# data[].attributes.body
The beginning of biological robots

# data[].attributes.body
Scientists killed for their beliefs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The relationship between scientific inquiry and Catholic orthodoxy is hotly disputed in the contemporary world. The Catholic position affirms that there can be no true disharmony between scientific and religious truth, since all truth comes from the one God. There is no true hostility between religion and science, properly understood. On the other hand, others say that Catholic orthodoxy is intrinsically hostile to scientific inquiry, and that fidelity to the Catholicism actually necessitates the repression of scientific truth. This brings us to the myth of the Catholic Church's repression of scientific activities, specifically with regard to the Church's alleged persecution of scientists merely for their scientific theories. In this essay, we will study the lives of ten scientists who somehow came into conflict with the Church. We will examine the circumstances of their condemnations and see if the accusation that the Church punished people for their scientific beliefs actually holds up.

1. Hypatia

Hypatia was a pagan philosopher in late 4th century Alexandria. She appears to have been a lecturer in Platonic thought, a practicing scientist, and the author of several mathematical treatises. She was killed by a Christian mob in the year 415.

Myth: In an age when a male-dominated Christian clergy was working to suppress independent thought, Hypatia served as a walking repudiation of clerical power. As an important scientist, a pagan - and most annoyingly, a female - Hypatia's very existence was a threat to the social order imposed by the ignorant Christian clergy of the day. While speaking publicly in favor of religious toleration, she was seized by an angry Christian mob and murdered, with the enthusiastic support of the local Christian bishop, who found it intolerable that Christians should be lectured by a scientist and a woman.: Hypatia's death was political. In 415, the city of Alexandria was in tumult due to a row between Orestes, the Roman governor, and St. Cyril of Alexandria, the city's bishop. Orestes coveted the growing power of the Christian bishop and sought to undermine St. Cyril's authority by instigating the city's sizable Jewish population to violence against the Christians. After a violent night-time slaughter of Christians at Jewish hands, Cyril struck back by securing the exile of many of Alexandria's Jews, many of them wealthy patrons of the governor. Orestes tried to employ the noted pagan philosopher Hypatia to try to negotiate peace with St. Cyril. Hypatia was not an enemy of Christianity; on the contrary, she was respected by the Christian intellectual circles of the day. She maintained a correspondence with Bishop Synesius of Cyrene, with whom she discussed scientific theories, and she was well respected by the Church historian Socrates Scholasticus. The local Christian populace, however, was suspicious of her intervention because she was a pagan and Orestes had proven untrustworthy in the past. Fearing another ambush was being planned, as had occurred at the hands of the Jews, they apprehended Hypatia and killed her. The historian Socrates, who was a contemporary of the events, stated that the cause of her death was political, that she was a "victim to the political jealousy which at the time prevailed". [1] At any rate, she was not killed for being a scientist, much less a woman. Other persons had been similarly killed in the same conflict for similar reasons who were neither scientists nor female.

Furthermore, the Church did not instigate nor celebrate her death. St. Cyril denounced the ruthless murder of Hypatia, and Socrates, the Catholic historian of the era, wrote, "Surely nothing can be farther from the spirit of Christianity than the allowance of massacres, fights, and transactions of that sort." [2]

2. Roger Bacon

Roger Bacon (1220-1292) was an English philosopher and Franciscan friar who is was a talented natural scientist and is considered one of the pioneers of the "scientific method" and was noted for his use of empirical observation. His greatest work was the Opus Major, which contains treatments of mathematics, optics, alchemy, and astronomy, including theories on the positions and sizes of the celestial bodies. Bacon appears to have been imprisoned by the ecclesiastical authorities sometime around 1279 and may have died in captivity.: Bacon was one of the great freethinkers of the Middle Ages. Criticizing everything from Scholasticism to the Julian Calendar to the acceptance of Catholic doctrine on the authority of the Church and Tradition, Bacon aroused the ire of the ecclesiastical regime. He was imprisoned in 1279 for being too original a thinker and spent the rest of his life forcibly confined in a Franciscan monastery under the orders of Franciscan Minister-General Jerome of Ascoli, where he eventually died in captivity, a medieval martyr to free thought.

History: Details on Bacon's life are thin, but he was certainly not persecuted for his scientific ideas. Roger Bacon was a friend of Pope Clement IV. He sent the pope a copy of his Opus Major, which the pope received joyfully. Clement IV also received copies of Bacon's scientific treatises Opus Minus, De Multiplicatione Specierum , and De Speculis Comburentibus , as well as an optical lens Bacon had been working on. None of these works were censured by the pope or any other clerical authority. Bacon did get in trouble in 1277, not for his scientific theories, but because he had slandered other professors and monks in his 1271 Compendium Studii Philosophiae. This alone might not have been sufficient to put him in danger, but he had also aligned himself with the radical Franciscan Fraticelli in the debate between the Spirituals and the Conventuals. The Minister-General of the Order, Jerome of Ascoli, thus used the opportunity to crack down on a trouble-maker within the order. He also had a reputation as loose cannon theologically because of his promotion of certain wild prophecies then floating around in relation to the Spiritual-Conventual debate, as well as his preference for deterministic astrology. Most historians reject the idea that Bacon was persecuted for any scientific theory. [3] Records of his captivity only note he was imprisoned for "suspected novelties."

However, it is uncertain that Bacon ever was actually imprisoned. The first reference to Bacon's alleged imprisonment does not appear until almost eighty years after his death. There is no contemporary evidence that Bacon was ever imprisoned, let alone that he died under house arrest.

3. Pietro d' Abano

Pietro d' Abano (1257-1316) was an Italian philosopher, astrologer, and professor of medicine. He was a noted author whose most famous work was Conciliator Differentiarum, quæ inter Philosophos et Medicos Versantur, an exploration on the relationship between contemporary medical theories and Aristotelian natural philosophy. He was arrested by the Inquisition and died in prison around 1316. He was condemned posthumously and his bones burned.: Abano was such an educated man that Church authorities assumed he must be in league with the devil. He was accused of witchcraft and of obtaining his knowledge by the dark arts, which was a common accusation made against learned people. Abano is lucky he died in prison or else he certainly would have been burned alive.

History: Medieval science was often bound up with occultic practices and magic. Though Abano was a distinguished physician and scholar, he was also deeply involved in the occult. He practiced geomancy (earth divination) and appears to have observed some primitive form of phrenology. He also dabbled in palmistry and was apparently so engaged in the dark arts that he wrote a magical tome called the Heptameron, a book of occultic rituals for conjuring specific angels for the seven days of the week. His arrest by the Inquisition seems to be on the grounds of magic and his astrological theories, for he apparently taught that natural effects were produced by celestial bodies and the arrangements of the stars. Abano cannot be considered to have suffered for science unless one is ready to admit palmistry, conjuring, geomancy, and astrology as scientific doctrines.

4. Cecco d' Ascoli

Cecco d' Ascoli (1257-1327) was an Italian encyclopaedist, physician, and scholar specializing in mathematics and astronomy. He was a professor of astronomy at the University of Bologna and was such a noted astronomer that there is a crater on the moon named after him. He is famous for his feud with the poet Dante. He was eventually tried for heresy and burned at the stake in Florence, the first university professor to be condemned to death by the Inquisition.

Myth: Like Bacon, Ascoli was known as a freethinker who eschewed Church doctrine in favor of scientific facts. He was charged with "impiety" for his dedication to empirical science and burned at the stake in 1327 as an example that university professors should not be too assertive in promoting scientific theory.: Ascoli was a renowned scholar and astronomer who was of favorable enough reputation to work in the service of Pope John XXIII. He first fell afoul of the Inquisition in 1324, not for any scientific theory, but for some statements he made in a commentary on John de Sacrobosco's book Sphere that concerned wild theories about demonology. He fled the papal court to Florence where he subsequently got in trouble for trying to read Christ's horoscope. He had already won the enmity of the eminent physician Gino del Garbo, who had formerly accused Ascoli of plagiarism. Seeing Ascoli again in trouble, Garbo hounded Ascoli until he secured his condemnation for impiety for his demonological theories and the incident with the horoscope. Cecco was subsequently condemned and burned. Again, it was not for his scientific theory that Cecci d'Ascoli was put to death, but for his occultic impiety exacerbated by the jealousy of a professional opponent.

5. Michael Servetus

Michael Servetus (1509-1553), usually known simply as Servetus, was a Spanish doctor, theologian, mapmaker, and Humanist scholar. His expertise spanned many areas; he wrote treatises in mathematics, astronomy, meteorology, geography, human anatomy, medicine and pharmacology, as well as jurisprudence and poetry. In 1553 he was tried and sentenced to death in Vienna by the Inquisition, though it would ultimately be the Calvinists who put him to death in Geneva later that year.

Myth: The intransigent Catholic authorities in Vienne (and the Calvinists of Geneva) could not tolerate the challenge posed to their respective creeds by the scientifically minded Servetus. Rather than deal with his skeptical arguments rationally, it was easier to off the poor bastard by burning him at the stake, thus making Michael Servetus a true martyr to science.: Servetus was not a religious skeptic. Servetus rejected the tenets of both the Catholic and Protestant creeds, but not because he was a religious skeptic per se, but because he was a Unitarian - he rejected the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. Servetus believed that the doctrine of the Trinity represented a pagan corruption introduced into the Christian faith via the Greek philosophers. He hoped his ideas would help purify Christianity, as he argued in his 1553 books Restoration of Christianity. It was for his heterodoxy regarding the Trinity that he was condemned by the Inquisition and later burned at the stake by John Calvin. He was certainly not killed for any of his scientific ideas.

6. Girolamo Cardano

Girolamo Cardano (1501-1576) was a Renaissance polymath whose talents ranged from mathematics to medicine, biology, physics, chemistry, astronomy, philosophy, and linguistics. He was one of the most influential mathematicians of the Renaissance, and was one of the key figures in the foundation of probability and the earliest user of the binomial coefficients and the binomial theorem in the west. He wrote over 200 scientific treatises.He was arrested and condemned by the Inquisition and spent several years imprisoned, though he was eventually released and rehabilitated by Pope Gregory XIII. He is famous for his contributions to algebra and made the first systematic use of negative numbers.: Cardano was a rationalist who was unfortunate enough to live and teach during the reforms of the Council of Trent. His originality and natural inquisitiveness got him in trouble with the Inquisition, who forced him to resign his professorship and imprisoned him. If it were not for friends in high places, he would have been burned as a heretic.: Cardano possessed an extremely abrasive personality that brought him into conflict with his professional peers. He was disliked at the University of Pavia, where he taught. During this period, his sons brought him much shame. His elder son Giovanni was tried and beheaded for murdering his wife; his younger son Aldo was a gambler and a profligate who was disinherited by Cardano. Cardano always suspected his elder son's execution was pushed by his professional rivals and fled Pavia, not only due to his professional difficulties but due to allegations of sexual impropriety with students. The Inquisition arrested him in 1570 but he was imprisoned only very briefly. He was released upon renouncing his professorship, which seems to have been the aim of his enemies. After his release, he was employed by Gregory XIII and given a lifetime annuity to compensate him for his difficulties.

It seems clear that Cardano's arrest by the Inquisition was a strong-arm tactic employed by his professional rivals to secure his resignation. He never seems to have been in danger of his life and there is no indication his scientific theories were ever the reason for his persecution.

7. Giordano Bruno

Bruno is among the most famous scientists ever to run afoul of the Inquisition. Giordano Bruno (1548-1600) was a Dominican friar, mathematician, astronomer and poet. He is most remembered for his cosmological theories. After seven years of trials in Rome, he was condemned and burned at the stake in 1600.: Like Galileo, Bruno's great crime was proposing that the earth was not stationary at the center of the universe. He proposed that stars might were like other suns, each of which might have their own exoplanets capable of supporting life. This ran counter to Church doctrine, so the Inquisition had him executed for having the audacity to challenge Catholic dogma. He was burned at the stake, a martyr to science.: Bruno's case is difficult because it is unknown to what degree his cosmological theories were behind his condemnation. Beginning with the advent of agnostic rationalism in the 18th and 19th centuries, historians were anxious to make Bruno into a martyr for science. It is true that he was burned at the stake in Rome in 1600, but the church authorities guilty of this action were almost certainly more distressed at his denial of Christ's divinity and his other heresies than at his cosmological doctrines."[4] Many documents of his trial have been lost, but a summary of the proceedings against Bruno still exists. The summary lists eight charges against Bruno; of the eight charges, only one relates to his cosmological theories - even this charge seems to relate to a philosophical rather than scientific problem. Bruno believed the universe was infinite in size and contained an infinite amount of other habitable planets. His assertion of the infinitude of the universe called into question the theological truth of the universe as a creation; only God is infinite in the proper sense. Nothing created can be infinite.

This was not a scientific theory. Galileo would not invent the first proper telescope until nine years after Bruno's death, so real enhanced empirical observation of space had not yet begun. Bruno's theorem was not a scientific idea based on observation; it was a philosophical assumption about the nature of the universe that is more properly understood against the backdrop of earlier medieval philosophical debates about the eternity of the universe than any hard science. It certainly may have had scientific aspects to it, but maybe it didn't; we do not know, as the notes of Bruno's trial have not been preserved.

The other seven charges against Bruno are all related to points of theology. He was charged with defaming the ministers of the Church, denying the Trinity, denying the divinity of Christ and the Incarnation, calling the virgin birth into doubt, denying that Jesus was the Messiah, denying Transubstantiation and the sacrificial nature of the Mass, the transmigration of souls, reincarnation of human souls into animals, dealings in magic and divination. The Church authorities were undoubtedly much more concerned with these charges than his theory that other planets could contain some form of life. We must also recall that Copernicus, a Polish Catholic priest, had also postulated a non-traditional cosmology and remained in the good graces of the Church, so it was not proposing novel cosmologies alone that could get one in trouble. Similarly, Galileo's troubles began not when he questioned the traditional Ptolemaic cosmology, but when he postulated a new relationship between faith and science that sought to subvert faith to empiricism.

While initially willing to accept the Church's dogmatic positions, Bruno ultimately refused a recantation and died obstinate. His death was primarily because of the theological doctrines he denied, not because of the cosmology he affirmed. His abrasive attitude and arrogance probably exacerbated his troubles. Renaissance historian Mordechai Feingold wrote, "Both admirers and critics of Giordano Bruno basically agree that he was pompous and arrogant, highly valuing his opinions and showing little patience with anyone who even mildly disagreed with him...it might have been Bruno's manner, his language and his self-assertiveness, rather than his ideas that caused offense" [5]. Nor were Bruno's ideas necessarily scientific; some historians, rejecting the "martyr of science" view as a 19th century myth, see Bruno's cosmology as retrograde. Modern historian Frances Yates notes, "Bruno pushes Copernicus' scientific work back into a prescientific stage, back into Hermetism, interpreting the Copernican diagram as a hieroglyph of divine mysteries" [6].

At any rate, the "martyr to science" view of Bruno is much too simplistic. He was executed for his heresies, not his cosmology.

8. Lucilio Vanini

Philosopher and physician Lucilio Vanini (1585-1616) was a Carmelite and noted late Renaissance scholar. He was a libertine, political opponent of the popes, and known as an early proponent of some form of evolution from primates. He once left the Church for Anglicanism but later returned to the faith. He went through a period of itinerant wandering, where he seemed to always get in trouble with the authorities. He eventually adopted a false identity and died under circumstances that are still uncertain in 1619, executed for blasphemy and heresy by the authorities in Toulouse. He was strangled, had his tongue removed, and his body burned.: Vanini was one of the first great naturalists, who attributed supernatural events to human imagination and called out clerical authorities for the charlatans they were. His naturalism put him at odds with the Church authorities, who hounded him from city to city until he was forced to take on a fake identity. Not even this could save him from the rabid Inquisition, who hunted him down and killed him in 1619.: Vanini began as a Carmelite friar with doctorates in canon and civil law. He had a reputation as a talented scholar, but he began to get into trouble after 1608 when in Venice he came under the influence of Paolo Sarpi, a fierce opponent of the papacy. It is too much here to go into the minutiae of the diplomatic crisis between Venice and the popes in the early 17th century, it suffices to say Vanini got embroiled in them and became a notable anti-clericalist. During this time he also wrote several works in which he denied the immortality of the soul He was commanded by his superiors to report to Naples for discipline, but instead he fled to England, repudiated the Catholic faith and became an Anglican in 1612. He soon returned to the faith and became persona non grata in England. Fleeing to France, he unfortunately was caught up in a wave of anti-Italian sentiment that swept the kingdom in 1618-1619. It's unclear to what degree Vanini was involved in this. At any rate, he took up a false identity and began a period of itinerant wandering through southern France, eventually winding up in Toulouse. The secular authorities in Toulouse were suspicious and interrogated him. The Parlement of Toulouse found Vanini guilty of blasphemy and atheism and put him to death, although it is important to note they did not realize it was Vanini at the time, as he was traveling under a false identity.

The reasons for Vanini's death are obscure, but a few facts should be pointed out: First, his death had nothing to do with the Church. It was not the Church, but the secular authorities who apprehended him and the Parlement of Toulouse that condemned him to death. The Catholic Church literally had no part in his death.

Second, Vanini could not have been put to death for his scientific theories since the Parlement which condemned him to death did not know the man they were executing was Vanini. Third, it's questionable to what degree Vanini was a dissenting skeptic. Though he once denied the immortality of the soul, he was reconciled with the Catholic Church after his sojourn in England and even wrote a book attacking atheism and affirming the teachings of the Council of Trent. He certainly went through a skeptical phase, but it is a stretch to say whether he maintained those opinions until his death. The formal charges against him were blasphemy and atheism, but there is little evidence beyond this. What really happened is uncertain.

9. Tommaso Campanella

The Dominican friar Tommaso Campanella (1568-1639) was an Italian astrologer, philosopher, and poet. Early in his clerical career he became disenchanted with Aristotelian thought and became a proponent of the new empiricism. He was briefly imprisoned by the Inquisition for engaging in wild astrological speculation. He was released but was apprehended in Calabria, tortured, and spent twenty-six years in prison. He was later released to be part of the court of Pope Urban VIII and had some remote involvement in the Galileo affair. Despite his age, he again got in trouble and had to go into exile to the court of Louis XIII of France, where he died in 1639.

Myth: Campanella was an empiricist who questioned the authority of Aristotle. His skepticism of Aristotle was anathema to the Inquisition, who had Campanella arrested, tortured, and imprisoned for his commitment to empirical science. The bloodthirsty Inquisition would have put Campanella to death had he not feigned madness in his cell.: Campanella's questioning of Aristotle did get him in trouble with the Inquisition, but he was released after only a brief confinement. What got Campanella in trouble was not his science, but his politics. In his hometown of Stilo in Calabria he was a ringleader in a political conspiracy against the Spanish rulers of the city. Inspired by Joachim of Fiore, he hoped to overthrow the Spanish and establish a communist republic with goods, wives, and children held in common. The coup failed; Campanella was tortured and imprisoned. All his most important scientific works were written from prison in Naples. After his release in 1626, he worked for Pope Urban VIII, but continued to advocate for political communism. When one of his followers attempted a coup in Calabria in 1634, Campanella had to flee to France where he lived in exile until his death.

Campanella's torture and imprisonment were due to his radical political activities, not his scientific ideas. Political revolution tends to get one in trouble.

10. Kazimierz Lyszczynsk

Kazimierz Lyszczynsk (1634-1689) is different than the rest of the people we have examined in that he did not have a reputation as a scientist. He was a Polish soldier and nobleman, but also an amateur scholar and philosopher. Lyszczynsk was educated by the Jesuits but later became an opponent of the Society, whom he later opposed as a judge in several cases against the Jesuits concerning ownership of estates. He was arrested and charged with atheism and blasphemy based on an allegedly atheist manuscript he had written entitled "On the Non-Existence of God." He was condemned and beheaded in 1689 after having his tongue tore out and hands burned.: At the dawn of the age of reason, Lyszczynsk dared to speak out against the irrational belief in an invisible deity by publishing one of the first Polish treatise examining the world from an atheist perspective. The Catholic Church had him condemned and cruelly executed, a martyr to the atheist cause.: It is actually not known whether Lyszczynsk was an atheist or not. Lyszczynsk was a nobleman who had a great interest in philosophical problems. Like other philosophers of the age, Lyszczynsk found traditional arguments for the existence of God to be unconvincing. For example, Lyszczynsk read Henry Alsted's Theologia Naturalis, which attempted to prove the existence of God by arguments from reason. Alsted's arguments, however, were so confused that Lyszczynsk believed they actually undermined the arguments for faith. In his copy of Alsted's book, Lyszczynsk ridiculed the argument by writing "ergo non est Deus" ("Therefore, God does not exist") in the margins. It is important to note Lyszczynsk does not appear to have been arguing God did not exist, but stating that if Alsted's weak arguments were followed to their logical conclusions, it would imply the non-existence of God.

Lyszczynsk himself was laboring through his own treatise aiming to prove the existence of God on more solid philosophical grounds. In this sense, he appears similar to Descartes, professing belief in God's existence but seeking for a kind of demonstrative rational argument that was philosophically unshakeable. Sometime in 1674, he began work on a treatise that he hoped would provide this philosophical argument. The treatise was structured in the form of a dialogue between an atheist and a Catholic, in which the atheist would make his case for the non-existence of God, followed by the Catholic rebuttal.

At this point, Lyszczynsk got into serious trouble. There was a certain cleric named Jan Brzoska who was the nuncio of Brest and an attendant of the royal court. This Brzoska had borrowed a very large sum of money from Lyszczynsk and was without means to pay it back. Brzoska somehow came upon Lyszczynsk's copy of Alsted's Theologia Naturalis and found Lyszczynsk's "ergo non est Deus" scribbled in the margins of the book. He made off with the book and presented it to the Church authorities, accusing Lyszczynsk of atheism and blasphemy. As further evidence, Brzoska also stole Lyszczynsk's private manuscript he had been working on. This seemed particularly damning, as at the time Brzoska stole the manuscript, Lyszczynsk had only completed the first half of the book, in which the atheist presented his case against God. This section was titled "On the Non-Existence of God."

Lyszczynsk was in a terrible position. He insisted on his belief in God and explained that his manuscript was incomplete, that the next section was to contain a Catholic rebuttal to the claims of the atheist, that the final title of the work would not be "On the Non-Existence of God"; this was only the title of the atheist's dialogue. He also said that he had paused work on the manuscript because his confessor had advised him against it.

Unfortunately, Brzoska knew that if Lyszczynsk went free he would have to pay back his large debt. Using his influence as nuncio, Brzorska painted Lyszczynsk as a rabid atheist and was able to secure the support of the entire Polish hierarchy against Lyszczynsk. King Jan Sobieksi attempted to rescue Lyszczynsk by having the case transferred to Vilna, but the clergy, led by Brzoska, insisted on his condemnation. Brzoska succeeded in getting Lyszczynsk condemned to death by the royal diet of 1689. Despite professing his innocence and recanting any errors he may have professed, Lyszczynsk had his tongue tore out, hands burned, and suffered beheading before having his body and his manuscript committed to the flames.

The story of Kazimierz Lyszczynsk is a truly tragic one; the manipulation of canonical and civil law by Nuncio Brzoska to secure the condemnation of a person whose guilt was far from certain for the purpose of avoiding a debt is deplorable. But we have to keep in mind that Brzoska's debt does seem to be the motivating factor in Lyszczynsk's condemnation. If Brzoska had not owed Lyszczynsk a considerable sum of money, it's unlikely he or any churchman would have been bothered by Lyszczynsk's philosophical writings. Rene Descartes had undertaken an essentially similar task in France during the same era had was left unmolested. But who knows what would have happened to Descartes had a hostile and powerful clerical opponent got a hold of Meditations on First Philosophy in an incomplete state, when Descartes had undermined the traditional arguments for God's existence but had not yet presented his own arguments in favor.

Yes, the death of Lyszczynsk was instigated by the Polish Church. But the motivating factor was clearly the financial obligations of a corrupt cleric. Lyszczynsk was not a martyr to science or atheism; he arguably was not an atheist at all - rather, he was the victim of greed and corruption.

Conclusion

In none of these cases was a man put to death or imprisoned merely on account of his scientific ideas; in most cases, these people were punished for theological heresies, or for political actions or financial reasons. Now the skeptic might retort that for the Church to seek a man's condemnation for heresy is just as bad or worse than condemning him for science. We could argue about that point, but it is nevertheless a different argument altogether. The original complaint was that the Catholic Church had executed scientists because of their scientific theories. One may argue that the Church should never have sought punishment for any man's ideas, scientific, political, or otherwise, but that is a different argument altogether. Regarding the original point, it is clear that the Church did not punish anybody with death merely on account of their scientific beliefs.

Speaking of the Church punishing people, it also must be pointed out that in none of these cases did the Church actually kill anybody. It must be remembered that heresy was a civil crime in the secular law books. Lyszczynsk was condemned by a secular royal diet; Vanini by the Parlement of Toulouse, and so on. Certainly, it was the Church's role to verify that the accused actually professed the heresy of which he was suspected, but it was the secular power that pronounced sentence and executed it. The Church did not execute anybody, scientist or otherwise. Persons guilty of secular crimes were handed over to the secular authorities for punishment.

It could be argued that this is mere semantics because the Church was nevertheless complicit in handing them over when they knew they would be punished by the secular authorities. But again, this would be shifting the ground of the argument. We can debate whether heresy should or should not be a secular crime, but our original question was whether the Church had executed people. Clearly the Church did not.

Thus, we can exonerate the Church from the charge of executing scientists for their beliefs. It simply didn't happen.

NOTES

[1] "Hypatia" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypatia#Scholasticus.27_account
[2] ibid.
[3] Lindberg, David C. (1995), "Medieval Science and Its Religious Context", Osiris, Vol. 10, No. 10, pp. 60-79, JSTOR 301913, doi:10.1086/368743.
[4] Michael J. Crowe, The Extraterrestrial Life Debate 1750-1900, Cambridge University Press, 1986, p. 10
[5] Feingold, Mordechai; Vickers, Brian (1984). "The occult tradition in the English universities of the Renaissance: a reassessment": 73-94.
[6] Giordano Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition, by Frances Yates. Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1964, p. 225

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Scientists Executed by the Catholic Church

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The relationship between scientific inquiry and Catholic orthodoxy is hotly disputed in the contemporary world. The Catholic position affirms that there can be no true disharmony between scientific and religious truth, since all truth comes from the one God. There is no true hostility between religion and science, properly understood.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A defence of the doctrine touching the spring and weight of the air propos'd by Mr. R. Boyle in his new physico-mechanical experiments, against the objections of Franciscus Linus ; wherewith the objector's funicular hypothesis is also examin'd, by the author of those experiments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A defence of the doctrine touching the spring and weight of the air propos'd by Mr. R. Boyle in his new physico-mechanical experiments, against the objections of Franciscus Linus ; wherewith the objector's funicular hypothesis is also examin'd, by the author of those experiments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A controversial new hypothesis that suggests our understanding of gravity is wrong has just passed an important first test.

First proposed back in 2010, the new hypothesis states that gravity might behave and arise very differently than Einstein predicted, and an independent study of more than 30,000 galaxies has now found the first evidence to back this up.

The hypothesis is referred to as 'Verlinde's hypothesis of gravity' after the theoretical physicist who came up with it, Erik Verlinde from the University of Amsterdam. If it can stand up to further testing, it could completely overhaul over a century of physics - including getting rid of dark matter altogether.

It could even be part of the puzzle that takes us one step closer to one of modern physics' Holy Grails - a much-longed-for ' theory of everything', that merges the observable effects of classic physics, with the weird, microscopic world of quantum mechanics.

The problem with our current understanding of gravity - even though it's widely accepted by the physics community - is that it doesn't quite account for everything we see in the Universe.

Most glaringly, researchers have shown that there's more gravity in our Universe - especially in our galaxies - than can be produced by all the visible matter out there.

This inconsistency has been explained by assuming the presence of dark matter - a mysterious force in the Universe that we can't see that's forming all of this extra gravity. But despite decades of searching and many leading candidates for a dark matter particle, researchers are still no closer to actually detecting this invisible substance.

Verlinde's approach, on the other hand, says we don't need dark matter at all, we just need to rethink gravity.

As we described back in November:

"His suggestion is that gravity isn't a fundamental force of nature at all, but rather an emergent phenomenon - just like temperature is an emergent phenomenon that arises from the movement of microscopic particles.

In other words, gravity is a side effect, not the cause, of what's happening in the Universe."

