نو ارغنون

by Francis Bacon, محمود صناعی (Translator)

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.

This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.

As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.

Genres: Philosophy, Science, Classics, Nonfiction, History, 17th Century, Logic

136 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1620

About the author

Not to confuse with collateral descendant and artist Francis Bacon

English philosopher, essayist, courtier, jurist, and statesman Francis Bacon, first viscount Saint Albans, in writings, which include The Advancement of Learning (1605) and the Novum Organum (1620), proposed a theory of scientific knowledge, based on observation and experiment, which people came as the inductive method.

A Baconian follows the doctrines of the philosopher Francis Bacon or believes in the theory of, relating to, or characteristic of his works or thought that he authored the plays, attributed to William Shakespeare.

This Queen's Counsel, an orator, authored. He served as Attorney General and Lord Chancellor of England. After his death, his works extremely influenced especially as advocate and practitioner during the revolution.

People called Bacon the creator of empiricism. His works established and popularized simple Baconian inquiry, often called. His demand for a planned procedure of investigating all natural things marked a new turn in much of the rhetorical framework, which still surrounds proper conceptions today.

Bacon received a knighthood in 1603, and people created him baron Verulam in 1618 and promoted him in 1621.

Ideas of Bacon in the 1630s and 1650s influenced scholars; Sir Thomas Browne in his Encyclopaedia Pseudodoxia Epidemica (1646–72) frequently adheres to an approach to his inquiries. During the Restoration, the royal society founded under Charles II in 1660, commonly invoked Bacon as a guiding spirit.

During the 18th-century Enlightenment of France, criticism of the ancien regime associated more influential non-metaphysical approach of Bacon than the dualism of his French contemporary René Descartes. In 1733, Voltaire "introduced him as the ''father," a widespread understanding before 1750, to a French audience.

In the 19th century, William Whewell revived and developed his emphasis. People reputed him as the "father."

Because Bacon introduced the influence behind the dawning of the Industrial age in England, people also consider him. In works, Bacon,

"the explanation of which things, and of the true relation between the nature of things and the nature of the mind, is as the strewing and decoration of the bridal chamber of the mind and the universe, out of which marriage let us hope there may spring helps to man, and a line and race of inventions that may in some degree subdue and overcome the necessities and miseries of humanity,"

meaning he expected that through the understanding of use of mechanics, society creates more inventions that to an extent solves the problems. This idea, found in medieval ages, changed the course in history to inventive that eventually led to the mechanical inventions that made possible the Industrial Revolutions of the following centuries.

He also a long treatise on Medicine, History of Life and Death , with the natural prolongation.

For the historian William Hepworth Dixon of biographers, so great influence of Bacon in modern world proceeds to owe to who rides in a train, sends a telegram, follows a steam plough, sits in an easy chair, crosses the channel or the Atlantic, eats a good dinner, enjoys a beautiful garden, or undergoes a painless surgical operation

Francis Bacon's left the vast and varied that dispaly and that divided in three great branches:

Works present his ideas for an universal reform into the use of the improvement.

In literary works, he presents his morals.

Works reform in law.

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with thi

Reviews

[Roy Lotz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Since I’ve lately read Aristotle’s original, I thought I’d go ahead and read Bacon’s New Organon. The title more or less says it all. For this book is an attempt to recast the method of the sciences in a better mold. Whereas Aristotle spends pages and pages enumerating the various types of syllogisms, Bacon dismisses it all with one wave of the hand—away with such scholarly nonsense! Because Aristotle is so single-mindedly deductive, his scientific research came to naught; or, as Bacon puts it, “Aristotle, who made his natural philosophy a mere bond servant to his logic, thereby [rendered] it contentious and well-nigh useless.”

What is needed is not deduction—which draws trivial conclusions form absurd premises—but induction. More specifically, what is needed is a great deal of experiments, the results of which the careful scientist can sort into air-tight conclusions. Down with the syllogism; up with experiment. Down with the schoolmen; up with the scientists.

In my (admittedly snotty) review of Bacon’s Essays, I remarked that he would have done better to have written a work entirely in aphorisms. Little did I know that Bacon did just that, and it is this book. Whatever Bacon’s defects were as a politician or a philosopher, Bacon is the undisputed master of the pithy, punchy maxim. In fact, his writing style can be almost sickening, so dense is it with aphorism, so rich is it with metaphor, so replete is it with compressed thought.

In the first part of his New Organon all of the defects of Bacon’s style are absent, and all of his strengths are present in full force. Indeed, if this work consisted of only the first part, it would have merited five stars, for it is a tour de force. Bacon systematically goes through all of the errors the human mind is prone to when investigating nature, leaving no stone unturned and no vices unexamined, damning them all in epigram after epigram. The reader hardly has time to catch his breath from one astonishing insight, when Bacon is on to another.

Among these insights are, of course, Bacon’s famous four idols. We have the Idol of the Tribe, which consist of the errors humans are wont to make by virtue of their humanity. For our eyes, our ears, and our very minds distort reality in a systematic way—something earlier philosophers had, so far as I know, neglected to account for. We have then the Idols of the Cave, which are the foibles of the individual person, over and above the common limitations of our species. Of these may include certain pet theories, preferences, accidents of background, peculiarities of taste. And then finally we have the Idols of the Market Place, which are caused by the deceptive nature of language and words, as well as the Idols of the Theater, which consists of the various dogmas present in the universities and schools.

Bacon also displays a remarkable insight into psychology. He points out that humans are pattern-seeking animals, which leads us to sometimes see patterns which aren’t there: “The human understanding is of its own nature prone to suppose the existence of more order and regularity in the world than it finds.” Bacon also draws the distinction, made so memorable in Isaiah Berlin’s essay, between foxes and hedgehogs: “… some minds are stronger and apter to mark the differences of things, others to mark their resemblances.” Bacon also notes, in terms no psychologist could fault, a description of confirmation bias:

The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, or else by some distinction sets aside and rejects, in order that by this great and pernicious predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain inviolate.

Part two, on the other hand, is a tedious, rambling affair, which makes the patient reader almost forget the greatness of the first half. Here, Bacon moves on from condemning the errors of others to setting up his own system. In his opinion, scientific enquiry is a simple matter of tabulation: make a table of every situation in which a given phenomenon is always found, and then make a table of every situation in which a given phenomenon is never found; finally, make a table of every situation in which said phenomenon is sometimes found, shake well, and out comes your answer.

The modern reader will not recognize the scientific method in this process. For we now know that Bacon’s induction is not sufficient. (Though, he does use his method to draw an accurate conclusion about the nature of heat: “Heat is a motion, expansive, restrained, and acting in its strife upon the smaller particles of bodies.”) What Bacon describes is more or less what we’d now call ‘natural history’, a gathering up of facts and a noting of regularities. But the scientific method proper requires the framing of hypotheses. The hypothesis is key, because it determines what facts need to be collected, and what relationship those facts will have with the theory in question. Otherwise, the buzzing world of facts is too lush and fecund to tabulate; there are simply too many facts. Furthermore, Bacon makes the somewhat naïve—though excusable, I think—assumption that a fact is simply a fact, whereas we now know that facts are basically meaningless unless contextualized; and, in science, it is the theory in question which contextualizes said facts.

The importance of hypotheses also makes deduction far more important than Bacon acknowledges. For the aspiring experimentalist must often go through a long chain of deductive reasoning before he can determine what experiment should be performed in order to test a theory. In short, science relies on both deductive and inductive methods, and the relationship of theory to data is far more intertwined than Bacon apparently thinks. (As a side note, I’d also like to point out that Bacon wasn’t much of a scientist himself; he brings up the Copernican view of the heliocentric solar system many times, only to dismiss it as ridiculous, and also seems curiously unaware of the other scientific advances of his day.)

In a review of David Hume’s Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, I somewhat impertinently remarked that the English love examples—or, to use a more English word, instances. I hope not to offend any English readers, but Bacon confirms me in this prejudice—for the vast bulk of this work is a tedious enumeration of twenty-seven (yes, that’s almost thirty) types of ‘instances’ to be found in nature. Needless to say, this long and dry list of the different sorts of instances makes for both dull reading and bad philosophy, for I doubt any scientist in the history of the world ever made progress by sorting his results into one of Bacon’s categories.

