2.3 Francis Bacon & The Birth of Scientism
He Wasn't the Father of Science, But Rather, the Father of Scientism
Our discussion of medieval science takes us to a particularly fascinating transition character. Elizabethan England was the period in which both the modern British Empire and the modern vision of science emerged. Elizabeth I (1533–1603), the last surviving daughter of Henry VIII (1509–1547), ruled from 1558 until her death. She came to power in a time of turmoil. Her father, Henry VIII, confiscated church property during the “Dissolution of the Monasteries” (1536–1541), broke with Rome, and established himself as head of the Church of England. Henry VIII’s nine-year old son became Edward VI (1537–1553), ruling from 1547 until his death at age 15. Mary I (1516–1558) ruled from 1553. Her attempts to restore Catholicism and plans to marry a foreign suitor faced opposition. The Protestant “Færie Queene,” Elizabeth, succeeded Mary I upon her death in 1558 [[ii]].
Francis Bacon (1561–1626), “Lord Verulam,” was one of the most mysterious and intriguing figures of the period. Reputed to be the secret son of Elizabeth I, a potential author of Shakespeare’s plays, and a founding father of Freemasonry and Rosicrucianism, [[iii], [iv], [v], [vi]], even the publicly acknowledged and accepted facts of his life make for an extraordinary tale. Figure 2.10 presents Bacon.
Bacon was a lawyer and high officer of state, serving as Solicitor General, Attorney General, and ultimately as Lord Chancellor of England. He is best known, however, as a philosopher and proponent of science and the scientific method [[vii]].
Bacon dismissed Aristotle, saying “Aristotle… made his natural philosophy completely subservient to his logic, and thus rendered it little more than useless and disputatious” [[viii]]. Bacon disdained syllogism. “Our only hope then, is in genuine induction.” While advocating for induction and experimentation, Bacon condemned his contemporaries who used those methods to make novel discoveries. William Gilbert (1544–1603), Court Physician to Elizabeth I and later James I, made many marvelous discoveries of the fundamental properties of magnets (to be addressed Chapter 4). Yet Bacon showed disdain for those who “waste all their time on probing some solitary matter, as Gilbert on the magnet” [[ix]].
Bacon did identify certain “Idols of the Mind” or cognitive biases that hinder correct thinking [[x]]:
Idols of the Tribe: natural innate biases common to human nature,
Idols of the Den: biases unique to an individual due to their personal experience or upbringing,
Idols of the Marketplace: biases that arise through human intercourse, particularly through misuse of language, and
Idols of the Theater: biases acquired culturally through widespread belief in erroneous philosophical systems.
While Bacon is correct that these “idols” are all cognitive biases best avoided, his list is not notably superior to Roger Bacon’s “four grounds” of human ignorance [[xi]]:
Trust in inadequate authority,
The force of custom which leads men to accept too unquestioningly what has been accepted before their time,
The placing of confidence in the opinion of the inexperienced, and
The hiding of one’s own ignorance with the parade of a superficial wisdom.
It is difficult to see what was particularly novel in Bacon’s proposed experimental approach to science that had not already been proposed in part or in whole centuries earlier by Robert Grosseteste and Roger Bacon. Whewell noted, “…many of the expressions of the Franciscan friar remind us of the large thoughts and lofty phrases of the philosophical chancellor” [[xii]].
As Clifford Truesdell (1919–2000), noted mathematician, natural philosopher, and historian of science observed, “The standard histories of science adulate [Francis] Bacon for his having been the first to recommend a now sanctified method of scientific inquiry, though he himself discovered nothing of importance either with it or without it” [[xiv]]. William Harvey (1578–1657) said that Francis Bacon “writes Philosophy like a Lord Chancellour” [[xv]]. Figure 2.11 shows the pioneering doctor who not only first described the circulation of blood but also served as Bacon’s own personal physician. “The popular belief that Francis Bacon was the founder of modern science is so flagrantly in contradiction with all the facts of the history of science and so patently belied by the contents of Bacon’s ‘Sylva Sylvarum’ or the second book of his ‘Novum Organum’ that it is most instructive to inquire how such an absurd belief ever gained currency among educated people” [[xvi]].
Even centuries later, Bacon’s vision for science continued inspiring scholars, however. As William Whewell declared in the preface to his 1837 History of the Inductive Sciences, “…the Great Reform of Philosophy and Method, in which Bacon so eloquently called upon men to unite their exertions in his day, has, even in ours, been very imperfectly carried into effect” [[xvii]].