For the past six years, this hypothesis has been left untested. But now a team of researchers at Leiden University in the Netherlands has tested it for the first time, and shown some evidence that it could actually hold up.

The team, led by Margot Brouwer, looked at the distribution of matter in more than 33,000 galaxies, and said that what they say could indeed be explained without dark matter if they used Verlinde's hypothesis of gravity.

Testing this involved studying something called gravitational lensing - the way galaxies closer to us bend the light of more distant galaxies. This is a well-established way of measuring the amount of dark matter in galaxies.

But the team found that if they just factored in Verlinde's modified gravity, then their results made sense without them having to add in the idea of dark matter.

The team compared their results to the predictions made by Einstein's general theory of relativity and those made by Verlinde, and found that both fit.

But they found that Verlinde's predictions matched their observations without needing to use any free parameters - which are values that can be tweaked to make observations match a hypothesis. The presence of dark matter, on the other hand, required four free parameters.

"The dark matter model actually fits slightly better with the data than Verlinde's prediction," Brouwer told New Scientist. "But then if you mathematically factor in the fact that Verlinde's prediction doesn't have any free parameters, whereas the dark matter prediction does, then you find Verlinde's model is actually performing slightly better."

Importantly, this is just one very early test of Verlinde's hypothesis, and it's going to take a lot more than that to throw out over a century of accepted thinking on gravity and dark matter.

Also, Verlinde's hypothesis might get rid of mysterious dark matter, but it doesn't match up with everything else we see in the Universe, either. String theorist Lubos Motl recently took down Verlinde's ideas a blog post, saying: "I wouldn't okay this wrong piece of work as an undergraduate term paper."

So, to be very clear, our current understanding of gravity, based on Einstein's generally theory of relativity, isn't going anywhere anytime soon. But neither is Verlinde's hypothesis.

"The question now is how the theory develops, and how it can be further tested," said Brouwer in a press release. "But the result of this first test definitely looks interesting."

The research has been accepted for publication in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and you can read the full paper now on arXiv.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Controversial New Gravity Hypothesis Has Passed Its First Test

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A controversial new hypothesis that suggests our understanding of gravity is wrong has just passed an important first test. First proposed back in 2010, the new hypothesis states that gravity might behave and arise very differently than Einstein predicted, and an independent study of more than 30,000 galaxies has now found the first evidence to back this up.

# data[].attributes.body
Francis Bacon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
THE NEW ORGANON
OR TRUE DIRECTIONS CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF NATURE

Francis Bacon

1620
[Note on the Text]
AUTHOR'S PREFACE

Those who have taken upon them to lay down the law of nature as a thing already searched out and understood, whether they have spoken in simple assurance or professional affectation, have therein done philosophy and the sciences great injury. For as they have been successful in inducing belief, so they have been effective in quenching and stopping inquiry; and have done more harm by spoiling and putting an end to other men's efforts than good by their own. Those on the other hand who have taken a contrary course, and asserted that absolutely nothing can be known - whether it were from hatred of the ancient sophists, or from uncertainty and fluctuation of mind, or even from a kind of fullness of learning, that they fell upon this opinion - have certainly advanced reasons for it that are not to be despised; but yet they have neither started from true principles nor rested in the just conclusion, zeal and affectation having carried them much too far. The more ancient of the Greeks (whose writings are lost) took up with better judgment a position between these two extremes - between the presumption of pronouncing on everything, and the despair of comprehending anything; and though frequently and bitterly complaining of the difficulty of inquiry and the obscurity of things, and like impatient horses champing at the bit, they did not the less follow up their object and engage with nature, thinking (it seems) that this very question - viz., whether or not anything can be known - was to be settled not by arguing, but by trying. And yet they too, trusting entirely to the force of their understanding, applied no rule, but made everything turn upon hard thinking and perpetual working and exercise of the mind.

Now my method, though hard to practice, is easy to explain; and it is this. I propose to establish progressive stages of certainty. The evidence of the sense, helped and guarded by a certain process of correction, I retain. But the mental operation which follows the act of sense I for the most part reject; and instead of it I open and lay out a new and certain path for the mind to proceed in, starting directly from the simple sensuous perception. The necessity of this was felt, no doubt, by those who attributed so much importance to logic, showing thereby that they were in search of helps for the understanding, and had no confidence in the native and spontaneous process of the mind. But this remedy comes too late to do any good, when the mind is already, through the daily intercourse and conversation of life, occupied with unsound doctrines and beset on all sides by vain imaginations. And therefore that art of logic, coming (as I said) too late to the rescue, and no way able to set matters right again, has had the effect of fixing errors rather than disclosing truth. There remains but one course for the recovery of a sound and healthy condition - namely, that the entire work of the understanding be commenced afresh, and the mind itself be from the very outset not left to take its own course, but guided at every step; and the business be done as if by machinery. Certainly if in things mechanical men had set to work with their naked hands, without help or force of instruments, just as in things intellectual they have set to work with little else than the naked forces of the understanding, very small would the matters have been which, even with their best efforts applied in conjunction, they could have attempted or accomplished. Now (to pause a while upon this example and look in it as in a glass) let us suppose that some vast obelisk were (for the decoration of a triumph or some such magnificence) to be removed from its place, and that men should set to work upon it with their naked hands, would not any sober spectator think them mad? And if they should then send for more people, thinking that in that way they might manage it, would he not think them all the madder? And if they then proceeded to make a selection, putting away the weaker hands, and using only the strong and vigorous, would he not think them madder than ever? And if lastly, not content with this, they resolved to call in aid the art of athletics, and required all their men to come with hands, arms, and sinews well anointed and medicated according to the rules of the art, would he not cry out that they were only taking pains to show a kind of method and discretion in their madness? Yet just so it is that men proceed in matters intellectual - with just the same kind of mad effort and useless combination of forces - when they hope great things either from the number and cooperation or from the excellency and acuteness of individual wits; yea, and when they endeavor by logic (which may be considered as a kind of athletic art) to strengthen the sinews of the understanding, and yet with all this study and endeavor it is apparent to any true judgment that they are but applying the naked intellect all the time; whereas in every great work to be done by the hand of man it is manifestly impossible, without instruments and machinery, either for the strength of each to be exerted or the strength of all to be united.

Upon these premises two things occur to me of which, that they may not be overlooked, I would have men reminded. First, it falls out fortunately as I think for the allaying of contradictions and heartburnings, that the honor and reverence due to the ancients remains untouched and undiminished, while I may carry out my designs and at the same time reap the fruit of my modesty. For if I should profess that I, going the same road as the ancients, have something better to produce, there must needs have been some comparison or rivalry between us (not to be avoided by any art of words) in respect of excellency or ability of wit; and though in this there would be nothing unlawful or new (for if there be anything misapprehended by them, or falsely laid down, why may not I, using a liberty common to all, take exception to it?) yet the contest, however just and allowable, would have been an unequal one perhaps, in respect of the measure of my own powers. As it is, however (my object being to open a new way for the understanding, a way by them untried and unknown), the case is altered: party zeal and emulation are at an end, and I appear merely as a guide to point out the road - an office of small authority, and depending more upon a kind of luck than upon any ability or excellency. And thus much relates to the persons only. The other point of which I would have men reminded relates to the matter itself.

Be it remembered then that I am far from wishing to interfere with the philosophy which now flourishes, or with any other philosophy more correct and complete than this which has been or may hereafter be propounded. For I do not object to the use of this received philosophy, or others like it, for supplying matter for disputations or ornaments for discourse - for the professor's lecture and for the business of life. Nay, more, I declare openly that for these uses the philosophy which I bring forward will not be much available. It does not lie in the way. It cannot be caught up in passage. It does not flatter the understanding by conformity with preconceived notions. Nor will it come down to the apprehension of the vulgar except by its utility and effects.

Let there be therefore (and may it be for the benefit of both) two streams and two dispensations of knowledge, and in like manner two tribes or kindreds of students in philosophy - tribes not hostile or alien to each other, but bound together by mutual services; let there in short be one method for the cultivation, another for the invention, of knowledge.

And for those who prefer the former, either from hurry or from considerations of business or for want of mental power to take in and embrace the other (which must needs be most men's case), I wish that they may succeed to their desire in what they are about, and obtain what they are pursuing. But if there be any man who, not content to rest in and use the knowledge which has already been discovered, aspires to penetrate further; to overcome, not an adversary in argument, but nature in action; to seek, not pretty and probable conjectures, but certain and demonstrable knowledge - I invite all such to join themselves, as true sons of knowledge, with me, that passing by the outer courts of nature, which numbers have trodden, we may find a way at length into her inner chambers. And to make my meaning clearer and to familiarize the thing by giving it a name, I have chosen to call one of these methods or ways Anticipation of the Mind, the other Interpretation of Nature.

Moreover, I have one request to make. I have on my own part made it my care and study that the things which I shall propound should not only be true, but should also be presented to men's minds, how strangely soever preoccupied and obstructed, in a manner not harsh or unpleasant. It is but reasonable, however (especially in so great a restoration of learning and knowledge), that I should claim of men one favor in return, which is this: if anyone would form an opinion or judgment either out of his own observation, or out of the crowd of authorities, or out of the forms of demonstration (which have now acquired a sanction like that of judicial laws), concerning these speculations of mine, let him not hope that he can do it in passage or by the by; but let him examine the thing thoroughly; let him make some little trial for himself of the way which I describe and lay out; let him familiarize his thoughts with that subtlety of nature to which experience bears witness; let him correct by seasonable patience and due delay the depraved and deep-rooted habits of his mind; and when all this is done and he has begun to be his own master, let him (if he will) use his own judgment.

APHORISMS

[BOOK ONE]

I

Man, being the servant and interpreter of Nature, can do and understand so much and so much only as he has observed in fact or in thought of the course of nature. Beyond this he neither knows anything nor can do anything.

II

Neither the naked hand nor the understanding left to itself can effect much. It is by instruments and helps that the work is done, which are as much wanted for the understanding as for the hand. And as the instruments of the hand either give motion or guide it, so the instruments of the mind supply either suggestions for the understanding or cautions.

III

Human knowledge and human power meet in one; for where the cause is not known the effect cannot be produced. Nature to be commanded must be obeyed; and that which in contemplation is as the cause is in operation as the rule.

IV

Toward the effecting of works, all that man can do is to put together or put asunder natural bodies. The rest is done by nature working within.

V

The study of nature with a view to works is engaged in by the mechanic, the mathematician, the physician, the alchemist, and the magician; but by all (as things now are) with slight endeavor and scanty success.

VI

It would be an unsound fancy and self-contradictory to expect that things which have never yet been done can be done except by means which have never yet been tried.

VII

The productions of the mind and hand seem very numerous in books and manufactures. But all this variety lies in an exquisite subtlety and derivations from a few things already known, not in the number of axioms.

VIII

Moreover, the works already known are due to chance and experiment rather than to sciences; for the sciences we now possess are merely systems for the nice ordering and setting forth of things already invented, not methods of invention or directions for new works.

IX

The cause and root of nearly all evils in the sciences is this - that while we falsely admire and extol the powers of the human mind we neglect to seek for its true helps.

X

The subtlety of nature is greater many times over than the subtlety of the senses and understanding; so that all those specious meditations, speculations, and glosses in which men indulge are quite from the purpose, only there is no one by to observe it.

XI

As the sciences which we now have do not help us in finding out new works, so neither does the logic which we now have help us in finding out new sciences.

XII

The logic now in use serves rather to fix and give stability to the errors which have their foundation in commonly received notions than to help the search after truth. So it does more harm than good.

XIII

The syllogism is not applied to the first principles of sciences, and is applied in vain to intermediate axioms, being no match for the subtlety of nature. It commands assent therefore to the proposition, but does not take hold of the thing.

XIV

The syllogism consists of propositions, propositions consist of words, words are symbols of notions. Therefore if the notions themselves (which is the root of the matter) are confused and overhastily abstracted from the facts, there can be no firmness in the superstructure. Our only hope therefore lies in a true induction.

XV

There is no soundness in our notions, whether logical or physical. Substance, Quality, Action, Passion, Essence itself, are not sound notions; much less are Heavy, Light, Dense, Rare, Moist, Dry, Generation, Corruption, Attraction, Repulsion, Element, Matter, Form, and the like; but all are fantastical and ill defined.

XVI

Our notions of less general species, as Man, Dog, Dove, and of the immediate perceptions of the sense, as Hot, Cold, Black, White, do not materially mislead us; yet even these are sometimes confused by the flux and alteration of matter and the mixing of one thing with another. All the others which men have hitherto adopted are but wanderings, not being abstracted and formed from things by proper methods.

XVII

Nor is there less of willfulness and wandering in the construction of axioms than in the formation of notions, not excepting even those very principles which are obtained by common induction; but much more in the axioms and lower propositions educed by the syllogism.

XVIII

The discoveries which have hitherto been made in the sciences are such as lie close to vulgar notions, scarcely beneath the surface. In order to penetrate into the inner and further recesses of nature, it is necessary that both notions and axioms be derived from things by a more sure and guarded way, and that a method of intellectual operation be introduced altogether better and more certain.

XIX

There are and can be only two ways of searching into and discovering truth. The one flies from the senses and particulars to the most general axioms, and from these principles, the truth of which it takes for settled and immovable, proceeds to judgment and to the discovery of middle axioms. And this way is now in fashion. The other derives axioms from the senses and particulars, rising by a gradual and unbroken ascent, so that it arrives at the most general axioms last of all. This is the true way, but as yet untried.

XX

The understanding left to itself takes the same course (namely, the former) which it takes in accordance with logical order. For the mind longs to spring up to positions of higher generality, that it may find rest there, and so after a little while wearies of experiment. But this evil is increased by logic, because of the order and solemnity of its disputations.

XXI

The understanding left to itself, in a sober, patient, and grave mind, especially if it be not hindered by received doctrines, tries a little that other way, which is the right one, but with little progress, since the understanding, unless directed and assisted, is a thing unequal, and quite unfit to contend with the obscurity of things.

XXII

Both ways set out from the senses and particulars, and rest in the highest generalities; but the difference between them is infinite. For the one just glances at experiment and particulars in passing, the other dwells duly and orderly among them.

The one, again, begins at once by establishing certain abstract and useless generalities, the other rises by gradual steps to that which is prior and better known in the order of nature.

XXIII

There is a great difference between the Idols of the human mind and the Ideas of the divine. That is to say, between certain empty dogmas, and the true signatures and marks set upon the works of creation as they are found in nature.

XXIV

It cannot be that axioms established by argumentation should avail for the discovery of new works, since the subtlety of nature is greater many times over than the subtlety of argument. But axioms duly and orderly formed from particulars easily discover the way to new particulars, and thus render sciences active.

XXV

The axioms now in use, having been suggested by a scanty and manipular experience and a few particulars of most general occurrence, are made for the most part just large enough to fit and take these in; and therefore it is no wonder if they do not lead to new particulars. And if some opposite instance, not observed or not known before, chance to come in the way, the axiom is rescued and preserved by some frivolous distinction; whereas the truer course would be to correct the axiom itself.

XXVI

The conclusions of human reason as ordinarily applied in matters of nature, I call for the sake of distinction Anticipations of Nature (as a thing rash or premature). That reason which is elicited from facts by a just and methodical process, I call Interpretation of Nature.

XXVII

Anticipations are a ground sufficiently firm for consent, for even if men went mad all after the same fashion, they might agree one with another well enough.

XXVIII

For the winning of assent, indeed, anticipations are far more powerful than interpretations, because being collected from a few instances, and those for the most part of familiar occurrence, they straightway touch the understanding and fill the imagination; whereas interpretations, on the other hand, being gathered here and there from very various and widely dispersed facts, cannot suddenly strike the understanding; and therefore they must needs, in respect of the opinions of the time, seem harsh and out of tune, much as the mysteries of faith do.

XXIX

In sciences founded on opinions and dogmas, the use of anticipations and logic is good; for in them the object is to command assent to the proposition, not to master the thing.

XXX

Though all the wits of all the ages should meet together and combine and transmit their labors, yet will no great progress ever be made in science by means of anticipations; because radical errors in the first concoction of the mind are not to be cured by the excellence of functions and subsequent remedies.

XXXI

It is idle to expect any great advancement in science from the superinducing and engrafting of new things upon old. We must begin anew from the very foundations, unless we would revolve forever in a circle with mean and contemptible progress.

XXXII

The honor of the ancient authors, and indeed of all, remains untouched, since the comparison I challenge is not of wits or faculties, but of ways and methods, and the part I take upon myself is not that of a judge, but of a guide.

XXXIII

This must be plainly avowed: no judgment can be rightly formed either of my method or of the discoveries to which it leads, by means of anticipations (that is to say, of the reasoning which is now in use); since I cannot be called on to abide by the sentence of a tribunal which is itself on trial.

XXXIV

Even to deliver and explain what I bring forward is no easy matter, for things in themselves new will yet be apprehended with reference to what is old.

XXXV

It was said by Borgia of the expedition of the French into Italy, that they came with chalk in their hands to mark out their lodgings, not with arms to force their way in. I in like manner would have my doctrine enter quietly into the minds that are fit and capable of receiving it; for confutations cannot be employed when the difference is upon first principles and very notions, and even upon forms of demonstration.

XXXVI

One method of delivery alone remains to us which is simply this: we must lead men to the particulars themselves, and their series and order; while men on their side must force themselves for a while to lay their notions by and begin to familiarize themselves with facts.

XXXVII

The doctrine of those who have denied that certainty could be attained at all has some agreement with my way of proceeding at the first setting out; but they end in being infinitely separated and opposed. For the holders of that doctrine assert simply that nothing can be known. I also assert that not much can be known in nature by the way which is now in use. But then they go on to destroy the authority of the senses and understanding; whereas I proceed to devise and supply helps for the same.

XXXVIII

The idols and false notions which are now in possession of the human understanding, and have taken deep root therein, not only so beset men's minds that truth can hardly find entrance, but even after entrance is obtained, they will again in the very instauration of the sciences meet and trouble us, unless men being forewarned of the danger fortify themselves as far as may be against their assaults.

XXXIX

There are four classes of Idols which beset men's minds. To these for distinction's sake I have assigned names, calling the first class Idols of the Tribe; the second, Idols of the Cave; the third, Idols of the Market Place; the fourth, Idols of the Theater.

XL

The formation of ideas and axioms by true induction is no doubt the proper remedy to be applied for the keeping off and clearing away of idols. To point them out, however, is of great use; for the doctrine of Idols is to the interpretation of nature what the doctrine of the refutation of sophisms is to common logic.

XLI

The Idols of the Tribe have their foundation in human nature itself, and in the tribe or race of men. For it is a false assertion that the sense of man is the measure of things. On the contrary, all perceptions as well of the sense as of the mind are according to the measure of the individual and not according to the measure of the universe. And the human understanding is like a false mirror, which, receiving rays irregularly, distorts and discolors the nature of things by mingling its own nature with it.

XLII

The Idols of the Cave are the idols of the individual man. For everyone (besides the errors common to human nature in general) has a cave or den of his own, which refracts and discolors the light of nature, owing either to his own proper and peculiar nature; or to his education and conversation with others; or to the reading of books, and the authority of those whom he esteems and admires; or to the differences of impressions, accordingly as they take place in a mind preoccupied and predisposed or in a mind indifferent and settled; or the like. So that the spirit of man (according as it is meted out to different individuals) is in fact a thing variable and full of perturbation, and governed as it were by chance. Whence it was well observed by Heraclitus that men look for sciences in their own lesser worlds, and not in the greater or common world.

XLIII

There are also Idols formed by the intercourse and association of men with each other, which I call Idols of the Market Place, on account of the commerce and consort of men there. For it is by discourse that men associate, and words are imposed according to the apprehension of the vulgar. And therefore the ill and unfit choice of words wonderfully obstructs the understanding. Nor do the definitions or explanations wherewith in some things learned men are wont to guard and defend themselves, by any means set the matter right. But words plainly force and overrule the understanding, and throw all into confusion, and lead men away into numberless empty controversies and idle fancies.

XLIV

Lastly, there are Idols which have immigrated into men's minds from the various dogmas of philosophies, and also from wrong laws of demonstration. These I call Idols of the Theater, because in my judgment all the received systems are but so many stage plays, representing worlds of their own creation after an unreal and scenic fashion. Nor is it only of the systems now in vogue, or only of the ancient sects and philosophies, that I speak; for many more plays of the same kind may yet be composed and in like artificial manner set forth; seeing that errors the most widely different have nevertheless causes for the most part alike. Neither again do I mean this only of entire systems, but also of many principles and axioms in science, which by tradition, credulity, and negligence have come to be received.

But of these several kinds of Idols I must speak more largely and exactly, that the understanding may be duly cautioned.

XLV

The human understanding is of its own nature prone to suppose the existence of more order and regularity in the world than it finds. And though there be many things in nature which are singular and unmatched, yet it devises for them parallels and conjugates and relatives which do not exist. Hence the fiction that all celestial bodies move in perfect circles, spirals and dragons being (except in name) utterly rejected. Hence too the element of fire with its orb is brought in, to make up the square with the other three which the sense perceives. Hence also the ratio of density of the so-called elements is arbitrarily fixed at ten to one. And so on of other dreams. And these fancies affect not dogmas only, but simple notions also.

XLVI

The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it. And though there be a greater number and weight of instances to be found on the other side, yet these it either neglects and despises, or else by some distinction sets aside and rejects, in order that by this great and pernicious predetermination the authority of its former conclusions may remain inviolate. And therefore it was a good answer that was made by one who, when they showed him hanging in a temple a picture of those who had paid their vows as having escaped shipwreck, and would have him say whether he did not now acknowledge the power of the gods - "Aye," asked he again, "but where are they painted that were drowned after their vows?" And such is the way of all superstition, whether in astrology, dreams, omens, divine judgments, or the like; wherein men, having a delight in such vanities, mark the events where they are fulfilled, but where they fail, though this happen much oftener, neglect and pass them by. But with far more subtlety does this mischief insinuate itself into philosophy and the sciences; in which the first conclusion colors and brings into conformity with itself all that come after, though far sounder and better. Besides, independently of that delight and vanity which I have described, it is the peculiar and perpetual error of the human intellect to be more moved and excited by affirmatives than by negatives; whereas it ought properly to hold itself indifferently disposed toward both alike. Indeed, in the establishment of any true axiom, the negative instance is the more forcible of the two.

XLVII

The human understanding is moved by those things most which strike and enter the mind simultaneously and suddenly, and so fill the imagination; and then it feigns and supposes all other things to be somehow, though it cannot see how, similar to those few things by which it is surrounded. But for that going to and fro to remote and heterogeneous instances by which axioms are tried as in the fire, the intellect is altogether slow and unfit, unless it be forced thereto by severe laws and overruling authority.

XLVIII

The human understanding is unquiet; it cannot stop or rest, and still presses onward, but in vain. Therefore it is that we cannot conceive of any end or limit to the world, but always as of necessity it occurs to us that there is something beyond. Neither, again, can it be conceived how eternity has flowed down to the present day, for that distinction which is commonly received of infinity in time past and in time to come can by no means hold; for it would thence follow that one infinity is greater than another, and that infinity is wasting away and tending to become finite. The like subtlety arises touching the infinite divisibility of lines, from the same inability of thought to stop. But this inability interferes more mischievously in the discovery of causes; for although the most general principles in nature ought to be held merely positive, as they are discovered, and cannot with truth be referred to a cause, nevertheless the human understanding being unable to rest still seeks something prior in the order of nature. And then it is that in struggling toward that which is further off it falls back upon that which is nearer at hand, namely, on final causes, which have relation clearly to the nature of man rather than to the nature of the universe; and from this source have strangely defiled philosophy. But he is no less an unskilled and shallow philosopher who seeks causes of that which is most general, than he who in things subordinate and subaltern omits to do so.

XLIX

The human understanding is no dry light, but receives an infusion from the will and affections; whence proceed sciences which may be called "sciences as one would." For what a man had rather were true he more readily believes. Therefore he rejects difficult things from impatience of research; sober things, because they narrow hope; the deeper things of nature, from superstition; the light of experience, from arrogance and pride, lest his mind should seem to be occupied with things mean and transitory; things not commonly believed, out of deference to the opinion of the vulgar. Numberless, in short, are the ways, and sometimes imperceptible, in which the affections color and infect the understanding.

L

But by far the greatest hindrance and aberration of the human understanding proceeds from the dullness, incompetency, and deceptions of the senses; in that things which strike the sense outweigh things which do not immediately strike it, though they be more important. Hence it is that speculation commonly ceases where sight ceases; insomuch that of things invisible there is little or no observation. Hence all the working of the spirits enclosed in tangible bodies lies hid and unobserved of men. So also all the more subtle changes of form in the parts of coarser substances (which they commonly call alteration, though it is in truth local motion through exceedingly small spaces) is in like manner unobserved. And yet unless these two things just mentioned be searched out and brought to light, nothing great can be achieved in nature, as far as the production of works is concerned. So again the essential nature of our common air, and of all bodies less dense than air (which are very many), is almost unknown. For the sense by itself is a thing infirm and erring; neither can instruments for enlarging or sharpening the senses do much; but all the truer kind of interpretation of nature is effected by instances and experiments fit and apposite; wherein the sense decides touching the experiment only, and the experiment touching the point in nature and the thing itself.

LI

The human understanding is of its own nature prone to abstractions and gives a substance and reality to things which are fleeting. But to resolve nature into abstractions is less to our purpose than to dissect her into parts; as did the school of Democritus, which went further into nature than the rest. Matter rather than forms should be the object of our attention, its configurations and changes of configuration, and simple action, and law of action or motion; for forms are figments of the human mind, unless you will call those laws of action forms.

LII

Such then are the idols which I call Idols of the Tribe, and which take their rise either from the homogeneity of the substance of the human spirit, or from its preoccupation, or from its narrowness, or from its restless motion, or from an infusion of the affections, or from the incompetency of the senses, or from the mode of impression.

LIII

The Idols of the Cave take their rise in the peculiar constitution, mental or bodily, of each individual; and also in education, habit, and accident. Of this kind there is a great number and variety. But I will instance those the pointing out of which contains the most important caution, and which have most effect in disturbing the clearness of the understanding.

LIV

Men become attached to certain particular sciences and speculations, either because they fancy themselves the authors and inventors thereof, or because they have bestowed the greatest pains upon them and become most habituated to them. But men of this kind, if they betake themselves to philosophy and contemplation of a general character, distort and color them in obedience to their former fancies; a thing especially to be noticed in Aristotle, who made his natural philosophy a mere bond servant to his logic, thereby rendering it contentious and well-nigh useless. The race of chemists, again out of a few experiments of the furnace, have built up a fantastic philosophy, framed with reference to a few things; and Gilbert also, after he had employed himself most laboriously in the study and observation of the loadstone, proceeded at once to construct an entire system in accordance with his favorite subject.

LV

There is one principal and as it were radical distinction between different minds, in respect of philosophy and the sciences, which is this: that some minds are stronger and apter to mark the differences of things, others to mark their resemblances. The steady and acute mind can fix its contemplations and dwell and fasten on the subtlest distinctions; the lofty and discursive mind recognizes and puts together the finest and most general resemblances. Both kinds, however, easily err in excess, by catching the one at gradations, the other at shadows.

LVI

There are found some minds given to an extreme admiration of antiquity, others to an extreme love and appetite for novelty; but few so duly tempered that they can hold the mean, neither carping at what has been well laid down by the ancients, nor despising what is well introduced by the moderns. This, however, turns to the great injury of the sciences and philosophy, since these affectations of antiquity and novelty are the humors of partisans rather than judgments; and truth is to be sought for not in the felicity of any age, which is an unstable thing, but in the light of nature and experience, which is eternal. These factions therefore must be abjured, and care must be taken that the intellect be not hurried by them into assent.

LVII

Contemplations of nature and of bodies in their simple form break up and distract the understanding, while contemplations of nature and bodies in their composition and configuration overpower and dissolve the understanding, a distinction well seen in the school of Leucippus and Democritus as compared with the other philosophies. For that school is so busied with the particles that it hardly attends to the structure, while the others are so lost in admiration of the structure that they do not penetrate to the simplicity of nature. These kinds of contemplation should therefore be alternated and taken by turns, so that the understanding may be rendered at once penetrating and comprehensive, and the inconveniences above mentioned, with the idols which proceed from them, may be avoided.

LVIII

Let such then be our provision and contemplative prudence for keeping off and dislodging the Idols of the Cave, which grow for the most part either out of the predominance of a favorite subject, or out of an excessive tendency to compare or to distinguish, or out of partiality for particular ages, or out of the largeness or minuteness of the objects contemplated. And generally let every student of nature take this as a rule: that whatever his mind seizes and dwells upon with peculiar satisfaction is to be held in suspicion, and that so much the more care is to be taken in dealing with such questions to keep the understanding even and clear.

