It is sometimes difficult to determine Bacon's ultimate goal in New Organon, to ascertain whether he is interested in utility or in understanding nature. Bacon criticizes ancient philosophy for studying “things which, even if true, can do but little for the welfare of mankind” (§66). Yet he also admonishes the chemists for turning “aside with overhasty and unseasonable eagerness to practice” instead of continuing to pursue disinterested “experiments of Light” that yield no Fruit (§70).
If we are to properly understand The New Organon, we must for the moment turn away from its specific content and quotations and instead focus on its broader, functional form. I propose that we understand The New Organon as a rhetorical appeal, a textual “infomercial” designed to “sell” Bacon's new inductive logic. The second part, then, is a demonstration of Bacon's product. Yet, like any good late-night As-Seen-On-TV commercial, Bacon begins his appeal by demonstrating that there is a problem, a problem which his product will solve most elegantly.
Bacon most clearly makes this kind of appeal in §85, when he states that instead of feeling pride and admiration for the impressive works of man already produced, we should instead “pity the condition of mankind, seeing that in a course of so many ages there has been so great a dearth and barrenness of arts and inventions.” Bacon is trying to convince us that there is a problem that needs solving, and in order to do so, he has to appeal to the utility of his method's practical uses.
Some philosophers of saintly intellectual integrity may be convinced by strict, logical appeals, but Bacon is well aware that the rest of us may need convincing by other means. Thus, whatever Bacon himself feels about truth, Bacon is forced to ground most of his arguments on utility in order to sell his new inductive method.
In fact, one could argue that Bacon himself actually does favor truth to utility. For example, the famous distinction between “experiments of Light” and “experiments of Fruit” in §70 is a rhetorical appeal to utility meant to convince would-be scientists to focus on the proper understanding and interpretation of nature rather than on practical works. In other words, Bacon grounds his arguments by appeal to utility in order to “sell” us the truth.
There does seem to be a close connection in Bacon between utility and truth.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting way to think about what Bacon is doing with The New Organon. You made the leap I failed to do with my post; Bacon is using utility as an attention-getter for all the soon-to-be scientists. He is honest about that intention; The New Organon is, after all, supposed to supply new guidance and hope for the sciences. Bacon assumes that the promise of works (or utility) is a tantalizing prospect for new sceintists, and I would be hard pressed to disagree.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Mr. Lefavor. It is difficult to determine Bacon's goal between the aphorisms. However, I hesitate to say that he prefers truth to utility. He does say in aphorism 81 that the goal of science is for human life to be endowed with new discoveries and powers. As for the distinction between the experiments of fruit and those of light, it seems that Bacon believes that these "would-be scientists" are too focused on utility rather than truth and hence, they will never reach the goal of utility. That is, if they were to focus on truth, they may, since having the correct focus they may reach truth, be able to reach utility. When read in this way, it seems that Bacon only cares to focus on truth as the proper means to reach utility.
ReplyDeleteTo further Mr. Smith's point:
ReplyDelete70 reads: "For axioms rightly discovered and established supply practice with its instruments"
Axioms (discovered by experiments of light) are *instruments* for practice, not ends in themselves.
Mr. Lefavor may still be on to something.
This is all true. My main point was to argue that it was a possibility that Bacon favored truth to utility, though I think the evidence generally indicates that the opposite is the case.
ReplyDeleteAll that notwithstanding, I don't think Bacon really has to decide. There does not seem to be such a thing as utility that has no basis in truth. Whether there exists truth that has no utility, however, is debatable. But I think Bacon would be comfortable with the idea that there is no useless truth.
The reading for today illustrates best the point I made in my comment:
ReplyDelete§I.124: The former [abstract truths, the knowledge-for-its-own-sake of all previous philosophy] are nothing more than arbitrary abstractions. The latter are the Creator's own stamp upon creation, impressed and defined in matter by true and exquisite lines. Truth, therefore, and utility are here the very same things. And works themselves are of greater value as pledges of truth than as contributing to the comforts of life."
For Bacon, truth and utility are identical, so perhaps the discussion of which he prefers is misguided.