Although his status may have waned in the past century, he was until recently considered among the most profound thinkers. “From 1661 to 1831 the majority of the European thinkers and practically all those who were interested in natural science considered Bacon the father of the experimental method… They considered him the profoundest thinker of all ages except for Newton” [[xviii]]. And even today, transhumanists like Peter Thiel still cite Bacon as an inspiration [[xix], [xx]].
What was Bacon’s vision, and why was he so idolized? From the Novum Organon:
Further it will not be amiss to distinguish the three kinds and as it were grades of ambition in mankind. The first is of those who desire to extend their own power in their native country; which kind is vulgar and degenerate. The second is of those who labour to extend the power of their country and its dominion among men. This certainly has more dignity, though not less covetousness. But if a man endeavours to establish and extend the power and dominion of the human race itself over the Universe his ambition (if ambition it can be called) is without doubt a both more wholesome thing and a more noble than the other two. Now the empire of man over things is founded on the arts and sciences alone, for nature is only to be commanded by obeying her [[xxi]].
To “establish and extend the power and dominion of the human race itself over the universe.” Bacon was not so much the Father of Science as he was the Father of Scientism. His appeal arose from his vision of science as a means to power including such benefits as life extension and recovery of youth. And how was Bacon’s vision to be accomplished? To answer that question, we can examine a short (only about 46 pages) work of utopian fiction first published posthumously in 1626, The New Atlantis.
Bacon’s novella follows a party of travelers cast ashore on the mythical island of Bensalem whose superior civilization holds science and scientists in high regard. A centuries-old independent institution, “Salomon’s House,” “the noblest foundation… that ever was upon the earth,” employs the wise men of the island “dedicated to the study of the works and creatures of God” [[xxii]].
“The end of our foundation is the knowledge of causes, and secret motions of things; and the enlarging of the bounds of human empire, to the effecting of all things possible,” the Father of Salomon’s House explains to his visitors. To this end, Salomon’s House provides a wide range of facilities, including large and deep caves, high towers, lakes, wells, fountains, baths, orchards, gardens, brew houses, bake-houses, kitchens, furnaces, mines, perfume houses, engine houses, and more.
The scholars are collectively organized in an elaborate division of labor: those who sail to foreign countries to acquire their knowledge, those who collect experiments from books, those who think up new experiments, those who perform the new experiments, those who organize experimental data, those who analyze data, those who review the data and suggest new experiments, those who perform the new experiments, those who induce new axioms from the results, and a wide range of novices, apprentices, servants, and attendants. Each step of Bacon’s inductive process has its own caste of dedicated practitioners. All are bound by “an oath of secrecy, for the concealing of those which we think fit to keep secret: though some of those we do reveal sometimes to the state and some not.” Their peers honor successful discovery. “[U]pon every invention of value, we erect a statue to the inventor, and give him liberal and honorable reward.”
Finally, “…we have circuits or visits of divers principal cities of the kingdom; where, as it cometh to pass, we do publish such new profitable inventions as we think good. And we do also declare natural divinations of diseases, plagues, swarms of hurtful creatures, scarcity, tempests, earthquakes, great inundations, comets, temperature of the year, and divers other things; and we give counsel thereupon what the people shall do for the prevention and remedy of them.”
Step aside “Philosopher Kings.” Make room for the “Scientist Kings” whose superior wisdom makes them best able to guide the affairs of lesser mortals. Bacon’s vision of an autonomous scholarly institution reminiscent of a modern research university beguiled generations of scholars and technologists, aligning with their aspirations for independence, prestige, influence, and status.
“Indeed, this plan, never realised during Bacon’s lifetime, marked the birth of scientific humanism for the founders of the Royal Society and later for the Encyclopedists; and through humanism it has inspired some of the more progressive forms of European culture” [[xxiv]]. Within months of Charles II (1630–1685) reclaiming the throne in 1660, a dozen prominent nobles and scholars founded The Royal Society, one of the earliest research organizations, and Francis Bacon’s vision was an inspiration [[xxv]].