So the brilliant, brash, and brazen beginning of this book fizzles out into pedantry that, ironically enough, rivals even Aristotle’s original Organon. So, to repeat myself, the title of this book more or less says it all.

[M.L. Rio · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is just Francis Bacon calling you out for all your bad study habits.

[Asmaâ · Rating 4 out of 5]

هذا الكتاب محطة مهمة في تطور العلم (الفلسفة الطبيعية) وانتقاد منطق أرسطو.

في الكتاب الأول، يعرض بيكون استنتاجاته حول كل ما يشكل خللًا في تعاطي المنطق والفلسفة الطبيعية في حقبته. (في الكتاب الثاني يعرض بيكون بعض استنتاجاته العلمية الخاصة وفق منهجه، وهي حالياً متجاوزة ولن تُذكر هنا)

فتطبيق القياس على مبادئ العلوم (المنطق) لا يمكنه أن يجاري دقة الطبيعة. يقول بيكون "يتكون القياس من قضايا، والقضايا من كلمات، والكلمات هي مقابلات رمزية للأفكار. وعليه فإذا كانت الأفكار نفسها (وهذا هو جذر المسألة) مختلطة ومنتزَعة برعونة من الوقائع، فلن يكون هناك ثبات فيما يبنى فوقها."

ينتقد بيكون أيضا طريقة الاستقراء التي كانت رائجة (يسميها "استباق الطبيعة") وهي الانطلاق من الجزئيات -> والقفز إلى المبادئ الأولى للفنون (أكثرها عمومية) -> ثم الانطلاق من التسليم بهاته الأخيرة تسليما يقينيا للبرهنة على المبادئ الوسطى وتفصيلها. وهذا من أكبر أخطاء العلم التجريبي حيث يجب عوض ذلك الارتقاء بتدريج ممل من الجزئيات إلى المبادئ الصغرى ثم الوسطى انتهاءً بالمبادئ الأعم. وهذا ما سماه "تفسير الطبيعة".

——— الأوهام ———
يؤكد بيكون أن نسق المنطق الحالي يفيد في تثبيت الأخطاء (القائمة على الأفكار السائدة) أكثر مما يفيد في البحث عن الحقيقة. يحصر بيكون تلك الأخطاء في أربعة أنواع من الأوهام idols التي تحدق بالعقل البشري:

١- أوهام القبيلة: المبيتتة في الجنس البشري والطبيعة البشرية، والتي تقول أن حواس الإنسان هي مقياس الأشياء. وهذا خاطئ فالإدراكات الحسية والعقلية منسوبة إلى الإنسان وليس إلى العالم (يقصد أنها ليست موضوعية).

٢- أوهام الكهف: الخاصة بكل فرد، فبسبب الطبيعة الفريدة لكل إنسان (تربيته، صلاته الخاصة، قراءاته، علاقاته، اختلاف الانطباعات التي تتركها الأشياء في ذهنه) تشوه الطبيعة أكثر.

٣- أوهام السوق: الناشئة عن تواصل الناس واجتماع بعضهم ببعض. فالكلمات يتم اختيارها بما يلائم فهم العامة، وبذلك تنشأ كلمات بليدة تعيق العقل وتنتهك الفهم وتوقع الناس في مجادلات ومغالطات لا حصر لها.

٤- أوهام المسرح: حيث يعتبر بيكون أن "كل الفلسفات التي تعلمها الناس وابتكروها حتى الآن هي أشبه بمسرحيات عديدة جدا تُقدَّم وتُؤدى على المسرح، خالقة عوالم من عندها زائفة وهمية." وذلك يشمل الفلسفات الكلية وكثيرًا من العناصر والمبادئ الخاصة بالعلوم.


يستطرد لاحقًا بذكر الأوهام التي تفرضها اللغة على الفهم:
- أسماء لأشياء لا وجود لها؛
- الأشياء التي تفتقر إلى أسماء لأنها لم تلاحظ بعد؛
- أسماء تفتقر إلى أشياء لأنها افتراضية؛
-أسماء لأشياء موجودة لكنها مختلطة وغير دقيقة.

———البراهين الزائفة (حصون الأوهام)———

تخضع البراهين الزائفة العالم وتسخره للأفكار البشرية. فالفلسفات مترتبة على براهين، والبراهين المستخدمة تمضي من الحواس إلى المبادئ، دون تصحيح ومعالجة للحواس الخادعة.

١- انطباعات الحواس خاطئة؛
٢- التصورات المستمدة من انطباعات الحواس غير قويمة؛
٣- الاستقراء المستخدم خاطئ، لأنه يقرر مبادئ العلم بناء على التعداد البسيط، دون استخدام الاستبعاد والفصل أو التحليل الصحيح للطبيعة؛
٤- طريقة البرهان التي تبدأ بوضع المبادئ الأعم ثم تجعل منها محكا للمبادئ الوسطى تُختبر بمضاهاتها: هي أم الأخطاء.

———أسباب عدم تطور الفلسفة الطبيعية———

١- ضآلة الفترات الزمنية التي كانت مواتية للعلم.
٢- لم يكن الناس يولون الفلسفة الطبيعية إلى جزءًا ضئيلا من جهدهم. انشغلت العقول النابغة باللاهوت والشأن العام (السياسة). وعوملت الفلسفة كمجرد معبر أو جسر إلى مطالب أخرى.
٣- الهدف الحقيقي والمشروع للعلوم هو أن تزود الحياة الإنسانية باكتشافات وموارد جديدة لكن أكثر الناس لا يعرفون شيئا عن ذلك.
٤- يتخذ الناس طريقاً خاطئا ومسدوداً فا تعاطيهم للعلوم: حيث اعتادوا منهجا بسيطا غير علمي. حيث يُعد الباحث نفسه للكشف عن طريق الاستعلام عن كل ما قبل قبل في الموضوع، ويُلم به، ثم يضيف تأملاته الخاصة، ويُقلب الأمر في ذهنه، ويستنطق روحه الخاصة ويهيب بها أن توحي إليه وهذا منهج يفتقر إلى أي أساس.
٥- الاعتقاد أن الاعتكاف على التجارب والأشياء الحزئية يحط من قدر الذهن البشري.
٦- توقير العصور القديمة ونفوذِ الرحال الذين حظوا بمكانة كبيرة في الفلسفة. كبلت قيود القدم والسلطة والإجماع قوى البشر.
٧- الخرافة والحماس الأعمى والمتطرف للدين.


———المنطق الأرسطي———

"أخذ أرسطو يؤسس أحكاما في كل شيء، ثم أخذ يطرح اعتراضات من عنده كي لا يلبث أن يتصدى لها، بحيث لا يترك أمراً إلى وهو يقيني محسوم. وهي طريقة مازالت قائمة اليوم بين أتباعه."


"فالمنطق لا يكشف المبادئ والقضايا الرئيسية التي تتألف منها الفنون، بل يكتشف فحسب تلك القضايا التي تبدو متسقة معها." ولو سألت عن براهينه على المبادئ أو القضايا الأولى، فالمنطق يحيلك إلى "الإيمان وقسم الولاء الذي ينبغي أن يؤدي لم��ادئ كل فن على حدة".

يرد بيكون على القول الشائع بأن هناك شبه إجماع على فلسفة أرسطو، حيث توارت جميع الفلسفات الأخرى بعد ظهورها:
١- لم تنته الفلسفات الأخرى عقب ظهور فلسفة أرسطو بل ظلت قائمة، لكن ربما كانت فلسفته مبسطة في الصياغة والمبادئ فتناقلها العامة أكثر.
٢- الإجماع الحقيقي هو ذلك الذي ينطلق من أحكام حرة، أما من ارتهن نفسه لفلسفة أرسطو فذلك أقرب إلى الاتباع والتحزب من الاتفاق.

يعتبر الحديث عن الطبيعة أصعب وأخطر اليوم بسبب رد اللاهوت إلى نظام مطرد في شكل علم ومزج جوهره بفلسفة أرسطو الشائكة والخلافية أكثر منا ينبغي.

