Changes

Text taken from [http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/hst/european/CriticalandHistoricalEssaysVolume2/chap27.html "Francis Bacon, part VII"] from "Critical and Historical Essays", Volume 2, by Thomas B. Macaulay.

Text taken from [http://www.worldwideschool.org/library/books/hst/european/CriticalandHistoricalEssaysVolume2/chap27.html "Francis Bacon, part VII"] from "Critical and Historical Essays", Volume 2, by Thomas B. Macaulay.

The vulgar notion about Bacon we take to be this, that he invented a new method of arriving at truth, which method is called Induction, and that he detected some fallacy in the syllogistic reasoning which had been in vogue before his time. This notion is about as well founded as that of the people who, in the middle ages, imagined that Virgil was a great conjurer. Many who are far too well-informed to talk such extravagant nonsense entertain what we think incorrect notions as to what Bacon really effected in this matter.

The vulgar notion about Bacon we take to be this, that he invented a new method of arriving at truth, which method is called Induction, and that he detected some fallacy in the syllogistic reasoning which had been in vogue before his time. This notion is about as well founded as that of the people who, in the middle ages, imagined that Virgil was a great conjurer. Many who are far too well-informed to talk such extravagant nonsense entertain what we think incorrect notions as to what Bacon really effected in this matter.

Not only is it not true that Bacon invented the inductive method; but it is not true that he was the first person who correctly analysed that method and explained its uses. Aristotle had long before pointed out the absurdity of supposing that syllogistic reasoning could ever conduct men to the discovery of any new principle, had shown that such discoveries must be made by induction, and by induction alone, and had given the history of the inductive process, concisely indeed, but with great perspicuity and precision.

Not only is it not true that Bacon invented the inductive method; but it is not true that he was the first person who correctly analysed that method and explained its uses. Aristotle had long before pointed out the absurdity of supposing that syllogistic reasoning could ever conduct men to the discovery of any new principle, had shown that such discoveries must be made by induction, and by induction alone, and had given the history of the inductive process, concisely indeed, but with great perspicuity and precision.

Again, we are not inclined to ascribe much practical value to that analysis of the inductive method which Bacon has given, in the second book of the Novum Organum. It is indeed an elaborate and correct analysis. But it is an analysis of that which we are all doing from morning to night, and which we continue to do even in our dreams. A plain man finds his stomach out of order. He never heard Lord Bacon's name. But he proceeds in the strictest conformity with the rules laid down in the second book of the Novum Organum, and satisfies himself that minced pies have done the mischief. "I ate minced pies on Monday and Wednesday, and I was kept awake by indigestion all night." This is the ''comparentia ad intellectum instantiarum convenientium''. "I did not eat any on Tuesday and Friday, and I was quite well." This is the ''comparentia instantiarum in proximo quae natura data privantur''. "I ate very sparingly of them on Sunday, and was very slightly indisposed in the evening. But on Christmas-day I almost dined on them, and was so ill that I was in great danger." This is the ''comparentia instantiarum secundum magis et minus''. "It cannot have been the brandy which I took with them. For I have drunk brandy daily for years without being the worse for it." This is the ''rejectio naturarum''. Our invalid then proceeds to what is termed by Bacon the ''Vindemiatio'', and pronounces that minced pies do not agree with him.

Again, we are not inclined to ascribe much practical value to that analysis of the inductive method which Bacon has given, in the second book of the Novum Organum. It is indeed an elaborate and correct analysis. But it is an analysis of that which we are all doing from morning to night, and which we continue to do even in our dreams. A plain man finds his stomach out of order. He never heard Lord Bacon's name. But he proceeds in the strictest conformity with the rules laid down in the second book of the Novum Organum, and satisfies himself that minced pies have done the mischief. "I ate minced pies on Monday and Wednesday, and I was kept awake by indigestion all night." This is the ''comparentia ad intellectum instantiarum convenientium''. "I did not eat any on Tuesday and Friday, and I was quite well." This is the ''comparentia instantiarum in proximo quae natura data privantur''. "I ate very sparingly of them on Sunday, and was very slightly indisposed in the evening. But on Christmas-day I almost dined on them, and was so ill that I was in great danger." This is the ''comparentia instantiarum secundum magis et minus''. "It cannot have been the brandy which I took with them. For I have drunk brandy daily for years without being the worse for it." This is the ''rejectio naturarum''. Our invalid then proceeds to what is termed by Bacon the ''Vindemiatio'', and pronounces that minced pies do not agree with him.