel who in

15
his book Covering Law Theory of Explanation, developed influential theories of science,

scientific explanation and theory of confirmation. He argued that a phenomenon is

"explained" when we can see that it is the logical consequence of a law of nature. His studies

of induction, explanation, and rationality in science exerted a profound influence upon more

than a generation of philosophers of science, many of whom became leaders of the discipline

in their own right.

Science is valued by society because the application of scientific knowledge helps to satisfy

many basic human needs and improve living standards. Finding a cure for cancer and a clean

form of energy are just two topical examples. Similarly, science is often justified to the public

as driving economic growth, which is seen as a return-on-investment for public funding.

During the past few decades, however, another goal of science has emerged: to find a way to

rationally use natural resources to guarantee their continuity and the continuity of humanity

itself; an endeavor that is currently referred to as “sustainability”.

Scientists often justify their work using these and similar arguments currently linked to

personal health and longer life expectancies, technological advancement, economic profits,

and/or sustainability in order to secure funding and gain social acceptance. They point out

that most of the tools, technologies and medicines we use today are products or by-products

of research, from pens to rockets and from aspirin to organ transplantation. This progressive

application of scientific knowledge is captured in Isaac Asimov’s book, Chronology of

science and discovery, which beautifully describes how science has shaped the world, from

the discovery of fire until the 20th century.

16
However, there is another application of science that has been largely ignored, but that has

enormous potential to address the challenges facing humanity in the present-day education. It

is time to seriously consider how science and research can contribute to education at all levels

of society; not just to engage more people in research and teach them about scientific

knowledge, but crucially to provide them with a basic understanding of how science has

shaped the world and human civilisation. Education could become the most important

application of science in the next decades.

More and better education of citizens would also enable informed debate and decision-

making about the fair and sustainable application of new technologies, which would help to

address problems such as social inequality and the misuse of scientific discoveries. For

example, an individual might perceive an increase in welfare and life expectancy as a positive

goal and would not consider the current problems of inequality relating to food supply and

health resources.

Furthermore, John Desmond Bernal in his The Social Function of Science, in 1939. Bernal

argued that science should contribute to satisfy the material needs of ordinary human life and

that it should be centrally controlled by the state to maximise its utility, he was heavily

influenced by Marxist thought. The zoologist John R. Baker criticised this “Bernalistic” view,

defending a “liberal” conception of science according to which “the advancement of

knowledge by scientific research has a value as an end in itself”. This approach has been

called the “free-science” approach.

It is discernible from the above literature review, that to improve the cultural level of human

17
societies is a long-term venture in which science will need to play a critical role. We first

need to accept that scientific reasoning is intimately linked to human nature: Humanity did

not explicitly adopt science as the preferred tool for acquiring knowledge after choosing

among a set of possibilities; we simply used our own mental functioning to explain the world.

If reason is a universal human feature, any knowledge can be transmitted and understood by

everyone without the need for alien constraints, not unlike art or music.

Moreover, science has demonstrated that it is a supreme mechanism to explain the world, to

solve problems and to fulfil human needs. A fundamental condition of science is its dynamic

nature: the constant revision and re-evaluation of the existing knowledge. Every scientific

theory is always under scrutiny and questioned whenever new evidence seems to challenge

its validity. No other knowledge system has demonstrated this capacity, and even, the

defenders of faith-based systems are common users of medical services and technological

facilities that have emerged from scientific knowledge.

The improvement of human culture and society relies on more diffuse structural and

functional patterns. In the case of science, its diffusion to the general public is commonly

called the popularisation of science and can involve scientists themselves, rather than

journalists and other communicators. In this endeavour, scientists should be actively and

massively involved. Scientists, especially those working in public institutions, should make a

greater effort to communicate to society what science is and what is not; how is it done; what

are its main results; and what are they useful for. This would be the best way of demystifying

science and scientists and upgrading society’s scientific literacy.

Science is not only necessary for humanity to thrive socially, environmentally and

18
economically in both the short and the long term, but it is also the best tool available to

satisfy the fundamental human thirst for knowledge, as well as to maintain and enhance the

human cultural heritage, which is knowledge-based by definition. This research takes further

to explore an make a brief exposition and appraisal on Francis Bacon notion of science and

how it has influenced mankind in acquisition of knowledge and interpretation of nature.

CHAPTER THREE: FRANCIS BACON ON THE NOTION OF SCIENCE

3.1 GENERAL MEANING OF SCIENCE

19
The word Science comes from Latin word "scientia" meaning "knowledge" and in the

broadest sense it is any systematic knowledge-base or prescriptive practice capable of

resulting in prediction. Science can also be understood as a highly skilled technique or

practice.

In more contemporary terms, science is a system of acquiring knowledge based on the

scientific process or method in order to organize a body of knowledge gained through

research.

Science is a continuing effort to discover and increase knowledge through research. Scientists

make observations, record measurable data related to their observations, and analyze the

information at hand to construct theoretical explanations of the phenomenon involved.

The methods involved in scientific research include making a hypothesis and conducting

experiments to test the hypothesis under controlled conditions. In this process, scientists

publish their work so other scientists can repeat the experiment and further strengthen the

reliability of results.

Scientific fields are broadly divided into natural sciences (the study of natural phenomena)

and social sciences (the study of human behavior and society). However, in both these

divisions, knowledge is obtained through observation and must be capable of being tested for

its validity by other researchers working under similar conditions.

There are some disciplines like health science and engineering that are grouped into

interdisciplinary and applied sciences.