——— المنهج العلمي الصحيح ———

١- جمع التاريخ الطبيعي (أساس الفلسفة الطبيعية) على نحو أفضل.
٢- إدخال منهج مختلف لمواصلة الخبرة والتقدم بها.
٣- عدم القبول بأي طريقة للكشف دون تدوين.
٤- تنظيم كل الجزئيات المتعلقة بموضوع ما وصفها بواسطة قوائم للكشف ملائمة.
٥- استنباط القوانين والقضايا بمنهج وقاعدة وثيقين انطلاقا من الجزئيات، ثم المبادئ الصغرى، ثم الوسطى، انتهاءً بالمبادئ الأعم.
٦- الاستقراء المستعمل لإثبات المبادئ الصغرى: يجب أن يحلل الطبيعة بواسطة عمليات نبذ واستبعاد مناسبة. حيث بعد عدد كاف من السوالب نصل إلى استنتاج عن الأمثلة الموجبة.
٧- تفحص ما إذا كان المبدأ المتكون مفصلا على مقاس تلك الجزئيات أم أنه أوسع مجالا.

[mohab samir · Rating 5 out of 5]

كما قلنا مراراً وسنقولها كثيرا بما أننا نقرأ فى أمهات الكتب أكرر فأقول أننا لا يجب أن نحكم على هذه الكتب على أساس مفاهيمنا الحالية وظروف عصرنا الأدبية أو العلمية أو خلاصةً لا يجب أن نقيمها من وجهة نظر فكرنا الحديث وخط تطوره وسرعته أو بعبارة أخرى لا نقيمها بوجهة نظرنا الفردية إلا بعد محاولة تحريرها من أسر الظروف المحيطة الحالية قدر الإمكان وأن نحاول أن نرجع بطريقة تفكيرنا متدهورين فى الزمن إلى العصور التى كتبت فيها هذه البذور التى أثمرت عقولنا المعاصرة محاولين أن نكتشف عقول هذا العصر فى ظل ظروفه البائدة وخط تطورها البطىء الذى لا يقارن بمعدلاتنا الحالية .
فرانسيس بيكون , فى وجهة نظرى أنه اكثر رجال عصره نبوغاً وإليه يرجع أغلب الفضل فى تطور العلوم من عصره إلى عصرنا وأنه كان الخط الفاصل بين ما يمكن تعريفه بالعلوم القديمة وعلومنا الحديثة ومن بعده مباشرة إنما تطورت العلوم وتقدمت الكيمياء وظهر نيوتن وديكارت وخطت الرياضيات خطىً بعيدة على أنه لم يفيد العلوم ذاتها من حيث زيادتها كماً وليس لإكتشافاته بعيد أهمية وهى لا تعدو أن تكون تجارب رجل يتماشى مع عقله العلمى المشتت بين أفرع العلوم فكانت بذلك تجاربه مشتته لا تعبن بعضها بعضا ولم تذهب بعيداً فى أى مجال .
إلا أنه كان المُقَسِم الجديد للعلوم الحديثة وواضع منهجها ورغم انه عُدِّل مراراً فى الفترات الأخيرة إلا أن سماته لا تزال واضحة بارزة ولا يزال الكثير من مبادىء هذا المنهج معمول بها كما هى إلى الحين وللقارىء البسيط فى العلوم وتاريخها أن يلحظ ذلك .
والحقيقة ان إرادة العمل السليم تحتاج إلى المنهج قدر ما تحتاج إلى العمل والمحاولة خصوصا إذا إقتضى العمل السرعه والإفادة المستمرة حيث كانت رغبة بيكون دائماً الوصول فى أقرب وقت إلى السيطرة على الطبيعة عن طريق معرفة عللها الأولى بإستخدام منهجه العلمى الذى يتولى مهمة إختصار الطريق من أجل راحة الإنسان رغم أنه لا يغفل عن أن السيطرة على الطبيعة لا تأتى إلا بالخضوع لها ولقوانينها الأزلية .
رغم ذلك نذكر من التجارب العلمية الهامة التى أجراها بيكون وتوصل فيها إلى نتائج سليمة هى تجاربه على الحرارة وإكتشاف حفظ البرودة للأطعمة والمواد العضوية . وأدرك أن سرعة الضوء تفوق سرعة الصوت بمراحل عديدة رغم أنه تعثر فى إدراك الأوساط المادية الصحيحة التى تكون فيها هذه الموجات أسرع منها فى سواها . لكنه كذلك سبق بفكره ثلاثة قرون حين شك فى أن صورة النجوم والأجرام السماوية البعيدة تصل إلينا متأخرة فى الزمن بسبب بعدها المهول عن الأرض موضع رؤيتنا ولو أنه ظن أن هذا الزمن قصير جدا ولم يدرك أنه قد يصل لملايين السنوات ولكننا نغفر له ذلك لعلمنا أنه لم تتوفر له الأدوات التى يعرف بها سرعة الضوء ولا أن يقيس بُعد هذه الأجرام عن أرضنا .
فالخمس نجوم هذه لعبقرية بيكون فقط وليس لأسلوبه الأدبى ولا للمتعة الكبيرة التى يتوقعها القارئ من قراءة الكتاب ولا أى عامل آخر فقط هذه العبقرية .

[andalosi khaled · Rating 3 out of 5]

كتاب مرهق، لا أنصح بقراءته الا لمن تمرس لغة الفلسفة والمنطق ، خصوصا الجزء الثاني منه، شأنه شأن الدواء؛ يؤخذ على جرعات .
إن كنت تبحث عن متعة القراءة، والقراءة الممتعة ، فلا أظن أن هذا الكتاب سيكون اختيارا موفقا !

[ZaRi]

شخصی را به معبدی برده، می خواستند قدرت خدایان را به وی نشان دهند و به ایمان بیاورند. برای این کار، لوحه های نذر کسانی را که به علت نذر برای خدا از طوفان نجات یافته بودند به وی نشان می دادند ولی او به همه این ها پاسخ بسیار خوبی داد و گفت: پس لوحه آن ها که نذر کردند و با وجود این غرق شدند کجاست؟
تمام خرافات از قبیل عقیده به احکام نجوم و رویاها و تفالات و غیب گویی ها و امثال آن به هم شبیه است. عقیده به این خرافات از اینجا ناشی شده که فقط یک بار یا در یک قضیه نتیجه مثبت داده است ولی هیچکس دفعات بی شماری را که این خرافات نتیجه منفی داده است در نظر نمی آورد!

[Joseph Voelbel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Through these pages it becomes keenly aware that Francis Bacon was a top notch observationalist. His in depth analysis of heat and cold are fascinating to the modern mind. The permutations he arrives at put to shame any wikipedia entry that could be mounted on the matter.

Perhaps the most striking element to this book is the rigourous sense of faith which stands tall alongside his earnest desire for inductive reasoning as a method to 'penetrate nature'.

Across the text Bacon makes reference to Virgil, Galileo, Plato, ("He who can properly define and divide is to be considered a god"), Aristotle, and ancient Greek Philosophers, including, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, Leucippus, Democritus, Parmenides, Heraclitus, Xenophanes, Philolaus, (he omits Pythagoras for being superstitious)... and Biblical passages, of Daniel & Solomon.

On why we must doubt our knowing from the onset, Bacon discusses the difference betweeen an immediate apprehension of true nature, which he believes is restricted to divine and possibly angelic intelligences, whereas humans, he urges, must make use of a different kind of approach.

"But is is only for God (the bestower and creater of forms), and perhaps for angels and intelligences, at once to recognize forms affirmatively at the first glance of contemplation: man, at least, is unable to do so, and is only allowed to proceed first by negatives, and then to conclude with affirmatives, after every species of exclusion."

Of how to approach this new way of thinking Bacon makes an analogy to how the French came to Italy: "Alexander Borgia said of the expedition of the French into Italy that they came with chalk in their hands to mark up their lodgings, and not with weapons to force their passage. Even so do we wish our philosophy to make its way quietly into those minds that are fit for it, and of good capacity; for we have no need of contention where we differ in first principles, and in our very notions, and even in our forms of demonstration."

The book, which catalyzed the origins of what became, for some, a bastion of reductive materialism, is highly faithful, and makes no claims as to create anything contrariwise to the faith of a man, simply instead, giving him tools to unlock nature's secrets. The book concludes with a poetic homage to Man's fall from grace, and means for partial return, a poetic touch, no doubt.

