SUMMARY OF BOOK I.

THE First Book of the Novum Organum, which was designed to be a sort of introduction to the whole work, is called in the Partis Secundae Delineatio (Ellis and Spedding, vol. iii. p. 552) 'pars praeparans,' in opposition to the 'pars informans,' which was to be comprised in the remaining books. The following brief account of its contents may be of service to the reader. Aphs. 1-31 consist of certain preliminary remarks, chiefly on the futility of the methods of enquiry at present in use and the necessity of a more faithful study of Nature. In Aphs. 32-37, he makes a kind of apology for the introduction of a new method. Aphs. 38-70 contain the doctrine of the Idola, to which Bacon justly attaches the utmost importance. Primo enim mentis area aequanda, et liberanda ab eis quae hactenus recepta sunt.' (Partis Secundae Delineatio, Ellis and Spedding, vol. iii. p. 548.) Then follow the signs, five in number, of the weakness and inutility of preceding philosophies (Aphs. 71–77). These are followed by the causes, fifteen in number, of so long continuance in error (Aphs. 78-92). In the middle of Aphorism 92, he passes on to the Grounds of Hope in the future progress of Science. These are twenty-one, and occupy Aphs. 92-115. The next three Aphorisms contain three cautions or warnings. Aphs. 119-121 contain three apologies. Then follow the answers to four possible objections (Aphs. 122-126). The next Aphorism is of great importance, as vindicating for the application of his method not only the field of natural, but also that of moral and mental science. The remainder of the Book (Aphs. 128–130) consists of certain miscellaneous remarks, forming the transition to Book ii.

APHORISMI

DE INTERPRETATIONE

NATURAE

ET REGNO HOMINIS.

APHORISMUS.

I.

HOMO, naturae minister et interpres, tantum facit et intelligit quantum de naturae ordine re vel mente observaverit: nec amplius scit, aut potest 1.

1 'Man, the servant and interpreter of Nature, does and understands just so much as he has discerned concerning the order of nature by observation or reflection (or by the observation of things or of himself): nor does he know more, or can he do more.'

The precise meaning of the words re vel mente observaverit is not clear. The distinction intended may be either, as I am inclined to think is the case, between the observation of facts and the subsequent process of meditation or reflection on such observation, or between the observation of the external world and that of our own minds, external and internal perception, as they have been called. According to either interpretation, the passage will remind the reader of the main positions in Locke's Essay, to which it might well serve as a motto. Though the precise meaning of the words is obscure, the purport of the Aphorism is plain. Man, if he would learn or do anything, must carefully watch the processes of Nature, must register and interpret her phenomena. This is his only way either to knowledge or power.

The same sentence, with a slight variation, occurs towards the end of the Distributio Operis. Its connection in that place with the preceding and succeeding sentences is worthy of notice. 'Neque enim agitur solum felicitas contemplativa, sed vere res humanae et fortunae, atque omnis operum potentia. Homo enim naturae minister et interpres tantum facit et intelligit, quantum de naturae ordine, opere vel mente, observaverit: nec amplius scit, aut potest. Neque enim ullae vires causarum catenam solvere aut perfringere possint, neque natura aliter quam parendo vincitur.'

II.

Nec manus nuda, nec intellectus sibi permissus, multum valet; instrumentis et auxiliis res perficitur; quibus opus est, non minus ad intellectum, quam ad manum. Atque ut instrumenta manus motum aut cient aut regunt; ita et instrumenta mentis intellectui aut suggerunt aut cavent.

III.

Scientia et potentia humana in idem coincidunt, quia ignoratio causae destituit effectum. Natura enim non nisi parendo vincitur3: et quod in contemplatione instar causae est, id in operatione instar regulae est.

IV.

Ad opera nil aliud potest homo, quam ut corpora naturalia admoveat et amoveat: reliqua natura intus transigit *.

V.

Solent se immiscere naturae (quoad opera 5) mechanicus, mathematicus, medicus, alchemista, et magus; sed omnes (ut nunc sunt res) conatu levi, successu tenui".