Most scientific investigations use some form of the scientific method. The scientific method

tries to explain the events of nature in a reproducible way, eventually allowing researchers to

20
formulate testable predictions.

Scientists make observations of natural phenomenon and then through experimentation they

try to simulate natural events under controlled conditions. Based on observations, a scientist

may generate a model and then attempt to describe or depict the phenomenon in terms of

mathematical or logical representation.

Scientist will then gather the necessary empirical evidence to generate a hypothesis to explain

the phenomenon.

This hypothesis is used to form predictions which in turn will be tested by experiment or

observations using the scientific method. Statistical analysis is commonly used to interpret

results of experiments, and evaluations are made to decide whether a hypothesis should be

accepted, rejected, or merely examined again with modifications. This inspires ongoing

research and the overall accumulation of knowledge in that particular field of science.

3.2 NATURAL PHILOSOPHY: THEORY OF THE IDOLS AND THE SYSTEM OF

SCIENCE
In the history of mankind and in the search for Knowles and truth, there are those who have

taken it on themselves to lay down the law of nature as something that has already been

discovered and understood, whether they have been spoken in simple confidence or in a spirit

of professional posturing, have done great harm to philosophy and the scienves.

The interpretation of nature, however is the leading idea in Francis Bacon's natural

philosophy. Bacon's life can be characterized as a mercurial search for power. His drive for

power extended beyond politics, bacon saw knowledge, especially scientific knowledge as a

means to power. He was not interested in abstract "Truth", but in "that knowledge whose

dignity is maintained by works of utility and power". Bacon sought to make human masters

21
of the natural world, he saw the goal of science as the glory of the creator and the relief if

Man's estate. To this end, bacon sought a total reconstruction of the sciences, arts and all

human knowledge which he called "The Great Instauration".

Bacon's total reconstruction begins with dismantling all past errors; he argues that medieval

philosophers, and the scholastics, were consumed with disputing questions but never

approached knowledge of the real world. Renaissance humanists were not much better, they

were obsessed with the eloquence of ancient Greeks and Romans but inclined to words more

than matter. According to bacon, all previous thinkers and most thinkers of his own day as

well, as succeeded in developing bad mental habits or what he called idols of the mind and

how these idols have impeded real knowledge.

3.2.1 THE IDOLS

The idols are false notions which are now in possession of the human understanding, and

have taken deep root therein, not only to beset men's minds that truth can hardly find

entrance, but that even after entrance is obtained, they will again in the very instauaration of

the sciences meet and trouble us, unless men being forewarned of the danger fortify

themselves as far as may be against their assaults. Bacon's doctrine of the idols do not only

represent a stage in the history of the theories of error or fallacies but also functions as an

important theoretical element within the birth of modern empiricism and science.

There are four classes of idols which beset Men's minds. To these for distinction's sake bacon

assigned names, calling the first-class idols of the Tribe; the second, idols of the cave; the

third, idols if the marketplace; and the fourth, idols of the Theatre.

The idols of the tribe have their foundations in the human nature itself, and in the tribe or

22
race of men. For it is a false assertion that the sense of man is the measure of all things. On

the contrary, all perception as well as the sense as of the mind are according to the measure of

the individual and not according to the universe. And the human understanding is like a false

mirror, which receiving rays irregularly distorts and discolors the nature of things by

mingling its own nature with it.

The idols of the cave are the idols of the individual man. For everyone (besides the errors

common to human nature in general) has a cave or den of his own, which refracts and

discolors the light of nature; owing either to his own proper and peculiar nature; or to his

education and conversation with others; or to the reading of books, and the authority of those

whom he esteems and admires; or to the difference of impressions, according as they take

place in a mind indifferent and settled; or the like. So that the spirit of man (according as it is

melted out to different individuals) is in fact a thing variable and full of perturbation, and

governed as it were by chance. Whence it was well observed by Heraclitus that man look for

science in their own lesser worlds and not in the greater or common world.

There are also idols formed by the inter course and association of men with each other, which

is called idols of the marketplace, on account of the commerce and consort of men there. For

it is by discourse that men associate; and words are imposed according to the apprehension if

the vulgar. And therefore the I'll and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs the

understanding, nor do the definitions and explanations wherewith in some things learned by

men, won't guard and defend themselves, by any means set the matter right. But words

plainly force and overrule the understanding, and throw all into confusion and lead men away

into numberless empty controversies and idle fancies.

23
Lastly, there are idols which have immigrated into men's minds from the various dogmas of

philosophies, and also from wrong laws of demonstration. These bacons called idols of the

Theatre; because all the received systems are but so many stage plays, representing worlds of

their own creation after an unreal and scenic fashion. The idols of theater is sum, are

prejudices stemming from received or traditional philosophical systems. These systems

resemble plays in so far as they render fictional worlds, which were never exposed to an

experimental check or to a test by experience.

So much concerning the several classes of the doctrines of idols and their equipage have been

discussed: all of which must be renounced and put away with a fixed and solemn

determination, and the understanding thoroughly freed and cleansed; which is anchored on

the entrance into the kingdom of man, founded on sciences. Bacon discusses the idols

together with the problems of information gained through the senses, which must be

corrected by the use of experiments.

3.2.2 SYSTEM OF SCIENCE

The system of science Bacon eventually proposed was what we know as the scientific

method, a process by which one, through inductive principles and empirical data gathered

through observation, can find precise answers to natural and scientific phenomena. Up until

this time, Sir Francis saw the educational methods of his peers as completely disjointed and

separated from reality.