"For man, by the fall, lost at once his state of innocence and his empire over creation, both of which can be partially recovered even in this life, the first by religion and faith, the second by the arts and sciences. For creation did not become entirely and utterly rebellious by the curse, but in consequence of the Divine decree, 'in the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread', she is compelled by our labors (not assuredly by our disputes or magical ceremonies), at length to afford mankind in some degree his bread, that is to say, to supply man's daily wants." - Francis Bacon, Novum Organum

For a complete version of this review you may visit my blog: http://josephvoelbel.com/blog and type Bacon in the search box.

[Imene Philosophia]

The New Organon forms part of the great renewal, or Instauratio magna, an ambitious practical and theoretical project to overhaul and reform the way in which man investigates nature. Bacon divides his project into six parts: one) a summary of current knowledge, two) the New Organon itself, which sets out the method to be followed and seeks to prepare the mind for investigation, three) a complete natural history, that will provide the foundations for this investigation, four) examples of the kind of investigation Bacon's method would produce, five) specific practical discoveries that he has made, which serve as a kind of interest payment before the "capital" sum of the complete theory is known, six) the real philosophy, completely explained. Bacon doubts his own ability to complete the project, particularly the last section; he calls for royal patronage to help realize the project. As he imagines it, however, the Great Renewal will reform both epistemology (the philosophy of knowledge) and practice. It will alter the way we think about truth in nature, and how we try to uncover that truth.

[Andrew Ferguson · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the foundational texts of Western thought for a reason. Sure it is the definition of dated and some of its assertions about nature and physics are flat out wrong, but that's because Bacon literally pioneered the method of scientific inquiry that went on to give humanity the answers. The manner in which Bacon splits the "wisdom of the ancients" from modern scientific inquiry is ruthlessly efficient and should be required reading for anyone who says all has already been discovered. The opening preface of the book contains some choice insights that are still relevant today for anyone looking to understand the complexities of the world in which we all live.

[Gordan Karlic · Rating 4 out of 5]

There is no doubt Francis Bacon had a huge influence on philosophy, philosophy of science and science.
And that is the greatest strength and greatest weakness of this book, it is a mix of philosophy and science were Bacon never full reached apex or either of those two disciplines.
There are two more reasons why I gave grade 4.
First, he tried to categorize a lot of natural phenomes unfortunately a lot of it didn't stand the test of time.
Probably the biggest reason I didn't like this book as much I hope I would is Bacon the politician.
What I mean by that, Bacon acted like a politician with his attacks on Aristotle. I understand he disagrees with his philosophical thought, but he is spent so much time in this book to attack a person who is dead for 2000 years.
Furthermore, Aristotle is one of the greatest minds in human history and when you insult him you better bring something that will surpass him otherwise you insult yourself and he didn't come close to surpass Aristotle.

[arbuz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Эта книга -- уже не от Возрождения. Ведь она решительно отметает суеверия и естественную магию и провозглашает новую науку, на новых принципах, ориентированную не на бессмысленную спекуляцию, а на общественно полезную практику. Отвергается и оторванная от современных условий динамично меняющегося мира схоластика, а вместе с ней и ветхое учение Аристотеля. Страшно подумать -- во времена Бэкона кто-то мог верить в существование небесных сфер! Тем не менее, мы знаем, что процесс против Галилея (а значит, и против его научного метода) начался всего через 12 лет -- в 1632 году.

Тем более поразителен такой мощный, революционный посыл Бэкона в достаточно темную, по нашим меркам, эпоху религиозных войн и суеверий.

[Ethan Zimmerman · Rating 3 out of 5]

I didn't read this in its entirety. Bacon's writing is majorly important in the history of philosophy and science as the new science emerged in early modernity. I recommend this as an important historical artifact with some thought-provoking genius. Without the work of Bacon and others like him, the technological and medical advancements of the following centuries would have never happened. However, he also played an important role in the development toward reductionist, scientific accounts of reality, which were largely destructive.

[Juan · Rating 2 out of 5]

He pasado mucho tiempo odiando a Descartes por cosas que son culpa de Bacon

[Felipe · Rating 4 out of 5]

Novum Organum is a work written by Francis Bacon published in 1620, which constitutes Part II of the broader project named The Great Instauration. It is organized into “aphorisms” and divided into 2 main parts. At first, I was skeptical about the format, as I prefer the standard prose characteristic of Treatises. However, I was surprised to find that the “aphorisms” of the work had a logical and sequential continuity. In that regard, they are not true aphorisms, but rather prose broken down into sections for easier referencing and quotability.

Part I

Bacon believes that old science has failed to achieve effective results. In the early 17th century, still humanity is a slave to nature, such that as a species, we failed to truly conquer and master nature, bending it to our benefit. This is because the current methods used to acquire knowledge are fundamentally flawed.

They are flawed because of the illusions (idola), which have seized men’s minds in the past and still have a strong hold in the present. These are fourfold, representing various kinds of biases:

Idols of the tribe are cognitive biases inherent to human nature itself, being common to all individuals. Humans often see more regularity than there really is, are inclined to confirm previous beliefs rather than question them, and often let emotions over-influence them. Therefore, the Idola Tribus are prejudices and limitations common to all humans as humans.

Idols of the cave represent personal biases, echo chambers of beliefs that are reinforced by a person’s own views and background. As each person is shaped by education, life experiences, temperament, etc, so is their interpretation of the world. Therefore, the Idola Specus needs to be taken into account when understanding humanity’s failure in the sciences.

Idols of the Marketplace are shared biases originating from human exchange. They arise from the use of ambiguous language and jargon in social interaction, and represent how words can distort thought or lead someone to believe in something that does not exist. The Idola Fori then, impose misleading distinctions and encourage vague or ambiguous terms.

Lastly, Idols of the Theater are systematic biases arising from previously held philosophical systems and dogmas accepted uncritically. They create false and fictitious worlds, relying on authority to create grand and coherent systems that do not represent reality as it really is. Therefore, the Idola Theatri are traditional systems accepted on authority rather than tested through experience.

The causes of errors, and the reasons why humanity has insisted so strongly on these errors also merit an explanation. Bacon holds that there were truly few times when science has been favored: only Greek, Roman and the current times can be considered high points of learning, and in such times, natural philosophy has occupied only a small part of intellectual efforts, being in fact subject to ethics, metaphysics and theology. Additionally, old science lacked a definitive sense of purpose and method, as previous attempts into the field were unfocused, instead of an undeviating investigation of truth based on a well-established procedure and method. Furthermore, the lack of incentive is also a factor: while the discoveries of science come from great intellects, the prizes and rewards are in turn concentrated in the hands of the wealthy, who are mostly uneducated themselves. Lastly, the neglect of experiment and experience is equally guilty, which falls back on the necessity of a structured, rigorous, repeated method.

The true and legitimate goal of the sciences is to endow human life with new discoveries and resources.

If left to tradition, the sciences will never achieve this goal. But fear not, there is much hope. The lack of results comes not from the subject matter itself, but from the faulty application of human reason to it. So, by fixing the method used to derive human understanding, the sciences will naturally make a comeback and walk towards the realization of this goal.

But what does this method look like? Aristotle’s procedure of observing particulars, abstracting the most general axioms, and then through deduction arriving at middle axioms is, of course, incorrect because it rises too quickly from a narrow base of experience to highly general principles, and once those principles are established, it treats them as fixed foundations. This jump from particulars to general axioms is unjustified and leads to conclusions that are not founded on nature itself, but on its own closed logical system. Accordingly, Bacon addresses this by proposing a method based on induction:

one may only expect anything from the sciences when the ascent is made on a genuine ladder, by regular steps, without gaps or breaks, from particulars to lesser axioms and then to intermediate axioms, one above the other, and only at the end to the most general.

The goal is still to find middle axioms, on which human affairs are based, yet the method to arrive at them is instead grounded in a gradual and disciplined ascent guided by experience and experimentation, rather than the premature leap to universal principles, and the subsequent syllogistic derivation of the middle axioms, as is characteristic of the old science.