2 The same thought is often briefly expressed in English under the form: Knowledge is Power.' It may be remarked that Power always implies Knowledge, but Knowledge does not always give power. To do a thing, we must know how to do it, but there are some departments of knowledge which, however interesting in themselves or valuable as instruments of mental discipline, do not appear to increase our power over Nature.

Bacon seldom loses any opportunity of insisting on the practical applications of science. Professor Playfair truly remarks that the want of connection between the sciences and arts was one of the principal defects which Bacon deplored in the philosophy of his time.

3 We must patiently observe Nature, if we wish to acquire any control over her operations. Our 'rules' are merely copies and adaptations of the 'causes' which we see at work in the external world. The same sentence, slightly altered, is repeated in Aphorism 129. See note on it in that place. * We cannot create; we can only combine or separate bodies already existing. In Art,' says Playfair, 'man does nothing more than bring things nearer to one another, or carry them farther off; the rest is performed by Nature, and on most occasions by means of which we are quite ignorant.'

5 So far as concerns the active or operative part of knowledge, that is to say, Art as distinguished from Science.

6 Mr. Kitchin has the following note: As to the Mechanician, the Mathematician and the Physician, Bacon's remarks were being falsified at

VI.

Insanum quiddam esset, et in se contrarium, existimare ea, quae adhuc nunquam facta sunt, fieri posse, nisi per modos adhuc nunquam tentatos.

VII.

Generationes mentis et manus numerosae admodum videntur in libris et opificiis. Sed omnis ista varietas sita est in subtilitate eximia, et derivationibus paucarum rerum, quae innotuerunt; non in numero axiomatum 7.

the very time he wrote.-Mechanics had produced fly-clocks, telescopes, and other useful contrivances.-Mathematics boasted of Kepler and Galileo; and the discoveries of Harvey and Gilbert were opening out a new world for Medical research. But Bacon could scarcely have discerned all this, and his jealousy' (or, as I should rather say, distrust) 'of his contemporaries (cf. I. 54) would scarcely have allowed him to acknowledge their worth. Besides this he was utterly ignorant of Mathematics (see Hallam, Lit. Eur. vol. II. iii. 3. § 78). Alchemy was certainly thoroughly empirical and faulty; for "at this time Chemistry seemed to have an elective attraction for everything that was absurd and unfounded." (Playfair.) And Magic, which still exerted great influence, was as bad. Sir T. Browne, Rel. Med. i. 31, gives some account of it; which is worth consulting as it gives the views of a physician and contemporary of Bacon. Cf. also De Augm. Sc. iii. 5, and Adv. of Learning, Bk. ii.'

In Aph. 85, Bacon distinguishes between Natural and Superstitious Magic. Natural Magic is treated in the De Augmentis, lib. iii. cap. 5, as supplementary to the Inquisition of Forms, and vindicated, when distinguished from the 'false and ignoble kind,' as a legitimate branch of enquiry. 'Si igitur desiderari eam partem Metaphysicae quae de Formis agit posuimus, sequitur ut Naturalis etiam Magia, quae ad eam est relativa, similiter desideretur. Verum hoc loco postulandum videtur, ut vocabulum istud Magiae, in deteriorem partem jampridem acceptum, antiquo et honorifico sensui restituatur. Etenim Magia apud Persas pro sapientia sublimi, et scientia consensuum rerum universalium, accipiebatur; atque etiam tres illi reges, qui ab Oriente ad Christum adorandum venerunt, Magorum nomine vocabantur. Nos vero eam illo in sensu intelligimus, ut sit scientia quae cognitionem Formarum Abditarum ad opera admiranda deducat; atque, quod dici solet, activa cum passivis conjungendo magnalia naturae manifestet.'

The substance of this Aphorism, greatly expanded, occupies the two first paragraphs of the Cogitata et Visa. These paragraphs are too long to be extracted, but they may be read by the student with advantage. See also Filum Labyrinthi sive Formula Inquisitionis, ad init. (E. and S., vol. iii. pp. 496, 497).

The word Axioma is used by Bacon of any general proposition. In Aphorism 103, Axiomata are contrasted with 'Opera' and 'particularia.'

VIII.

