Novum Organum 'New Method' in Classics and the Western Canon

Jun 03, 2010 Rowland Pasaribu rated it really liked it · review of another edition

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 c 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. ...more

Like · see review

Jan 01, 2013 Matt rated it really liked it

In his zeal to challenge the Aristotelian teaching of his youth, Bacon swung to other extreme. Aristotle’s deductive reasoning had dominated for centuries before Bacon. Natural science was explored through the use of syllogisms based off premises arrived at by generalized observation. Once the premises were established, the inductive method was cast aside in favor of deduction. Science was solely an intellectual exercise which sought theoretical causation for effects that were observed. Hypothes In his zeal to challenge the Aristotelian teaching of his youth, Bacon swung to other extreme. Aristotle’s deductive reasoning had dominated for centuries before Bacon. Natural science was explored through the use of syllogisms based off premises arrived at by generalized observation. Once the premises were established, the inductive method was cast aside in favor of deduction. Science was solely an intellectual exercise which sought theoretical causation for effects that were observed. Hypotheses determined to be truth without experimentation.

Bacon was among those in the forefront (in Western culture) to reject that approach. He and others during the Renaissance were harshly critical of Aristotle’s incorrect conclusions and the process which led him. Maybe even more so against the countless thinkers who followed and failed to build upon Aristotle.

But if any one turn from the manufactories to libraries, and be inclined to admire the immense variety of books offered to our view, let him but examine and diligently inspect the matter and contents of these books, and his astonishment will certainly change its object: for when he finds no end of repetitions, and how much men do and speak the same thing over again, he will pass from admiration of this variety to astonishment at the poverty and scarcity of matter, which has hitherto possessed and filled men’s minds. pg. 64.

Bacon placed emphasis on the value of empirical evidence. What could be observed and documented. Unlike Aristotle, he embraced inductive reasoning. Bacon thought the first step of critical thinking in natural science was to document every instance in which a particular event occurs. He uses the example of heat. Then to document cases in which it does not occur and then to document when it occurs occasionally. From all this documentation, a hypothesis is supposed to generate organically. It’s probably no coincidence that Bacon did not contribute any new theories regarding heat or other area of natural science. The documentation could be endless if someone was diligent enough.

The current scientific method is a little more imaginative. Hypotheses are generated various ways and induction is then used to give validity. In some ways, it’s a mix of Aristotle and Bacon. Everything is better with bacon.

I can’t say it’s the most enjoyable reading, but it is significant. Bacon challenges established authority and makes an intellectually honest attempt to add to our collective knowledge. Unlike most of his Essays, Bacon contributes to the conversation more than simply recycles adages of old.
...more

Like · see review

Oct 18, 2015 Donald rated it it was amazing · review of another edition

Shelves: sjc

Baconian eschatology: Look at the aphorism in which he quotes the epigraph from Daniel ("many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased...") and then consider what happens next in Daniel. Science to welcome the apocalypse! ...more

Like · see review