The New Organon: Historical & Philosophical Context for The New Organon

Previous Next

Francis 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 17th and 18th 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 19th 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.

Previous section About Francis Bacon Next section Suggested Essay Topics