Writing in his 1667 History of the Royal Society, Thomas Sprat declared, “I shall onely mention one great Man, who had the true Imagination of the whole extent of this Enterprize, as it is now set on foot ; and that is, the Lord Bacon…” [[xxvi]]. Figure 2.12 shows the frontispiece of Sprat’s 1667 History. The frontispiece features a bust of Charles II with Royal Society President Viscount William Brouncker (1620–1684) on the right side and Bacon on the left. The illustration also abounds with masonic imagery: the checkerboard floor, the multiple squares and compasses prominently at odd angles amid the scientific instruments, and the arrangement of the figures with Charles II centered in the traditional position of the Grand Master in the East with the rising sun behind him, Brouckner to his left in the seat of the Working Master, and Bacon to the right in the seat of the immediate Past Master [[xxvii]]. Recall that the existence of Freemasonry was not publicly disclosed until St. John’s Day, June 24, 1717 [[xxviii]].
Bacon’s influence echoes today amid the modern cults of scientism and transhumanism. In his 1971 essay, “The New Universal Church,” the brilliant French mathematician Alexander Grothendieck (1928–2014) explained the tenets of scientism [[xxix]]. Scientific knowledge is whatever can be expressed in quantitative terms, or can be repeated under laboratory conditions, and, for believers, only scientific knowledge is true or real knowledge. Scientism holds a “mechanistic” or “formalistic” or “analytic” view of nature. The logical corollary of scientism is technocracy: the experts alone are qualified to make decisions, as only the experts know best what to do. And science & technology alone can solve mankind’s problems.
Utopian – or dystopian – literature all too often appears ambiguous about whether it serves as a warning or as a roadmap. Bacon’s New Atlantis takes its proper place beside more modern stories like Huxley’s Brave New World or Orwell’s 1984. When we consider where physics went wrong, we will do well to take a closer look at Bacon and his influence.
If you would like to learn more about the emerging scholarship and clues to Francis Bacon’s hidden life, check out Robert Frederick’s The Hidden Life is Best website and podcast.
For now, however, let’s continue with a contemporaneous revolution in science disdained by Bacon, the Copernican Revolution, next time on the Fields & Energy Substack.
Follow Online:
You may follow me online in other places as well:
Telegram: 𝔸𝕖𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕣𝕔𝕫𝕒𝕣'𝕤 𝔸𝕖𝕥𝕙𝕖𝕣𝕤𝕥𝕣𝕖𝕒𝕞
Gab: @aetherczar
Twitter: @aetherczar
Amazon: Hans G. Schantz
References
[i] Somer, Paul van, Portrait of Francis Bacon, 1619. See: https://infogalactic.com/info/File:Somer_Francis_Bacon.jpg
[ii] Traill, H.D., and J.S. Mann, The Building of Britain and the Empire: Illustrated Edition Vol. III, From the Ascension of Henry the Eighth to the Death of Elizabeth, Waverly Book Company, 1909.
[iii] Phoenix, A., “The Secret Life and Writings of Francis Bacon in 39 Shakespeare Poems and Plays,” October 2023. See: https://www.academia.edu/attachments/106928484/download_file?s=portfolio
[iv] Phoenix, A., “The Pregnancy Portrait of Queen Elizabeth I and The Secret Royal Birth of Francis Bacon, Concealed Author of the Shakespeare Works,” See: https://www.academia.edu/attachments/65551317/download_file?s=portfolio
[v] Many more such scholarly speculations may be found at https://sirbacon.org/.
[vi] Michell, John, Who Wrote Shakespeare? London: Thames & Hudson, 1996, p. 243. See: https://amzn.to/4apNEty.
“Thirteen authors name thirty-seven different people as contributors to Shakespeare…”
“It is difficult to exclude Bacon from any Group theory [of Shakespeare authorship]… if there was a conspiracy behind it, Bacon would have been involved and probably controlled it.”
“The only honest answer that can be given to someone who wants to know who wrote Shakespeare is that it is a perfect mystery, dangerously addictive, but very worthwhile looking into.” Ibid., p. 261.
[vii] Cajori, Florian, “The Baconian Method of Scientific Research,” The Scientific Monthly, Vol. 20, No. 1, Jan., 1925, pp. 85-91. See: https://www.jstor.org/stable/7205
[viii] Bacon, Francis, Novum Organum, New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1920, p. 29. Originally published 1620.
[ix] Bacon, Francis, Novum Organum, New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1920, p. 45. Originally published 1620.
[x] Bacon, Francis, Novum Organum, New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1920, p. 19-22. Originally published 1620.
[xi] Walsh, James J., The Thirteenth Greatest of Centuries, New York: Catholic Summer School Press:: 1913, p. 41. See: https://amzn.to/44ESmja
[xii] Whewell, William, History of the Inductive Sciences, From the Earliest to the Present Time, 3rd ed. vol. 1 of 3, London: John W. Parker and Son, West Strand, 1857, p. 342. See: https://amzn.to/3NuZx7u.