Bacon's eventual cure for the ills of the inadequate educational environment in which he

operated was the Novum Organum. This document was meant as a tool for the use of

establishing a foundation of objectivity prior to approaching a given subject or problem. In

24
Bacon's philosophy, the human mind is not a blank slate that will automatically synthesize

and receive information in an objective way, thereby creating a perfect picture of the world

around it. Instead, the human mind is fraught with biases in perception and cannot be trusted

to construct a clear image of any given circumstance.

The Novum Organum, then, is a tool for establishing the clearest, most complete, and most

level image of truth based on observation, prior to approaching any problem. It is through this

lens that educators were able to formulate valid and reliable data, hypotheses, and theories.

3.2.3 MATTER THEORY AND COSMOLOGY

In the specific field of natural philosophy, Bacon looked at matter as an infinitely pliable

substratum throbbing violent at all time with a finite number of structural motions. In a bold

metaphysical move, he defined motions in terms of desire, while describing the natural world,

down to its smallest constituents, as everywhere pervaded by ineradicable tendencies to act.

As a result, motions were deemed to follow patterns of appetitive response; struggle for

freedom, resistance to oppression, war against enemy forces, factions, alliances and

reconciliations. This also meant that nature was everywhere political, since motion was a

manifestation of desire. In Bacon's opinion, the mechanism of self-control and self-

sustenance that underlay all material aggregation in nature, from stone to human

communities, were the result of complex adjustments among conflicting systems of motion.

He thought that freedom, in particular, and the preservation of freedom in ways that were not

self-destructive represented a crucial aspect of nature. In Bacon's ontology, motions were real

and they induced physical changes of state and place. Indeed, motions were forces and

actions imparted by actual vital principles.

25
Through its motions, matter displayed inner tendencies of contradiction and expansion of

coercion and freedom, of fear and expectations. Bacon described the "cosmos" as shaped

according to degrees of density and rarefaction which divided natural beings into two great

families of things, organized according to dichotomous lines if development: "sulphurous and

mercurial, inflammable and not inflammable, mature and crude, oily and watery". For Bacon,

this means that the various levels of consistency in matter depends on the intensity of its

desire. In a universe always on the brink of disintegration, one of the most profound desires

was the 'appetite of Union'.

Insofar as the Aristotelian concept of matter was concerned, Bacon confronted the

ontologically elusive status of the material appetite in peripatetic metaphysics. Scholastic

philosophers had long maintained that matter being constitutively devoid of qualification,

was always striving for a form that could, from time to time, define its nature. For matter to

acquire a form, however, was tantamount to eradicating its previous condition, a process

which seemed to imply a fundamental tendency of self-destruction within matter itself. On

the other hand, why should a form bring matter to perfection, when in fact forms appeared to

be transient and matter eternally persistent in its function of ultimate substratum? Moreover,

these were line of argument that Bacon put to the test in an attempt to overcome the

principles of peripatetic cosmology. He thought that indefinite permanence was ontologically

preferable to a process of actualization in which a given potential needed to be constantly

fulfilled and perfected. In Bacon's opinion, matter was capable of sorting itself into forms,

precarious as they might be, by unfolding its constitutive appetitive drives, rather than

following preestablished lines of development. Knowledge of the ultimate appetite of matter

26
could therefore lead human beings to the transformation of matter and, through matter, they

could change all aspects of reality.

By contrast, as a real condition of natural and human action matter denoted for Bacon both

the pneumatic force of desire and the tangible effects produced by it in nature. In Bacon's

cosmos, natural beings were driven by self-interest and list for power already extent at the

atomic level, manifesting their hunger and greed in the original furrows and folds of pliable

matter. In being ruled by their desires, they had already committed the offence of idolatrous

self-worship in their primal responses, chasing after delusions and being easily manipulated

by the appearance of things. This was the grim foundation on which Bacon's political view of

life rested.

3.3 SCIENTIFIC METHOD: NOVUM ORGANUM AND THE THEORY OF

INDUCTION
The origination point of the 'Novum Organum' was in Bacon's perception that the scientific

process or method of his time was woefully inadequate to get to the bottom of deep and

important questions about nature and knowledge. The system Bacon eventually proposed was

what he called the scientific method, a process by which one through inductive principles and

empirical data gathered through observation, can find precise answers to natural and

scientific phenomenon.

Francis Bacon lived in England in the 16th and 17th centuries, serving in parliament and as

Queen's counsel, a position reserved for only the most trusted and respected lords of the time.

He was basically the most prominent philosopher of his time and space in history. Bacon

established himself as a lawyer, but his real passion was in philosophy, of which he strove to

lead the way, in which he did. Thus, Bacon embarked on the journey to right the wrongs of

27
his contemporaries by breaking the mold of the apathetic teachers and philosophers he saw

holding back progress by writing his philosophical manifesto, 'Novum Organum'. The book

began as a replacement of Aristotle's organum, a logical, philosophical treatise that originated

as a tool for approaching the world, nature and science. Over the years and in human history

a number of scholars and thinkers have come to ask the question "what is the Novum

Organum?" This question has however been an easy question to ask but its answer have been

given little attention. Ultimately, the Novum Organum is defined as the new tool, but a new

tool for what, and why is it new? This research ventures to answer these questions.

The Novum Organum or New Organ on is a synthesis and further development of Bacon's

earlier thought and a presentation of his method of discovery by induction, which exhibits the

art of interpreting nature and of the truer operation of the intellect. Although he says there,

that his method is equally adaptable to all sciences, including ethics and politics and various

mental operations.