LIX

But the Idols of the Market Place are the most troublesome of all - idols which have crept into the understanding through the alliances of words and names. For men believe that their reason governs words; but it is also true that words react on the understanding; and this it is that has rendered philosophy and the sciences sophistical and inactive. Now words, being commonly framed and applied according to the capacity of the vulgar, follow those lines of division which are most obvious to the vulgar understanding. And whenever an understanding of greater acuteness or a more diligent observation would alter those lines to suit the true divisions of nature, words stand in the way and resist the change. Whence it comes to pass that the high and formal discussions of learned men end oftentimes in disputes about words and names; with which (according to the use and wisdom of the mathematicians) it would be more prudent to begin, and so by means of definitions reduce them to order. Yet even definitions cannot cure this evil in dealing with natural and material things, since the definitions themselves consist of words, and those words beget others. So that it is necessary to recur to individual instances, and those in due series and order, as I shall say presently when I come to the method and scheme for the formation of notions and axioms.

LX

The idols imposed by words on the understanding are of two kinds. They are either names of things which do not exist (for as there are things left unnamed through lack of observation, so likewise are there names which result from fantastic suppositions and to which nothing in reality corresponds), or they are names of things which exist, but yet confused and ill-defined, and hastily and irregularly derived from realities. Of the former kind are Fortune, the Prime Mover, Planetary Orbits, Element of Fire, and like fictions which owe their origin to false and idle theories. And this class of idols is more easily expelled, because to get rid of them it is only necessary that all theories should be steadily rejected and dismissed as obsolete.

But the other class, which springs out of a faulty and unskillful abstraction, is intricate and deeply rooted. Let us take for example such a word as humid and see how far the several things which the word is used to signify agree with each other, and we shall find the word humid to be nothing else than a mark loosely and confusedly applied to denote a variety of actions which will not bear to be reduced to any constant meaning. For it both signifies that which easily spreads itself round any other body; and that which in itself is indeterminate and cannot solidize; and that which readily yields in every direction; and that which easily divides and scatters itself; and that which easily unites and collects itself; and that which readily flows and is put in motion; and that which readily clings to another body and wets it; and that which is easily reduced to a liquid, or being solid easily melts. Accordingly, when you come to apply the word, if you take it in one sense, flame is humid; if in another, air is not humid; if in another, fine dust is humid; if in another, glass is humid. So that it is easy to see that the notion is taken by abstraction only from water and common and ordinary liquids, without any due verification.

There are, however, in words certain degrees of distortion and error. One of the least faulty kinds is that of names of substances, especially of lowest species and well-deduced (for the notion of chalk and of mud is good, of earth bad); a more faulty kind is that of actions, as to generate, to corrupt, to alter; the most faulty is of qualities (except such as are the immediate objects of the sense) as heavy, light, rare, dense, and the like. Yet in all these cases some notions are of necessity a little better than others, in proportion to the greater variety of subjects that fall within the range of the human sense.

LXI

But the Idols of the Theater are not innate, nor do they steal into the understanding secretly, but are plainly impressed and received into the mind from the playbooks of philosophical systems and the perverted rules of demonstration. To attempt refutations in this case would be merely inconsistent with what I have already said, for since we agree neither upon principles nor upon demonstrations there is no place for argument. And this is so far well, inasmuch as it leaves the honor of the ancients untouched. For they are no wise disparaged - the question between them and me being only as to the way. For as the saying is, the lame man who keeps the right road outstrips the runner who takes a wrong one. Nay, it is obvious that when a man runs the wrong way, the more active and swift he is, the further he will go astray.

But the course I propose for the discovery of sciences is such as leaves but little to the acuteness and strength of wits, but places all wits and understandings nearly on a level. For as in the drawing of a straight line or a perfect circle, much depends on the steadiness and practice of the hand, if it be done by aim of hand only, but if with the aid of rule or compass, little or nothing; so is it exactly with my plan. But though particular confutations would be of no avail, yet touching the sects and general divisions of such systems I must say something; something also touching the external signs which show that they are unsound; and finally something touching the causes of such great infelicity and of such lasting and general agreement in error; that so the access to truth may be made less difficult, and the human understanding may the more willingly submit to its purgation and dismiss its idols.

LXII

Idols of the Theater, or of Systems, are many, and there can be and perhaps will be yet many more. For were it not that now for many ages men's minds have been busied with religion and theology; and were it not that civil governments, especially monarchies, have been averse to such novelties, even in matters speculative; so that men labor therein to the peril and harming of their fortunes - not only unrewarded, but exposed also to contempt and envy - doubtless there would have arisen many other philosophical sects like those which in great variety flourished once among the Greeks. For as on the phenomena of the heavens many hypotheses may be constructed, so likewise (and more also) many various dogmas may be set up and established on the phenomena of philosophy. And in the plays of this philosophical theater you may observe the same thing which is found in the theater of the poets, that stories invented for the stage are more compact and elegant, and more as one would wish them to be, than true stories out of history.

In general, however, there is taken for the material of philosophy either a great deal out of a few things, or a very little out of many things; so that on both sides philosophy is based on too narrow a foundation of experiment and natural history, and decides on the authority of too few cases. For the Rational School of philosophers snatches from experience a variety of common instances, neither duly ascertained nor diligently examined and weighed, and leaves all the rest to meditation and agitation of wit.

There is also another class of philosophers who, having bestowed much diligent and careful labor on a few experiments, have thence made bold to educe and construct systems, wresting all other facts in a strange fashion to conformity therewith.

And there is yet a third class, consisting of those who out of faith and veneration mix their philosophy with theology and traditions; among whom the vanity of some has gone so far aside as to seek the origin of sciences among spirits and genii. So that this parent stock of errors - this false philosophy - is of three kinds: the Sophistical, the Empirical, and the Superstitious.

LXIII

The most conspicuous example of the first class was Aristotle, who corrupted natural philosophy by his logic: fashioning the world out of categories; assigning to the human soul, the noblest of substances, a genus from words of the second intention; doing the business of density and rarity (which is to make bodies of greater or less dimensions, that is, occupy greater or less spaces), by the frigid distinction of act and power; asserting that single bodies have each a single and proper motion, and that if they participate in any other, then this results from an external cause; and imposing countless other arbitrary restrictions on the nature of things; being always more solicitous to provide an answer to the question and affirm something positive in words, than about the inner truth of things; a failing best shown when his philosophy is compared with other systems of note among the Greeks. For the homoeomera of Anaxagoras; the Atoms of Leucippus and Democritus; the Heaven and Earth of Parmenides; the Strife and Friendship of Empedocles; Heraclitus' doctrine how bodies are resolved into the indifferent nature of fire, and remolded into solids, have all of them some taste of the natural philosopher - some savor of the nature of things, and experience, and bodies; whereas in the physics of Aristotle you hear hardly anything but the words of logic, which in his metaphysics also, under a more imposing name, and more forsooth as a realist than a nominalist, he has handled over again. Nor let any weight be given to the fact that in his books on animals and his problems, and other of his treatises, there is frequent dealing with experiments. For he had come to his conclusion before; he did not consult experience, as he should have done, for the purpose of framing his decisions and axioms, but having first determined the question according to his will, he then resorts to experience, and bending her into conformity with his placets, leads her about like a captive in a procession. So that even on this count he is more guilty than his modern followers, the schoolmen, who have abandoned experience altogether.

LXIV

But the Empirical school of philosophy gives birth to dogmas more deformed and monstrous than the Sophistical or Rational school. For it has its foundations not in the light of common notions (which though it be a faint and superficial light, is yet in a manner universal, and has reference to many things), but in the narrowness and darkness of a few experiments. To those therefore who are daily busied with these experiments and have infected their imagination with them, such a philosophy seems probable and all but certain; to all men else incredible and vain. Of this there is a notable instance in the alchemists and their dogmas, though it is hardly to be found elsewhere in these times, except perhaps in the philosophy of Gilbert. Nevertheless, with regard to philosophies of this kind there is one caution not to be omitted; for I foresee that if ever men are roused by my admonitions to betake themselves seriously to experiment and bid farewell to sophistical doctrines, then indeed through the premature hurry of the understanding to leap or fly to universals and principles of things, great danger may be apprehended from philosophies of this kind, against which evil we ought even now to prepare.

LXV

But the corruption of philosophy by superstition and an admixture of theology is far more widely spread, and does the greatest harm, whether to entire systems or to their parts. For the human understanding is obnoxious to the influence of the imagination no less than to the influence of common notions. For the contentious and sophistical kind of philosophy ensnares the understanding; but this kind, being fanciful and tumid and half poetical, misleads it more by flattery. For there is in man an ambition of the understanding, no less than of the will, especially in high and lofty spirits.

Of this kind we have among the Greeks a striking example in Pythagoras, though he united with it a coarser and more cumbrous superstition; another in Plato and his school, more dangerous and subtle. It shows itself likewise in parts of other philosophies, in the introduction of abstract forms and final causes and first causes, with the omission in most cases of causes intermediate, and the like. Upon this point the greatest caution should be used. For nothing is so mischievous as the apotheosis of error; and it is a very plague of the understanding for vanity to become the object of veneration. Yet in this vanity some of the moderns have with extreme levity indulged so far as to attempt to found a system of natural philosophy on the first chapter of Genesis, on the book of Job, and other parts of the sacred writings, seeking for the dead among the living; which also makes the inhibition and repression of it the more important, because from this unwholesome mixture of things human and divine there arises not only a fantastic philosophy but also a heretical religion. Very meet it is therefore that we be sober-minded, and give to faith that only which is faith's.

LXVI

So much, then, for the mischievous authorities of systems, which are founded either on common notions, or on a few experiments, or on superstition. It remains to speak of the faulty subject matter of contemplations, especially in natural philosophy. Now the human understanding is infected by the sight of what takes place in the mechanical arts, in which the alteration of bodies proceeds chiefly by composition or separation, and so imagines that something similar goes on in the universal nature of things. From this source has flowed the fiction of elements, and of their concourse for the formation of natural bodies. Again, when man contemplates nature working freely, he meets with different species of things, of animals, of plants, of minerals; whence he readily passes into the opinion that there are in nature certain primary forms which nature intends to educe, and that the remaining variety proceeds from hindrances and aberrations of nature in the fulfillment of her work, or from the collision of different species and the transplanting of one into another. To the first of these speculations we owe our primary qualities of the elements; to the other our occult properties and specific virtues; and both of them belong to those empty compendia of thought wherein the mind rests, and whereby it is diverted from more solid pursuits. It is to better purpose that the physicians bestow their labor on the secondary qualities of matter, and the operations of attraction, repulsion, attenuation, conspissation, ¹ dilatation, astriction, dissipation, maturation, and the like; and were it not that by those two compendia which I have mentioned (elementary qualities, to wit, and specific virtues) they corrupted their correct observations in these other matters - either reducing them to first qualities and their subtle and incommensurable mixtures, or not following them out with greater and more diligent observations to third and fourth qualities, but breaking off the scrutiny prematurely - they would have made much greater progress. Nor are powers of this kind (I do not say the same, but similar) to be sought for only in the medicines of the human body, but also in the changes of all other bodies.

But it is a far greater evil that they make the quiescent principles, wherefrom, and not the moving principles, whereby, things are produced, the object of their contemplation and inquiry. For the former tend to discourse, the latter to works. Nor is there any value in those vulgar distinctions of motion which are observed in the received system of natural philosophy, as generation, corruption, augmentation, diminution, alteration, and local motion. What they mean no doubt is this: if a body in other respects not changed be moved from its place, this is local motion; if without change of place or essence, it be changed in quality, this is alteration; if by reason of the change the mass and quantity of the body do not remain the same, this is augmentation or diminution; if they be changed to such a degree that they change their very essence and substance and turn to something else, this is generation and corruption. But all this is merely popular, and does not at all go deep into nature; for these are only measures and limits, not kinds of motion. What they intimate is how far, not by what means, or from what source. For they do not suggest anything with regard either to the desires of bodies or to the development of their parts. It is only when that motion presents the thing grossly and palpably to the sense as different from what it was that they begin to mark the division. Even when they wish to suggest something with regard to the causes of motion, and to establish a division with reference to them, they introduce with the greatest negligence a distinction between motion natural and violent, a distinction which is itself drawn entirely from a vulgar notion, since all violent motion is also in fact natural; the external efficient simply setting nature working otherwise than it was before. But if, leaving all this, anyone shall observe (for instance) that there is in bodies a desire of mutual contact, so as not to suffer the unity of nature to be quite separated or broken and a vacuum thus made; or if anyone say that there is in bodies a desire of resuming their natural dimensions or tension, so that if compressed within or extended beyond them, they immediately strive to recover themselves, and fall back to their old volume and extent; or if anyone say that there is in bodies a desire of congregating toward masses of kindred nature - of dense bodies, for instance, toward the globe of the earth, of thin and rare bodies toward the compass of the sky; all these and the like are truly physical kinds of motion - but those others are entirely logical and scholastic, as is abundantly manifest from this comparison.

Nor again is it a lesser evil that in their philosophies and contemplations their labor is spent in investigating and handling the first principles of things and the highest generalities of nature; whereas utility and the means of working result entirely from things intermediate. Hence it is that men cease not from abstracting nature till they come to potential and uninformed matter, nor on the other hand from dissecting nature till they reach the atom; things which, even if true, can do but little for the welfare of mankind.

1 [ Conspissatio. - Ed.]

LXVII

A caution must also be given to the understanding against the intemperance which systems of philosophy manifest in giving or withholding assent, because intemperance of this kind seems to establish idols and in some sort to perpetuate them, leaving no way open to reach and dislodge them.

This excess is of two kinds: the first being manifest in those who are ready in deciding, and render sciences dogmatic and magisterial; the other in those who deny that we can know anything, and so introduce a wandering kind of inquiry that leads to nothing; of which kinds the former subdues, the latter weakens the understanding. For the philosophy of Aristotle, after having by hostile confutations destroyed all the rest (as the Ottomans serve their brothers), has laid down the law on all points; which done, he proceeds himself to raise new questions of his own suggestion, and dispose of them likewise, so that nothing may remain that is not certain and decided; a practice which holds and is in use among his successors.

The school of Plato, on the other hand, introduced Acatalepsia, at first in jest and irony, and in disdain of the older sophists, Protagoras, Hippias, and the rest, who were of nothing else so much ashamed as of seeming to doubt about anything. But the New Academy made a dogma of it, and held it as a tenet. And though theirs is a fairer seeming way than arbitrary decisions, since they say that they by no means destroy all investigation, like Pyrrho and his Refrainers, but allow of some things to be followed as probable, though of none to be maintained as true; yet still when the human mind has once despaired of finding truth, its interest in all things grows fainter, and the result is that men turn aside to pleasant disputations and discourses and roam as it were from object to object, rather than keep on a course of severe inquisition. But, as I said at the beginning and am ever urging, the human senses and understanding, weak as they are, are not to be deprived of their authority, but to be supplied with helps.

LXVIII

So much concerning the several classes of Idols and their equipage; all of which must be renounced and put away with a fixed and solemn determination, and the understanding thoroughly freed and cleansed; the entrance into the kingdom of man, founded on the sciences, being not much other than the entrance into the kingdom of heaven, whereinto none may enter except as a little child.

LXIX

But vicious demonstrations are as the strongholds and defenses of idols; and those we have in logic do little else than make the world the bondslave of human thought, and human thought the bondslave of words. Demonstrations truly are in effect the philosophies themselves and the sciences. For such as they are, well or ill established, such are the systems of philosophy and the contemplations which follow. Now in the whole of the process which leads from the sense and objects to axioms and conclusions, the demonstrations which we use are deceptive and incompetent. This process consists of four parts, and has as many faults. In the first place, the impressions of the sense itself are faulty; for the sense both fails us and deceives us. But its shortcomings are to be supplied, and its deceptions to be corrected. Secondly, notions are ill-drawn from the impressions of the senses, and are indefinite and confused, whereas they should be definite and distinctly bounded. Thirdly, the induction is amiss which infers the principles of sciences by simple enumeration, and does not, as it ought, employ exclusions and solutions (or separations) of nature. Lastly, that method of discovery and proof according to which the most general principles are first established, and then intermediate axioms are tried and proved by them, is the parent of error and the curse of all science. Of these things, however, which now I do but touch upon, I will speak more largely when, having performed these expiations and purgings of the mind, I come to set forth the true way for the interpretation of nature.

LXX

But the best demonstration by far is experience, if it go not beyond the actual experiment. For if it be transferred to other cases which are deemed similar, unless such transfer be made by a just and orderly process, it is a fallacious thing. But the manner of making experiments which men now use is blind and stupid. And therefore, wandering and straying as they do with no settled course, and taking counsel only from things as they fall out, they fetch a wide circuit and meet with many matters, but make little progress; and sometimes are full of hope, sometimes are distracted; and always find that there is something beyond to be sought. For it generally happens that men make their trials carelessly, and as it were in play; slightly varying experiments already known, and, if the thing does not answer, growing weary and abandoning the attempt. And even if they apply themselves to experiments more seriously and earnestly and laboriously, still they spend their labor in working out some one experiment, as Gilbert with the magnet, and the chemists with gold; a course of proceeding not less unskillful in the design than small in the attempt. For no one successfully investigates the nature of a thing in the thing itself; the inquiry must be enlarged so as to become more general.

And even when they seek to educe some science or theory from their experiments, they nevertheless almost always turn aside with overhasty and unseasonable eagerness to practice; not only for the sake of the uses and fruits of the practice, but from impatience to obtain in the shape of some new work an assurance for themselves that it is worth their while to go on; and also to show themselves off to the world, and so raise the credit of the business in which they are engaged. Thus, like Atalanta, they go aside to pick up the golden apple, but meanwhile they interrupt their course, and let the victory escape them. But in the true course of experience, and in carrying it on to the effecting of new works, the divine wisdom and order must be our pattern. Now God on the first day of creation created light only, giving to that work an entire day, in which no material substance was created. So must we likewise from experience of every kind first endeavor to discover true causes and axioms; and seek for experiments of Light, not for experiments of Fruit. For axioms rightly discovered and established supply practice with its instruments, not one by one, but in clusters, and draw after them trains and troops of works. Of the paths, however, of experience, which no less than the paths of judgment are impeded and beset, I will speak hereafter; here I have only mentioned ordinary experimental research as a bad kind of demonstration. But now the order of the matter in hand leads me to add something both as to those signs which I lately mentioned (signs that the systems of philosophy and contemplation in use are in a bad condition), and also as to the causes of what seems at first so strange and incredible. For a knowledge of the signs prepares assent; an explanation of the causes removes the marvel - which two things will do much to render the extirpation of idols from the understanding more easy and gentle.

LXXI

The sciences which we possess come for the most part from the Greeks. For what has been added by Roman, Arabic, or later writers is not much nor of much importance; and whatever it is, it is built on the foundation of Greek discoveries. Now the wisdom of the Greeks was professorial and much given to disputations, a kind of wisdom most adverse to the inquisition of truth. Thus that name of Sophists, which by those who would be thought philosophers was in contempt cast back upon and so transferred to the ancient rhetoricians, Gorgias, Protagoras, Hippias, Polus, does indeed suit the entire class: Plato, Aristotle, Zeno, Epicurus, Theophrastus, and their successors Chrysippus, Carneades, and the rest. There was this difference only, that the former class was wandering and mercenary, going about from town to town, putting up their wisdom to sale, and taking a price for it, while the latter was more pompous and dignified, as composed of men who had fixed abodes, and who opened schools and taught their philosophy without reward. Still both sorts, though in other respects unequal, were professorial; both turned the matter into disputations, and set up and battled for philosophical sects and heresies; so that their doctrines were for the most part (as Dionysius not unaptly rallied Plato) "the talk of idle old men to ignorant youths." But the elder of the Greek philosophers, Empedocles, Anaxagoras, Leucippus, Democritus, Parmenides, Heraclitus, Xenophanes, Philolaus, and the rest (I omit Pythagoras as a mystic), did not, so far as we know, open schools; but more silently and severely and simply - that is, with less affectation and parade - betook themselves to the inquisition of truth. And therefore they were in my judgment more successful; only that their works were in the course of time obscured by those slighter persons who had more which suits and pleases the capacity and tastes of the vulgar; time, like a river, bringing down to us things which are light and puffed up, but letting weighty matters sink. Still even they were not altogether free from the failing of their nation, but leaned too much to the ambition and vanity of founding a sect and catching popular applause. But the inquisition of truth must be despaired of when it turns aside to trifles of this kind. Nor should we omit that judgment, or rather divination, which was given concerning the Greeks by the Egyptian priest - that "they were always boys, without antiquity of knowledge or knowledge of antiquity." Assuredly they have that which is characteristic of boys: they are prompt to prattle, but cannot generate; for their wisdom abounds in words but is barren of works. And therefore the signs which are taken from the origin and birthplace of the received philosophy are not good.

LXXII

Nor does the character of the time and age yield much better signs than the character of the country and nation. For at that period there was but a narrow and meager knowledge either of time or place, which is the worst thing that can be, especially for those who rest all on experience. For they had no history worthy to be called history that went back a thousand years - but only fables and rumors of antiquity. And of the regions and districts of the world they knew but a small portion, giving indiscriminately the name of Scythians to all in the North, of Celts to all in the West; knowing nothing of Africa beyond the hither side of Ethiopia, of Asia beyond the Ganges. Much less were they acquainted with the provinces of the New World, even by hearsay or any well-founded rumor; nay, a multitude of climates and zones, wherein innumerable nations breathe and live, were pronounced by them to be uninhabitable; and the travels of Democritus, Plato, and Pythagoras, which were rather suburban excursions than distant journeys, were talked of as something great. In our times, on the other hand, both many parts of the New World and the limits on every side of the Old World are known, and our stock of experience has increased to an infinite amount. Wherefore if (like astrologers) we draw signs from the season of their nativity or birth, nothing great can be predicted of those systems of philosophy.

LXXIII

Of all signs there is none more certain or more noble than that taken from fruits. For fruits and works are as it were sponsors and sureties for the truth of philosophies. Now, from all these systems of the Greeks, and their ramifications through particular sciences, there can hardly after the lapse of so many years be adduced a single experiment which tends to relieve and benefit the condition of man, and which can with truth be referred to the speculations and theories of philosophy. And Celsus ingenuously and wisely owns as much when he tells us that the experimental part of medicine was first discovered, and that afterwards men philosophized about it, and hunted for and assigned causes; and not by an inverse process that philosophy and the knowledge of causes led to the discovery and development of the experimental part. And therefore it was not strange that among the Egyptians, who rewarded inventors with divine honors and sacred rites, there were more images of brutes than of men; inasmuch as brutes by their natural instinct have produced many discoveries, whereas men by discussion and the conclusions of reason have given birth to few or none.

Some little has indeed been produced by the industry of chemists; but it has been produced accidentally and in passing, or else by a kind of variation of experiments, such as mechanics use, and not by any art or theory. For the theory which they have devised rather confuses the experiments than aids them. They, too, who have busied themselves with natural magic, as they call it, have but few discoveries to show, and those trifling and imposture-like. Wherefore, as in religion we are warned to show our faith by works, so in philosophy by the same rule the system should be judged of by its fruits, and pronounced frivolous if it be barren, more especially if, in place of fruits of grape and olive, it bear thorns and briers of dispute and contention.

LXXIV

Signs also are to be drawn from the increase and progress of systems and sciences. For what is founded on nature grows and increases, while what is founded on opinion varies but increases not. If therefore those doctrines had not plainly been like a plant torn up from its roots, but had remained attached to the womb of nature and continued to draw nourishment from her, that could never have come to pass which we have seen now for twice a thousand years; namely, that the sciences stand where they did and remain almost in the same condition, receiving no noticeable increase, but on the contrary, thriving most under their first founder, and then declining. Whereas in the mechanical arts, which are founded on nature and the light of experience, we see the contrary happen, for these (as long as they are popular) are continually thriving and growing, as having in them a breath of life, at the first rude, then convenient, afterwards adorned, and at all times advancing.

LXXV

There is still another sign remaining (if sign it can be called, when it is rather testimony, nay, of all testimony the most valid). I mean the confession of the very authorities whom men now follow. For even they who lay down the law on all things so confidently, do still in their more sober moods fall to complaints of the subtlety of nature, the obscurity of things, and the weakness of the human mind. Now if this were all they did, some perhaps of a timid disposition might be deterred from further search, while others of a more ardent and hopeful spirit might be whetted and incited to go on farther. But not content to speak for themselves, whatever is beyond their own or their master's knowledge or reach they set down as beyond the bounds of possibility, and pronounce, as if on the authority of their art, that it cannot be known or done; thus most presumptuously and invidiously turning the weakness of their own discoveries into a calumny of nature herself, and the despair of the rest of the world. Hence the school of the New Academy, which held Acatalepsia as a tenet and doomed men to perpetual darkness. Hence the opinion that forms or true differences of things (which are in fact laws of pure act) are past finding out and beyond the reach of man. Hence, too, those opinions in the department of action and operation; as, that the heat of the sun and of fire are quite different in kind - lest men should imagine that by the operations of fire anything like the works of nature can be educed and formed. Hence the notion that composition only is the work of man, and mixture of none but nature - lest men should expect from art some power of generating or transforming natural bodies. By this sign, therefore, men will easily take warning not to mix up their fortunes and labors with dogmas not only despaired of but dedicated to despair.

LXXVI

Neither is this other sign to be omitted: that formerly there existed among philosophers such great disagreement, and such diversities in the schools themselves, a fact which sufficiently shows that the road from the senses to the understanding was not skillfully laid out, when the same groundwork of philosophy (the nature of things to wit) was torn and split up into such vague and multifarious errors. And although in these times disagreements and diversities of opinion on first principles and entire systems are for the most part extinguished, still on parts of philosophy there remain innumerable questions and disputes, so that it plainly appears that neither in the systems themselves nor in the modes of demonstration is there anything certain or sound.

LXXVII

And as for the general opinion that in the philosophy of Aristotle, at any rate, there is great agreement, since after its publication the systems of older philosophers died away, while in the times which followed nothing better was found, so that it seems to have been so well laid and established as to have drawn both ages in its train - I answer in the first place, that the common notion of the falling off of the old systems upon the publication of Aristotle's works is a false one; for long afterwards, down even to the times of Cicero and subsequent ages, the works of the old philosophers still remained. But in the times which followed, when on the inundation of barbarians into the Roman empire human learning had suffered shipwreck, then the systems of Aristotle and Plato, like planks of lighter and less solid material, floated on the waves of time and were preserved. Upon the point of consent also men are deceived, if the matter be looked into more keenly. For true consent is that which consists in the coincidence of free judgments, after due examination. But far the greater number of those who have assented to the philosophy of Aristotle have addicted themselves thereto from prejudgment and upon the authority of others; so that it is a following and going along together, rather than consent. But even if it had been a real and widespread consent, still so little ought consent to be deemed a sure and solid confirmation, that it is in fact a strong presumption the other way. For the worst of all auguries is from consent in matters intellectual (divinity excepted, and politics where there is right of vote). For nothing pleases the many unless it strikes the imagination, or binds the understanding with the bands of common notions, as I have already said. We may very well transfer, therefore, from moral to intellectual matters the saying of Phocion, that if the multitude assent and applaud, men ought immediately to examine themselves as to what blunder or fault they may have committed. This sign, therefore, is one of the most unfavorable. And so much for this point; namely, that the signs of truth and soundness in the received systems and sciences are not good, whether they be drawn from their origin, or from their fruits, or from their progress, or from the confessions of their founders, or from general consent.

LXXVIII

I now come to the causes of these errors, and of so long a continuance in them through so many ages, which are very many and very potent; that all wonder how these considerations which I bring forward should have escaped men's notice till now may cease, and the only wonder be how now at last they should have entered into any man's head and become the subject of his thoughts - which truly I myself esteem as the result of some happy accident, rather than of any excellence of faculty in me - a birth of Time rather than a birth of Wit. Now, in the first place, those so many ages, if you weigh the case truly, shrink into a very small compass. For out of the five and twenty centuries over which the memory and learning of men extends, you can hardly pick out six that were fertile in sciences or favorable to their development. In times no less than in regions there are wastes and deserts. For only three revolutions and periods of learning can properly be reckoned: one among the Greeks, the second among the Romans, and the last among us, that is to say, the nations of Western Europe. And to each of these hardly two centuries can justly be assigned. The intervening ages of the world, in respect of any rich or flourishing growth of the sciences, were unprosperous. For neither the Arabians nor the Schoolmen need be mentioned, who in the intermediate times rather crushed the sciences with a multitude of treatises, than increased their weight. And therefore the first cause of so meager a progress in the sciences is duly and orderly referred to the narrow limits of the time that has been favorable to them.