As a result, Bacon’s project vehemently rejects the prior Scholastic-Aristotelian method. Old science looked at the world and fitted it into a previously devised system; new science begins from sense experience, ascending gradually towards axioms grounded in nature rather than in logical construction. Rather than leaping prematurely from observation to the most general axioms, true induction builds up knowledge step by step, testing findings through experiments, which can either reject or refine them. From this process arises not merely speculative, biased knowledge, but a true science which enables humanity’s control over nature, transforming it to our own needs and bringing in a new era of discovery and progress.

Part II

… to the first is subordinate the transformation of concrete bodies from one thing into another within the bounds of the Possible; to the latter is subordinate the discovery, in every generation and motion, of the continuous hidden process from the manifest Efficient cause and the observable matter to the acquired Form; and similarly, the discovery, in bodies at rest and not in motion, of the latent structure.

The shift proposed by Bacon has many interesting corollaries. Among them, the impact and change in how causation is viewed. From the four Aristotelian causes, the final cause is altogether dropped, and the other three are greatly reinterpreted and reduced. The inquiry into final cause is sterile, mainly because it is derived from human interpretation and understanding, rather than the nature of the universe. As such, it distracts from achieving real physical causes, being mostly useless outside the context of human actions. The efficient cause is substituted for the latent process, or the how of a natural change, viewed as a continuous motion, a process which is hidden from the senses. The formal and material causes are, in turn, fit into the latent structure of the substances. That is, the hidden internal physical constitution and organization that produce observable effects. From this, we understand that gold isn’t a form in and of itself, in the traditional Aristotelian sense, and is not made out of goldness. Instead, it has a hidden physical architecture made of particles that produces the material of gold. The word form, however, is not abandoned by Bacon. It is repurposed to signify the physical laws associated with a given nature, as a mechanical principle that governs it. Hence, the form of heat is the physical law that governs heat.

Subsequently, Bacon expands on his method per se. True induction follows three steps: firstly, a systematic observation of nature is needed to order sense experience, from which the whole of knowledge follows. Secondly, the scientist constructs tables of presence, absence and comparison, which present instances to the intellect, working like a tool to organize the mass of data derived from the first step. Lastly, the scientist finds inconsistencies in the tables, using the principle of exclusion. The tables are contrasted and singular natures (potential causes being investigated) are rejected and reduced until the form of a given nature (the effect being explained) can be discerned. From these steps, an interpretation of findings is possible, which can then be tested and refined through experiments.

Of course, the rebranding of the Aristotelian form causes a metaphysical impact on the definition of substance, which to him is the composite of matter and form; a definition that cannot be maintained from Bacon’s position. Despite not explicitly presenting a full alternative ontology, the author holds that the fundamental entities of reality are not substances in the traditional sense; what exists fundamentally is matter, organized into particular ways (latent structures), undergoing particular motions (latent processes).

Bacon’s method, then, wishes to discover the physical laws (forms) that govern simple natures, these being the fundamental observable features out of which complex bodies are composed, e.g. heat, cold, denseness, motion, rest, etc. From this discovery, we can understand how these simple natures are combined to form new complex bodies previously unheard of until, finally, a generative, operational science can be created.

Brief thoughts

Bacon’s project is magnificent and necessary, despite not being formulated ideally. The rejection of the Aristotelian tradition signals a shift into what became modern epistemology. However, the inclusion of the tables of discovery makes his method laborious, formulaic, and too rigid in my interpretation. One could endlessly list entries in any given table, and jumbling all that information simultaneously makes arriving at a conclusion a journey too difficult for a system that supposedly means to construct a new body of knowledge and stimulate discovery. To help with that, he introduces an extensive list of privileged instances, which help refine induction and speed up discovery. But still, his work is valuable not for the method per se, which was painfully detailed in the second part, but for the shift it caused in the sciences and in epistemology.

[Tilde · Rating 2 out of 5]

Bro stop yapping, I'm not interested

Read the first 150-ish pages for lit class

[Plato · Rating 5 out of 5]

I didn't know this was just a bunch of aphorisms. Banger alert.

The New Organon is divided into two books, and the first 100 pages is what should be focused on for a primary philosophical purpose. The second book is interesting if one is into the history of science/ideas. But what people know Bacon for is primarily in the first part.

[Andrea Giovana Pesenti · Rating 4 out of 5]

We could say that Francis Bacon, a seventeenth century scholar, certainly revolutionized Western thought by proposing new forms of researching the "natural philosophies". His inductive method predicate, first, freeing the human mind of its "idols", that distract and corrupt it, and then, by cautious and comparative observations, formulating new general laws, which would illuminate the path to new discoveries. As for the book itself, reading it was somewhat difficult, for two reasons in my view: first, I've never read the Aristotle's books of Natural Sciences and, consequently, I know nothing about the scholastic thought to which Bacon is opposite; second, the examples he provides are a bit confusing because of the way he describes them, especially his concepts of "form" and "matter". Maybe it's too much abstraction for me, but I think I could grasp the main idea of the text.

[Patrick Santino · Rating 3 out of 5]

Audiobooked & took notes as I researched for a paper on why modern philosophy threw out formal and final causes, leaving only the material and efficient causes. It does in fact seem like Francis Bacon is the single most influential figure in the process, and this work is his magnum opus. The most significant lines for my inquiry are explicitly stated and fit in continuity with the whole thought and tone of the rest of the book: “But of these the final cause rather corrupts than advances the sciences, except such as have to do with human action. The discovery of the formal is despaired of” (Book 2, aphorism 2).
The book is divided into two halves. Book 1 is basically his clearing out of the field for a fresh rigorously empirical start on philosophy and science. He rejects blind confidence in the ideas of ancient philosophers (most notably Aristotle). He may at points pay lip service to his indebtedness to the ancient philosophers, but overall one of his main purposes is that in realm of natural philosophical knowledge he rejects the concept of standing on the shoulders of giants. He did not think Aristotle was empirical enough, and Aristotle’s logic and even his experiments only served metaphysical conclusions Aristotle had already made up his mind about beforehand. And even worse, he disliked the philosophers down the centuries who seemed to just blindly “take Aristotle’s word for it” which completely stifled scientific inquiry for centuries. Whether this is a fair assessment of Aristotle and his descending adherents by Bacon are other topics. Bacon planned to do something new: follow empirical observation where it leads especially with experimentation, and then heavily reduce mental abstraction & metaphysical language about substance and forms etc. Perhaps it was the translation or length, but as I plowed through the book it was hard to get a read of Bacon’s true feelings on his own mission relative to those who came before. But upon looking at the notes of the most potent quotes, Bacon comes off as arrogant and has cutting disrespect for Aristotle.
This then leads to a surprisingly pleasant second half of the book. I’m pretty sure Book 2 of the New Organon is the most elaborate foundation for the scientific method we have today (focusing on the material by rigorous empirical evidence and corresponding experimentation). And while I naturally do not love Bacon’s ungrateful rejection of those who came before him, I was unexpectedly impressed with his new alternative methods and practices. My favorite part was when he started investigating the Nature of Heat. Here he does truly improve on Aristotle’s induction. After listing every instance of heat he can think of, he then heavily scrutinizes all of these instances with even more critical observation and replicable experimentation. With this further scrutinized data, he then seems to do some sort of “Via Negativa” about Heat to get down to the undeniable “affirmatives” we can say about Heat. Which leads him to suddenly declare “Heat is motion and nothing else.” Which is pretty cool! As he was making his lists and observations about heat I was thinking “O I don’t think anyone’s figured out yet that heat is energy transfer.” And then all of a sudden here he has figured out it’s related to motion, (which I also assume no one else had figured out yet?). Assuming this was the first instance of connecting heat only with motion, I was in awe of witnessing quite an impressive contribution to humanity’s knowledge. As it obviously paved the way to seeing heat as energy transfer (a form of motion). As Book 2 goes on, it is interesting to see his empirical brain hypothesize about all sorts of phsyical phenomena that have since been discovered: like he contemplated if when the tide flows in Florida, is it simultaneously then ebbing in Spain? He seems extremely well-read and knowledgeable about the world. He seems certainly an excellent empiricist and scientist wanting rigorous experimentation to verify his hypotheses; regardless of what I think of him as a philosopher. But at some point he seems to usurp the definition of “form” to be what we mean by “law of nature”, which I’ll have to look into more.
Surprisingly, his motivations and purposes only make small appearances throughout this book. He is impressed by technological innovations. He wants to beef up the applied science. He wants to be remembered as a great contributor to the field of knowledge. And in the conclusion there is an explicit desire for the “improvement in man’s estate and an enlargement of his power over nature.” But this is about as close as Bacon comes in this book to saying his most famous quote (from some other essay): “Knowledge (itself) is Power.” Still, I think all of these motivations are implicitly summed up throughout the book in all of Bacon’s references to one technology in particular. Bacon reveals himself to be a totally typical guy in finding gunpowder really cool and apparently the most fascinating of all technologies. I think if he had lived for 400 years he would have shed tears to see 20th Century rockets and the Space Race. Because for both good and ill, the Space Race and all the industrial technological innovations that came before seem the apotheosis of all of Bacon’s goals. His New Organon published all the way back in 1620 truly set science on a course towards their fruition.