The Novum Organum is divided into two, the first and second; the first is the aphorisms

concerning the interpretation of nature and the kingdom of man, the second is the theory of

forms and induction.

The first book of the Novum Organum

The two books of which the first book of the Novum Organum consist both bear the title,

"Aphorisms concerning the interpretation of nature and the kingdom of man". What did

Bacon mean by the kingdom of man? In their context, these words seem to allude to the

entrance to the kingdom of man and signify that his reconstruction of philosophy constitutes

this entrance. What they point to, is the prospect of using scientific knowledge for the vast

28
amelioration of humanity's condition to the extent of making the world the kingdom of man.

Indeed in one place Bacon even goes so far as to liken the entrance into the kingdom of man,

founded on the sciences, to the entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

Bound up with the concept of the kingdom of man is the image of man The Novum Organum

projects. Man is seen in it as both a knowing and an active subject who investigates nature in

order to master it. The first aphorism of the work depicts man as at once "the servant of

nature and interpreter of nature", who can do and understand so much and so much only as he

has observed in thought or fact of the course of nature. The understanding must therefore

conform to nature's course in order to control it. In this relationship obedience and

domination are totally intertwined; hence Bacon never tries of insisting that "nature to be

commanded must be obeyed". Only in this way can human knowledge and power meet in

one. To release Man's potential to achieve the union of knowledge and power is the supreme

object of Bacon's philosophy, and this, when achieved, would be synonymous with the

kingdom of man.

The first Novum Organum, occupied chiefly the criticism of reigning philosophical doctrines

and systems. It also includes an extended discussion of the idols of the mind and frequent

comments on the defects of current methods of inquiry and their causes. All this for Bacon

serves as an introduction to the exposition of the new method of discovery. He nonetheless

denies any wish to destroy the existing philosophy, arts and sciences. When he looked at the

received systems of philosophy, Bacon reiterated the disparaging assessment of his preceding

works, but only a small number of the older Greek thinkers like Anaxagoras, Leucippus and

Democritus won his praise for their rigorous pursuit of the knowledge of nature. To the

29
skeptics, despair of the sense and doubts of the possibility of attaining truth, he gave a short

dismissal. Contrasting his own approach with theirs, bacon explained that his aim was not to

destroy the authority of the sense and understanding, but to equip them with helps for

overcoming errors.

The high point of the first book of the Novum Organum still remains its analysis of the idols

of the mind, as endeavor to cover the deep-seated causes of misconceptions and irrationality

that bar the way to truth. This was a larger, more fully developed treatment of a subject Bacon

had discussed, in several of his previous writings, notably in the advancement of learning.

His Latin term, "Idola" from the Greek eidola, did not mean false gods but phantoms,

fictions, fallacies, delusive images, and what Bacon called false ideas. Bacon's examination

of the idols stands out as his most significant and original contribution to the philosophy of

mind, in comparison with Aristotle, he explained that the doctrine of idols was to the

interpretation of nature, what Aristotle's refutation of sophisms was to ordinary logic.

Bacon named four classes of idols that besets the mind.

Idols of the tribe ("Idola tribus"): These were founded in human nature itself, being

common to the whole human race, and caused men to regard the universe according

to their own measure and as an analogy to themselves.

Idols of the cave ("Idola specus"): These were the errors peculiar to the individual,

each of whom dwells in his own cave, arising from his own personal traits, rearing

and variety of impressions.

Idols of the market place ("Idola fori"): These were the misconceptions bred of

human intercourse and use of language, whose confusions generated innumerable

30
 sterile controversies and vain fancies.

Idols of the theater ("Idola theatri"): These were the offspring of the false dogmas

of philosophers, false demonstrations in logic, and false principles and axioms in the

sciences, which like stage plays, generated fictions and unreal worlds.

In the first book of the Novum Organum, Bacon spoke of the idols as fallacies to be

renounced and purged.

The Novum Organum first book concluded with a further exposition of Bacon's aims in the

part still to come. The discussion which includes a candid admission that the natural history

and tables of discovery he had produced thus far, were not sufficiently verified to serve the

purpose of a legitimate interpretation of nature. Bacon felt sure, nevertheless that whatever

errors they contained were small and easily corrected.

The second book of the Novum Organum

The main subjects of the Novum Organum second book which is nearly twice as long as the

first, is anchored on the theory of forms and induction. It presents an explanation of forms as

the key to the understanding and control of nature, and it demonstrates the true inductive

method by applying it to the form of heat. Knowledge of forms gained by induction

constitutes Bacon's art of interpretation of nature. At the end of the work, Bacon said that his

Organum dealt with logic, not philosophy, its purpose being to teach how to dissect nature

and discover the virtues and actions of bodies and their laws grounded in matter. From this

we must understand that he was not professing to offer any actual discoveries in natural

philosophy but intended his discussion as a manual of scientific procedure.

However, with respect to induction, it is usually not realized how little Bacon had to go on in

31
attempting to improve it. Aristotle's logic had discussed induction as a form of reasoning that

involved the passage from particular judgments to a general or universal one. Bacon devoted

only a small amount of attention to it, though allowing it much less importance than he gave

to the syllogism and demonstration. It was not for him, moreover, a way of proceeding from

the known to the unknown but rather, among other things the means by which the mind could

intuitively perceive or come to know a general proposition not attainable by demonstration

through a process of abstraction from a number of particular instances or facts. Medieval and

Renaissance authors on logic did not extend induction beyond its limits in Aristotle's

writings. Sixteenth century dialectics, which was oriented toward rhetorical presentation and

persuasion, treated induction solely as a means of imparting knowledge and as a form of

argument establishing a general conclusion by the enumeration of particular cases. None of

Bacon's predecessors or philosophical contemporaries conceived of induction as a research

procedure and method of discovery that could add to the knowledge of nature. Bacon was

therefore forced to work out for himself, in connection with his critical empiricism, how the

logic of induction could be reformed so as to serve as an instrument of progress in the natural

sciences.