LXXIX

In the second place there presents itself a cause of great weight in all ways, namely, that during those very ages in which the wits and learning of men have flourished most, or indeed flourished at all, the least part of their diligence was given to natural philosophy. Yet this very philosophy it is that ought to be esteemed the great mother of the sciences. For all arts and all sciences, if torn from this root, though they may be polished and shaped and made fit for use, yet they will hardly grow. Now it is well known that after the Christian religion was received and grew strong, by far the greater number of the best wits applied themselves to theology; that to this both the highest rewards were offered, and helps of all kinds most abundantly supplied; and that this devotion to theology chiefly occupied that third portion or epoch of time among us Europeans of the West, and the more so because about the same time both literature began to flourish and religious controversies to spring up. In the age before, on the other hand, during the continuance of the second period among the Romans, the meditations and labors of philosophers were principally employed and consumed on moral philosophy, which to the heathen was as theology to us. Moreover, in those times the greatest wits applied themselves very generally to public affairs, the magnitude of the Roman empire requiring the services of a great number of persons. Again, the age in which natural philosophy was seen to flourish most among the Greeks was but a brief particle of time; for in early ages the Seven Wise Men, as they were called (all except Thales), applied themselves to morals and politics; and in later times, when Socrates had drawn down philosophy from heaven to earth, moral philosophy became more fashionable than ever, and diverted the minds of men from the philosophy of nature.

Nay, the very period itself in which inquiries concerning nature flourished, was by controversies and the ambitious display of new opinions corrupted and made useless. Seeing therefore that during those three periods natural philosophy was in a great degree either neglected or hindered, it is no wonder if men made but small advance in that to which they were not attending.

LXXX

To this it may be added that natural philosophy, even among those who have attended to it, has scarcely ever possessed, especially in these later times, a disengaged and whole man (unless it were some monk studying in his cell, or some gentleman in his country house), but that it has been made merely a passage and bridge to something else. And so this great mother of the sciences has with strange indignity been degraded to the offices of a servant, having to attend on the business of medicine or mathematics, and likewise to wash and imbue youthful and unripe wits with a sort of first dye, in order that they may be the fitter to receive another afterwards. Meanwhile let no man look for much progress in the sciences - especially in the practical part of them - unless natural philosophy be carried on and applied to particular sciences, and particular sciences be carried back again to natural philosophy. For want of this, astronomy, optics, music, a number of mechanical arts, medicine itself - nay, what one might more wonder at, moral and political philosophy, and the logical sciences - altogether lack profoundness, and merely glide along the surface and variety of things. Because after these particular sciences have been once distributed and established, they are no more nourished by natural philosophy, which might have drawn out of the true contemplation of motions, rays, sounds, texture and configuration of bodies, affections, and intellectual perceptions, the means of imparting to them fresh strength and growth. And therefore it is nothing strange if the sciences grow not, seeing they are parted from their roots.

LXXXI

Again there is another great and powerful cause why the sciences have made but little progress, which is this. It is not possible to run a course aright when the goal itself has not been rightly placed. Now the true and lawful goal of the sciences is none other than this: that human life be endowed with new discoveries and powers. But of this the great majority have no feeling, but are merely hireling and professorial; except when it occasionally happens that some workman of acuter wit and covetous of honor applies himself to a new invention, which he mostly does at the expense of his fortunes. But in general, so far are men from proposing to themselves to augment the mass of arts and sciences, that from the mass already at hand they neither take nor look for anything more than what they may turn to use in their lectures, or to gain, or to reputation, or to some similar advantage. And if any one out of all the multitude court science with honest affection and for her own sake, yet even with him the object will be found to be rather the variety of contemplations and doctrines than the severe and rigid search after truth. And if by chance there be one who seeks after truth in earnest, yet even he will propose to himself such a kind of truth as shall yield satisfaction to the mind and understanding in rendering causes for things long since discovered, and not the truth which shall lead to new assurance of works and new light of axioms. If then the end of the sciences has not as yet been well placed, it is not strange that men have erred as to the means.

LXXXII

And as men have misplaced the end and goal of the sciences, so again, even if they had placed it right, yet they have chosen a way to it which is altogether erroneous and impassable. And an astonishing thing it is to one who rightly considers the matter, that no mortal should have seriously applied himself to the opening and laying out of a road for the human understanding direct from the sense, by a course of experiment orderly conducted and well built up, but that all has been left either to the mist of tradition, or the whirl and eddy of argument, or the fluctuations and mazes of chance and of vague and ill-digested experience. Now let any man soberly and diligently consider what the way is by which men have been accustomed to proceed in the investigation and discovery of things, and in the first place he will no doubt remark a method of discovery very simple and inartificial, which is the most ordinary method, and is no more than this. When a man addresses himself to discover something, he first seeks out and sets before him all that has been said about it by others; then he begins to meditate for himself; and so by much agitation and working of the wit solicits and as it were evokes his own spirit to give him oracles; which method has no foundation at all, but rests only upon opinions and is carried about with them.

Another may perhaps call in logic to discover it for him, but that has no relation to the matter except in name. For logical invention does not discover principles and chief axioms, of which arts are composed, but only such things as appear to be consistent with them. For if you grow more curious and importunate and busy, and question her of probations and invention of principles or primary axioms, her answer is well known; she refers you to the faith you are bound to give to the principles of each separate art.

There remains simple experience which, if taken as it comes, is called accident; if sought for, experiment. But this kind of experience is no better than a broom without its band, as the saying is - a mere groping, as of men in the dark, that feel all round them for the chance of finding their way, when they had much better wait for daylight, or light a candle, and then go. But the true method of experience, on the contrary, first lights the candle, and then by means of the candle shows the way; commencing as it does with experience duly ordered and digested, not bungling or erratic, and from it educing axioms, and from established axioms again new experiments; even as it was not without order and method that the divine word operated on the created mass. Let men therefore cease to wonder that the course of science is not yet wholly run, seeing that they have gone altogether astray, either leaving and abandoning experience entirely, or losing their way in it and wandering round and round as in a labyrinth. Whereas a method rightly ordered leads by an unbroken route through the woods of experience to the open ground of axioms.

LXXXIII

This evil, however, has been strangely increased by an opinion or conceit, which though of long standing is vain and hurtful, namely, that the dignity of the human mind is impaired by long and close intercourse with experiments and particulars, subject to sense and bound in matter; especially as they are laborious to search, ignoble to meditate, harsh to deliver, illiberal to practice, infinite in number, and minute in subtlety. So that it has come at length to this, that the true way is not merely deserted, but shut out and stopped up; experience being, I do not say abandoned or badly managed, but rejected with disdain.

LXXXIV

Again, men have been kept back as by a kind of enchantment from progress in the sciences by reverence for antiquity, by the authority of men accounted great in philosophy, and then by general consent. Of the last I have spoken above.

As for antiquity, the opinion touching it which men entertain is quite a negligent one and scarcely consonant with the word itself. For the old age of the world is to be accounted the true antiquity; and this is the attribute of our own times, not of that earlier age of the world in which the ancients lived, and which, though in respect of us it was the elder, yet in respect of the world it was the younger. And truly as we look for greater knowledge of human things and a riper judgment in the old man than in the young, because of his experience and of the number and variety of the things which he has seen and heard and thought of, so in like manner from our age, if it but knew its own strength and chose to essay and exert it, much more might fairly be expected than from the ancient times, inasmuch as it is a more advanced age of the world, and stored and stocked with infinite experiments and observations.

Nor must it go for nothing that by the distant voyages and travels which have become frequent in our times many things in nature have been laid open and discovered which may let in new light upon philosophy. And surely it would be disgraceful if, while the regions of the material globe - that is, of the earth, of the sea, and of the stars - have been in our times laid widely open and revealed, the intellectual globe should remain shut up within the narrow limits of old discoveries.

And with regard to authority, it shows a feeble mind to grant so much to authors and yet deny time his rights, who is the author of authors, nay, rather of all authority. For rightly is truth called the daughter of time, not of authority. It is no wonder therefore if those enchantments of antiquity and authority and consent have so bound up men's powers that they have been made impotent (like persons bewitched) to accompany with the nature of things.

LXXXV

Nor is it only the admiration of antiquity, authority, and consent, that has forced the industry of man to rest satisfied with the discoveries already made, but also an admiration for the works themselves of which the human race has long been in possession. For when a man looks at the variety and the beauty of the provision which the mechanical arts have brought together for men's use, he will certainly be more inclined to admire the wealth of man than to feel his wants; not considering that the original observations and operations of nature (which are the life and moving principle of all that variety) are not many nor deeply fetched, and that the rest is but patience, and the subtle and ruled motion of the hand and instruments - as the making of clocks (for instance) is certainly a subtle and exact work: their wheels seem to imitate the celestial orbs, and their alternating and orderly motion, the pulse of animals; and yet all this depends on one or two axioms of nature.

Again, if you observe the refinement of the liberal arts, or even that which relates to the mechanical preparation of natural substances, and take notice of such things as the discovery in astronomy of the motions of the heavens, of harmony in music, of the letters of the alphabet (to this day not in use among the Chinese) in grammar; or again in things mechanical, the discovery of the works of Bacchus and Ceres - that is, of the arts of preparing wine and beer, and of making bread; the discovery once more of the delicacies of the table, of distillations and the like; and if you likewise bear in mind the long periods which it has taken to bring these things to their present degree of perfection (for they are all ancient except distillation), and again (as has been said of clocks) how little they owe to observations and axioms of nature, and how easily and obviously and as it were by casual suggestion they may have been discovered; you will easily cease from wondering, and on the contrary will 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. And yet these very discoveries which we have just mentioned are older than philosophy and intellectual arts. So that, if the truth must be spoken, when the rational and dogmatical sciences began, the discovery of useful works came to an end.

And again, if a man turn from the workshop to the library, and wonder at the immense variety of books he sees there, let him but examine and diligently inspect their matter and contents, and his wonder will assuredly be turned the other way. For after observing their endless repetitions, and how men are ever saying and doing what has been said and done before, he will pass from admiration of the variety to astonishment at the poverty and scantiness of the subjects which till now have occupied and possessed the minds of men.

And if again he descend to the consideration of those arts which are deemed curious rather than safe, and look more closely into the works of the alchemists or the magicians, he will be in doubt perhaps whether he ought rather to laugh over them or to weep. For the alchemist nurses eternal hope and when the thing fails, lays the blame upon some error of his own; fearing either that he has not sufficiently understood the words of his art or of his authors (whereupon he turns to tradition and auricular whispers), or else that in his manipulations he has made some slip of a scruple in weight or a moment in time (whereupon he repeats his trials to infinity). And when, meanwhile, among the chances of experiment he lights upon some conclusions either in aspect new or for utility not contemptible, he takes these for earnest of what is to come, and feeds his mind upon them, and magnifies them to the most, and supplies the rest in hope. Not but that the alchemists have made a good many discoveries and presented men with useful inventions. But their case may be well compared to the fable of the old man who bequeathed to his sons gold buried in a vineyard, pretending not to know the exact spot; whereupon the sons applied themselves diligently to the digging of the vineyard, and though no gold was found there, yet the vintage by that digging was made more plentiful.

Again the students of natural magic, who explain everything by sympathies and antipathies, have in their idle and most slothful conjectures ascribed to substances wonderful virtues and operations; and if ever they have produced works, they have been such as aim rather at admiration and novelty than at utility and fruit.

In superstitious magic on the other hand (if of this also we must speak), it is especially to be observed that they are but subjects of a certain and definite kind wherein the curious and superstitious arts, in all nations and ages, and religions also, have worked or played. These therefore we may pass. Meanwhile if is nowise strange if opinion of plenty has been the cause of want.

LXXXVI

Further, this admiration of men for knowledges and arts - an admiration in itself weak enough, and well-nigh childish - has been increased by the craft and artifices of those who have handled and transmitted sciences. For they set them forth with such ambition and parade, and bring them into the view of the world so fashioned and masked as if they were complete in all parts and finished. For if you look at the method of them and the divisions, they seem to embrace and comprise everything which can belong to the subject. And although these divisions are ill filled out and are but as empty cases, still to the common mind they present the form and plan of a perfect science. But the first and most ancient seekers after truth were wont, with better faith and better fortune, too, to throw the knowledge which they gathered from the contemplation of things, and which they meant to store up for use, into aphorisms; that is, into short and scattered sentences, not linked together by an artificial method; and did not pretend or profess to embrace the entire art. But as the matter now is, it is nothing strange if men do not seek to advance in things delivered to them as long since perfect and complete.

LXXXVII

Moreover, the ancient systems have received no slight accession of reputation and credit from the vanity and levity of those who have propounded new ones, especially in the active and practical department of natural philosophy. For there have not been wanting talkers and dreamers who, partly from credulity, partly in imposture, have loaded mankind with promises, offering and announcing the prolongation of life, the retardation of age, the alleviation of pain, the repairing of natural defects, the deceiving of the senses; arts of binding and inciting the affections, of illuminating and exalting the intellectual faculties, of transmuting substances, of strengthening and multiplying motions at will, of making impressions and alterations in the air, of bringing down and procuring celestial influences; arts of divining things future, and bringing things distant near, and revealing things secret; and many more. But with regard to these lavish promisers, this judgment would not be far amiss: that there is as much difference in philosophy between their vanities and true arts as there is in history between the exploits of Julius Caesar or Alexander the Great, and the exploits of Amadis of Gaul or Arthur of Britain. For it is true that those illustrious generals really did greater things than these shadowy heroes are even feigned to have done; but they did them by means and ways of action not fabulous or monstrous. Yet surely it is not fair that the credit of true history should be lessened because it has sometimes been injured and wronged by fables. Meanwhile it is not to be wondered at if a great prejudice is raised against new propositions, especially when works are also mentioned, because of those impostors who have attempted the like; since their excess of vanity, and the disgust it has bred, have their effect still in the destruction of all greatness of mind in enterprises of this kind.

LXXXVIII

Far more, however, has knowledge suffered from littleness of spirit and the smallness and slightness of the tasks which human industry has proposed to itself. And what is worst of all, this very littleness of spirit comes with a certain air of arrogance and superiority.

For in the first place there is found in all arts one general device, which has now become familiar - that the author lays the weakness of his art to the charge of nature: whatever his art cannot attain he sets down on the authority of the same art to be in nature impossible. And truly no art can be condemned if it be judge itself. Moreover, the philosophy which is now in vogue embraces and cherishes certain tenets, the purpose of which (if it be diligently examined) is to persuade men that nothing difficult, nothing by which nature may be commanded and subdued, can be expected from art or human labor; as with respect to the doctrine that the heat of the sun and of fire differ in kind, and to that other concerning mixture, has been already observed. Which things, if they be noted accurately, tend wholly to the unfair circumscription of human power, and to a deliberate and factitious despair, which not only disturbs the auguries of hope, but also cuts the sinews and spur of industry, and throws away the chances of experience itself. And all for the sake of having their art thought perfect, and for the miserable vainglory of making it believed that whatever has not yet been discovered and comprehended can never be discovered or comprehended hereafter.

And even if a man apply himself fairly to facts, and endeavor to find out something new, yet he will confine his aim and intention to the investigation and working out of some one discovery and no more; such as the nature of the magnet, the ebb and flow of the sea, the system of the heavens, and things of this kind, which seem to be in some measure secret, and have hitherto been handled without much success. Whereas it is most unskillful to investigate the nature of anything in the thing itself, seeing that the same nature which appears in some things to be latent and hidden is in others manifest and palpable; wherefore in the former it produces wonder, in the latter excites no attention; as we find it in the nature of consistency, which in wood or stone is not observed, but is passed over under the appellation of solidity without further inquiry as to why separation or solution of continuity is avoided; while in the case of bubbles, which form themselves into certain pellicles, curiously shaped into hemispheres, so that the solution of continuity is avoided for a moment, it is thought a subtle matter. In fact, what in some things is accounted a secret has in others a manifest and well-known nature, which will never be recognized as long as the experiments and thoughts of men are engaged on the former only.

But generally speaking, in mechanics old discoveries pass for new if a man does but refine or embellish them, or unite several in one, or couple them better with their use, or make the work in greater or less volume than it was before, or the like.

Thus, then, it is no wonder if inventions noble and worthy of mankind have not been brought to light, when men have been contented and delighted with such trifling and puerile tasks, and have even fancied that in them they have been endeavoring after, if not accomplishing, some great matter.

LXXXIX

Neither is it to be forgotten that in every age natural philosophy has had a troublesome and hard to deal with adversary - namely, superstition, and the blind and immoderate zeal of religion. For we see among the Greeks that those who first proposed to men's then uninitiated ears the natural causes for thunder and for storms were thereupon found guilty of impiety. Nor was much more forbearance shown by some of the ancient fathers of the Christian church to those who on most convincing grounds (such as no one in his senses would now think of contradicting) maintained that the earth was round, and of consequence asserted the existence of the antipodes.

Moreover, as things now are, to discourse of nature is made harder and more perilous by the summaries and systems of the schoolmen who, having reduced theology into regular order as well as they were able, and fashioned it into the shape of an art, ended in incorporating the contentious and thorny philosophy of Aristotle, more than was fit, with the body of religion.

To the same result, though in a different way, tend the speculations of those who have taken upon them to deduce the truth of the Christian religion from the principles of philosophers, and to confirm it by their authority, pompously solemnizing this union of the sense and faith as a lawful marriage, and entertaining men's minds with a pleasing variety of matter, but all the while disparaging things divine by mingling them with things human. Now in such mixtures of theology with philosophy only the received doctrines of philosophy are included; while new ones, albeit changes for the better, are all but expelled and exterminated.

Lastly, you will find that by the simpleness of certain divines, access to any philosophy, however pure, is well-nigh closed. Some are weakly afraid lest a deeper search into nature should transgress the permitted limits of sober-mindedness, wrongfully wresting and transferring what is said in Holy Writ against those who pry into sacred mysteries, to the hidden things of nature, which are barred by no prohibition. Others with more subtlety surmise and reflect that if second causes are unknown everything can more readily be referred to the divine hand and rod, a point in which they think religion greatly concerned - which is in fact nothing else but to seek to gratify God with a lie. Others fear from past example that movements and changes in philosophy will end in assaults on religion. And others again appear apprehensive that in the investigation of nature something may be found to subvert or at least shake the authority of religion, especially with the unlearned. But these two last fears seem to me to savor utterly of carnal wisdom; as if men in the recesses and secret thought of their hearts doubted and distrusted the strength of religion and the empire of faith over the sense, and therefore feared that the investigation of truth in nature might be dangerous to them. But if the matter be truly considered, natural philosophy is, after the word of God, at once the surest medicine against superstition and the most approved nourishment for faith, and therefore she is rightly given to religion as her most faithful handmaid, since the one displays the will of God, the other his power. For he did not err who said, "Ye err in that ye know not the Scriptures and the power of God," thus coupling and blending in an indissoluble bond information concerning his will and meditation concerning his power. Meanwhile it is not surprising if the growth of natural philosophy is checked when religion, the thing which has most power over men's minds, has by the simpleness and incautious zeal of certain persons been drawn to take part against her.

XC

Again, in the customs and institutions of schools, academies, colleges, and similar bodies destined for the abode of learned men and the cultivation of learning, everything is found adverse to the progress of science. For the lectures and exercises there are so ordered that to think or speculate on anything out of the common way can hardly occur to any man. And if one or two have the boldness to use any liberty of judgment, they must undertake the task all by themselves; they can have no advantage from the company of others. And if they can endure this also, they will find their industry and largeness of mind no slight hindrance to their fortune. For the studies of men in these places are confined and as it were imprisoned in the writings of certain authors, from whom if any man dissent he is straightway arraigned as a turbulent person and an innovator. But surely there is a great distinction between matters of state and the arts; for the danger from new motion and from new light is not the same. In matters of state a change even for the better is distrusted, because it unsettles what is established; these things resting on authority, consent, fame and opinion, not on demonstration. But arts and sciences should be like mines, where the noise of new works and further advances is heard on every side. But though the matter be so according to right reason, it is not so acted on in practice; and the points above mentioned in the administration and government of learning put a severe restraint upon the advancement of the sciences.

XCI

Nay, even if that jealousy were to cease, still it is enough to check the growth of science that efforts and labors in this field go unrewarded. For it does not rest with the same persons to cultivate sciences and to reward them. The growth of them comes from great wits; the prizes and rewards of them are in the hands of the people, or of great persons, who are but in very few cases even moderately learned. Moreover, this kind of progress is not only unrewarded with prizes and substantial benefits; it has not even the advantage of popular applause. For it is a greater matter than the generality of men can take in, and is apt to be overwhelmed and extinguished by the gales of popular opinions. And it is nothing strange if a thing not held in honor does not prosper.

XCII

But by far the greatest obstacle to the progress of science and to the undertaking of new tasks and provinces therein is found in this - that men despair and think things impossible. For wise and serious men are wont in these matters to be altogether distrustful, considering with themselves the obscurity of nature, the shortness of life, the deceitfulness of the senses, the weakness of the judgment, the difficulty of experiment, and the like; and so supposing that in the revolution of time and of the ages of the world the sciences have their ebbs and flows; that at one season they grow and flourish, at another wither and decay, yet in such sort that when they have reached a certain point and condition they can advance no further. If therefore anyone believes or promises more, they think this comes of an ungoverned and unripened mind, and that such attempts have prosperous beginnings, become difficult as they go on, and end in confusion. Now since these are thoughts which naturally present themselves to men grave and of great judgment, we must take good heed that we be not led away by our love for a most fair and excellent object to relax or diminish the severity of our judgment. We must observe diligently what encouragement dawns upon us and from what quarter, and, putting aside the lighter breezes of hope, we must thoroughly sift and examine those which promise greater steadiness and constancy. Nay, and we must take state prudence too into our counsels, whose rule is to distrust, and to take the less favorable view of human affairs. I am now therefore to speak touching hope, especially as I am not a dealer in promises, and wish neither to force nor to ensnare men's judgments, but to lead them by the hand with their good will. And though the strongest means of inspiring hope will be to bring men to particulars, especially to particulars digested and arranged in my Tables of Discovery (the subject partly of the second, but much more of the fourth part of my Instauration), since this is not merely the promise of the thing but the thing itself; nevertheless, that everything may be done with gentleness, I will proceed with my plan of preparing men's minds, of which preparation to give hope is no unimportant part. For without it the rest tends rather to make men sad (by giving them a worse and meaner opinion of things as they are than they now have, and making them more fully to feel and know the unhappiness of their own condition) than to induce any alacrity or to whet their industry in making trial. And therefore it is fit that I publish and set forth those conjectures of mine which make hope in this matter reasonable, just as Columbus did, before that wonderful voyage of his across the Atlantic, when he gave the reasons for his conviction that new lands and continents might be discovered besides those which were known before; which reasons, though rejected at first, were afterwards made good by experience, and were the causes and beginnings of great events.

XCIII

The beginning is from God: for the business which is in hand, having the character of good so strongly impressed upon it, appears manifestly to proceed from God, who is the author of good, and the Father of Lights. Now in divine operations even the smallest beginnings lead of a certainty to their end. And as it was said of spiritual things, "The kingdom of God cometh not with observation," so is it in all the greater works of Divine Providence; everything glides on smoothly and noiselessly, and the work is fairly going on before men are aware that it has begun. Nor should the prophecy of Daniel be forgotten touching the last ages of the world: "Many shall go to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased"; clearly intimating that the thorough passage of the world (which now by so many distant voyages seems to be accomplished, or in course of accomplishment), and the advancement of the sciences, are destined by fate, that is, by Divine Providence, to meet in the same age.

XCIV

Next comes a consideration of the greatest importance as an argument of hope; I mean that drawn from the errors of past time, and of the ways hitherto trodden. For most excellent was the censure once passed upon a government that had been unwisely administered. "That which is the worst thing in reference to the past, ought to be regarded as best for the future. For if you had done all that your duty demanded, and yet your affairs were no better, you would not have even a hope left you that further improvement is possible. But now, when your misfortunes are owing, not to the force of circumstances, but to your own errors, you may hope that by dismissing or correcting these errors, a great change may be made for the better." In like manner, if during so long a course of years men had kept the true road for discovering and cultivating sciences, and had yet been unable to make further progress therein, bold doubtless and rash would be the opinion that further progress is possible. But if the road itself has been mistaken, and men's labor spent on unfit objects, it follows that the difficulty has its rise not in things themselves, which are not in our power, but in the human understanding, and the use and application thereof, which admits of remedy and medicine. It will be of great use therefore to set forth what these errors are. For as many impediments as there have been in times past from this cause, so many arguments are there of hope for the time to come. And although they have been partly touched before, I think fit here also, in plain and simple words, to represent them.

XCV

Those who have handled sciences have been either men of experiment or men of dogmas. The men of experiment are like the ant, they only collect and use; the reasoners resemble spiders, who make cobwebs out of their own substance. But the bee takes a middle course: it gathers its material from the flowers of the garden and of the field, but transforms and digests it by a power of its own. Not unlike this is the true business of philosophy; for it neither relies solely or chiefly on the powers of the mind, nor does it take the matter which it gathers from natural history and mechanical experiments and lay it up in the memory whole, as it finds it, but lays it up in the understanding altered and digested. Therefore from a closer and purer league between these two faculties, the experimental and the rational (such as has never yet been made), much may be hoped.

XCVI

We have as yet no natural philosophy that is pure; all is tainted and corrupted: in Aristotle's school by logic; in Plato's by natural theology; in the second school of Platonists, such as Proclus and others, by mathematics, which ought only to give definiteness to natural philosophy, not to generate or give it birth. From a natural philosophy pure and unmixed, better things are to be expected.

XCVII

No one has yet been found so firm of mind and purpose as resolutely to compel himself to sweep away all theories and common notions, and to apply the understanding, thus made fair and even, to a fresh examination of particulars. Thus it happens that human knowledge, as we have it, is a mere medley and ill-digested mass, made up of much credulity and much accident, and also of the childish notions which we at first imbibed.

Now if anyone of ripe age, unimpaired senses, and well-purged mind, apply himself anew to experience and particulars, better hopes may be entertained of that man. In which point I promise to myself a like fortune to that of Alexander the Great, and let no man tax me with vanity till he have heard the end; for the thing which I mean tends to the putting off of all vanity. For of Alexander and his deeds Aeschines spoke thus: "Assuredly we do not live the life of mortal men; but to this end were we born, that in after ages wonders might be told of us," as if what Alexander had done seemed to him miraculous. But in the next age Titus Livius took a better and a deeper view of the matter, saying in effect that Alexander "had done no more than take courage to despise vain apprehensions." And a like judgment I suppose may be passed on myself in future ages: that I did no great things, but simply made less account of things that were accounted great. In the meanwhile, as I have already said, there is no hope except in a new birth of science; that is, in raising it regularly up from experience and building it afresh, which no one (I think) will say has yet been done or thought of.

XCVIII

Now for grounds of experience - since to experience we must come - we have as yet had either none or very weak ones; no search has been made to collect a store of particular observations sufficient either in number, or in kind, or in certainty, to inform the understanding, or in any way adequate. On the contrary, men of learning, but easy withal and idle, have taken for the construction or for the confirmation of their philosophy certain rumors and vague fames or airs of experience, and allowed to these the weight of lawful evidence. And just as if some kingdom or state were to direct its counsels and affairs not by letters and reports from ambassadors and trustworthy messengers, but by the gossip of the streets; such exactly is the system of management introduced into philosophy with relation to experience. Nothing duly investigated, nothing verified, nothing counted, weighed, or measured, is to be found in natural history; and what in observation is loose and vague, is in information deceptive and treacherous. And if anyone thinks that this is a strange thing to say, and something like an unjust complaint, seeing that Aristotle, himself so great a man, and supported by the wealth of so great a king, has composed so accurate a history of animals; and that others with greater diligence, though less pretense, have made many additions; while others, again, have compiled copious histories and descriptions of metals, plants, and fossils; it seems that he does not rightly apprehend what it is that we are now about. For a natural history which is composed for its own sake is not like one that is collected to supply the understanding with information for the building up of philosophy. They differ in many ways, but especially in this: that the former contains the variety of natural species only, and not experiments of the mechanical arts. For even as in the business of life a man's disposition and the secret workings of his mind and affections are better discovered when he is in trouble than at other times, so likewise the secrets of nature reveal themselves more readily under the vexations of art than when they go their own way. Good hopes may therefore be conceived of natural philosophy, when natural history, which is the basis and foundation of it, has been drawn up on a better plan; but not till then.