[xiii] William Harvey demonstrating his theory of circulation of blood before Charles I. Oil painting by Ernest Board. Wellcome Collection. Source: Wellcome Collection.
[xiv] Truesdell, Clifford, Essays in the History of Mechanics, (New York: Springer-Verlag, 1968) p. 80.
[xv] Walshe, Sir Francis, “William Harvey upon Lord Chancellor Bacon: Being a Text for Some Reflections upon Critical Thinking and Writing in Medicine and the Medical Sciences,” Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, Johns Hopkins University Press, Volume 2, Number 2, Winter 1959, pp. 197-207, doi: 10.1353/pbm.1959.0007. See: https://muse.jhu.edu/article/405633/summary
[xvi] Cohen, Morris R., “The Myth about Bacon and the Inductive Method,” The Scientific Monthly, Vol. 23, No. 6, Dec. 1926, pp. 504-508. See: https://www.jstor.org/stable/7669
[xvii] Whewell, William, History of the Inductive Sciences, From the Earliest to the Present Time, 3rd ed. vol. 1 of 3, London: John W. Parker and Son, West Strand, 1857, p. vii. See: https://amzn.to/3NuZx7u.
[xviii] Agassi, Joseph, The Very Idea of Modern Science: Francis Bacon and Robert Boyle, New York: Springer, 2013, p. 3. See: https://amzn.to/4akCZQF.
[xix] Thiel, Peter with Blake Masters, Zero to One: Notes on Startups or How to Build the Future, New York: Crown Business, 2014, p. 74.
“…Francis Bacon wrote that ‘the prolongation of life’ should be considered its own branch of medicine – and the noblest. In the 1660’s Robert Boyle placed life extension (along with ‘the Recovery of Youth’) atop his famous wish…”
[xx] Liebeskind, Louise, “If Scientists Were Angels,” The New Atlantis, see: https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/if-scientists-were-angels.
“If the point of philosophy is to change the world,” Peter Thiel posits, “Sir Francis Bacon may be the most successful philosopher ever.”
[xxi] Bacon, Francis, Novum Organum, New York: P.F. Collier & Son, 1920, pp. 105-106. Originally published 1620. See: https://archive.org/details/novumorganonren01whewgoog
[xxii] Bacon, Francis, The New Atlantis, London: J. Crooke, 1660, p. 4.
[xxiii] Francis Bacon and William Brouncker flanking a bust of King Charles II set on a pedestal, surrounded by symbols of scientific learning representing the Royal Society. Etching by W. Hollar, 1667, after J. Evelyn. Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). Source: Wellcome Collection. See: https://wellcomecollection.org/works/a4n7r9v4/items
[xxiv] Rossi, Paolo, Francis Bacon: from magic to science, London: Routledge & K.Paul, 1968, p. 25. See: https://archive.org/details/francisbaconfrom0000ross
[xxv] Rossi, Paolo, Francis Bacon: from magic to science, London: Routledge & K.Paul, 1968, p. xiiii.
[xxvi] Sprat, Thomas, The history of the Royal Society of London, for the Improving of Natural Knowledge, London: T.R., 1667, p. 35.
[xxvii] Lomas, Robert, Freemasonry and the Birth of Modern Science, New York: Barnes & Nobel Books, 2002, pp. 72-74. See: https://amzn.to/46XHRbv.
[xxviii] Lomas, Robert, Freemasonry and the Birth of Modern Science, New York: Barnes & Nobel Books, 2002, pp. 309-315. See: https://amzn.to/46XHRbv.
[xxix] Grothendieck, Alexander, The New Universal Church, 1971. Editorial from Survivre et Vivre no. 9, pp. 1-8, translated by John Bell. See: https://publish.uwo.ca/~jbell/univ.pdf.
Some interesting alternate views on Francis Bacon that I'm putting here for future reference:
https://www.thesavvystreet.com/before-ayn-rand-there-was-the-contribution-of-sir-francis-bacon/
'Bacon, the founder of modern science' is a joke, and a bad one at that, that one can still find in the textbooks. In fact Bacon understood nothing about science. He was credulous and completely uncritical. His manner of thinking was closer to alchemy and magic (he believed in 'sympathies'), in short to that of a primitive or to a thinker of the Renaissance than to that of a Galileo or even a Scholastic.
Alexandre Koyré, Galileo Studies, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1978, p.39, n.6.