A further point concerning induction that historical modern critics of Bacon's scientific

method easily forgot, is that he knew of no reason to doubt the validity of induction in

establishing the empirical generalization and scientific propositions or axioms, he desiderated

in natural philosophy. Bacon was not cognizant of the celebrated problem of induction that

stemmed from the philosopher David Hume's skepticism about causation.

Bacon opened his second book of the Novum Organum with an analysis of forms that at

32
times is very obscure. Bacon explained that he used the word 'form' because it was common

and familiar. It was indeed a term with long history in western thought, a portmanteau

concept containing deposits of the metaphysics of Plato, Aristotle and the medieval

scholastics. There can be no doubt that it was very largely from Aristotle that Bacon derived

the conception of form as an essential part of scientific explanation. Bacon began his

discussion with the broad thesis that the task and purpose of human power is to generate and

superinduced a new nature or natures on a given body, while the task and purpose of human

knowledge is to discover the form, or true specific difference, or nature engendering nature,

or source of emanation of a given nature. The successive phrases Bacon included here as

synonyms of form all serve to denote that form is what causes, structures and defines the

distinctive natures of which bodies consists. In several subsequent aphorisms, Bacon

identifies form with the physical cause or law governing the actions of individual bodies, and

contrasts it with material and efficient causes. The discovery of forms therefore results in

truth in contemplation and freedom in operations, in short, in the unity of knowledge and

power.

Bacon then goes on to treat forms as identical with the rules of operation that act universally

and with certainty of result in introducing any nature on a given body. This appears to

suggest, in language other than Bacon's, that one of the meanings of form is that it is the

necessary and sufficient cause of any nature. To illustrate how induction should be carried

out, Bacon chose the investigation of the form of heat as an example. The method proceeded

through several steps in order to arrive by a process of analysis, separation, and elimination at

the form sought. For they reason it can be described as 'Eliminative Induction'. The first step

33
for Bacon was to draw up a table of presence containing a number of affirmative instances of

heat in a variety of bodies. He listed twenty-seven such instances, including the Sun's rays,

flame, boiling liquids, and the like. This was followed in the second step by a table of

absence designed to identify the possible negative instances, that is, cases that were

counterparts akin to the instances in the first table, but in which heat was absent or its

presence uncertain. Thus, neither the rays of the moon or stars are hot, nor is liquid hot in its

ordinary state. Some of the data in this table had to be tentative, for as bacon pointed out at

the beginning of his exposition, a prerequisite of induction was a natural and experimental

history of ascertained facts.

Bacon however stated that true induction was based on a process of exclusion which

remained incomplete until it arrived at an affirmative conclusion. He recognized, that his

demonstration using the form of heat was imperfect, one of the main reasons for this, as he

pointed out, was that exclusion involved the rejection of simple natures and if we do not yet

possess sound and true notions of simple natures, the process of exclusion could not be

accurate. Owing to this shortcoming, as well as to his lack of the reliable data a natural and

experimental history would have provided, Bacon knew that his inquiry into the form of heat

could not be complete or certain. In acknowledgment of this fact, Bacon described his

attempted induction from the three tables as merely a permission he had given his intellect, a

first vintage and a beginning of interpretation of nature.

3.4 THE ETHICAL DIMENSION IN BACON'S THOUGHT

Bacon was not a moralist in the particular sense that he looked upon the world of men

34
primarily as a sense of the conflict between good and evil; but his experience in the

dangerous, intensely rivalrous world of Elizabethan and Jacobean courts made him a keen

student of human nature, its varieties, permutations and disguises. These interests were

transmuted into philosophical reflections in various of his writing that touched upon human

conduct, ambition, and the ends of life. In the Novum organum, it is true, Bacon did not limit

the inductive method to natural philosophy but stated that it was equally applicable to all of

the sciences, including ethics. He never attempted, though, to give effect to this sweeping

claim, which thus remained no more than an untried theoretical possibility. Bacon's moral

philosophy were therefore independent of his natural philosophy and must be understood in

terms of their own principles.

Bacon approach to ethics was preeminently practical, looking invariably to use. One of his

chief accusations against traditional moral teaching in philosophy was that it painted fine

pictures of goodness and the virtues without showing how to attain them. He connected moral

knowledge not only with reason but with the will, which, moved by the passions, can mistake

a false for a genuine good. This branch of knowledge accordingly had two parts: one, the

exemplar or platform of the good, described the nature of the good; the other, is the culture or

geogics of the mind, prescribed the rules for accommodating the will to be good. To establish

the nature of the good, Bacon invoked an axiom derived from first philosophy. The latter

consisted of the prior logical and conceptual principles common to all the sciences. One of

such principle, as formulated in physics, specified that whatever is preservative of a greater

form is more powerful in action. When this is applied to ethics, it affirmed that whatsoever

contributes to preserve the whole state in its own nature, has greater power than that which

35
benefits only the particular members of the state. This axiom accordingly defined the 'moral

good' for Bacon. Bacon pointed out that everything is imbued with an appetite both toward its

individual or self-good and toward the good of the whole of which it is part. The latter,

however, is the greater because it tends to the conservation of the more general form. In

human beings, the desire for the common good is more strongly engraved unless they are

degenerated. Bacon did not try to defend this debatable claim but noted that the exaltation of

the good of all over private and particular good is in complete harmony with the Christian

religion and the law God gave to mankind. However, with the help of this principle, Bacon

then undertook to resolve what he termed some of the most important controversies in ethics,

discussed by Aristotle, the Stoics and other thinkers.