XCIX

Again, even in the great plenty of mechanical experiments, there is yet a great scarcity of those which are of most use for the information of the understanding. For the mechanic, not troubling himself with the investigation of truth, confines his attention to those things which bear upon his particular work, and will not either raise his mind or stretch out his hand for anything else. But then only will there be good ground of hope for the further advance of knowledge when there shall be received and gathered together into natural history a variety of experiments which are of no use in themselves but simply serve to discover causes and axioms, which I call Experimenta lucifera, experiments of light, to distinguish them from those which I call fructifera, experiments of fruit.

Now experiments of this kind have one admirable property and condition: they never miss or fail. For since they are applied, not for the purpose of producing any particular effect, but only of discovering the natural cause of some effect, they answer the end equally well whichever way they turn out; for they settle the question.

C

But not only is a greater abundance of experiments to be sought for and procured, and that too of a different kind from those hitherto tried; an entirely different method, order, and process for carrying on and advancing experience must also be introduced. For experience, when it wanders in its own track, is, as I have already remarked, mere groping in the dark, and confounds men rather than instructs them. But when it shall proceed in accordance with a fixed law, in regular order, and without interruption, then may better things be hoped of knowledge.

CI

But even after such a store of natural history and experience as is required for the work of the understanding, or of philosophy, shall be ready at hand, still the understanding is by no means competent to deal with it offhand and by memory alone; no more than if a man should hope by force of memory to retain and make himself master of the computation of an ephemeris. And yet hitherto more has been done in matter of invention by thinking than by writing; and experience has not yet learned her letters. Now no course of invention can be satisfactory unless it be carried on in writing. But when this is brought into use, and experience has been taught to read and write, better things may be hoped.

CII

Moreover, since there is so great a number and army of particulars, and that army so scattered and dispersed as to distract and confound the understanding, little is to be hoped for from the skirmishings and slight attacks and desultory movements of the intellect, unless all the particulars which pertain to the subject of inquiry shall, by means of Tables of Discovery, apt, well arranged, and, as it were, animate, be drawn up and marshaled; and the mind be set to work upon the helps duly prepared and digested which these tables supply.

CIII

But after this store of particulars has been set out duly and in order before our eyes, we are not to pass at once to the investigation and discovery of new particulars or works; or at any rate if we do so we must not stop there. For although I do not deny that when all the experiments of all the arts shall have been collected and digested, and brought within one man's knowledge and judgment, the mere transferring of the experiments of one art to others may lead, by means of that experience which I term literate, to the discovery of many new things of service to the life and state of man, yet it is no great matter that can be hoped from that; but from the new light of axioms, which having been educed from those particulars by a certain method and rule, shall in their turn point out the way again to new particulars, greater things may be looked for. For our road does not lie on a level, but ascends and descends; first ascending to axioms, then descending to works.

CIV

The understanding must not, however, be allowed to jump and fly from particulars to axioms remote and of almost the highest generality (such as the first principles, as they are called, of arts and things), and taking stand upon them as truths that cannot be shaken, proceed to prove and frame the middle axioms by reference to them; which has been the practice hitherto, the understanding being not only carried that way by a natural impulse, but also by the use of syllogistic demonstration trained and inured to it. But then, and then only, may we hope well of the sciences when in a just scale of ascent, and by successive steps not interrupted or broken, we rise from particulars to lesser axioms; and then to middle axioms, one above the other; and last of all to the most general. For the lowest axioms differ but slightly from bare experience, while the highest and most general (which we now have) are notional and abstract and without solidity. But the middle are the true and solid and living axioms, on which depend the affairs and fortunes of men; and above them again, last of all, those which are indeed the most general; such, I mean, as are not abstract, but of which those intermediate axioms are really limitations.

The understanding must not therefore be supplied with wings, but rather hung with weights, to keep it from leaping and flying. Now this has never yet been done; when it is done, we may entertain better hopes of the sciences.

CV

In establishing axioms, another form of induction must be devised than has hitherto been employed, and it must be used for proving and discovering not first principles (as they are called) only, but also the lesser axioms, and the middle, and indeed all. For the induction which proceeds by simple enumeration is childish; its conclusions are precarious and exposed to peril from a contradictory instance; and it generally decides on too small a number of facts, and on those only which are at hand. But the induction which is to be available for the discovery and demonstration of sciences and arts, must analyze nature by proper rejections and exclusions; and then, after a sufficient number of negatives, come to a conclusion on the affirmative instances - which has not yet been done or even attempted, save only by Plato, who does indeed employ this form of induction to a certain extent for the purpose of discussing definitions and ideas. But in order to furnish this induction or demonstration well and duly for its work, very many things are to be provided which no mortal has yet thought of; insomuch that greater labor will have to be spent in it than has hitherto been spent on the syllogism. And this induction must be used not only to discover axioms, but also in the formation of notions. And it is in this induction that our chief hope lies.

CVI

But in establishing axioms by this kind of induction, we must also examine and try whether the axiom so established be framed to the measure of those particulars only from which it is derived, or whether it be larger and wider. And if it be larger and wider, we must observe whether by indicating to us new particulars it confirm that wideness and largeness as by a collateral security, that we may not either stick fast in things already known, or loosely grasp at shadows and abstract forms, not at things solid and realized in matter. And when this process shall have come into use, then at last shall we see the dawn of a solid hope.

CVII

And here also should be remembered what was said above concerning the extending of the range of natural philosophy to take in the particular sciences, and the referring or bringing back of the particular sciences to natural philosophy, that the branches of knowledge may not be severed and cut off from the stem. For without this the hope of progress will not be so good.

CVIII

So much then for the removing of despair and the raising of hope through the dismissal or rectification of the errors of past time. We must now see what else there is to ground hope upon. And this consideration occurs at once - that if many useful discoveries have been made by accident or upon occasion, when men were not seeking for them but were busy about other things, no one can doubt but that when they apply themselves to seek and make this their business, and that too by method and in order and not by desultory impulses, they will discover far more. For although it may happen once or twice that a man shall stumble on a thing by accident which, when taking great pains to search for it, he could not find, yet upon the whole it unquestionably falls out the other way. And therefore far better things, and more of them, and at shorter intervals, are to be expected from man's reason and industry and direction and fixed application than from accident and animal instinct and the like, in which inventions have hitherto had their origin.

CIX

Another argument of hope may be drawn from this - that some of the inventions already known are such as before they were discovered it could hardly have entered any man's head to think of; they would have been simply set aside as impossible. For in conjecturing what may be men set before them the example of what has been, and divine of the new with an imagination preoccupied and colored by the old; which way of forming opinions is very fallacious, for streams that are drawn from the springheads of nature do not always run in the old channels.

If, for instance, before the invention of ordnance, a man had described the thing by its effects, and said that there was a new invention by means of which the strongest towers and walls could be shaken and thrown down at a great distance, men would doubtless have begun to think over all the ways of multiplying the force of catapults and mechanical engines by weights and wheels and such machinery for ramming and projecting; but the notion of a fiery blast suddenly and violently expanding and exploding would hardly have entered into any man's imagination or fancy, being a thing to which nothing immediately analogous had been seen, except perhaps in an earthquake or in lightning, which as magnalia or marvels of nature, and by man not imitable, would have been immediately rejected.

In the same way, if, before the discovery of silk, anyone had said that there was a kind of thread discovered for the purposes of dress and furniture which far surpassed the thread of linen or of wool in fineness and at the same time in strength, and also in beauty and softness, men would have begun immediately to think of some silky kind of vegetable, or of the finer hair of some animal, or of the feathers and down of birds; but a web woven by a tiny worm, and that in such abundance, and renewing itself yearly, they would assuredly never have thought. Nay, if anyone had said anything about a worm, he would no doubt have been laughed at as dreaming of a new kind of cobwebs.

So again, if, before the discovery of the magnet, anyone had said that a certain instrument had been invented by means of which the quarters and points of the heavens could be taken and distinguished with exactness, men would have been carried by their imagination to a variety of conjectures concerning the more exquisite construction of astronomical instruments; but that anything could be discovered agreeing so well in its movements with the heavenly bodies, and yet not a heavenly body itself, but simply a substance of metal or stone, would have been judged altogether incredible. Yet these things and others like them lay for so many ages of the world concealed from men, nor was it by philosophy or the rational arts that they were found out at last, but by accident and occasion, being indeed, as I said, altogether different in kind and as remote as possible from anything that was known before; so that no preconceived notion could possibly have led to the discovery of them.

There is therefore much ground for hoping that there are still laid up in the womb of nature many secrets of excellent use, having no affinity or parallelism with anything that is now known, but lying entirely out of the beat of the imagination, which have not yet been found out. They too no doubt will some time or other, in the course and revolution of many ages, come to light of themselves, just as the others did; only by the method of which we are now treating they can be speedily and suddenly and simultaneously presented and anticipated.

CX

But we have also discoveries to show of another kind, which prove that noble inventions may be lying at our very feet, and yet mankind may step over without seeing them. For however the discovery of gunpowder, of silk, of the magnet, of sugar, of paper, or the like, may seem to depend on certain properties of things themselves and nature, there is at any rate nothing in the art of printing which is not plain and obvious. Nevertheless for want of observing that although it is more difficult to arrange types of letters than to write letters by the motion of the hand, there is yet this difference between the two, that types once arranged serve for innumerable impressions, but letters written with the hand for a single copy only; or perhaps again for want of observing that ink can be so thickened as to color without running (particularly when the letters face upwards and the impression is made from above) - for want, I say, of observing these things, men went for so many ages without this most beautiful discovery, which is of so much service in the propagation of knowledge.

But such is the infelicity and unhappy disposition of the human mind in this course of invention, that it first distrusts and then despises itself: first will not believe that any such thing can be found out; and when it is found out, cannot understand how the world should have missed it so long. And this very thing may be justly taken as an argument of hope, namely, that there is a great mass of inventions still remaining which not only by means of operations that are yet to be discovered, but also through the transferring, comparing, and applying of those already known, by the help of that learned experience of which I spoke, may be deduced and brought to light.

CXI

There is another ground of hope that must not be omitted. Let men but think over their infinite expenditure of understanding, time, and means on matters and pursuits of far less use and value; whereof, if but a small part were directed to sound and solid studies, there is no difficulty that might not be overcome. This I thought good to add, because I plainly confess that a collection of history natural and experimental, such as I conceive it and as it ought to be, is a great, I may say a royal work, and of much labor and expense.

CXII

Meantime, let no man be alarmed at the multitude of particulars, but let this rather encourage him to hope. For the particular phenomena of art and nature are but a handful to the inventions of the wit, when disjoined and separated from the evidence of things. Moreover, this road has an issue in the open ground and not far off; the other has no issue at all, but endless entanglement. For men hitherto have made but short stay with experience, but passing her lightly by, have wasted an infinity of time on meditations and glosses of the wit. But if someone were by that could answer our questions and tell us in each case what the fact in nature is, the discovery of all causes and sciences would be but the work of a few years.

CXIII

Moreover, I think that men may take some hope from my own example. And this I say not by way of boasting, but because it is useful to say it. If there be any that despond, let them look at me, that being of all men of my time the most busied in affairs of state, and a man of health not very strong (whereby much time is lost), and in this course altogether a pioneer, following in no man's track nor sharing these counsels with anyone, have nevertheless by resolutely entering on the true road, and submitting my mind to Things, advanced these matters, as I suppose, some little way. And then let them consider what may be expected (after the way has been thus indicated) from men abounding in leisure, and from association of labors, and from successions of ages - the rather because it is not a way over which only one man can pass at a time (as is the case with that of reasoning), but one in which the labors and industries of men (especially as regards the collecting of experience) may with the best effect be first distributed and then combined. For then only will men begin to know their strength when instead of great numbers doing all the same things, one shall take charge of one thing and another of another.

CXIV

Lastly, even if the breath of hope which blows on us from that New Continent were fainter than it is and harder to perceive, yet the trial (if we would not bear a spirit altogether abject) must by all means be made. For there is no comparison between that which we may lose by not trying and by not succeeding, since by not trying we throw away the chance of an immense good; by not succeeding we only incur the loss of a little human labor. But as it is, it appears to me from what has been said, and also from what has been left unsaid, that there is hope enough and to spare, not only to make a bold man try, but also to make a sober-minded and wise man believe.

CXV

Concerning the grounds then for putting away despair, which has been one of the most powerful causes of delay and hindrance to the progress of knowledge, I have now spoken. And this also concludes what I had to say touching the signs and causes of the errors, sluggishness, and ignorance which have prevailed; especially since the more subtle causes, which do not fall under popular judgment and observation, must be referred to what has been said on the Idols of the human mind.

And here likewise should close that part of my Instauration which is devoted to pulling down, which part is performed by three refutations: first, by the refutation of the natural human reason, left to itself; secondly, by the refutation of the demonstrations; and thirdly, by the refutation of the theories, or the received systems of philosophy and doctrine. And the refutation of these has been such as alone it could be: that is to say, by signs and the evidence of causes, since no other kind of confutation was open to me, differing as I do from the others both on first principles and on rules of demonstration.

It is time therefore to proceed to the art itself and rule of interpreting nature. Still, however, there remains something to be premised. For whereas in this first book of aphorisms I proposed to prepare men's minds as well for understanding as for receiving what is to follow, now that I have purged and swept and leveled the floor of the mind, it remains that I place the mind in a good position and as it were in a favorable aspect toward what I have to lay before it. For in a new matter it is not only the strong preoccupation of some old opinion that tends to create a prejudice, but also a false preconception or prefiguration of the new thing which is presented. I will endeavor therefore to impart sound and true opinions as to the things I propose, although they are to serve only for the time, and by way of interest (so to speak), till the thing itself, which is the principal, be fully known.

CXVI

First, then, I must request men not to suppose that after the fashion of ancient Greeks, and of certain moderns, as Telesius, Patricius, Severinus, I wish to found a new sect in philosophy. For this is not what I am about, nor do I think that it matters much to the fortunes of men what abstract notions one may entertain concerning nature and the principles of things. And no doubt many old theories of this kind can be revived and many new ones introduced, just as many theories of the heavens may be supposed which agree well enough with the phenomena and yet differ with each other.

But for my part I do not trouble myself with any such speculative and withal unprofitable matters. My purpose, on the contrary, is to try whether I cannot in very fact lay more firmly the foundations and extend more widely the limits of the power and greatness of man. And although on some special subjects and in an incomplete form I am in possession of results which I take to be far more true and more certain and withal more fruitful than those now received (and these I have collected into the fifth part of my Instauration), yet I have no entire or universal theory to propound. For it does not seem that the time is come for such an attempt. Neither can I hope to live to complete the sixth part of the Instauration (which is destined for the philosophy discovered by the legitimate interpretation of nature), but hold it enough if in the intermediate business I bear myself soberly and profitably, sowing in the meantime for future ages the seeds of a purer truth, and performing my part toward the commencement of the great undertaking.

CXVII

And as I do not seek to found a school, so neither do I hold out offers or promises of particular works. It may be thought, indeed, that I who make such frequent mention of works and refer everything to that end, should produce some myself by way of earnest. But my course and method, as I have often clearly stated and would wish to state again, is this - not to extract works from works or experiments from experiments (as an empiric), but from works and experiments to extract causes and axioms, and again from those causes and axioms new works and experiments, as a legitimate interpreter of nature. And although in my tables of discovery (which compose the fourth part of the Instauration), and also in the examples of particulars (which I have adduced in the second part), and moreover in my observations on the history (which I have drawn out in the third part), any reader of even moderate sagacity and intelligence will everywhere observe indications and outlines of many noble works; still I candidly confess that the natural history which I now have, whether collected from books or from my own investigations, is neither sufficiently copious nor verified with sufficient accuracy to serve the purposes of legitimate interpretation.

Accordingly, if there be anyone more apt and better prepared for mechanical pursuits, and sagacious in hunting out works by the mere dealing with experiment, let him by all means use his industry to gather from my history and tables many things by the way, and apply them to the production of works, which may serve as interest until the principal be forthcoming. But for myself, aiming as I do at greater things, I condemn all unseasonable and premature tarrying over such things as these, being (as I often say) like Atalanta's balls. For I do not run off like a child after golden apples, but stake all on the victory of art over nature in the race. Nor do I make haste to mow down the moss or the corn in blade, but wait for the harvest in its due season.

CXVIII

There will be found, no doubt, when ray history and tables of discovery are read, some things in the experiments themselves that are not quite certain, or perhaps that are quite false, which may make a man think that the foundations and principles upon which my discoveries rest are false and doubtful. But this is of no consequence, for such things must needs happen at first. It is only like the occurrence in a written or printed page of a letter or two mistaken or misplaced, which does not much hinder the reader, because such errors are easily corrected by the sense. So likewise may there occur in my natural history many experiments which are mistaken and falsely set down, and yet they will presently, by the discovery of causes and axioms, be easily expunged and rejected. It is nevertheless true that if the mistakes in natural history and experiments are important, frequent, and continual, they cannot possibly be corrected or amended by any felicity of wit or art. And therefore, if in my natural history, which has been collected and tested with so much diligence, severity, and I may say religious care, there still lurk at intervals certain falsities or errors in the particulars, what is to be said of common natural history, which in comparison with mine is so negligent and inexact? And what of the philosophy and sciences built on such a sand (or rather quicksand)? Let no man therefore trouble himself for this.

CXIX

There will be met with also in my history and experiments many things which are trivial and commonly known; many which are mean and low; many, lastly, which are too subtle and merely speculative, and that seem to be of no use; which kind of things may possibly avert and alienate men's interest.

And first, for those things which seem common. Let men bear in mind that hitherto they have been accustomed to do no more than refer and adapt the causes of things which rarely happen to such as happen frequently, while of those which happen frequently they never ask the cause, but take them as they are for granted. And therefore they do not investigate the causes of weight, of the rotation of heavenly bodies, of heat, cold, light, hardness, softness, rarity, density, liquidity, solidity, animation, inanimation, similarity, dissimilarity, organization, and the like; but admitting these as self-evident and obvious, they dispute and decide on other things of less frequent and familiar occurrence.

But I, who am well aware that no judgment can be passed on uncommon or remarkable things, much less anything new brought to light, unless the causes of common things, and the causes of those causes, be first duly examined and found out, am of necessity compelled to admit the commonest things into my history. Nay, in my judgment philosophy has been hindered by nothing more than this, that things of familiar and frequent occurrence do not arrest and detain the thoughts of men, but are received in passing without any inquiry into their causes; insomuch that information concerning things which are not known is not oftener wanted than attention concerning things which are.

CXX

And for things that are mean or even filthy - things which (as Pliny says) must be introduced with an apology - such things, no less than the most splendid and costly, must be admitted into natural history. Nor is natural history polluted thereby, for the sun enters the sewer no less than the palace, yet takes no pollution. And for myself, I am not raising a capitol or pyramid to the pride of man, but laying a foundation in the human understanding for a holy temple after the model of the world. That model therefore I follow. For whatever deserves to exist deserves also to be known, for knowledge is the image of existence; and things mean and splendid exist alike. Moreover, as from certain putrid substances - musk, for instance, and civet - the sweetest odors are sometimes generated, so, too, from mean and sordid instances there sometimes emanates excellent light and information. But enough and more than enough of this, such fastidiousness being merely childish and effeminate.

CXXI

But there is another objection which must be more carefully looked to, namely, that there are many things in this History which to common apprehension, or indeed to any understanding accustomed to the present system, will seem to be curiously and unprofitably subtle. Upon this point, therefore, above all I must say again what I have said already: that at first, and for a time, I am seeking for experiments of light, not for experiments of fruit, following therein, as I have often said, the example of the divine creation which on the first day produced light only, and assigned to it alone one entire day, nor mixed up with it on that day any material work.

To suppose, therefore, that things like these are of no use is the same as to suppose that light is of no use, because it is not a thing solid or material. And the truth is that the knowledge of simple natures well examined and defined is as light: it gives entrance to all the secrets of nature's workshop, and virtually includes and draws after it whole bands and troops of works, and opens to us the sources of the noblest axioms; and yet in itself it is of no great use. So also the letters of the alphabet in themselves and apart have no use or meaning, yet they are the subject matter for the composition and apparatus of all discourse. So again the seeds of things are of much latent virtue, and yet of no use except in their development. And the scattered rays of light itself, until they are made to converge, can impart none of their benefit.

But if objection be taken to speculative subtleties, what is to be said of the schoolmen, who have indulged in subtleties to such excess - in subtleties, too, that were spent on words, or at any rate on popular notions (which is much the same thing), not on facts or nature; and such as were useless not only in their origin but also in their consequences; and not like those I speak of, useless indeed for the present, but promising infinite utility hereafter. But let men be assured of this, that all subtlety of disputation and discourse, if not applied till after axioms are discovered, is out of season and preposterous, and that the true and proper or at any rate the chief time for subtlety is in weighing experience and in founding axioms thereon. For that other subtlety, though it grasps and snatches at nature, yet can never take hold of her. Certainly what is said of opportunity or fortune is most true of nature: she has a lock in front, but is bald behind.

Lastly, concerning the disdain to receive into natural history things either common, or mean, or oversubtle and in their original condition useless, the answer of the poor woman to the haughty prince who had rejected her petition as an unworthy thing and beneath his dignity, may be taken for an oracle: "Then leave off being king." For most certain it is that he who will not attend to things like these as being too paltry and minute, can neither win the kingdom of nature nor govern it.

CXXII

It may be thought also a strange and a harsh thing that we should at once and with one blow set aside all sciences and all authors; and that, too, without calling in any of the ancients to our aid and support, but relying on our own strength.

And I know that if I had chosen to deal less sincerely, I might easily have found authority for my suggestions by referring them either to the old times before the Greeks (when natural science was perhaps more flourishing, though it made less noise, not having yet passed into the pipes and trumpets of the Greeks), or even, in part at least, to some of the Greeks themselves; and so gained for them both support and honor, as men of no family devise for themselves by the good help of genealogies the nobility of a descent from some ancient stock. But for my part, relying on the evidence and truth of things, I reject all forms of fiction and imposture; nor do I think that it matters any more to the business in hand whether the discoveries that shall now be made were long ago known to the ancients, and have their settings and their risings according to the vicissitude of things and course of ages, than it matters to mankind whether the new world be that island of Atlantis with which the ancients were acquainted, or now discovered for the first time. For new discoveries must be sought from the light of nature, not fetched back out of the darkness of antiquity.

And as for the universality of the censure, certainly if the matter be truly considered such a censure is not only more probable but more modest, too, than a partial one would be. For if the errors had not been rooted in primary notions, there must have been some true discoveries to correct the false. But the errors being fundamental, and not so much of false judgment as of inattention and oversight, it is no wonder that men have not obtained what they have not tried for, nor reached a mark which they never set up, nor finished a course which they never entered on or kept.

And as for the presumption implied in it, certainly if a man undertakes by steadiness of hand and power of eye to describe a straighter line or more perfect circle than anyone else, he challenges a comparison of abilities; but if he only says that he with the help of a rule or a pair of compasses can draw a straighter line or a more perfect circle than anyone else can by eye and hand alone, he makes no great boast. And this remark, be it observed, applies not merely to this first and inceptive attempt of mine, but to all that shall take the work in hand hereafter. For my way of discovering sciences goes far to level men's wit and leaves but little to individual excellence, because it performs everything by the surest rules and demonstrations. And therefore I attribute my part in all this, as I have often said, rather to good luck than to ability, and account it a birth of time rather than of wit. For certainly chance has something to do with men's thoughts, as well as with their works and deeds.

CXXIII

I may say then of myself that which one said in jest (since it marks the distinction so truly), "It cannot be that we should think alike, when one drinks water and the other drinks wine." Now other men, as well in ancient as in modern times, have in the matter of sciences drunk a crude liquor like water, either flowing spontaneously from the understanding, or drawn up by logic, as by wheels from a well. Whereas I pledge mankind in a liquor strained from countless grapes, from grapes ripe and fully seasoned, collected in clusters, and gathered, and then squeezed in the press, and finally purified and clarified in the vat. And therefore it is no wonder if they and I do not think alike.

CXXIV

Again, it will be thought, no doubt, that the goal and mark of knowledge which I myself set up (the very point which I object to in others) is not the true or the best, for that the contemplation of truth is a thing worthier and loftier than all utility and magnitude of works; and that this long and anxious dwelling with experience and matter and the fluctuations of individual things, drags down the mind to earth, or rather sinks it to a very Tartarus of turmoil and confusion, removing and withdrawing it from the serene tranquility of abstract wisdom, a condition far more heavenly. Now to this I readily assent, and indeed this which they point at as so much to be preferred is the very thing of all others which I am about. For I am building in the human understanding a true model of the world, such as it is in fact, not such as a man's own reason would have it to be; a thing which cannot be done without a very diligent dissection and anatomy of the world. But I say that those foolish and apish images of worlds which the fancies of men have created in philosophical systems must be utterly scattered to the winds. Be it known then how vast a difference there is (as I said above) between the idols of the human mind and the ideas of the divine. The former 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; ² and works themselves are of greater value as pledges of truth than as contributing to the comforts of life.

CXXV

It may be thought again that I am but doing what has been done before; that the ancients themselves took the same course which I am now taking; and that it is likely therefore that I too, after all this stir and striving, shall come at last to some one of those systems which prevailed in ancient times. For the ancients, too, it will be said, provided at the outset of their speculations a great store and abundance of examples and particulars, digested the same into notebooks under heads and titles, from them completed their systems and arts, and afterward, when they understood the matter, published them to the world, adding a few examples here and there for proof and illustration; but thought it superfluous and inconvenient to publish their notes and minutes and digests of particulars, and therefore did as builders do: after the house was built they removed the scaffolding and ladders out of sight. And so no doubt they did. But this objection (or scruple rather) will be easily answered by anyone who has not quite forgotten what I have said above. For the form of inquiry and discovery that was in use among the ancients is by themselves professed and appears on the very face of their writings. And that form was simply this. From a few examples and particulars (with the addition of common notions and perhaps of some portion of the received opinions which have been most popular) they flew at once to the most general conclusions, or first principles of science. Taking the truth of these as fixed and immovable, they proceeded by means of intermediate propositions to educe and prove from them the inferior conclusions; and out of these they framed the art. After that, if any new particulars and examples repugnant to their dogmas were mooted and adduced, either they subtly molded them into their system by distinctions or explanations of their rules, or else coarsely got rid of them by exceptions; while to such particulars as were not repugnant they labored to assign causes in conformity with those of their principles. But this was not the natural history and experience that was wanted; far from it. And besides, that flying off to the highest generalities ruined all.

² Ipsissimæ res. I think this must have been Bacon's meaning, though not a meaning which the word can properly bear. - J. S.

CXXVI

It will also be thought that by forbidding men to pronounce and to set down principles as established until they have duly arrived through the intermediate steps at the highest generalities, I maintain a sort of suspension of the judgment, and bring it to what the Greeks call Acatalepsia - a denial of the capacity of the mind to comprehend truth. But in reality that which I meditate and propound is not Acatalepsia, but Eucatalepsia; not denial of the capacity to understand, but provision for understanding truly. For I do not take away authority from the senses, but supply them with helps; I do not slight the understanding, but govern it. And better surely it is that we should know all we need to know, and yet think our knowledge imperfect, than that we should think our knowledge perfect, and yet not know anything we need to know.

CXXVII

It may also be asked (in the way of doubt rather than objection) whether I speak of natural philosophy only, or whether I mean that the other sciences, logic, ethics, and politics, should be carried on by this method. Now I certainly mean what I have said to be understood of them all; and as the common logic, which governs by the syllogism, extends not only to natural but to all sciences, so does mine also, which proceeds by induction, embrace everything. For I form a history and table of discovery for anger, fear, shame, and the like; for matters political; and again for the mental operations of memory, composition and division, judgment, and the rest; not less than for heat and cold, or light, or vegetation, or the like. But, nevertheless, since my method of interpretation, after the history has been prepared and duly arranged, regards not the working and discourse of the mind only (as the common logic does) but the nature of things also, I supply the mind such rules and guidance that it may in every case apply itself aptly to the nature of things. And therefore I deliver many and diverse precepts in the doctrine of interpretation, which in some measure modify the method of invention according to the quality and condition of the subject of the inquiry.