Etiam opera, quae jam inventa sunt, casui debentur et

In Aphorism 104, he speaks of 'axiomata generalissima' ('qualia sunt principia, quae vocant, artium et rerum'), 'axiomata media,' and ‘axiomata minora' or 'infima.' Of the last he says, 'Etenim axiomata infima non multum ab experientia nuda discrepant.'

In the works of Aristotle, the word ȧğiwμa, even when confined to its logical sense, is employed in no less than three significations. Sometimes it is used for any proposition whatever, as, for instance, in Topics, ix. or Soph. El., 24 (ed. Bekker, p. 179 b. 12-15): αὕτη δ ̓ οὐκ ἔσται, ἄν τις μὴ ἐπὶ τοῦ εἰδέναι ἀλλ ̓ ἐπὶ τοῦ εἶναι ἢ πῶς ἔχειν τὸ αὐτὸ ἀξίωμα λαμβάνῃ, οἷον εἰ ὅδε éσTì Taτηp, čσTɩ dè σós. Cp. Topics, viii. 1 (p. 156 a. 23), viii. 3 (p. 159 a. 4, 5). Secondly, Aristotle shews that he is aware of the signification in which the term was employed by mathematicians, who then, as now, designated the first principles of their science as 'axioms.' AEKтéov dè tótepov μιᾶς ἢ ἑτέρας ἐπιστήμης περί τε τῶν ἐν τοῖς μαθήμασι καλουμένων ἀξιωμάτων καὶ Teρì Tĥs ovσías. Metaphysics, iii. 3 (1005 a. 19–21). Lastly, he employs the term in a peculiarly technical sense of his own, to designate those ultimate principles or postulates which are necessary not to the knowledge of this or that particular science but to any knowledge whatsoever. In this sense, ağıμara are contrasted with Oéreis, the first principles of this or that particular science. ̓Αμέσου δ ̓ ἀρχῆς συλλογιστικῆς θέσιν μὲν λέγω ἣν μὴ ἔστι δεῖξαι, μηδ ̓ ἀνάγκη ἔχειν τὸν μαθησόμενόν τι ἣν δ ̓ ἀνάγκη ἔχειν τὸν ὁτιοῦν μαθησόμενον, ἀξίωμα· ἔστι γὰρ ἔνια τοιαῦτα· τοῦτο γὰρ μάλιστ ̓ ἐπὶ τοῖς TOLOÚTOLS εióbaμev ovoμa λéyew. An. Post. i. 2 (p. 72 a. 14-18). Cp. i. 10. As an example of 'Axioms' in this sense may be adduced the 'Law of Contradiction,' which Aristotle describes (Metaphysics, iii. 3, p. 1025 b. 33, 34) as φύσει ἀρχὴ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἀξιωμάτων πάντων.

Some logicians, especially those of the school of Ramus, use the word Axioma as the equivalent of Propositio or Judicium. Thus Milton (Ars Logica, lib. ii. cap. 2) defines and defends this use of the word as follows: 'Axioma est dispositio argumenti cum argumento', qua esse aliquid aut non esse indicatur. Axioma saepe Aristoteli significat propositionem sive sententiam ita claram, ut quasi digna sit cui propter se fides habeatur. Alias axioma et propositionem sive sententiam quamlibet pro eodem is habet: et recte quidem: ut enim sententia a sentio, i. e. existimo vel arbitror, ita axioma a verbo Graeco quod idem significat, derivatur. Atque hujus vocis generalem hanc significationem apud veteres Dialecticos receptam fuisse, ex Cicerone, Plutarcho, Laertio, Gellio, Galeno lib. xvi. c. 8 etc. constat.' Cicero, following the Stoics, appears invariably to use the word in this 'Nempe fundamentum dialecticae est, quidquid enuntietur (id autem appellant aέiwua, quod est quasi effatum) aut verum esse aut falsum.' Acad. II. 29. 'Omne pronuntiatum (sic enim mihi in praesentia occurrit, ut appellarem ȧğiwua; utar post alio, si invenero melius) id ergo est pronuntiatum, quod est verum aut falsum.' Tusc. i. 7. Bacon's usage of

sense.

1 'Argumentum autem cum argumento est id quod arguit cum eo quod arguitur.'