The first question Bacon addressed was the famous one whether the active or contemplative

life was superior. Aristotle had considered the contemplative life of the philosopher, the

highest for man; but bacon, needless to say, decided in favour of the active life, which could

exert itself for the good of all, whereas the contemplative life placed its goal exclusively in

personal well-being. Another question was whether happiness lay, as the Epicureans believed,

in pleasure and tranquility of mind. Bacon rejected this view as well on the ground that it

took account only of private repose and contentment, not the good of society. The third

question was whether happiness was to be found, as the Stoic philosopher Epictetus thought,

solely in the things within men's power, lest in seeking for more, they expose themselves to

disturbance and blows of fortune. Bacon also opposed this conception, of course, maintaining

that to strive for good and virtuous ends for the public, even if one should fail, brought more

happiness than to gain everything one could want for one's private benefit.

36
Bacon likewise dissented from the opinion that philosophers should avoid perturbations of

mind and the occasions that create them. Instead, he held that philosophers should help men

to shape a course of life in which, conscious of their duties to society, they could endure and

overcome the general perturbation and temptations. Regarding individual good, Bacon

pointed out that it could be active or passive, hence striving either to conserve and perfect

what it valued. Critical philosophies that preached abstention and renunciation, Bacon

characterized their counsels as "the precaution of cowardice" looking at the common good,

which referred to society, he equated it with duty, both the duty every person owes as a

member of the community and the particular duties incumbent on individuals in their ranks,

vocations and professions.

Bacon went further to express the opinion that for honest and virtuous men to discharge their

duties, they needed to know and understand evil, because without this knowledge their virtue

would sheer ignorance, and they would be incapable of correcting the wicked. On this

account, he declared his appreciation of Machiavelli, whose writings openly and

unfeignedly... described what men do and not what men ought to do. Bacon moral

philosophy, thus began with the strongest possible commandation of the active life of

engagement (duty) in the world on behalf of the common good as the best life for individuals.

3.5 THE NOTION OF SCIENCE IN FRANCIS BACON

Modern science has always claimed to have a monopoly on truth, that it alone possesses the

path to accessing the real, the objective and the accurate. To create valid knowledge, to gain

access to empirical truth of an object, scientists presume that they exist in an objective

vacuum, having cleansed themselves of any potential sympathetic attachment to the object

37
and particularities of their socio-historical position that might obscure their appreciation of

the distinctness of the object of their investigation. The 20th century saw however, the

erosion of the appeal of scientific surety, the belief that science through progressive

generations of its practitioners would give ever more insight into nature and gain increasing

control over its processes.

The undergirding narrative of modern science, one that this research traces back to, is a

foundational voice of the scientific revolution - Francis Bacon.

The notion of science in Francis Bacon championed the new empiricism resulting from the

achievements of early modern science. He opposed alleged knowledge based on appeals to

authority, and on the barrenness of scholasticism. He thought that what is needed is a new

attitude and methodology based strictly on scientific practices. The goal of acquiring

knowledge is the good of mankind: knowledge is power. The method of induction to be

employed if man is to acquire knowledge and conquer nature and this is worked out in

Bacon's book Novum Organum (1620). This new logic is to replace that of Aristotle's

syllogism, as well as induction by simple enumeration of instances. Neither of these older

logics can produce knowledge of actual natural laws. Bacon thought that we must intervene

in nature, manipulating it by means of experimental control leading to the invention of new

ideas, knowledge and technology.

Bacon noticed that in trying to manipulate nature by means of experimental control and

observation, there are well known hindrances which disrupt our acquisition of knowledge of

caual laws. Such hinderances (false opinion, prejudices), which "anticipate" nature rather

than explain it, Bacon calls idols (idola). Idols of the tribe (idola tribus) are natural mental

38
tendencies, among which are the idle search for purposes of nature, and the impulse to read

our own desires and needs into nature. Idols of the cave (idola specus) are predisposition of

particular individuals. The individual is inclined to form opinions based on idiosyncrasies of

education, social intercourse, reading, and favored authorities. Idols of the marketplace (idola

fori) Bacon regards as the most potentially dangerous of all dispositions, because they arise

from common uses of language that often result in verbal disputes. Many words, though

thought to be meaningful, stand for nonexistent things; others, although they name actual

things, but are poorly defined or used in confused ways. Idols of the theater (idola theatre)

depend upon the influence of received theories. The only authority possessed by such theories

is that they are ingenious verbal constructions. The aim of acquiring genuine knowledge does

not depend on superior skill in the use of words, but rather on the discovery of natural laws.

Once the idols are eliminated, the mind is free to seek knowledge of natural laws based on

experimentation. Bacon held that nothing exists in nature except bodies (material bodies)

acting in conformity with fixed laws. These laws are "forms". For example, Bacon thought

that the form or cause of heat is the motion of the tiny particles making up a body. This form

is that on which the existence of heat depends. What induction seeks to show is that certain

laws are perfectly general, universal in application. In every case of heat, there is a

measurable change in the motion of the particles constituting the moving body.