[Cooper Ackerly · Rating 5 out of 5]

The science is obviously dated (as Bacon would doubtless be pleased to learn) and the exclusive reliance upon induction ultimately fails (though his theory was arguably a necessary step), but the preface is a brilliant articulation of the way forward for science and a biting (and prescient) indictment of much of its past.

[Jaff · Rating 4 out of 5]

يهدف بيكون في هذا الكتاب إلى بناء وسيلة جديدة لفهم الطبيعة, فهو ينتقد المنطق الأرسطي ويعتبره لغوًا طفوليًا كما دمر التفكير السليم كما يهاجم الفلاسفة لكونهم لا يعطون اي قيمة للتجربة ويتمادون في المصطلحات والتفاسير التي لا صحة لها, هنا يقدم بيكون منهجه الجديد القائم على الملاحظة والتجربة وهو بذلك يعد أب المنهج العلمي.

[Karl Hallbjörnsson · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read this in a sitting a month ago. I thought it was pretty amazing how much his scientific vision corresponds to our modern one. I guess he laid some serious foundations for modern scientific epistemology and research.

[Davis Smith · Rating 3 out of 5]

All things considered, Bacon is probably the most important pre-18th-century thinker for the modern world. His work is wildly interesting in all sorts of ways, and merits deep study. This is a book that I'd definitely like to do a thorough dive into someday

[Heather · Rating 1 out of 5]

i hate this book.
in this book, bacon separates philosphy from science. in my opinion this is the root of all scientific folly and arrogance.

[Arkar Kyaw · Rating 2 out of 5]

Edgy fedora tipper. Shitposting at its best.

[Rowland Pasaribu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bacon's most immediate philosophical context is that of Aristotelian philosophy, which was still one of the prevalent intellectual currents of Bacon's day. Aristotle's Physics, which emphasized the role of a complex system of causes, form and matter, offered a theoretical rather than experimental picture of the natural world. Medieval Aristotelian philosophers, collectively known as the scholastics, sought to interpret and update Aristotle's system. However, absolute consensus around Aristotle clearly did not exist, even in the universities. When Bacon was at Cambridge, attacks on Aristotle's logic by the French thinker Ramus were being debated. Recent scholarship emphasizes the wide range of opinions that can be classed as "Aristotelian."

Bacon was by no means the first thinker to react against Aristotle, but to understand his reaction one must recognize the importance of Aristotle in early modern intellectual life. This reaction was indeed a severe one; Bacon's key aim throughout The New Organon was to replace what he believed to be Aristotle's universal truths with the idea that truth had to be discovered.

Bacon's involvement with contemporary experimental philosophy is also important. From comments in The New Organon itself, and from his letters, we know that Bacon took a keen interest in scientific developments and discoveries, despite his criticism of purely "empirical" philosophy. His discussions of Galileo's theory of tides, Gilbert's concept of magnetism, and of the use of the recently-developed microscope, show a philosopher in touch with contemporary developments. Bacon also performed and directed his own experiments, some of which were more successful than the chicken-freezing enterprise that hastened his demise. The modern view of Bacon emphasizes the role of scientific practice in his work, and his links to contemporary experimenters.

The immediate reception of The New Organon was varied. James I famously claimed not to understand a word of the book, and the scientist William Harvey accused him of writing philosophy "like a Lord Chancellor"; that is, of arguing in a manipulative, political way. On a similarly negative note, John Chamberlain agreed with the judgment that "a fool could not have written such a work, and a wise man would not." Bacon's new method was more popular amongst the scientists and natural philosophers who made up the newly created Royal Society in London. He was adopted by them as a kind of philosophical patron saint, and figures like Robert Hooke tried to model their own investigations on Baconian lines.

Bacon's later influence is debatable. Certainly, the modern "scientific method" bears no resemblance to Bacon's inductive method. On these grounds, his project can be judged to have failed. But although no modern scientist uses inductive methods, Bacon is still credited with influencing the development of modern science. His philosophical reputation was greatest in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, but has declined ever since. Many later historians agreed that his criticism of Aristotle, and his emphasis on experiments and practice were important steps, but these historians also argued that the concept of induction was outdated and represented a false step in the development of the modern scientific method. The most recent Bacon scholarship is less judgmental, and emphasizes Bacon's historical and theoretical contexts. Most informed historians agree that criticizing Bacon because his method did not survive the test of time, or because of his "moral failings" is a mistake. The nineteenth century's obsession with vindicating Bacon of political corruption at the expense of studying his philosophy has disappeared. Whether Bacon would have welcomed this development is unclear.

Bacon begins with explanation and self-justification. He explains the genesis of his work by his own realization that the intellectual errors of the past need to be swept away. He writes in the first person, and identifies himself with his project absolutely. In a sense, he stakes his own reputation on it. In the preface, Bacon argues that he saw "every other ambition as lower than the work in hand." This perhaps gives an insight into the relationship between politics and philosophy in Bacon's life. Although he devoted a great deal of time to political business, at heart he believed that he made his greatest contribution to human life as a philosopher.

The dedication to King James I of England is an attempt to flatter James and gain personal advancement. James's intellectual interests (he wrote books on witchcraft, theology and tobacco) were well known, and he saw himself as a model of a scholar-prince. Bacon attempts to gain personal advancement (always a major concern), but also patronage for his great scientific project. The work, which was involved in his scheme to "renew" the sciences, would have been vastly expensive, and certainly beyond the means of the permanently indebted Bacon. In this preface and in letters written to James at the time, Bacon imagines prince and philosopher collaborating on this project, with James suggesting useful revisions. The King admitted, however, that Bacon's "last book, like the peace of God, passeth all understanding." This is an opinion unfortunately shared by some modern readers. The remainder of the section is essentially an outline of Bacon's broader project. It represents the beginning of his fierce polemic against authority and traditional learning.

Bacon was not the first writer to break with the "ancients," or classical Greek and Roman authors, but it is important to recognize how radical his suggestions were. Most of the European education system from the Middle Ages through the Renaissance was built on a foundation of classical texts. For a long time, the writings of Aristotle were the key source of knowledge about the natural world. The idea that the best way to study nature was by experiments and experience was not self-evident and had to be invented. A great deal of scholarship in the arts and sciences consisted of commentaries on classical texts. Considerable effort was expended in trying to reconcile ancient wisdom with modern experience.

The concept of authority is central to this deferential treatment of the past. Authors who were particularly famous or celebrated were given a high intellectual status. They had a power beyond the force of their arguments. Their teaching was accepted as true on little external evidence. For many writers, citing authority was enough to clinch an argument. The fact that Aristotle believed that some people were "slaves by nature" could be an argument for the oppression of indigenous peoples, for instance.

Various texts had the kind of authority that the Bible retains for some people today. The establishment of this authority was not simple, however. It was a gradual process with many arguments. The force of Bacon's attack should not blind us to the fact that considerable scholarly effort went into erecting the apparatus of authority.

Bacon seeks to destroy this apparatus completely. He makes it clear that he does not want to argue with the ancients about nature and science, but rather to ignore them altogether and start afresh. He calls for a completely clean slate, as far as such a thing is possible. This call for renewal in a way exempts Bacon from immediate criticism, as he cleverly makes clear. Other philosophers cannot criticize him using the principles of the old system, he argues, because he does not recognize them. Instead, they should read his new work carefully, and work within his new method. This is a clever, but not necessarily convincing, argument intended to diffuse criticism. Critics could of course argue that they judged his system from some universal viewpoint, or that his system is no more valid than theirs.

