Re: Bacon Fat

Jim Bell (70672.1241@CompuServe.COM)
23 Dec 96 12:18:06 EST

Excellent post on Bacon, David. Thanks.

I still find Durant's view supportable, because I find the same thing in other
passages of the Novum.

<<One of Bacon's less endearing features here: he could not see
anyone making progress in science in his day. Only he had found
the pathway to understanding the Book of Nature.>>

Yeah, he had an attitude. But so have numerous pioneers in the history of
thought. That does not, I think, detract from his insights. We need people
like that to challenge the current wisdom, for this is how the dialectic
proceeds! We need the Bacons, the Ayn Rands, the Glenn Mortons.

<<The "wings" are the theoretical systems (dogma) supplied by the
Greek philosophers, the Church theologians, etc., etc. Bacon
wanted to sweep these out of science and to build up from a
foundation of empirical data by induction. I think he regarded
"hypotheses" as too dependent on dogma and therefore unhealthy
for science. He wanted to move much more slowly, using
experiments to elucidate causation and to discover principles and
"axioms" in gradual steps.>>

I'm not sure it was "hypotheses" he regarded so, but as you say, Dogma,
especially as it was divorced from observation--that "first light."

But what I like most is his treatment of the idols of the mind. I find that so
relevant still.

<<I hope this helps the discussion.>>

Wonderfully so. Thank you for the tone and content of your message.

Jim