Bacon thought that scientific induction proceeded as follows. First, we look for those cases

where, given certain changes, certain others invariably follow. In his example, if certain

changes in the form (motion of particles) take place, heat always follows. We seek to find all

of the positive instances of the form that rise to the effect of that form. Next, we investigate

39
the negative instances, cases where in the absence of the form, the qualitative change does

not take place. In the operation of these methods, it is important to try to produce

experimentally prerogative instances, particularly striking or typical examples of the

phenomenon under investigation. Finally, in cases where the object under study is present to

some greater or lesser degree, we must be able to take into account why these changes occur.

In the example, qualitative changes in degrees of heat will be correlated to qualitative

changes in the speed of the motion of the particles. This method implies that in many cases

we can invent instruments to measure changes in degree. Such inventions are of course the

hoped-for outcome of scientific inquiry, because their possession improve the lot of human

beings.

Bacon strikingly modern empiricist methodology influenced 19th century figures (e.g., Sir

John Herschel and J. S. Mill) who generalized his results and used them as the basis for

displaying new insights into scientific methodology.

CHAPTER FOUR: SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATION AND CONCLUSION

4.1 SUMMARY

The word Renaissance is a French word which literally means "rebirth". The Renaissance

40
(14th - 16th) was a movement in Europe which began in the 14th century in Italy and

eventually spread all over Europe. It marked a turning point in the history of Europe. The

movement was actually a rebirth of knowledge, a revival of interest and zeal for knowledge.

It began with a renewed interest in Ancient writings and eventually developed into

humanistic and scientific movements, with emphasis on man (rather than God) and on

experimental science (rather than religion).

The Renaissance marked the end of the Middle Ages dominated by religion, and the

beginning of the modern period, dominated by science. The religious outlook of the Middle

Ages was replaced by a scientific and humanistic outlook. Theology that was the Queen of all

sciences in the Middle Ages was replaced by science which now become the Queen of all

sciences. Thus, there was a shift in emphasis from God to man, and from theology to science.

This marked the beginning of modern science.

Francis Bacon is considered as the father of modern philosophy in England. Born in London,

he studied in Cambridge and eventually become a philosopher and scientist. He is known for

his contribution to the scientific method, with his well-known work, Novum Organum. He

was an empiricist epistemologist, and in him we can see the link between empiricism and

experimental science. In his Novum Organum, we can see how empiricist philosophy gave

rise to experimental science and helped its development. Beacon believes that knowledge is

power, that it is by knowledge that man can conquer nature an dominate it.

Knowledge must however be based on experience, otherwise it is useless. Hence Bacon

considers Aristotle's logic (Deductive reasoning) as useless because it is purely formal, not

based on experience. It does not start with observation, but with general principles. It cannot

41
prove any empirical truth therefore it is of no practical use to man in his effort to understand

nature and dominate it. The purpose of knowledge is to understand nature and dominate it.

The Deductive method of Aristotle cannot help us achieve this purpose. We must therefore

adopt the inductive method because it is based on empirical observation. Thus, our

knowledge must be based on experience and must help man understand nature and dominate

it.

In our interpretation of our experience, we must be on our guard against certain influence that

tend to distort our interpretation. Bacon calls them "Idols". What are Idols? Idols for Bacon,

are prejudices and preconceptions which colour and distort our view of things and the

interpretation of our experience. There are four kinds of Idols, namely; Idols of the tribe,

Idols of the cave, the Idols of the market place and idols of the theatre.

Idols of the tribe

The Idols of the tribe are the tendencies to take things superficially as the they appear at first

sight without proper investigation. They include the tendency to cling to old beliefs, the

tendency to see things as fixed, the tendency to read finality into nature, and the tendency to

see things as we want to see them.

Idols of the cave

These are errors arising from the individual’s biases, education, temperament, likes and

dislikes, etc., that influence a person's judgment.

Idols of the market place

These are the errors due to language. Language tends to give fixed meaning to things as they

are commonly perceived.

Idols of the theatre

42
These are the speculative systems of the past, which portrays unreal world as real whereas it

is the product of the imagination.

Bacon maintains that the best kind of demonstration is that of experience, not abstract

demonstration. The best method of acquiring knowledge is "Induction", and the purpose of

induction is to discover the "forms" of things, that is, the law of things. The Forms of things

in Bacon's philosophy are not the same as the Forms in Plato's or Aristotle's philosophy. In

Plato's Philosophy the "Forms" are transcendental ideas in the world of Forms, and they are

the real nature of things. They are perfect, eternal and immutable. In Aristotle's philosophy,

the "Forms" of things are the essences of things which constitute the real nature of things. But

they are inside things, not outside them or in another world as in Plato's philosophy. In

Francis Bacon's philosophy the "Forms" of things are the scientific laws of things, the laws

that governs things. For example, the "Forms" of heat is the law that governs heat, that

element that is essential to heat, which if present there would be heat, and if absent there

would be no heat.

Francis Bacon's notion of science marks an important landmark in the history of scientific

method. The Greek and Medieval philosophers were inclined towards speculation, and

produced speculative metaphysical systems. But Francis Bacon rejected abstract speculation,

and insisted on experience and experiment. He considered speculative knowledge

(speculative metaphysics) as useless because it cannot help us understand nature and

dominate it. We need empirical, scientific knowledge, derived from experience and

experiment. Thus, Bacon can be seen as the father of modern scientific method, and

experimental science.