Bacon calls his work "natural philosophy" to emphasize the role that the practical study of nature has in it, but his project is only similar to, not identical with, modern "science." A key difference is that Bacon's new method operates within a Christian context. This argument may seem strange to modern readers, who are used to the idea of a conflict between science and religion. To Bacon and his contemporaries, there is no contradiction between the idea that God created the world, and the use of scientific methods to investigate the world. Indeed, the prerequisite of a good philosophical method for investigating nature is that it does not challenge the existence of God. One could argue that Bacon is merely covering up his true position, but this misses the point. To most seventeenth century thinkers, a "scientific" method was a way of investigating God's creation.

Bacon's plan of the "Great Renewal" is a clear statement of his aims for the project. Apart from The New Organon itself, however, little of the whole enterprise was completed. The third section of the renewal was perhaps the most ambitious; it was intended as a huge data-bank of information about the natural world. It would require a huge effort to complete, but would allow the investigator to base his induction on firm foundations. It is for this project that Bacon hopes to gain royal patronage. The fourth section is vaguely described, but appears to be a series of examples of the inductive method giving partial explanations of natural phenomena. These preliminary explanations and systems would be replaced by the kind of total explanation of the natural world that Bacon imagines in the sixth section. The fifth section is intended as a kind of lure for wealthy investors who need to turn a quick profit. In order to encourage investment in his wider project, Bacon aims to reveal discoveries with immediate practical and commercial value to reward potential backers. He is clear that his grand philosophical system needs financial backing, and that it must be "marketed" in a skillful way if it is to succeed. Perhaps the key message of this section is that The New Organon is very much a work in progress. It forms part of a broader project that was never completed, and is itself fragmentary.

[Mohammed omran · Rating 3 out of 5]

حاول بيكون أن يعيد تقويم الفلسفة اليونانية، حيث وجد إن العيب الاساس في طريقة تفكير فلاسفة اليونان والعصور الوسطى هو الاعتقاد بان العقل النظري وحده كفيل بالوصول الى العلم، وأصرّ على الوقوف بوجه الفكرة التي تحتقر التجربة، ويشبه مؤرخو الفلسفة الدور الذي لعبه فرنسيس بيكون في الفلسفة بالدور الفعال الذي قدمه مارتن لوثر في حركة الاصلاح الديني فمثلما كان لوثر ومعه أصحاب الدعوة الإصلاحية يؤمنون أن غاية الدين أن يكون الفرد إنساناً صالح النوايا، وهو ليس بحاجة إلى سلطة يأخذ بتفسيراتها للدين، فإن بيكون كان يرى أن تحقيق غاية العلم هو أن يبدً الإنسان وكانه طفل بريء ن وأن يتحرر من كل سلطة مفروضة على ذهنه، وأن يستخدم عقله ويضع لنفسه منهجاً صحيحاً، وبذلك يصل الى الحقيقة دون معونة من آراء القدماء. وكما نادى لوثر بأن لاجدوى منها في الوصول الى الخلاص، فكذلك حاول بيكون أن يثبت في فلسفته التنويرية، أن حكمة القدماء وفلسفتهم اللفظية لا جدوى منها في الوصول الى الحقيقة وإنما هي عقبات تجعلنا نكتفي بمواجهة الالفاظ بدلاً من أن نواجه الطبيعة والأشياء بشكل مباشر.فمزيداً من نور المعرفة يهدينا إلى عقيدة فلسفية.. ولهذا يعلن بيكون من مكان عزلته: "فلتعقل حتى يمكنك أن تعتقد"ونجده يستهدف في فلسفته تضييق مجال الظن ليتسع مجال اليقين: "إن المعرفة وحدها هي التي تطهّر العقل من كل الشوائب"، ويكرس سنواته الأخيرة لفكرة واحدة وهي إن المعرفة ينبغي أن تثمر، وإن العلم ينبغي أن يكون قابلاً للتطبيق في كل مجالات الحياة، وإن على الإنسان أن يضع أمامه هدفاً واحداً وهو أن يجعل من تغيير ظروف الحياة وتحسينها وتغييرها واجباً مقدساً..ولهذا نجد صرخته العظيمة من أن العلم الذي يذهب ويختفي دون أن تتغير معه حياة الناس ليس علماً، والعلم الذي هو مجرد تكديس أفكار ونظريات مجردة دون أن ينعكس تاثيرها على أحوال الإنسان ليس علماً.. فقد وجد إن العلم الذي يدرس في الجامعات ليس علماً، ولا بد من ثورة شاملة تحدد وظيفة هذا العلم وعلاقته بما حوله.ووجد بيكون إن الطريق الى العلم الصحيح يكمن في التجربة العلمية ولهذا أخذ بنفسه يقوم ببعض التجارب كالتبريد الصناعي وتلقيح النباتات لإنتاج أنواع مختلفة جديدة، ورسم خرائط لاختراع سفن تسير تحت الماء، وأخرى لمركبة تطير في الهواء.

وقد كانت خاتمة حياته مرتبطة بشغفه بالتجارب العلمية، ففي أحد أيام شهر آذار من عام 1626 وبينما كان مسافراً في الريف الانكليزي أخذ يفكر في طريقة جديدة يمكن بها حفظ اللحوم من التعفن، فنزل من عربته واشترى دجاجة ذبحها ثم ملأها بحشوة من الثلج، وما إن فرغ من التجربة حتى أصيب بنزلة برد حادة تطوّرت الى التهاب بالرئتين لم يمهله طويلاً..وكانت وصيته أن يدفن في نوع من الكتمان: "إنني مودع روحي بين يدي الله، أما اسمي فإنني باعث به الى سائر الأمم والعصور"ويقول فولتير إن بيكون كان بإمكانه أن يكتب على شاهدة قبره"لتكن أفكاري حجر الزاوية في بناء عالم جديد مليء بالنور"
الأوهام الأربعة التي تحيط بحياة الانسان وهي:

1- أوهام القبيلة: وهي ناشئة عن طبيعة الجنس البشري، ذلك أن العقل ومعنى الطبيعة عندنا لايمكن أن ينشا إلا تبعا لمقاييسنا الانسانية، والعقل بمثابة مرآة غير مستوية إذ هو يجنح إلى مزج ذاته بالاشياء وهو بذلك يقوم بمسخ الاشياء.

2- اوهام الكهف: وهي اوهام قائمة في الفرد وهي تنشأ عن استعداداته، عن تربيته، عن عاداته وميوله.

3- اوهام السوق: وفيها يعتقد بيكون ان اللغة تقود أيضا إلى الخطأ من خلال تقديم دلالات خاطئة، عدا ان العبارات تقدم نفسها على الاشياء.من هنا تنشأ الخلافات حول الكلمات والاسماء والالفاظ.

4- اوهام المسرح: وهي اوهام متوارثة مع تعاليم المدارس الفلسفية. وقوامها استخدام اساليب برهانية معكوسة واختراع النظريات المبسطة. وهو يرى ان معظم الاراء الفلسفية السابقة، اشبه بمسرحيات غرضها التلاعب بعقولنا التي كثيرا ما تتقبل تلك الاراء دون مناقشة او نقد .

وبعد ان ينتهي بيكون من عرض الاوهام الاربعة، يؤكد على ضرورة التخلص منها جميعا حتى يكون دخولنا مملكة الانسانية بلا أفكار أو اوهام مسبقة ..لكن ما هو الطريق لدخول مملكة العقل والعلم .. يؤكد بيكون ان بداية الطريق هي الشك الذي هو طريق التجربة والخطأ.فالشك يدفعنا الى التجربة التي على ضوئها يتضح الطريق .

حظيت افكار فرنسيس بيكون باهتمام الفلاسفة، وكتب عنه الفيلسوف الالماني ليبنتز: "إنه حتى عبقرية عظيمة مثل ديكارت لتخر زاحفة على الأرض إذا قورنت ببيكون من حيث اتساع النطاق الفلسفي والرؤية الرفيعة "، وقد اعتبره فلاسفة التنوير مؤسسا للعهد الفلسفي الحديث واهدوا اليه موسوعتهم الفلسفية وقال ديدرو: " إننا إذا انتهينا من وضعها بنجاح نكون مدينين بالكثير لبيكون الذي وضع خطة معجم عالمي عن العلوم والفنون في وقتٍ خلا من الفنون والعلوم " .فيما اهدى ايمانويل كانط كتابه " نقد العقل المحض ": إلى بيكون معتبرا اياه المؤسس الاول للحداثة .