CXXVIII

On one point not even a doubt ought to be entertained, namely, whether I desire to pull down and destroy the philosophy and arts and sciences which are at present in use. So far from that, I am most glad to see them used, cultivated, and honored. There is no reason why the arts which are now in fashion should not continue to supply matter for disputation and ornaments for discourse, to be employed for the convenience of professors and men of business, to be, in short, like current coin, which passes among men by consent. Nay, I frankly declare that what I am introducing will be but little fitted for such purposes as these, since it cannot be brought down to common apprehension save by effects and works only. But how sincere I am in my professions of affection and good will toward the received sciences, my published writings, especially the books on the advancement of learning, sufficiently show; and therefore I will not attempt to prove it further by words. Meanwhile I give constant and distinct warning that by the methods now in use neither can any great progress be made in the doctrines and contemplative part of sciences, nor can they be carried out to any magnitude of works.

CXXIX

It remains for me to say a few words touching the excellency of the end in view. Had they been uttered earlier, they might have seemed like idle wishes, but now that hopes have been raised and unfair prejudices removed, they may perhaps have greater weight. Also if I had finished all myself, and had no occasion to call in others to help and take part in the work, I should even now have abstained from such language lest it might be taken as a proclamation of my own deserts. But since I want to quicken the industry and rouse and kindle the zeal of others, it is fitting that I put men in mind of some things.

In the first place, then, the introduction of famous discoveries appears to hold by far the first place among human actions; and this was the judgment of the former ages. For to the authors of inventions they awarded divine honors, while to those who did good service in the state (such as founders of cities and empires, legislators, saviors of their country from long endured evils, quellers of tyrannies, and the like) they decreed no higher honors than heroic. And certainly if a man rightly compare the two, he will find that this judgment of antiquity was just. For the benefits of discoveries may extend to the whole race of man, civil benefits only to particular places; the latter last not beyond a few ages, the former through all time. Moreover, the reformation of a state in civil matters is seldom brought in without violence and confusion; but discoveries carry blessings with them, and confer benefits without causing harm or sorrow to any.

Again, discoveries are as it were new creations, and imitations of God's works, as the poet well sang:

To man's frail race great Athens long ago
First gave the seed whence waving harvests grow,
And re-created all our life below.

And it appears worthy of remark in Solomon that, though mighty in empire and in gold, in the magnificence of his works, his court, his household, and his fleet, in the luster of his name and the worship of mankind, yet he took none of these to glory in, but pronounced that "The glory of God is to conceal a thing; the glory of the king to search it out."

Again, let a man only consider what a difference there is between the life of men in the most civilized province of Europe, and in the wildest and most barbarous districts of New India; he will feel it be great enough to justify the saying that "man is a god to man," not only in regard to aid and benefit, but also by a comparison of condition. And this difference comes not from soil, not from climate, not from race, but from the arts.

Again, it is well to observe the force and virtue and consequences of discoveries, and these are to be seen nowhere more conspicuously than in those three which were unknown to the ancients, and of which the origin, though recent, is obscure and inglorious; namely, printing, gunpowder, and the magnet. For these three have changed the whole face and state of things throughout the world; the first in literature, the second in warfare, the third in navigation; whence have followed innumerable changes, insomuch that no empire, no sect, no star seems to have exerted greater power and influence in human affairs than these mechanical discoveries.

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, a vulgar and degenerate kind. The second is of those who labor to extend the power and dominion of their country among men. This certainly has more dignity, though not less covetousness. But if a man endeavor 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 both a more wholesome and a more noble thing than the other two. Now the empire of man over things depends wholly on the arts and sciences. For we cannot command nature except by obeying her.

Again, if men have thought so much of some one particular discovery as to regard him as more than man who has been able by some benefit to make the whole human race his debtor, how much higher a thing to discover that by means of which all things else shall be discovered with ease! And yet (to speak the whole truth), as the uses of light are infinite in enabling us to walk, to ply our arts, to read, to recognize one another - and nevertheless the very beholding of the light is itself a more excellent and a fairer thing than all the uses of it - so assuredly the very contemplation of things as they are, without superstition or imposture, error or confusion, is in itself more worthy than all the fruit of inventions.

Lastly, if the debasement of arts and sciences to purposes of wickedness, luxury, and the like, be made a ground of objection, let no one be moved thereby. For the same may be said of all earthly goods: of wit, courage, strength, beauty, wealth, light itself, and the rest. Only let the human race recover that right over nature which belongs to it by divine bequest, and let power be given it; the exercise thereof will be governed by sound reason and true religion.

CXXX

And now it is time for me to propound the art itself of interpreting nature, in which, although I conceive that I have given true and most useful precepts, yet I do not say either that it is absolutely necessary (as if nothing could be done without it) or that it is perfect. For I am of the opinion that if men had ready at hand a just history of nature and experience, and labored diligently thereon, and if they could bind themselves to two rules - the first, to lay aside received opinions and notions; and the second, to refrain the mind for a time from the highest generalizations, and those next to them - they would be able by the native and genuine force of the mind, without any other art, to fall into my form of interpretation. For interpretation is the true and natural work of the mind when freed from impediments. It is true, however, that by my precepts everything will be in more readiness, and much more sure.

Nor again do I mean to say that no improvement can be made upon these. On the contrary, I regard that the mind, not only in its own faculties, but in its connection with things, must needs hold that the art of discovery may advance as discoveries advance.

APHORISMS

[BOOK TWO]

I

On a given body, to generate and superinduce a new nature or new natures is the work and aim of human power. Of a given nature to discover the form, or true specific difference, or nature-engendering nature, or source of emanation (for these are the terms which come nearest to a description of the thing), is the work and aim of human knowledge. Subordinate to these primary works are two others that are secondary and of inferior mark: to the former, the transformation of concrete bodies, so far as this is possible; to the latter, the discovery, in every case of generation and motion, of the latent process carried on from the manifest efficient and the manifest material to the form which is engendered; and in like manner the discovery of the latent configuration of bodies at rest and not in motion.

II

In what an ill condition human knowledge is at the present time is apparent even from the commonly received maxims. It is a correct position that "true knowledge is knowledge by causes." And causes again are not improperly distributed into four kinds: the material, the formal, the efficient, and the final. But of these the final cause rather corrupts than advances the sciences, except such as have to do with human action. The discovery of the formal is despaired of. The efficient and the material (as they are investigated and received, that is, as remote causes, without reference to the latent process leading to the form) are but slight and superficial, and contribute little, if anything, to true and active science. Nor have I forgotten that in a former passage I noted and corrected as an error of the human mind the opinion that forms give existence. For though in nature nothing really exists besides individual bodies, performing pure individual acts according to a fixed law, yet in philosophy this very law, and the investigation, discovery, and explanation of it, is the foundation as well of knowledge as of operation. And it is this law with its clauses that I mean when I speak of forms, a name which I the rather adopt because it has grown into use and become familiar.

III

If a man be acquainted with the cause of any nature (as whiteness or heat) in certain subjects only, his knowledge is imperfect; and if he be able to superinduce an effect on certain substances only (of those susceptible of such effect), his power is in like manner imperfect. Now if a man's knowledge be confined to the efficient and material causes (which are unstable causes, and merely vehicles, or causes which convey the form in certain cases) he may arrive at new discoveries in reference to substances in some degree similar to one another, and selected beforehand; but he does not touch the deeper boundaries of things. But whosoever is acquainted with forms embraces the unity of nature in substances the most unlike, and is able therefore to detect and bring to light things never yet done, and such as neither the vicissitudes of nature, nor industry in experimenting, nor accident itself, would ever have brought into act, and which would never have occurred to the thought of man. From the discovery of forms therefore results truth in speculation and freedom in operation.

IV

Although the roads to human power and to human knowledge lie close together and are nearly the same, nevertheless, on account of the pernicious and inveterate habit of dwelling on abstractions it is safer to begin and raise the sciences from those foundations which have relation to practice, and to let the active part itself be as the seal which prints and determines the contemplative counterpart. We must therefore consider, if a man wanted to generate and superinduce any nature upon a given body, what kind of rule or direction or guidance he would most wish for, and express the same in the simplest and least abstruse language. For instance, if a man wishes to superinduce upon silver that yellow color of gold or an increase of weight (observing the laws of matter), or transparency on an opaque stone, or tenacity on glass, or vegetation on some substance that is not vegetable - we must consider, I say, what kind of rule or guidance he would most desire. And in the first place, he will undoubtedly wish to be directed to something which will not deceive him in the result nor fail him in the trial. Secondly, he will wish for such a rule as shall not tie him down to certain means and particular modes of operation. For perhaps he may not have those means, nor be able conveniently to procure them. And if there be other means and other methods for producing the required nature (besides the one prescribed) these may perhaps be within his reach; and yet he shall be excluded by the narrowness of the rule, and get no good from them. Thirdly, he will desire something to be shown him, which is not as difficult as the thing proposed to be done, but comes nearer to practice.

For a true and perfect rule of operation, then, the direction will be that it be certain, free, and disposing or leading to action. And this is the same thing with the discovery of the true form. For the form of a nature is such, that given the form, the nature infallibly follows. Therefore it is always present when the nature is present, and universally implies it, and is constantly inherent in it. Again, the form is such that if it be taken away the nature infallibly vanishes. Therefore it is always absent when the nature is absent, and implies its absence, and inheres in nothing else. Lastly, the true form is such that it deduces the given nature from some source of being which is inherent in more natures, and which is better known in the natural order of things than the form itself. For a true and perfect axiom of knowledge, then, the direction and precept will be, that another nature be discovered which is convertible with the given nature and yet is a limitation of a more general nature, as of a true and real genus. Now these two directions, the one active the other contemplative, are one and the same thing; and what in operation is most useful, that in knowledge is most true.

V

The rule or axiom for the transformation of bodies is of two kinds. The first regards a body as a troop or collection of simple natures. In gold, for example, the following properties meet. It is yellow in color, heavy up to a certain weight, malleable or ductile to a certain degree of extension; it is not volatile and loses none of its substance by the action of fire; it turns into a liquid with a certain degree of fluidity; it is separated and dissolved by particular means; and so on for the other natures which meet in gold. This kind of axiom, therefore, deduces the thing from the forms of simple natures. For he who knows the forms of yellow, weight, ductility, fixity, fluidity, solution, and so on, and the methods for superinducing them and their gradations and modes, will make it his care to have them joined together in some body, whence may follow the transformation of that body into gold. And this kind of operation pertains to the first kind of action. For the principle of generating some one simple nature is the same as that of generating many; only that a man is more fettered and tied down in operation, if more are required, by reason of the difficulty of combining into one so many natures which do not readily meet, except in the beaten and ordinary paths of nature. It must be said, however, that this mode of operation (which looks to simple natures though in a compound body) proceeds from what in nature is constant and eternal and universal, and opens broad roads to human power, such as (in the present state of things) human thought can scarcely comprehend or anticipate.

The second kind of axiom, which is concerned with the discovery of the latent process, proceeds not by simple natures, but by compound bodies, as they are found in nature in its ordinary course. As, for instance, when inquiry is made from what beginnings, and by what method and by what process, gold or any other metal or stone is generated, from its first menstrua and rudiments up to the perfect mineral; or in like manner, by what process herbs are generated, from the first concretion of juices in the ground or from seeds up to the formed plant, with all the successive motions and diverse and continued efforts of nature. So also in the inquiry concerning the process of development in the generation of animals, from coition to birth; and in like manner of other bodies.

It is not however only to the generations of bodies that this investigation extends, but also to other motions and operations of nature. As, for instance, when inquiry is made concerning the whole course and continued action of nutrition, from the first reception of the food to its complete assimilation; or again, concerning the voluntary motion of animals from the first impression on the imagination and the continued efforts of the spirit up to the bendings and movements of the limbs; or concerning the motion of the tongue and lips and other instruments, and the changes through which it passes till it comes to the utterance of articulate sounds. For these inquiries also relate to natures concrete or combined into one structure, and have regard to what may be called particular and special habits of nature, not to her fundamental and universal laws which constitute forms. And yet it must be confessed that this plan appears to be readier and to lie nearer at hand and to give more ground for hope than the primary one.

In like manner the operative which answers to this speculative part, starting from the ordinary incidents of nature, extends its operation to things immediately adjoining, or at least not far removed. But as for any profound and radical operations on nature, they depend entirely on the primary axioms. And in those things too where man has no means of operating, but only of knowing, as in the heavenly bodies (for these he cannot operate upon or change or transform), the investigation of the fact itself or truth of the thing, no less than the knowledge of the causes and consents, must come from those primary and catholic axioms concerning simple natures, such as the nature of spontaneous rotation, of attraction or magnetism, and of many others which are of a more general form than the heavenly bodies themselves. For let no one hope to decide the question whether it is the earth or heaven that really revolves in the diurnal motion until he has first comprehended the nature of spontaneous rotation.

VI

But this latent process of which I speak is quite another thing than men, preoccupied as their minds now are, will easily conceive. For what I understand by it is not certain measures or signs or successive steps of process in bodies, which can be seen; but a process perfectly continuous, which for the most part escapes the sense.

For instance: in all generation and transformation of bodies, we must inquire what is lost and escapes; what remains, what is added; what is expanded, what contracted; what is united, what separated; what is continued, what cut off; what propels, what hinders; what predominates, what yields; and a variety of other particulars.

Again, not only in the generation or transformation of bodies are these points to be ascertained, but also in all other alterations and motions it should in like manner be inquired what goes before, what comes after; what is quicker, what more tardy; what produces, what governs motion; and like points; all which nevertheless in the present state of the sciences (the texture of which is as rude as possible and good for nothing) are unknown and unhandled. For seeing that every natural action depends on things infinitely small, or at least too small to strike the sense, no one can hope to govern or change nature until he has duly comprehended and observed them.

VII

In like manner the investigation and discovery of the latent configuration in bodies is a new thing, no less than the discovery of the latent process and of the form. For as yet we are but lingering in the outer courts of nature, nor are we preparing ourselves a way into her inner chambers. Yet no one can endow a given body with a new nature, or successfully and aptly transmute it into a new body, unless he has attained a competent knowledge of the body so to be altered or transformed. Otherwise he will run into methods which, if not useless, are at any rate difficult and perverse and unsuitable to the nature of the body on which he is operating. It is clear therefore that to this also a way must be opened and laid out.

And it is true that upon the anatomy of organized bodies (as of man and animals) some pains have been well bestowed and with good effect; and a subtle thing it seems to be, and a good scrutiny of nature. Yet this kind of anatomy is subject to sight and sense, and has place only in organized bodies. And besides it is a thing obvious and easy, when compared with the true anatomy of the latent configuration in bodies which are thought to be of uniform structure, especially in things and their parts that have a specific character, as iron, stone; and again in parts of uniform structure in plants and animals, as the root, the leaf, the flower, flesh, blood, and bones. But even in this kind, human industry has not been altogether wanting; for this is the very thing aimed at in the separation of bodies of uniform structure by means of distillations and other modes of analysis; that the complex structure of the compound may be made apparent by bringing together its several homogeneous parts. And this is of use too, and conduces to the object we are seeking, although too often fallacious in its results, because many natures which are in fact newly brought out and superinduced by fire and heat and other modes of solution are taken to be the effect of separation merely, and to have subsisted in the compound before. And after all, this is but a small part of the work of discovering the true configuration in the compound body; which configuration is a thing far more subtle and exact, and such as the operation of fire rather confounds than brings out and makes distinct.

Therefore a separation and solution of bodies must be effected, not by fire indeed, but by reasoning and true induction, with experiments to aid; and by a comparison with other bodies, and a reduction to simple natures and their forms, which meet and mix in the compound. In a word, we must pass from Vulcan to Minerva if we intend to bring to light the true textures and configurations of bodies on which all the occult and, as they are called, specific properties and virtues in things depend, and from which, too, the rule of every powerful alteration and transformation is derived.

For example, we must inquire what amount of spirit there is in every body, what of tangible essence; and of the spirit, whether it be copious and turgid, or meager and scarce; whether it be fine or coarse, akin to air or to fire, brisk or sluggish, weak or strong, progressive or retrograde, interrupted or continuous, agreeing with external and surrounding objects or disagreeing, etc. In like manner we must inquire into the tangible essence (which admits of no fewer differences than the spirit), into its coats, its fibers, its kinds of texture. Moreover, the disposition of the spirit throughout the corporeal frame, with its pores, passages, veins and cells, and the rudiments or first essays of the organized body, falls under the same investigation. But on these inquiries also, and I may say on all the discovery of the latent configuration, a true and clear light is shed by the primary axioms which entirely dispels darkness and subtlety.

VIII

Nor shall we thus be led to the doctrine of atoms, which implies the hypothesis of a vacuum and that of the unchangeableness of matter (both false assumptions); we shall be led only to real particles, such as really exist. Nor again is there any reason to be alarmed at the subtlety of the investigation, as if it could not be disentangled. On the contrary, the nearer it approaches to simple natures, the easier and plainer will everything become, the business being transferred from the complicated to the simple; from the incommensurable to the commensurable; from surds to rational quantities; from the infinite and vague to the finite and certain; as in the case of the letters of the alphabet and the notes of music. And inquiries into nature have the best result when they begin with physics and end in mathematics. Again, let no one be afraid of high numbers or minute fractions. For in dealing with numbers it is as easy to set down or conceive a thousand as one, or the thousandth part of an integer as an integer itself.

IX

From the two kinds of axioms which have been spoken of arises a just division of philosophy and the sciences, taking the received terms (which come nearest to express the thing) in a sense agreeable to my own views. Thus, let the investigation of forms, which are (in the eye of reason at least, and in their essential law) eternal and immutable, constitute Metaphysics; and let the investigation of the efficient cause, and of matter, and of the latent process, and the latent configuration (all of which have reference to the common and ordinary course of nature, not to her eternal and fundamental laws) constitute Physics. And to these let there be subordinate two practical divisions: to Physics, Mechanics; to Metaphysics, what (in a purer sense of the word) I call Magic, on account of the broadness of the ways it moves in, and its greater command over nature.

X

Having thus set up the mark of knowledge, we must go on to precepts, and that in the most direct and obvious order. Now my directions for the interpretation of nature embrace two generic divisions: the one how to educe and form axioms from experience; the other how to deduce and derive new experiments from axioms. The former again is divided into three ministrations: a ministration to the sense, a ministration to the memory, and a ministration to the mind or reason.

For first of all we must prepare a natural and experimental history, sufficient and good; and this is the foundation of all, for we are not to imagine or suppose, but to discover, what nature does or may be made to do.

But natural and experimental history is so various and diffuse that it confounds and distracts the understanding, unless it be ranged and presented to view in a suitable order. We must therefore form tables and arrangements of instances, in such a method and order that the understanding may be able to deal with them.

And even when this is done, still the understanding, if left to itself and its own spontaneous movements, is incompetent and unfit to form axioms, unless it be directed and guarded. Therefore in the third place we must use induction, true and legitimate induction, which is the very key of interpretation. But of this, which is the last, I must speak first, and then go back to the other ministrations.

XI

The investigation of forms proceeds thus: a nature being given, we must first of all have a muster or presentation before the understanding of all known instances which agree in the same nature, though in substances the most unlike. And such collection must be made in the manner of a history, without premature speculation, or any great amount of subtlety. For example, let the investigation be into the form of heat.
Instances Agreeing in the Nature of Heat
1. The rays of the sun, especially in summer and at noon.

2. The rays of the sun reflected and condensed, as between mountains, or on walls, and most of all in burning glasses and mirrors.

3. Fiery meteors.

4. Burning thunderbolts.

5. Eruptions of flame from the cavities of mountains.

6. All flame.

7. Ignited solids.

8. Natural warm baths.

9. Liquids boiling or heated.

10. Hot vapors and fumes, and the air itself, which conceives the most powerful and glowing heat if confined, as in reverbatory furnaces.

11. Certain seasons that are fine and cloudless by the constitution of the air itself, without regard to the time of year.

12. Air confined and underground in some caverns, especially in winter.

13. All villous substances, as wool, skins of animals, and down of birds, have heat.

14. All bodies, whether solid or liquid, whether dense or rare (as the air itself is), held for a time near the fire.

15. Sparks struck from flint and steel by strong percussion.

16. All bodies rubbed violently, as stone, wood, cloth, etc., insomuch that poles and axles of wheels sometimes catch fire; and the way they kindled fire in the West Indies was by attrition.

17. Green and moist vegetables confined and bruised together, as roses packed in baskets; insomuch that hay, if damp, when stacked, often catches fire.

18. Quicklime sprinkled with water.

19. Iron, when first dissolved by strong waters in glass, and that without being put near the fire. And in like manner tin, etc., but not with equal intensity.

20. Animals, especially and at all times internally; though in insects the heat is not perceptible to the touch by reason of the smallness of their size.

21. Horse dung and like excrements of animals, when fresh.

22. Strong oil of sulphur and of vitriol has the effect of heat in burning linen.

23. Oil of marjoram and similar oils have the effect of heat in burning the bones of the teeth.

24. Strong and well rectified spirit of wine has the effect of heat, insomuch that the white of an egg being put into it hardens and whitens almost as if it were boiled, and bread thrown in becomes dry and crusted like toast.

25. Aromatic and hot herbs, as dracunculus, nasturtium vetus, etc., although not warm to the hand (either whole or in powder), yet to the tongue and palate, being a little masticated, they feel hot and burning.

26. Strong vinegar, and all acids, on all parts of the body where there is no epidermis, as the eye, tongue, or on any part when wounded and laid bare of the skin, produce a pain but little differing from that which is created by heat.

27. Even keen and intense cold produces a kind of sensation of burning: "Nec Boreæ penetrabile frigus adurit." ¹

28. Other instances.

This table I call the Table of Essence and Presence.

l Nor burns the sharp cold of the northern blast.

XII

Secondly, we must make a presentation to the understanding of instances in which the given nature is wanting; because the form, as stated above, ought no less to be absent when the given nature is absent, than present when it is present. But to note all these would be endless.

The negatives should therefore be subjoined to the affirmatives, and the absence of the given nature inquired of in those subjects only that are most akin to the others in which it is present and forthcoming. This I call the Table of Deviation, or of Absence in Proximity.
Instances in Proximity where the Nature of Heat is Absent
Answering to the first affirmative instance.

1. The rays of the moon and of stars and comets are not found to be hot to the touch; indeed the severest colds are observed to be at the full moons.

The larger fixed stars, however, when passed or approached by the sun, are supposed to increase and give intensity to the heat of the sun, as is the case when the sun is in the sign Leo, and in the dog days.

To the 2nd.

2. The rays of the sun in what is called the middle region of the air do not give heat; for which there is commonly assigned not a bad reason, viz., that that region is neither near enough to the body of the sun from which the rays emanate, nor to the earth from which they are reflected. And this appears from the fact that on the tops of mountains, unless they are very high, there is perpetual snow. On the other hand, it has been observed that on the Peak of Tenerife, and among the Andes of Peru, the very tops of the mountains are free from snow, which lies only somewhat lower down. Moreover, the air itself at the very top is found to be by no means cold, but only rare and keen; insomuch that on the Andes it pricks and hurts the eyes by its excessive keenness, and also irritates the mouth of the stomach, producing vomiting. And it was observed by the ancients that on the top of Olympus the rarity of the air was such that those who ascended it had to carry sponges with them dipped in vinegar and water, and to apply them from time to time to the mouth and nose, the air being from its rarity not sufficient to support respiration; and it was further stated that on this summit the air was so serene, and so free from rain and snow and wind, that letters traced by the finger in the ashes of the sacrifices on the altar of Jupiter remained there still the next year without being at all disturbed. And at this day travelers ascending to the top of the Peak of Tenerife make the ascent by night and not by day, and soon after the rising of the sun are warned and urged by their guides to come down without delay, on account of the danger they run lest the animal spirits should swoon and be suffocated by the tenuity of the air.

To the 2nd.

3. The reflection of the rays of the sun in regions near the polar circles is found to be very weak and ineffective in producing heat, insomuch that the Dutch who wintered in Nova Zembla and expected their ship to be freed from the obstructions of the mass of ice which hemmed her in by the beginning of July, were disappointed in their expectation and obliged to take to their boat. Thus the direct rays of the sun seem to have but little power, even on the level ground; nor have the reflex much, unless they are multiplied and combined, which is the case when the sun tends more to the perpendicular, for then the incident rays make acuter angles, so that the lines of the rays are nearer each other; whereas on the contrary, when the sun shines very obliquely, the angles are very obtuse, and thus the lines of rays are at a greater distance from each other. Meanwhile, it should be observed that there may be many operations of the sun, and those too depending on the nature of heat, which are not proportioned to our touch, so that in respect to us their action does not go so far as to produce sensible warmth, but in respect to some other bodies they have the effect of heat.

4. Try the following experiment. Take a glass fashioned in a contrary manner to a common burning glass and, placing it between your hand and the rays of the sun, observe whether it diminishes the heat of the sun, as a burning glass increases and strengthens it. For it is evident in the case of optical rays that according as the glass is made thicker or thinner in the middle as compared with the sides, so do the objects seen through it appear more spread or more contracted. Observe therefore whether the same is the case with heat.
To the 2nd
5. Let the experiment be carefully tried, whether by means of the most powerful and best constructed burning glasses, the rays of the moon can be so caught and collected as to produce even the last degree of warmth. But should this degree of warmth prove too subtle and weak to be perceived and apprehended by the touch, recourse must be had to those glasses which indicate the state of the atmosphere in respect to heat and cold. Thus, let the rays of the moon fall through a burning glass on the top of a glass of this kind, and then observe whether there ensues a sinking of the water through warmth.

To the 2nd.

6. Let a burning glass also be tried with a heat that does not emit rays or light, as that of iron or stone heated but not ignited, boiling water, and the like; and observe whether there ensue an increase of the heat, as in the case of the sun's rays.

To the 2nd.

7. Let a burning glass also be tried with common flame.

To the 2nd.

8. Comets (if we are to reckon these too among meteors) are not found to exert a constant or manifest effect in increasing the heat of the season, though it is observed that they are often followed by droughts. Moreover bright beams and pillars and openings in the heavens appear more frequently in winter than in summertime, and chiefly during the intensest cold, but always accompanied by dry weather. Lightning, however, and coruscations and thunder seldom occur in the winter, but about the time of great heat. Falling stars, as they are called, are commonly supposed to consist rather of some bright and lighted viscous substance, than to be of any strong fiery nature. But on this point let further inquiry be made.

To the 3rd.

9. There are certain coruscations which give light but do not burn. And these always come without thunder.

To the 4th.

10. Eructations and eruptions of flame are found no less in cold than in warm countries, as in Iceland and Greenland. In cold countries, too, the trees are in many cases more inflammable and more pitchy and resinous than in warm; as the fir, pine, and others. The situations however and the nature of the soil in which eruptions of this kind usually occur have not been carefully enough ascertained to enable us to subjoin a negative to this affirmative instance.

To the 5th.

11. All flame is in all cases more or less warm; nor is there any negative to be subjoined. And yet they say that the ignis fatuus (as it is called), which sometimes even settles on a wall, has not much heat, perhaps as much as the flame of spirit of wine, which is mild and soft. But still milder must that flame be which, according to certain grave and trustworthy histories has been seen shining about the head and locks of boys and girls, without at all burning the hair, but softly playing round it. It is also most certain that about a horse, when sweating on the road, there is sometimes seen at night, and in clear weather, a sort of luminous appearance without any manifest heat. And it is a well-known fact, and looked upon as a sort of miracle, that a few years ago a girl's stomacher, on being slightly shaken or rubbed, emitted sparks, which was caused perhaps by some alum or salts used in the dye, that stood somewhat thick and formed a crust, and were broken by the friction. It is also most certain that all sugar, whether refined or raw, provided only it be somewhat hard, sparkles when broken or scraped with a knife in the dark. In like manner sea and salt water is sometimes found to sparkle by night when struck violently by oars. And in storms, too, at nighttime, the foam of the sea when violently agitated emits sparks, and this sparkling the Spaniards call Sea Lung. With regard to the heat of the flame which was called by ancient sailors Castor and Pollux, and by moderns St. Elmo's Fire, no sufficient investigation thereof has been made.

To the 6th.

12. Every body ignited so as to turn to a fiery red, even if unaccompanied by flame, is always hot; neither is there any negative to be subjoined to this affirmative. But that which comes nearest seems to be rotten wood, which shines by night and yet is not found to be hot; and the putrefying scales of fish, which also shine in the dark and yet are not warm to the touch; nor, again, is the body of the glowworm, or of the fly called Luciola, found to be warm to the touch.