43
4.2 CRITICAL APPRAISAL

Francis Bacon is often credited with being the father of the Scientific Method. As first put

forth in his Novum Organon or “New Method” (1620), he described the use of induction and

the steady collection of evidence as a means of establishing a description of the natural world

(we will talk about induction in a little more depth shortly). Intrinsic to this process is the

ranking of evidence both for and against a particular explanation, and the recognition that this

is an iterative process and that some modicum of “truth” would be arrived at in a steady and

incremental fashion. The steps in this process have been termed the Scientific Method, and

the iterative nature of the implementation of this process is called the Scientific Cycle. The

description of the Scientific Cycle is rightly considered to be the origin point of modern

science, and we do not think it an overstatement to say that the adoption of the Scientific

Cycle is responsible for the sum total of technological achievement since the seventeenth

century. However, Bacon realized that, in the real world, one could not count on the perfect

execution and outcome of any given process; living at the dawn of the Enlightenment, he was

well aware of the frailties in the human condition. Therefore, in addition to the description of

an iterative cycle of observation, categorization of evidence and refinement of hypotheses,

Bacon also identified specific hindrances to the effect execution of this process, which he

termed “Idols of the Mind.”

Bacon proposed a process of scientific discovery based on a collection of observations,

followed by a systematic evaluation of these observations in an effort to demonstrate their

truthfulness. Bacon’s requirement for elimination of all those inessential conditions (which

are not always associated with the phenomenon under study) was, in the end, unachievable,

44
and the process of choosing facts was found to depend on individual judgment. However,

Bacon did set the tenets for what would become the method of hypothesis testing.

Arguably, the foundation for sorting fact from fiction in scientific investigations is based on

hypothesis testing (a particularly weak aspect of Bacon’s philosophy). Although it is never

possible to directly prove a hypothesis by experimentation, but rather to disprove one (or

more) alternative (null) hypotheses; history has documented the steady (although sometimes

slow) progress toward understanding the scientific world. Additionally, observations made

during the testing of one hypothesis often have lead investigators in an altogether different

direction. One may argue, and rightfully so, that hypothesis testing is an inefficient

mechanism for discovery; however, this paradigm of generating a hypothesis based on known

facts and designing experiments to disprove the hypothesis generally produces meaningful

and reproducible results.

4.3 RECOMMENDATIONS

The terms of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations

General Assembly on 10 December 1948, and in particular Article 27, provides that everyone

has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, and to share in

scientific advancement and its benefits. In this study I recommend that;

Scientific discoveries and related technological developments and applications should open

up vast prospects for progress made possible in particular by the optimum utilization of

science and scientific methods for the benefit of humankind and for the preservation of peace

and the reduction of international tensions but may, at the same time, entail certain dangers

which constitute a threat, especially in cases where the results of scientific research are used

45
against humankind's vital interests in order to prepare wars involving destruction on a

massive scale or for purposes of the exploitation of one nation by another, or to the detriment

of human rights or fundamental freedoms or the dignity of a human person, and in any event

give rise to complex ethical and legal problems.

I also recommend a process of scientific discovery based on a collection of observations,

followed by a systematic evaluation of these observations in an effort to demonstrate their

truthfulness.

4.4 CONCLUSION

The scientific method of the Middle Ages had revolved around Aristotle's inductive method

of reasoning, in which a scientist gathers facts about individual cases and uses them to reach

a conclusion or theory. Descartes' great contribution was the introduction of deductive

reasoning, in which the scientist first formulates an educated hypothesis, and then seeks

evidence to support or disprove that hypothesis. The deductive method did not replace the

inductive method, but it added to the tools of scientists of the era, and proved useful on many

occasions.

Though Descartes the philosopher advocated order and rationality in method, Descartes the

scientist did not always adhere to his own philosophy. Had he been as critical of his own

theories as he was of those of others, including Galileo's, he would surely have seen that his

theories on the makeup of the cosmos, which revolved around a system of major and minor

vortices, were clearly disproved by recorded observations. Further, his proposed anatomical

theories, while complex and interesting, were untenable as the explanations for real

phenomena.

46
Despite his shortcomings as a scientist, Descartes made many valuable contributions to

science, mathematics, and most of all, philosophy. The Cartesian philosophy was the first

complete and coherent philosophical system of modern times. It quickly attracted a

following, and even was adopted by the clergy in many cases. Gradually, however, science

exposed the errors in Descartes' scientific claims, and his following dwindled. However,

Descartes had laid the foundation of modern philosophy, and left behind him a long chain of

thinkers who believed that truth could be reached with the power of the human mind.

While Francis Bacon was well respected in his time, it was not long before others began to

poke holes in his philosophy, citing elements which were left out, and the lack of

applicability in many cases. Yet despite Bacon's faults as a philosopher and failures as a

scientist, the world owes him a great debt. Bacon observed the vices and misconceptions

clung to by the scholastics of his time, and advocated the focus on ethics and logic, free from

the restricting influence of the Church and many of the accepted ancient thinkers. He clearly

and vigorously denounced the misconceptions and errors that had held scientific progress

back during the Middle Ages, and thus expressed the spirit of the Scientific Revolution. His

ideas on the cooperation and interaction of the fields of science factored greatly into the later

establishment of the Royal Society in London and similar societies elsewhere, where

scientists from different fields collaborated to advance science and technology as a whole.

His thoughts on ethics were an inspiration to Enlightenment thinkers, who continued to

advocate the practical application of Bacon's ethical code. Whatever his failings, Bacon

succeeded in rousing the enthusiasm and spirit of logical inquiry of the scientists of his day

and beyond.

47
48