[sichen li · Rating 3 out of 5]

Only read Book I. Solid introduction to Bacon's inductive scientific method, and rejection of Aristotelianism (although he sometimes misinterprets Aristotle's works).

Summary of ideas and evidence:

1. Accounting for our habit of mind when coming to knowledge and truths.
- Ridding the mind of preconceptions (destroying idols of the mind, or false appearances); e.g. idols of the tribe, cave, marketplace, and theater.
- We want to see order in things and have confirmation bias (a dislike for trying to "disprove" theories and beliefs).
- We often either come to erroneous conclusions due to our idols or stop our investigations prematurely.

2. Previous use of syllogisms (deductive) is limiting.
- Only reaffirms what we already believe to be true (which could be false, because we have not critically evaluated these "truths" properly).
- Circular.
- Aristelian demonstration, or logic, can only help us organize our thoughts, but cannot lead to new knowledge.
- "The logic now in use serves rather to fix and give stability to the errors which have their foundation in commonly received notions than to help the search for truth".

3. New method of investigation.
- True induction.
- "Derives axioms from the senses and particulars, rising by a gradual and unbroken ascent, so that it arrives at the most general axioms last of all" as opposed to flying "from the senses to the most general axioms".
- "Axioms established by argumentation" cannot lead to discoveries, whereas "axioms duly and orderly formed from particulars" can.
- Interpretation of nature as opposed to anticipation of nature.
- Survey a list of "qualities", then through "eliminating induction" determine the causes of these "qualities".

4. Other ideas.
- Bacon operates under the Aristotelian framework; i.e., his knowledge is about essential natures and explanations are qualitative, not quantitative (not size, motion, force, etc.).

Summary of Galileo Galilei's The Assayer, section on "Corpuscularianism" (read as a companion to Bacon):

“Motion is the cause of heat.”

There are certain secondary qualities that belong exclusively to the realm of perception and physical senses (i.e., heat). These properties are part of us than the object itself. Thus, ideas like taste, odor, color, etc., are only names for things we experience.

Things that have objective existence are primary and real properties/qualities. These are causes for the secondary qualities. E.g., rapid vibration of air, forming different waves, move the ear drum in different ways to produce harmony or dissonance.

Primary qualities are quantitative; “If ears, tongues, and noses be taken away, the number, shape, and motion of bodies would remain, but not their tastes, sounds, and odors.”

[Hesham Sheir · Rating 5 out of 5]

اسم الكتاب: الأورجانون الجديد- إرشادات صادقة في تفسير الطبيعة.
الكاتب: فرانسيس بيكون (فيلسوف ورجل دولة وكاتب إنجليزي)
(١٥٦١- ١٦٢٦)
تاريخ صدور الكتاب: ١٦٢٠.
التقييم: ٥/٥

كلمة (أورجانون) تعني أداة أو آلة، والمقصود (آلة الفكر)، وهو الاسم الذي أطلق على مجموع مؤلفات أرسطو المنطقية. وقد أراد بيكون بهذا الكتاب تحرير الفكر الإنساني في عصره من سلطة أرسطو الذي ظلت أفكاره تسيطر على الفكر الإنساني لقرون عديدة. وقد أراد بيكون وضع منهج فكري جديد يتناسب مع روح هذا العصر وما شهده من اكتشافات علمية مذهلة.

الكتاب ينقسم إلى جزئين. في الكتاب الأول يتحدث بيكون عن أخطاء طرق التفكير السائدة، وأوهام العقل التي تعوقه عن اكتشاف الحقيقة، والعوامل المسيطرة على الفكر الإنساني والتي أعاقت تقدمه لقرون طويلة. أما الكتاب الثاني فيشرح المنهج الاستقرائي الذي وضعه بيكون لتجنب أخطاء العقل، ولدعمه ومساعدته بصورة أفضل وأدق تمكنه من اكتشاف حقائق الطبيعة والسيطرة عليها.

الكتاب الأول أبهرني كثيراً وأنا أقرأه في القرن الحادي والعشرين، مما يجعلني أفكر كيف كان وقعه عند صدوره في القرن السابع عشر، وأتعجب أي صفاء ذهن كتب به بيكون هذا الكلام الذي يصلح لكل زمان ومكان، وكيف نجح في وضع يده على مواضع الخلل في الفكر الإنساني بتلك النظرة الثاقبة والشاملة.

أما الكتاب الثاني فيغلب عليه الجانب التطبيقي والاستشهاد بأمثلة قد تجاوزتها علوم عصرنا الحالي، ولم تعد هناك فائدة من مطالعتها إلا بغرض فهم منهج بيكون دون التوقف طويلا عند تفاصيل الأمثلة.

والكتاب مكتوب بطريقة غير مألوفة، فالسرد يمضي في صورة شذرات دون تقسيم إلى فصول أو عناوين. وقد شرح بيكون أن العناوين تجعل الكاتب يطوع معلوماته قسراً لتتناسب مع العناوين، أما طريقة الشذرات تساعد على انطلاق الفكر. وقد لمست ذلك بوضوح أثناء قراءة الكتاب، فالأفكار تنساب بسلاسة كمجرى النهر.

وأخيراً أحب أن أشيد بالترجمة المبدعة ل د. عادل مصطفى. فقد نجح باقتدار في نقل أسلوب بيكون البليغ بلغة قوية وسلسة في الوقت ذاته، كما أضاف شروحا قيمة في الهوامش. وقد دفعني انبهاري الشديد بالترجمة للبحث عن باقي ترجمات وأعمال المترجم.

الكتاب قيم وهام جداً وأوصي بقراءته بشدة، ولا سيما الكتاب الأول.

[Cihan Deniz · Rating 4 out of 5]

I would enjoy reading this book just because of its value in the history of philosophy and science. It feels like witnessing the birth of science.

Introduction does its job and clearly sets your expectation to a right place, good to have that!

To me Book I was more exciting than Book II. This is because it explains the motivation and reasoning behind this text. I think that is more valuable for today's readers. Second book was about the method itself, which failed to attract my attention probably because its old, but most probably I prefer visuals over text when it comes to understanding methodologies, experiments and such.

It is not, however, fair to say that one MUST read this to have a deeper understanding of modern science, you can read a book about scientific method and you are good to go. But I have to say it clearly helps you to build an emotional connection to the topic on top of an intellectual one, which, to me, is a better foundation of understanding.

Finally, I believe that the mindset behind this text will help me in my everday life a lot. It'll help me to get rid of the idea of "perfection" and "true" understanding. It'll help me to avoid trying without purpose and learning. It'll help me to be right in the middle. Ok, not "right" in the middle, but around in the middle.

See you around.

[David · Rating 5 out of 5]

A highly underrated, overlooked work, considering it is the chief origin of the scientific method and is credited with giving us the concept of cognitive biases and the importance and methodology of mitigating them systematically, toward discovering higher truths about the world, achieving real science. Bacon's emphasis is on scientific discovery for the works that enhance human life, a goal not grasped by those of earlier times, including the Greeks, a goal which seems obvious to us only because we've grown up in, and been conditioned by, a world that is the legatee of Bacon.

His "new instrument” (New Organon), is the method of induction, contrasted with Aristotle's (Organon), the "instrument" of deduction. Bacon surely makes some errors in seeing the valid place of deduction alongside induction, and overshoots in his harsh critique of Aristotle, but they hardly diminish his accomplishment in revealing the awesome power of induction as a means to attaining higher truth of the world.

The work is divided into two parts (Book I and II), and the primary value, particularly for me, is in Book I, which is focused on describing the methodology, principles; the second book is dovoted to the application of the methodology in the world.

---------------
Note: I recommend this excellent discussion of this book's extraordinary value, not just historically, but to science today (by two thinkers devoted to the revival of induction as a remedy to failures of modern science): https://youtu.be/pSI5BWbdsgw