>For those who recall the thread, I did not take any Bacon passages "out of
>context," but read deeply in the Novum Organum and posted relevant passages,
>citing the full sections.
In the paragraph above, after the word, "but" is an adequate definition of
"out of context." Any high schooler can take a text and find passages with
words that support the point she wants to make. "Out of context" does not
refer to whether a passage is short or long. Quoting even full sections
from a historical work like the Novum in a current discussion is using the
passages out of context. To provide the context, a scholar will look to
more than a single text from the relevant author. This sort of systematic
scholarship will ask several questions, such as: Did the author's viewpoint
change after he wrote what is quoted? Can the origin of the author's
thoughts on the topic be followed and are they consistent and logical (see
quote below from Will Durant)?. How were his thoughts received--i.e., was
the quoted section simply dismissed out of hand by the author's peers and
the line of thought subsequently dropped by the author? What was the
historical context in which the thought came to be? Has the thought had any
impact on the way that we think today? And so on.
That I happened to find passages that contradicted
>Steve on specific point was the result of my work in the primary source. I did
>not RELY on Durant, nor make him my PRIMARY SOURCE...I was only happy to find
>out LATER that he had written almost identical thoughts about Bacon that I had
>expressed. It was a sweet vindication.
>
>Why? Because if we had believed Prof. Clark, we would have thought no one with
>half a brain could possibly read Bacon in such a fashion. But finding the
>Durant passage proved Steve wrong. And as between Clark and Durant, I am more
>than happy to be listed on the side of Durant. In the comparison of
>credentials, reputation and standing, this is no contest for me.
It is really not necessary that you believe me. That is why I posted
several references. I also qualified my response here as being brief rather
than point-by-point, which was turning into a major project. If you want
the primary sources for the Baconian Compromise, I invite you to check the
sources I cited and then go back to Bacon's writings to see if the authors
of these "secondary sources" accurately reflect Bacon's position. This
would be much more productive than the grousing.
Basically, a systematic study will not stop once the scholar runs across
some passage that supports his preconceived position. This simply
represents selective quoting. Steve Jones is particularly fond of selective
quoting and it gets tiresome.
>And speaking of primary sources, I don't recall Steve ever posting anything
>from the Novum Organum to refute what I alleged. In fact, he refers only to
>secondary sources. Yet, after I have studied and cited Bacon, he castigates ME
>for referring to a portion of Durant that corroborates my interpretation.
Scholarship is more than finding contrary quotes from the same text.
Basically, Jim's reply is a criticism of me and never addresses my point
about the Baconian Compromise.
BTW, Durant concluded this about Bacon:
"Even a lover of the Baconian spirit must concede, too, that the great
chancellor, while laying down the law for science, failed to keep abreast of
the science of his time. He rejected Copernicus and ignored Kepler and
Tycho Brahe; he deprecated Gilbert and seemed unaware of Harvey. In truth,
he loved discourse better than research...Such work as he did in philosophy
and science was left in fragments and chaos at his death; full of
repetitions, contradictions, aspirations, and introductions."
So, given Bacon's overly ambitious desire to repeat the breadth of
Aristotle's impact on philosophy, Durant believed that Bacon came up short.
He tried to do too much. This problem with Bacon's philosophy illustrates
why it is not sufficient to simply find agreeable passages to quote from a
single text when trying to present a relevant argument in a scholarly
debate. Could the passages quoted represent some of the contradictions that
Durant mentioned above?
Steve
____________________________________________________________
Steven S. Clark, Ph.D . Phone: 608/263-9137
Associate Professor FAX: 608/263-4226
Dept. of Human Oncology and Email: ssclark@facstaff.wisc.edu
UW Comprehensive Cancer Center
CSC K4-432
600 Highland Ave.
Madison, WI 53792
____________________________________________________________