To the 7th.

13. In what situation and kind of soil warm baths usually spring has not been sufficiently examined; and therefore no negative is subjoined.

To the 8th.

14. To warm liquids I subjoin the negative instance of liquid itself in its natural state. For we find no tangible liquid which is warm in its own nature and remains so constantly; but the warmth is of an adventitious nature, superinduced only for the time being, so that the liquids which in power and operation are hottest, as spirit of wine, chemical oil of spices, oil of vitriol and sulphur, and the like, which burn after a while, are at first cold to the touch. The water of natural warm baths, on the other hand, if received into a vessel and separated from its springs, cools just like water that has been heated on a fire. But it is true that oily substances are less cold to the touch than watery, oil being less cold than water, and silk than linen. But this belongs to the Table of Degrees of Cold.

To the 9th.

15. In like manner to hot vapor I subjoin as a negative the nature of vapor itself, such as we find it with us. For exhalations from oily substances, though easily inflammable, are yet not found to be warm unless newly exhaled from the warm body.

To the 10th.

16. In like manner I subjoin as a negative to hot air the nature of air itself. For we do not find here any air that is warm, unless it has either been confined, or compressed, or manifestly warmed by the sun, fire, or some other warm substance.

To the 11th.

17. I here subjoin the negative of colder weather than is suitable to the season of the year, which we find occurs during east and north winds; just as we have weather of the opposite kind with the south and west winds. So a tendency to rain, especially in wintertime, accompanies warm weather; while frost accompanies cold.

To the 12th.

18. Here I subjoin the negative of air confined in caverns during the summer. But the subject of air in confinement should by all means be more diligently examined. For in the first place it may well be a matter of doubt what is the nature of air in itself with regard to heat and cold. For air manifestly receives warmth from the influence of the heavenly bodies, and cold perhaps from the exhalations of the earth; and, again, in the middle region of air, as it is called, from cold vapors and snow. So that no opinion can be formed as to the nature of air from the examination of air that is at large and exposed, but a truer judgment might be made by examining it when confined. It is, however, necessary for the air to be confined in a vessel of such material as will not itself communicate warmth or cold to the air by its own nature, nor readily admit the influence of the outer atmosphere. Let the experiment therefore be made in an earthen jar wrapped round with many folds of leather to protect it from the outward air, and let the vessel remain tightly closed for three or four days; then open the vessel and test the degree of heat or cold by applying either the hand or a graduated glass.

To the 13th.

19. In like manner a doubt suggests itself whether the warmth in wool, skins, feathers, and the like, proceeds from a faint degree of heat inherent in them, as being excretions from animals; or from a certain fat and oiliness, which is of a nature akin to warmth; or simply, as surmised in the preceding article, from the confinement and separation of the air. For all air that is cut off from connection with the outer air seems to have some warmth. Try the experiment therefore with fibrous substances made of linen; not of wool, feathers, or silk, which are excretions from animals. It should also be observed that all powders (in which there is manifestly air enclosed) are less cold than the whole substances they are made from; as likewise I suppose that all froth (as that which contains air) is less cold than the liquor it comes from.

To the 14th.

20. To this no negative is subjoined. For there is nothing found among us, either tangible or spirituous, which does not contract warmth when put near fire. There is this difference however, that some substances contract warmth more quickly, as air, oil, and water; others more slowly, as stone and metal. But this belongs to the Table of Degrees.

To the 15th.

21. To this instance I subjoin no negative, except that I would have it well observed that sparks are produced from flint and steel, or any other hard substance, only when certain minute particles are struck off from the substance of the stone or metal; and that the attrition of the air does not of itself ever produce sparks, as is commonly supposed. And the sparks themselves, too, owing to the weight of the ignited body, tend rather downwards than upwards; and on going out become a tangible sooty substance.

To the 16th.

22. There is no negative, I think, to be subjoined to this instance. For we find among us no tangible body which does not manifestly gain warmth by attrition; insomuch that the ancients fancied that the heavenly bodies had no other means or power of producing warmth than by the attrition of the air in their rapid and hurried revolution. But on this subject we must further inquire whether bodies discharged from engines, as balls from cannon, do not acquire some degree of heat from the very percussion, so as to be found somewhat warm when they fall. Air in motion, however, rather chills than warms, as appears from wind, bellows, and blowing with the mouth contracted. But motion of this kind is not so rapid as to excite heat, and is the motion of a mass, and not of particles; so that it is no wonder if it does not generate heat.

To the 17th.

23. On this instance should be made more diligent inquiry. For herbs and vegetables, when green and moist seem to contain some latent heat, though so slight that it is not perceptible to the touch when they are single, but only when they are collected and shut up together, so that their spirits may not breathe out into the air, but may mutually cherish each other; whereupon there arises a palpable heat, and sometimes flame in suitable matter.

To the 18th.

24. On this instance too should be made more diligent inquiry. For quicklime sprinkled with water seems to contract heat either by the concentration of heat before dispersed, as in the above-mentioned case of confined herbs, or because the igneous spirit is irritated and exasperated by the water so as to cause a conflict and reaction. Which of these two is the real cause will more readily appear if oil be poured on instead of water, for oil will serve equally well with water to concentrate the enclosed spirit, but not to irritate it. We should also extend the experiment both by employing the ashes and rusts of different bodies, and by pouring in different liquids.

To the 19th.

25. To this instance is subjoined the negative of other metals which are softer and more fusible. For gold leaf dissolved by aqua regia gives no heat to the touch; no more does lead dissolved in aqua fortis; neither again does quicksilver (as I remember); but silver itself does, and copper too (as I remember); tin still more manifestly; and most of all iron and steel, which not only excite a strong heat in dissolution but also a violent ebullition. It appears therefore that the heat is produced by conflict, the strong waters penetrating, digging into, and tearing asunder the parts of the substance, while the substance itself resists. But where the substances yield more easily, there is hardly any heat excited.

To the 20th.

26. To the heat of animals no negative is subjoined, except that of insects (as above-mentioned) on account of their small size. For in fishes, as compared with land animals, it is rather a low degree than an absence of heat that is noted. But in vegetables and plants there is no degree of heat perceptible to the touch, either in their exudations or in their pith when freshly exposed. In animals, however, is found a great diversity of heat, both in their parts (there being different degrees of heat about the heart, in the brain, and on the skin) and in their accidents, as violent exercise and fevers.

To the 21st.

27. To this instance it is hard to subjoin a negative. Indeed the excrements of animals when no longer fresh have manifestly a potential heat, as is seen in the enriching of soil.

To the 24th.

28. Liquids, whether waters or oils, which possess a great and intense acridity, act like heat in tearing asunder bodies and burning them after some time; yet to the touch they are not hot at first. But their operation is relative and according to the porosity of the body to which they are applied. For aqua regia dissolves gold but not silver; aqua fortis, on the contrary, dissolves silver, but not gold; neither dissolves glass, and so on with others.

To the 22nd and 23rd.

29. Let trial be made of spirit of wine on wood, and also on butter, wax, or pitch; and observe whether by its heat it in any degree melts them. For the twenty-fourth instance exhibits a power in it that resembles heat in producing incrustation. In like manner therefore try its power in producing liquefaction. Let trial also be made with a graduated or calendar glass, hollow at the top; pour into the hollow spirit of wine well rectified, cover it up that the spirit may better retain its heat, and observe whether by its heat it makes the water sink.

To the 25th.

30. Spices and acrid herbs strike hot on the palate, and much hotter on the stomach. Observe therefore on what other substances they produce the effects of heat. Sailors tell us that when large parcels and masses of spices are, after being long kept close, suddenly opened, those who first stir and take them out run the risk of fever and inflammation. It can also be tried whether such spices and herbs when pounded would not dry bacon and meat hung over them, as smoke does.

To the 26th.

31. There is an acridity or pungency both in cold things, as vinegar and oil of vitriol, and in hot, as oil of marjoram and the like. Both alike therefore cause pain in animate substances, and tear asunder and consume the parts in such as are inanimate. To this instance again there is no negative subjoined. Moreover we find no pain in animals, save with a certain sensation of heat.

To the 27th.

32. There are many actions common both to heat and cold, though in a very different manner. For boys find that snow after a while seems to burn their hands; and cold preserves meat from putrefaction, no less than fire; and heat contracts bodies, which cold does also. But these and similar instances may more conveniently be referred to the inquiry concerning cold.

XIII

Thirdly, we must make a presentation to the understanding of instances in which the nature under inquiry is found in different degrees, more or less; which must be done by making a comparison either of its increase and decrease in the same subject, or of its amount in different subjects, as compared one with another. For since the form of a thing is the very thing itself, and the thing differs from the form no otherwise than as the apparent differs from the real, or the external from the internal, or the thing in reference to man from the thing in reference to the universe, it necessarily follows that no nature can be taken as the true form, unless it always decrease when the nature in question decreases, and in like manner always increase when the nature in question increases. This Table therefore I call the Table of Degrees or the Table of Comparison.
Table of Degrees or Comparison in Heat
I will therefore first speak of those substances which contain no degree at all of heat perceptible to the touch, but seem to have a certain potential heat only, or disposition and preparation for hotness. After that I shall proceed to substances which are hot actually, and to the touch, and to their intensities and degrees.

1. In solid and tangible bodies we find nothing which is in its nature originally hot. For no stone, metal, sulphur, fossil, wood, water, or carcass of animal is found to be hot. And the hot water in baths seems to be heated by external causes; whether it be by flame or subterraneous fire, such as is thrown up from Etna and many other mountains, or by the conflict of bodies, as heat is caused in the dissolution of iron and tin. There is therefore no degree of heat palpable to the touch in animate substances; but they differ in degree of cold, wood not being equally cold with metal. But this belongs to the Table of Degrees in Cold.

2. As far, however, as potential heat and aptitude for flame is concerned, there are many inanimate substances found strongly disposed thereto, as sulphur, naphtha, rock oil.

3. Substances once hot, as horse dung from animal heat, and lime or perhaps ashes and soot from fire, retain some latent remains of their former heat. Hence certain distillations and resolutions of bodies are made by burying them in horse dung, and heat is excited in lime by sprinkling it with water, as already mentioned.

4. In the vegetable creation we find no plant or part of plant (as gum or pitch) which is warm to the human touch. But yet, as stated above, green herbs gain warmth by being shut up; and to the internal touch, as the palate or stomach, and even to external parts, after a little time, as in plasters and ointments, some vegetables are perceptibly warm and others cold.

5. In the parts of animals after death or separation from the body, we find nothing warm to the human touch. Not even horse dung, unless enclosed and buried, retains its heat. But yet all dung seems to have a potential heat, as is seen in the fattening of the land. In like manner carcasses of animals have some such latent and potential heat, insomuch that in burying grounds, where burials take place daily, the earth collects a certain hidden heat which consumes a body newly laid in it much more speedily than pure earth. We are told too that in the East there is discovered a fine soft texture, made of the down of birds, which by an innate force dissolves and melts butter when lightly wrapped in it.

6. Substances which fatten the soil, as dung of all kinds, chalk, sea sand, salt, and the like, have some disposition to heat.

7. All putrefaction contains in itself certain elements of a slight heat, though not so much as to be perceived by the touch. For not even those substances which on putrefaction turn to animalculae, as flesh, cheese, etc., feel warm to the touch; no more does rotten wood, which shines in the dark. Heat, however, in putrid substances sometimes betrays itself by foul and powerful odors.

8. The first degree of heat therefore among those substances which feel hot to the touch, seems to be the heat of animals, which has a pretty great extent in its degrees. For the lowest, as in insects, is hardly perceptible to the touch, but the highest scarcely equals the sun's heat in the hottest countries and seasons, nor is it too great to be borne by the hand. It is said, however, of Constantius, and some others of a very dry constitution and habit of body, that in violent fevers they became so hot as somewhat to burn the hand that touched them.

9. Animals increase in heat by motion and exercise, wine, feasting, venus, burning fevers, and pain.

10. When attacked by intermittent fevers, animals are at first seized with cold and shivering, but soon after they become exceedingly hot, which is their condition from the first in burning and pestilential fevers.

11. Let further inquiry be made into the different degrees of heat in different animals, as in fishes, quadrupeds, serpents, birds; and also according to their species, as in the lion, the kite, the man; for in common opinion fish are the least hot internally, and birds the hottest, especially doves, hawks, and sparrows.

12. Let further inquiry be made into the different degrees of heat in the different parts and limbs of the same animal. For milk, blood, seed, eggs, are found to be hot only in a moderate degree, and less hot than the outer flesh of the animal when in motion or agitated. But what the degree of heat is in the brain, stomach, heart, etc., has not yet been in like manner inquired.

13. All animals in winter and cold weather are cold externally, but internally they are thought to be even hotter.

14. The heat of the heavenly bodies, even in the hottest countries, and at the hottest times of the year and day, is never sufficiently strong to set on fire or burn the driest wood or straw, or even tinder, unless strengthened by burning glasses or mirrors. It is, however, able to extract vapor from moist substances.

15. By the tradition of astronomers some stars are hotter than others. Of planets, Mars is accounted the hottest after the sun; then comes Jupiter, and then Venus. Others, again, are set down as cold: the moon, for instance, and above all Saturn. Of fixed stars, Sirius is said to be the hottest, then Cor Leonis or Regulus, then Canicula, and so on.

16. The sun gives greater heat the nearer he approaches to the perpendicular or zenith; and this is probably true of the other planets also, according to the proportion of their heat. Jupiter, for instance, is hotter, probably, to us when under Cancer or Leo than under Capricorn or Aquarius.

17. We must also believe that the sun and other planets give more heat in perigee, from their proximity to the earth, than they do in apogee. But if it happens that in some region the sun is at the same time in perigee and near the perpendicular, his heat must of necessity be greater than in a region where he is also in perigee, but shining more obliquely. And therefore the altitude of the planets in their exaltation in different regions ought to be noted, with respect to perpendicularity or obliquity.

18. The sun and other planets are supposed to give greater heat when nearer to the larger fixed stars. Thus when the sun is in Leo he is nearer Cor Leonis, Cauda Leonis, Spica Virginis, Sirius and Canicula, than when he is in Cancer, in which sign, however, he is nearer to the perpendicular. And it must be supposed that those parts of the heavens shed the greatest heat (though it be not at all perceptible to the touch) which are the most adorned with stars, especially of a larger size.

19. Altogether, the heat of the heavenly bodies is increased in three ways: first, by perpendicularity; secondly, by proximity or perigee; thirdly, by the conjunction or combination of stars.

20. The heat of animals, and of the rays of the heavenly bodies also (as they reach us), is found to differ by a wide interval from flame, though of the mildest kind, and from all ignited bodies; and from liquids also, and air itself when highly heated by fire. For the flame of spirit of wine, though scattered and not condensed, is yet sufficient to set paper, straw, or linen on fire, which the heat of animals will never do, or of the sun without a burning glass or mirror.

21. There are, however, many degrees of strength and weakness in the heat of flame and ignited bodies. But as they have never been diligently inquired into, we must pass them lightly over. It appears, however, that of all flame that of spirit of wine is the softest, unless perhaps ignis fatuus be softer, and the flames or sparklings arising from the sweat of animals. Next to this, as I suppose, comes flame from light and porous vegetable matter, as straw, reeds, and dried leaves, from which the flame from hairs or feathers does not much differ. Next perhaps comes flame from wood, especially such as contains but little rosin or pitch; with this distinction, however, that the flame from small pieces of wood (such as are commonly tied up in fagots) is milder than the flame from trunks and roots of trees. And this you may try any day in furnaces for smelting iron, in which a fire made with fagots and boughs of trees is of no great use. After this I think comes flame from oil, tallow, wax, and such like fat and oily substances, which have no great acrimony. But the most violent heat is found in pitch and rosin; and yet more in sulphur, camphor, naphtha, rock oil, and salts (after the crude matter is discharged), and in their compounds, as gunpowder, Greek fire (commonly called wildfire), and its different kinds, which have so stubborn a heat that they are not easily extinguished by water.

22. I think also that the flame which results from some imperfect metals is very strong and eager. But on these points let further inquiry be made.

23. The flame of powerful lightning seems to exceed in strength all the former, for it has even been known to melt wrought iron into drops, which those other flames cannot do.

24. In ignited bodies too there are different degrees of heat, though these again have not yet been diligently examined. The weakest heat of all, I think, is that from tinder, such as we use to kindle flame with; and in like manner that of touchwood or tow, which is used in firing cannon. After this comes ignited wood or coal, and also bricks and the like heated to ignition. But of all ignited substances, the hottest, as I take it, are ignited metals, as iron, copper, etc. But these require further investigation.

25. Some ignited bodies are found to be much hotter than some flames. Ignited iron, for instance, is much hotter and more consuming than flame of spirit of wine.

26. Of substances also which are not ignited but only heated by fire, as boiling water and air confined in furnaces, some are found to exceed in heat many flames and ignited substances.

27. Motion increases heat, as you may see in bellows and by blowing; insomuch that the harder metals are not dissolved or melted by a dead or quiet fire, till it be made intense by blowing.

28. Let trial be made with burning glasses, which (as I remember) act thus. If you place a burning glass at the distance of (say) a span from a combustible body, it will not burn or consume it so easily as if it were first placed at the distance of (say) half a span, and then moved gradually and slowly to the distance of the whole span. And yet the cone and union of rays are the same; but the motion itself increases the operation of the heat.

29. Fires which break out during a strong wind are thought to make greater progress against than with it; because the flame recoils more violently when the wind gives way than it advances while the wind is driving it on.

30. Flame does not burst out, nor is it generated, unless some hollow space be allowed it to move and play in; except the explosive flame of gunpowder and the like, where compression and imprisonment increase its fury.

31. An anvil grows very hot under the hammer, insomuch that if it were made of a thin plate it might, I suppose, with strong and continuous blows of the hammer, grow red like ignited iron. But let this be tried by experiment.

32. But in ignited substances which are porous, so as to give the fire room to move, if this motion be checked by strong compression, the fire is immediately extinguished. For instance, when tinder, or the burning wick of a candle or lamp, or even live charcoal or coal, is pressed down with an extinguisher, or with the foot, or any similar instrument, the operation of the fire instantly ceases.

33. Approximation to a hot body increases heat in proportion to the degree of approximation. And this is the case also with light; for the nearer an object is brought to the light, the more visible it becomes.

34. The union of different heats increases heat, unless the hot substances be mixed together. For a large fire and a small fire in the same room increase one another's heat; but warm water plunged into boiling water cools it.

35. The continued application of a hot body increases heat, because heat perpetually passing and emanating from it mingles with the previously existing heat, and so multiplies the heat. For a fire does not warm a room as well in half an hour as it does if continued through the whole hour. But this is not the case with light; for a lamp or candle gives no more light after it has been long lighted than it did at first.

36. Irritation by surrounding cold increases heat, as you may see in fires during a sharp frost. And this I think is owing not merely to the confinement and contraction of the heat, which is a kind of union, but also to irritation. Thus, when air or a stick is violently compressed or bent, it recoils not merely to the point it was forced from, but beyond it on the other side. Let trial therefore be carefully made by putting a stick or some such thing into flame, and observing whether it is not burnt more quickly at the sides than in the middle of the flame.

37. There are many degrees in susceptibility of heat. And first of all it is to be observed how slight and faint a heat changes and somewhat warms even those bodies which are least of all susceptible of heat. Even the heat of the hand communicates some heat to a ball of lead or any metal, if held in it a little while. So readily and so universally is heat transmitted and excited, the body remaining to all appearance unchanged.

38. Of all substances that we are acquainted with, the one which most readily receives and loses heat is air; as is best seen in calendar glasses [air thermoscopes], which are made thus. Take a glass with a hollow belly, a thin and oblong neck; turn it upside down and lower it, with the mouth downwards and the belly upwards, into another glass vessel containing water; and let the mouth of the inserted vessel touch the bottom of the receiving vessel and its neck lean slightly against the mouth of the other, so that it can stand. And that this may be done more conveniently, apply a little wax to the mouth of the receiving glass, but not so as to seal its mouth quite up, in order that the motion, of which we are going to speak, and which is very facile and delicate, may not be impeded by want of a supply of air.

The lowered glass, before being inserted into the other, must be heated before a fire in its upper part, that is its belly. Now when it is placed in the position I have described, the air which was dilated by the heat will, after a lapse of time sufficient to allow for the extinction of that adventitious heat, withdraw and contract itself to the same extension or dimension as that of the surrounding air at the time of the immersion of the glass, and will draw the water upwards to a corresponding height. To the side of the glass there should be affixed a strip of paper, narrow and oblong, and marked with as many degrees as you choose. You will then see, according as the day is warm or cold, that the air contracts under the action of cold, and expands under the action of heat; as will be seen by the water rising when the air contracts, and sinking when it dilates. But the air's sense of heat and cold is so subtle and exquisite as far to exceed the perception of the human touch, insomuch that a ray of sunshine, or the heat of the breath, much more the heat of one's hand placed on the top of the glass, will cause the water immediately to sink in a perceptible degree. And yet I think that animal spirits have a sense of heat and cold more exquisite still, were it not that it is impeded and deadened by the grossness of the body.

39. Next to air, I take those bodies to be most sensitive to heat which have been recently changed and compressed by cold, as snow and ice; for they begin to dissolve and melt with any gentle heat. Next to them, perhaps, comes quicksilver. After that follow greasy substances, as oil, butter, and the like; then comes wood; then water; and lastly stones and metals, which are slow to heat, especially in the inside. These, however, when once they have acquired heat retain it very long; in so much that an ignited brick, stone, or piece of iron, when plunged into a basin of water, will remain for a quarter of an hour, or thereabouts, so hot that you cannot touch it.

40. The less the mass of a body, the sooner is it heated by the approach of a hot body; which shows that all heat of which we have experience is in some sort opposed to tangible matter.

41. Heat, as far as regards the sense and touch of man, is a thing various and relative; insomuch that tepid water feels hot if the hand be cold, but cold if the hand be hot.

XIV

How poor we are in history anyone may see from the foregoing tables, where I not only insert sometimes mere traditions and reports (though never without a note of doubtful credit and authority) in place of history proved and instances certain, but am also frequently forced to use the words "Let trial be made," or "Let it be further inquired."

XV

The work and office of these three tables I call the Presentation of Instances to the Understanding. Which presentation having been made, induction itself must be set at work; for the problem is, upon a review of the instances, all and each, to find such a nature as is always present or absent with the given nature, and always increases and decreases with it; and which is, as I have said, a particular case of a more general nature. Now if the mind attempt this affirmatively from the first, as when left to itself it is always wont to do, the result will be fancies and guesses and notions ill defined, and axioms that must be mended every day, unless like the schoolmen we have a mind to fight for what is false; though doubtless these will be better or worse according to the faculties and strength of the understanding which is at work. To God, truly, the Giver and Architect of Forms, and it may be to the angels and higher intelligences, it belongs to have an affirmative knowledge of forms immediately, and from the first contemplation. But this assuredly is more than man can do, to whom it is granted only to proceed at first by negatives, and at last to end in affirmatives after exclusion has been exhausted.

XVI

We must make, therefore, a complete solution and separation of nature, not indeed by fire, but by the mind, which is a kind of divine fire. The first work, therefore, of true induction (as far as regards the discovery of forms) is the rejection or exclusion of the several natures which are not found in some instance where the given nature is present, or are found in some instance where the given nature is absent, or are found to increase in some instance when the given nature decreases, or to decrease when the given nature increases. Then indeed after the rejection and exclusion has been duly made, there will remain at the bottom, all light opinions vanishing into smoke, a form affirmative, solid, and true and well defined. This is quickly said; but the way to come at it is winding and intricate. I will endeavor, however, not to overlook any of the points which may help us toward it.

XVII

But when I assign so prominent a part to forms, I cannot too often warn and admonish men against applying what I say to those forms to which their thoughts and contemplations have hitherto been accustomed.

For in the first place I do not at present speak of compound forms, which are, as I have remarked, combinations of simple natures according to the common course of the universe: as of the lion, eagle, rose, gold, and the like. It will be time to treat of these when we come to the latent processes and latent configurations, and the discovery of them, as they are found in what are called substances or natures concrete.

And even in the case of simple natures I would not be understood to speak of abstract forms and ideas, either not defined in matter at all, or ill defined. For when I speak of forms, I mean nothing more than those laws and determinations of absolute actuality which govern and constitute any simple nature, as heat, light, weight, in every kind of matter and subject that is susceptible of them. Thus the form of heat or the form of light is the same thing as the law of heat or the law of light. Nor indeed do I ever allow myself to be drawn away from things themselves and the operative part. And therefore when I say (for instance) in the investigation of the form of heat, "reject rarity," or "rarity does not belong to the form of heat," it is the same as if I said, "It is possible to superinduce heat on a dense body"; or, "It is possible to take away or keep out heat from a rare body."

But if anyone conceive that my forms too are of a somewhat abstract nature, because they mix and combine things heterogeneous (for the heat of heavenly bodies and the heat of fire seem to be very heterogeneous; so do the fixed red of the rose or the like, and the apparent red in the rainbow, the opal, or the diamond; so again do the different kinds of death: death by drowning, by hanging, by stabbing, by apoplexy, by atrophy; and yet they agree severally in the nature of heat, redness, death); if anyone, I say, be of this opinion, he may be assured that his mind is held in captivity by custom, by the gross appearance of things, and by men's opinions. For it is most certain that these things, however heterogeneous and alien from each other, agree in the form or law which governs heat, redness and death; and that the power of man cannot possibly be emancipated and freed from the common course of nature, and expanded and exalted to new efficients and new modes of operation, except by the revelation and discovery of forms of this kind. And yet, when I have spoken of this union of nature, which is the point of most importance, I shall proceed to the divisions and veins of nature, as well the ordinary as those that are more inward and exact, and speak of them in their place.

XVIII

I must now give an example of the exclusion or rejection of natures which by the Tables of Presentation are found not to belong to the form of heat; observing in the meantime that not only each table suffices for the rejection of any nature, but even any one of the particular instances contained in any of the tables. For it is manifest from what has been said that any one contradictory instance overthrows a conjecture as to the form. But nevertheless for clearness' sake and that the use of the tables may be more plainly shown, I sometimes double or multiply an exclusion.
An Example of Exclusion, or Rejection of Natures from the Form of Heat
1. On account of the rays of the sun, reject the nature of the elements.

2. On account of common fire, and chiefly subterraneous fires (which are the most remote and most completely separate from the rays of heavenly bodies), reject the nature of heavenly bodies.

3. On account of the warmth acquired by all kinds of bodies (minerals, vegetables, skin of animals, water, oil, air, and the rest) by mere approach to a fire, or other hot body, reject the distinctive or more subtle texture of bodies.

4. On account of ignited iron and other metals, which communicate heat to other bodies and yet lose none of their weight or substance, reject the communication or admixture of the substance of another hot body.

5. On account of boiling water and air, and also on account of metals and other solids that receive heat but not to ignition or red heat, reject light or brightness.

6. On account of the rays of the moon and other heavenly bodies, with the exception of the sun, also reject light and brightness.

7. By a comparison of ignited iron and the flame of spirit of wine (of which ignited iron has more heat and less brightness, while the flame of spirit of wine has more brightness and less heat), also reject light and brightness.

8. On account of ignited gold and other metals, which are of the greatest density as a whole, reject rarity.

9. On account of air, which is found for the most part cold and yet remains rare, also reject rarity.

10. On account of ignited iron, which does not swell in bulk, but keeps within the same visible dimensions, reject local or expansive motion of the body as a whole.

11. On account of the dilation of air in calendar glasses and the like, wherein the air evidently moves locally and expansively and yet acquires no manifest increase of heat, also reject local or expansive motion of the body as a whole.

12. On account of the ease with which all bodies are heated, without any destruction or observable alteration, reject a destructive nature, or the violent communication of any new nature.

13. On account of the agreement and conformity of the similar effects which are wrought by heat and cold, reject motion of the body as a whole, whether expansive or contractive.

14. On account of heat being kindled by the attrition of bodies, reject a principial nature. By principial nature I mean that which exists in the nature of things positively, and not as the effect of any antecedent nature.

There are other natures beside these; for these tables are not perfect, but meant only for examples.

All and each of the above-mentioned natures do not belong to the form of heat. And from all of them man is freed in his operations of heat.

XIX

In the process of exclusion are laid the foundations of true induction, which however is not completed till it arrives at an affirmative. Nor is the exclusive part itself at all complete, nor indeed can it possibly be so at first. For exclusion is evidently the rejection of simple natures; and if we do not yet possess sound and true notions of simple natures, how can the process of exclusion be made accurate? Now some of the above-mentioned notions (as that of the nature of the elements, of the nature of heavenly bodies, of rarity) are vague and ill defined. I, therefore, well knowing and nowise forgetting how great a work I am about (viz., that of rendering the human understanding a match for things and nature), do not rest satisfied with the precepts I have laid down, but proceed further to devise and supply more powerful aids for the use of the understanding; which I shall now subjoin. And assuredly in the interpretation of nature the mind should by all means be so prepared and disposed that while it rests and finds footing in due stages and degrees of certainty, it may remember withal (especially at the beginning) that what it has before it depends in great measure upon what remains behind.

XX

And yet since truth will sooner come out from error than from confusion, I think it expedient that the understanding should have permission, after the three Tables of First Presentation (such as I have exhibited) have been made and weighed, to make an essay of the Interpretation of Nature in the affirmative way, on the strength both of the instances given in the tables, and of any others it may meet with elsewhere. Which kind of essay I call the Indulgence of the Understanding, or the Commencement of Interpretation, or the First Vintage.
First Vintage Concerning the Form of Heat
It is to be observed that the form of a thing is to be found (as plainly appears from what has been said) in each and all the instances in which the thing itself is to be found; otherwise it would not be the form. It follows therefore that there can be no contradictory instance. At the same time the form is found much more conspicuous and evident in some instances than in others, namely in those wherein the nature of the form is less restrained and obstructed and kept within bounds by other natures. Instances of this kind I call Shining or Striking Instances. Let us now therefore proceed to the first vintage concerning the form of heat.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
THE NEW ORGANON OR TRUE DIRECTIONS CONCERNING THE INTERPRETATION OF NATURE Francis Bacon 1620 [Note on the Text] AUTHOR'S PREFACE Those who have taken upon them to lay down the law of nature as a thing already searched out and understood, whether they have spoken in simple assurance or professional affectation, have therein done philosophy and the sciences great injury.

# data[].attributes.body
Biology needs God to explain itself

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Teleological Notions in Biology (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Teleological notions were commonly associated with the pre-Darwinian view that the biological realm provides evidence of conscious design by a supernatural creator. Even after creationist viewpoints were rejected by most biologists there remained various grounds for concern about the role of teleology in biology, including whether such terms are:

# data[].attributes.body
Debates on Efficient and Final Causes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Anthropic Principle asserts that the existence of human life places certain necessary constraints on cosmological and metaphysical theories. It is an ex post facto methodological tool that attempts to relate the structure of the universe to the underlying conditions that are necessary for the existence of observers.

The Anthropic Principle attempts to explain the universe's many life-supporting "coincidences" in two distinct ways: 1) by appealing to an allencompassing selection effect amongst a variety of universes (e.g., the Weak Anthropic Principle); 2) by asserting that the evolution of life is the necessary outcome of the laws of nature (e.g., the Strong Anthropic Principle). It is this latter form that suggests the possible creative activity of an Intelligent Designer.

Formulated in 1974 by the British astrophysicist Brandon Carter, the Anthropic Principle is an attempt to limit the Copernican dogma, which asserts that the Earth does not occupy a privileged central position in the universe. However, while the Earth may not be special or privileged in every way, this does not mean that it cannot be privileged in any way. Indeed, Carter pointed out that the location of the Earth in space is "necessarily privileged to the extent of being compatible with our existence as observers" (p. 291).

The Anthropic Principle is controversial because it implies a teleological link between the structure of the universe and the existence of human beings. Several theorists have taken this idea one step further by incorporating the Anthropic Principle into a larger design argument for the existence of God.

Teleology and fine-tuning

The Anthropic Principle makes this type of goal-directed argument possible by highlighting the various prerequisites for the existence of life. When these prerequisites are duly examined, a striking number of "cosmic coincidences" are discovered to exist between distant branches of physics. These anthropic coincidences are noteworthy because they are essential for the existence of life and because they require tremendous "fine-tuning" before they can be operational. The gravitational constant ( G ), for instance, appears to be exceedingly fine-tuned for the existence of life. If it were slightly larger, stars would have burned too hot and much too quickly to support the fragile needs of life; if it were slightly smaller, the intrastellar process of nuclear fusion would have never initiated, and life would have been incapable of arising on the Earth.

This same rationale can also be applied to the expansion rate of the nascent universe. This crucial factor is determined by the cooperative interplay between several distinct cosmic parameters, including the mass density of the universe, the explosive vigor of the Big Bang, and the strength of the gravitational constant. If the resulting cosmic expansion rate happened to be slightly greater than the presently observed value, life-supporting galaxies would have been unable to form; if it were slightly smaller, the early universe would have collapsed back in on itself shortly after the Big Bang. Either way, no life forms would have been possible.

This is significant, because the various parameters that comprise the cosmic expansion rate also had to be fine-tuned to better than one part in 1060 in order to generate a "flat" universe, so that normal Euclidian geometry (in which the sum of a triangle's three angles adds up to 180 degrees) could then become applicable. A similar degree of fine-tuning can be found throughout the remainder of nature's fundamental parameters.

The challenge is to find a plausible explanation for this fine-tuning. According to the British mathematical physicist Roger Penrose, the odds that a fine-tuned biocentric universe could have accidentally evolved are an astounding one in ten to the 10123, a number so vast that it could not be written on a piece of paper the size of the entire visible universe. This is why many theorists have posited the existence of a "supercalculating intellect" to account for this fine-tuning.

Others, however, have scoffed at this teleological interpretation of cosmological history. They point out that this fine-tuning could have been generated randomly over billions of years if the universe turns out to be merely one of many. In this case, life would have evolved only in those regions that happened to possess the "correct" configuration of fundamental parameters, and human beings would then find themselves living in this special region as a straightforward selection effect. Critics, however, charge that this position is question-begging by its very nature, since it assumes the prior existence of these unexplained worlds.

Definitions

The Anthropic Principle comes in a variety of permutations, each with its own set of implications.

Weak Anthropic Principle. The broadest and least controversial permutation is known as the Weak Anthropic Principle (WAP). Given the reality of human life, the physical universe must contain areas that are compatible with the existence of human beings as observers. The WAP states that humans never could expect to observe a universe that is significantly different from their own, because human existence depends on the prior existence of just such a universe. The WAP thus doesn't try to explain how or why the universe came to be life-supporting. It merely notes that, while the universe is biocentric for unknown reasons, given the current existence of humans it couldn't possibly have been otherwise.

One of the advantages of the WAP is that it highlights the many diverse structural parameters that are necessary for the existence of life. Nevertheless, many people find the WAP deeply unsatisfying because it merely states what is already known to be true; namely, that the universe has to be structured in its present form before it can be capable of supporting carbon-based life. The WAP is thus incapable of explaining why the universe is structured in this biocentric manner.

Strong Anthropic Principle. The more potent Strong Anthropic Principle (SAP) attempts to explain why the universe has a biocentric structure. According to the SAP, the universe must have properties that will allow life to develop within it at some stage of its history. The key element is the word must; it means that the universe had to be life-supporting at some stage of its history. This possibility is suggested by the many astonishing coincidences between distant branches of physics that all work together, against all the odds, to make life possible. The conventional SAP, however, does not attempt to explain why the universe must be biocentric. It simply states that this must be so.

Design-Centered Anthropic Principle. The SAP thus comes close to positing the existence of a cosmic designer because there doesn't seem to be any other plausible way of explaining why the universe had to be life-supporting. For this reason the physicist Heinz R. Pagels (19391988) once quipped that the SAP is "the closest that some atheists can get to God." One interpretation of the SAP explicitly credits a designer for the Earth's many biocentric features. This interpretation, which can be called the Design-Centered Anthropic Principle (DCAP), holds that the universe is biocentric because it was deliberately designed to be this way by a higher power.

Participatory Anthropic Principle. A second version of the SAP, derived from the findings of modern theoretical physics, has been dubbed the Participatory Anthropic Principle (PAP) by physicist John Wheeler (b. 1911). This version holds that observers are necessary to bring the universe into being. The PAP follows from the standard Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics, in which some type of living consciousness is required to make events "real." According to this interpretation, developed by physicist Neils Bohr (18851962), there is no such thing as a concrete quantum reality until a living observer exists to "collapse" the appropriate quantum wave function. Without this act of observation, reality seems to be held in a paralyzing state of indecision.

Some theorists have gone so far as to argue that life is necessary to make the universe itself real. The physicist George Greenstein (b. 1940) has conceived of a "symbiotic universe" in which both life and the universe exist in a classic state of symbiosis; the universe provides the physical foundation for the existence of life, and life symbiotically responds by imparting a concrete state of reality to the cosmos.

The problem with this conceptualization is that life did not evolve until billions of years after the Big Bang. In order for Greenstein's theory to be plausible, a noncorporeal form of life had to have been responsible for observing the universe into being long ago. The only candidate for this role would be the "Ultimate Observer" spoken of by John Barrow and Frank Tipler. This observer alone would have been in a position to observe the entire universe into being.

Final Anthropic Principle. A third version of the SAP has been dubbed the Final Anthropic Principle (FAP). According to FAP, intelligent life must come into existence in the universe, and, once it comes into existence, it will survive forever and become infinitely knowledgeable as it strives to mold the universe to its will. The FAP thus possesses an obvious religious quality because it states that there is a positive universal purpose to human life that cannot be thwarted by any possible power. In this sense, the FAP is analogous to the tenets of generic theism, particularly in its affirmation of an afterlife. However, the FAP does not explain why intelligent life will endure forever. It merely states that it will do so.

Anthropic coincidences

It is important to distinguish between the Anthropic Principle and a curious set of physical facts known as anthropic coincidences. The Anthropic Principle proper is a speculative hypothesis regarding the possible role of humanity in the cosmos, whereas the various anthropic coincidences are empirical observations that relate the apparent fine-tuning of the universe to the needs of life. This, in turn, seems to provide some degree of empirical support for certain forms of the Anthropic Principle.

The value of the gravitational constant G, the mass density of the universe, and the explosive vigor of the Big Bang have all seemingly been fine-tuned to cooperate with one another to generate a smoothly expanding universe of coherent galaxies, each containing an abundance of medium-sized biocentric stars like the sun. Numerous other fine-tuned anthropic coincidences are also at work in the universe to make life possible. A partial list includes the following:

1. the values of nature's fundamental constants;

2. the existence of three spatial dimensions;

3. the ratio of the electromagnetic force constant to the gravitational constant;

4. the mass ratio of the electron and proton;

5. the ratio of protons to electrons;

6. the cosmic entropy level;

7. the speed of light;

8. the age of the universe;

9. the mass excess of the neutron over the proton;

10. the initial excess of matter over antimatter; and

11. the sun's historical change in luminosity, which happened to coincide with the specific needs of Earth-based life forms.

One of the most notable anthropic coincidences was discovered in 1953 by the British astronomer Fred Hoyle (19152001), a former atheist. Hoyle had been researching the intrastellar process of carbon synthesis when he stumbled upon a remarkable series of coincidences pertaining to the stepwise assembly of the carbon atom. To his great surprise, Hoyle discovered that the nuclear resonance levels of both carbon and its immediate precursors (helium and beryllium) were fine-tuned to work together to encourage carbon synthesis. He also found that oxygen's nuclear resonance level is half a percent too low to encourage the nuclear conversion of carbon into oxygen. The result of this remarkable series of coincidences is that carbon can be manufactured inside dying stars in sufficient quantities to make organic life possible. Hoyle concluded that the universe is a "put up job," and that a "supercalculating intellect" had to have "monkeyed" with the basic parameters of physics and cosmology. Otherwise, one would never expect so many unrelated and improbable coincidences to work seamlessly together to generate a biocentric universe.

The Anthropic Design argument

Given the many intercoordinated steps that are required to generate a fine-tuned biocentric universe, many theorists find it astonishing that any form of life could have evolved on this planet. There are simply too many ways in which cosmic evolution could have gone wrong with respect to life, particularly given the universality of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, which states that the total amount of disorder in the universe is always increasing. It is the Second Law that leads one to expect a non-biocentric outcome at each stage of the universe-building process, yet the correct biocentric result nevertheless happened at each bifurcation point.

It is the fine-tuning of nature's fundamental constants at the Big Bang that probably enabled this to happen. Indeed, given the brute fact of human existence, it is necessarily the case that the universe be fine-tuned enough for it to overcome the many thermodynamic hurdles that naturally exist on the way to life. This, in turn, seems to suggest a strong element of necessity in the universe's underlying ability to generate life. Insofar as this is so, it constitutes evidence in favor of the Strong Anthropic Principle.

Moreover, since the general cosmic tendency is always towards an increased amount of disorder, some thinkers conclude that there must have been some type of constraining force at work in the past. Otherwise, this predisposition towards disorder would likely have put the universe on a nonbiocentric path long ago, despite the fact that order can sometimes be generated within an open thermodynamic system by adding energy to it.

Traditional cosmology has been unable to account for this mystery, except insofar as it has used the principle of cumulative selection to explain the successive preservation of small instances of order, each of which possibly could have been random in origin. The problem with this hypothesis is that the universe had to have evolved to a relatively advanced stage before any type of cumulative selection could have taken place. For this reason many find the Strong Anthropic Principle to be compelling. How else can one explain the trillions of correct choices on the way to life, despite the Second Law, if it weren't structurally necessary for the universe to evolve life at some point in its history?

The Weak Anthropic Principle is typically invoked to refute this conclusion. According to this view, humans shouldn't be surprised at their own existence because they are merely experiencing a selection effect, since it is not possible for them to have observed a non-biocentric universe. While this may be so, it does not necessarily follow that human existence is not surprising. In the same way that a condemned criminal facing a one hundred-man firing squad would naturally be surprised if all one hundred rifles misfired simultaneously, it is also appropriate for human beings to be astonished at their own existence.

Many Worlds Interpretation. A potent counterargument to this anthropic viewpoint has been provided by Hugh Everett's (19301982) Many Worlds Interpretation of quantum mechanics. According to this hypothesis, there are an infinite number of "compartments" or worlds in existence within a much larger "multiverse," each possessing its own randomly varying set of fundamental constants. Humans therefore shouldn't be surprised at their own existence, because it is only natural for life to evolve in the one region of the multiverse that is capable of supporting its existence. This is a prime example of how the Weak Anthropic Principle can be used within a nontheistic worldview to account for the existence of life.

There are three problems with the Many Worlds approach, however. First, there is no evidence for any of these other possible worlds, nor can there be any such evidence in the future because these alternative domains are believed to be utterly beyond human observational powers, even in principle. Secondly, this approach begs the question, since it assumes the prior, unexplained existence of the multiverse itself. Finally, the use of an infinite number of unobservable worlds to explain the existence of our own world is an unprecedented violation of Ockham's Razor, which states that the simplest explanation in any set of natural circumstances is probably the correct one.

Anthropic explanations

Critics of the Anthropic Principle believe it to be scientifically sterile, since it doesn't initially seem to explain much about the cosmos in which humans live. Supporters of the Anthropic Principle, by contrast, believe that it holds the key to an intriguing relationship between the structure of the universe and the existence of human observers. The size and age of the universe provide an excellent case in point. Prior to the advance of modern cosmological science, it was believed that both the physical and temporal dimensions of the universe were unrelated to the existence of living observers. The mathematician and philosopher Bertrand Russell, for instance, believed that the universe's enormous size and age naturally rendered the concept of intelligent design implausible, since one would naturally expect a deity to have created the best things in the world (e.g., human beings) first rather than last.

This viewpoint has been supplanted by modern cosmological findings that indicate that a certain minimum time frame is inherently required for the intrastellar synthesis of carbon by natural evolutionary pathways. The amount of time that is necessary for this outcome amounts to several billion years, which is roughly equivalent to the time required to synthesize carbon and other heavy elements inside dying red giant stars. During this entire carbon-making epoch, though, the universe itself has been relentlessly expanding. Therefore, it is only in a universe that is sufficiently old, and hence sufficiently large, that carbon-based observers can evolve. The enormous size of the visible universe (approximately fifteen billion light years in spatial extent) is thus directly related to the time required for intrastellar carbon synthesis, due to the ongoing cosmic expansion. This is a genuine anthropic explanation because it links several aspects of the universe to the conditions necessary to generate living observers.

Anthropic versus biocentric

The Anthropic Principle is actually a philosophical misnomer, since it is primarily an argument about the centrality of biological life in general. As such, it could legitimately be called the "Biocentric Principle." A separate argument is thus required to generate an Anthropic Principle from the biocentric evidence. The Greek word anthropos, however, refers to uniquely human life, so the possible existence of intelligent beings elsewhere would technically invalidate the Anthropic Principle. In order to allow for this possibility, it has been suggested that the Anthropic Principle be renamed the Humanoid Principle.

Three distinct arguments are thus conflated within the Anthropic Principle: (1) a biocentric argument, which refers to the centrality of biological life forms in general; (2) a humanoid argument, which refers to the centrality of intelligent humanoid life; and (3) a specific anthropic argument, which argues for the exclusivity of Earth-based intelligent life. These conflations, however, are widely deemed to be irrelevant to the central thrust of the Anthropic Principle, since it is generally assumed that human life would be the ultimate goal of any cosmic intention to evolve Earth-based life. It is also assumed that the possible existence of other humanoid life forms would not invalidate the Anthropic Principle itself. Instead, it would simply provide other cosmic loci by which the biocentric nature of the universe could be explained.

Conclusion

The basic purpose of the Anthropic Principle is to relate the underlying structure of the universe to the fact of human existence. Although many thinkers find this goal unrealistic, others believe that the uniqueness of human consciousness is a fact of fundamental significance in the cosmos. For it is primarily through the vehicle of human awareness that the universe has somehow become aware of itself, and no other known entity appears to possess this marvelous capacity.

See also Anthropocentricism; Copenhagen Interpretation; Cosmology, Physical Aspects; Design; Entropy; Geocentricism; Many-worlds Hypothesis; Physics, Quantum; Thermodynamics, Second Law of

Bibliography

barrow, john d., and tipler, frank j. the anthropic cosmological principle. oxford: oxford university press, 1986.

barrow, john d. the world within the world. oxford: oxford university press, 1990.

barrow, john d. theories of everything: the quest for ultimate explanation. oxford: oxford university press, 1991.

carter, brandon. "large number coincidences and the anthropic principle in cosmology." in confrontation of cosmological theories with observation, ed. malclom s. longair. dordrecht, netherlands: reidel, 1974.

corey, michael a. god and the new cosmology: the anthropic design argument. lanham, md.: rowman & littlefield, 1993.

corey, michael a. the god hypothesis: discovering design in our just right goldilocks universe. lanham, md.: rowman & littlefield, 2001.

danielson, dennis r. "the great copernican clich." american journal of physics 69, no. 10 (2001): 10291035.

davies, paul. are we alone? philosophical implications of the discovery of extraterrestrial life. new york: basic books, 1995.

davies, paul. god and the new physics. new york: simon & schuster, 1983.

davies, paul. the accidental universe. new york: cambridge university press, 1982.

davies, paul. the cosmic blueprint: new discoveries in nature's creative ability to order the universe. new york: simon & schuster, 1989.

davies, paul. the fifth miracle: the search for the origin and meaning of life. new york: simon & schuster, 1999.

davies, paul. the mind of god: the scientific basis for a rational world. new york: simon & schuster, 1992.

dawkins, richard. the blind watchmaker: why the evidence of evolution reveals a universe without design. new york: norton, 1987.

gillespie, neal c. charles darwin and the problem of creation. chicago: university of chicago press, 1979.

gribbin, john. in the beginning. boston: little, brown, 1993.

griffin, david ray. reenchantment without supernaturalism: a process philosophy of religion. ithaca, n.y.: cornell university press, 2001.

henderson, lawrence j. the fitness of the environment: an inquiry into the biological significance of the properties of matter (1913). gloucester, mass.: peter smith, 1970.

hoyle, fred. "the universe: past and present reflections." annual review of astronomy and physics 20 (1982): 1-35.

hume, david. dialogues concerning natural religion (1779). london: penguin, 1990.

kauffman, stuart a. at home in the universe: the search for laws of self-organization and complexity. new york: oxford university press, 1995.

schrdinger, erwin. what is life? cambridge, uk: cambridge university press, 1967.

schroeder, gerald l. the science of god: the convergence of scientific and biblical wisdom. new york: free press, 1997.

scriven, michael. "the presumption of atheism." in philosophy of religion: an anthology, ed. louis p. pojman. belmont, calif.: wadsworth, 1987.

ward, keith. god, chance, and necessity. oxford: oxford university press, 1996.

weinberg, steven. the first three minutes: a modern view of the origin of the universe. london: andr deutsch, 1977.

michael a. corey

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Anthropic Principle asserts that the existence of human life places certain necessary constraints on cosmological and metaphysical theories. It is an ex post facto methodological tool that attempts to relate the structure of the universe to the underlying conditions that are necessary for the existence of observers.

# data[].attributes.body
Are the old Gos gone? A point to consider before Koyré and secularization.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ancient Gods - Where are they now? by Hannah M.G. Shapero

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The philosopher then might add, Does an entity, especially a non-material one, exist if no one believes in it? If it is true that no one still "believes in" Zeus, does "Zeus" still exist? Just because it is named, does it have to exist?

# data[].attributes.body
21st. Centurty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Paideia Project: Proceedings of the 20th World Congress of Philosophy. Includes the Paideia Archive, with the full text of the over 1,000 contributed papers at the August, 1998 Congress.

# data[].attributes.body
Plato
Aristotle

# data[].attributes.body
Thomas Aquinas

# data[].attributes.body
Francis Bacon
Rene Descartes
Robert Boyle
Issac Newton
Pierre Laplace

# data[].attributes.body
Francois-Marie Arouet (Voltaire)
Denis Diderot

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
His famous claim that an idividual can and cannot step into the same river twice reveals an interest in criteria of unity and identity; even though all material constituents have undergone change, it is still, in a sence, the same river.

# data[].attributes.body
From antiquity to present

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
His famous claim that an idividual can and cannot step into the same river twice reveals an interest in criteria of unity and identity; even though all material constituents have undergone change, it is still, in a sence, the same river.

# data[].attributes.body
The 7 Biggest Unanswered Questions in Physics - NBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 7 Biggest Unanswered Questions in Physics - NBC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Physicists have solved some of the universe's biggest mysteries. But they're not done yet.

# data[].attributes.body
A small step for [a] man – From Germany to the moon | Blog | Beyond History

# data[].attributes.body
Science or prediction?
I am not a fan of astrology, but surprisingly, its predictions fall true in the many followers. Pseudoscience takes advantage of the probabilistic fact that at least a few in this world, believe or will fit in a prediction. Science, on the other hand takes facts from educated observation and data collected from experimentation.

The incineration of a piece of wood to explain the matter and form model:
Looking at incineration from the chemical perspective, a transformation occurs by destroying some molecules and allowing for new molecules to form, therefore, incineration of wood causes a substantial change: sugars in the wood react with oxygen in the air producing carbon dioxide and water vapor. Solid wood disappears and is converted to gases and ashes.

In the other case, the change in color of some fruits obeys to an enzymatic reaction caused by enzymes reside in in the chloroplast, present in apples tissue, when this reacts with oxygen, an accidental form changes its color, a bit of its flavor and under extreme oxidation, its texture. A brown apple keeps being an apple anyways.

Matter and form model analyzed:
Strength: Matter and form analysis was a way to explain change and matter; although lacking the scientific understanding of today, he defined the essence of things by observing the tangible part (matter) and theorizing on the intangible (causes of form). Aristotle´s theories about matter and form are precursors of great discoveries, including some of the 20th century.

Weakness: matter and form as components of substance are insufficient to explain the physical and chemical processes that substances undergo during accidental changes. Aristotle´s concepts just put a label on those processes but did not go further to explain them.

Towards Mechanism
I think that philosophers of Descartes’s time were all motivated to finding the elemental unit of matter (or corpuscle) that made bodies different; some were looking at the problem from the mechanics of solids perspective, while biologists were actually looking for the fundamental unit of life. In their eyes, there was certainly a great difference between solids and living matter. Although at the end, we all know that it all comes to atoms, but they did not know back then.

Preformation and the microscope
Before the microscope, Cartesian philosophers were theorizing on complex problems such as animal generation in a way that resembles the Aristotelian substantial form theories. Harvey himself revoked his own theory on human fertilization for it lacked of scientific foundations. With the discovery of the microscope, a new minute world open and their perception of animal generation shed new light in favor of the preformationists and epigenesists had a hard time explaining their theories.

Reconsidering the scientific revolution
That the scientific revolution is the real origin of the modern world and of the modern mentality is something I can agree dearly. However, we cannot conceive a scientific revolution without the philosophical achievements of middle age and the ancient world. Some of those philosophical ideas are still believed true today.

# data[].attributes.headline
History of VR - Timeline of Events and Tech Development

# data[].attributes.subject
History of VR - Timeline of Events and Tech Development

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Updated June 14, 2023 - Dom Barnard

In 1935 Stanley Weinbaum released Pygmalion's Spectacles - a science fiction story. The story's main character wears a pair of goggles which transports him to a fictional world which stimulates his senses aptly and features holographic recordings. Some consider it to be the origin of the virtual reality (VR) concept as this story was a good prediction of the aims and achievements of the future.

However the first VR technical developments were in the 1830s, so this is where our timeline starts:

1838

Sir Charles Wheatstone was the first to describe stereopsis in 1838 and was awarded the Royal Medal of the Royal Society in 1840 for his explanation of binocular vision, a research which led him to construct the stereoscope.

The research demonstrated that the brain combines two photographs (one eye viewing each) of the same object taken from different points to make the image appear to have a sense of depth and immersion (3-dimensional).

This technology enabled Wheatstone to create the earliest type of stereoscope. It used a pair of mirrors at 45 degree angles to the user's eyes, each reflecting a picture located off to the side.
The Wheatstone mirror stereoscope.
1935

In 1935 American science fiction writer Stanley Weinbaum presented a fictional model for VR in his short story Pygmalion's Spectacles. In the story, the main character meets a professor who invented a pair of goggles which enabled "a movie that gives one sight and sound [...] taste, smell, and touch. [...] You are in the story, you speak to the shadows (characters) and they reply [...] the story is all about you, and you are in it."
Pygmalion's Spectacles short story.
1956

Cinematographer Morton Heilig created Sensorama, the first VR machine (patented in 1962). It was a large booth that could fit up to four people at a time. It combined multiple technologies to stimulate all of the senses: there was a combined full colour 3D video, audio, vibrations, smell and atmospheric effects, such as wind.

This was done using scent producers, a vibrating chair, stereo speakers and a stereoscopic 3D screen. Heilig thought that the Sensorama was the " cinema of the future" and he wanted to fully immerse people in their films. Six short films were developed for it.
The Sensorama VR machine.
1960

Heilig also patented the Telesphere Mask which was the first head-mounted display (HMD). This provided stereoscopic 3D images with wide vision and stereo sound. There was no motion tracking in the headset at this point.

Start a Free Trial

1961

Until Headsight was created by Comeau and Bryan, two Philco Corporation engineers. Headsight was the first motion tracking HMD. It had built-in video screens for each eye and a head-tracking system.

However, this wasn't used for virtual reality; it was developed for the military to allow them to remotely look at hazardous situations. A remote camera imitated the head movements so the user could look around the setting.

1965

Ivan Sutherland, a computer scientist, presented his vision of the Ultimate Display. The concept was of a virtual world viewed through an HMD which replicated reality so well that the user would not be able to differentiate from actual reality. This included the user being able to interact with objects. This concept featured computer hardware to form the virtual world and to keep it functioning in real-time. His paper is seen as the fundamental blueprint for VR.

"The ultimate display would, of course, be a room within which the computer can control the existence of matter. A chair displayed in such a room would be good enough to sit in. Handcuffs displayed in such a room would be confining, and a bullet displayed in such a room would be fatal. With appropriate programming such a display could literally be the Wonderland into which Alice walked."

1966

Thomas Furness, a military engineer, created the first flight simulator for the Air Force. This assisted in the progression of VR because the military subsequently provided a lot of funding for producing better flight simulators.

1968

Sutherland, with his student Bob Sproull, created the first virtual reality HMD, named The Sword of Damocles. This head-mount connected to a computer rather than a camera and was quite primitive as it could only show simple virtual wire-frame shapes.

These 3D models changed perspective when the user moved their head due to the tracking system. It was never developed beyond a lab project because it was too heavy for users to comfortably wear; they had to be strapped in because it was suspended from the ceiling.

1969

Myron Krueger, a computer artist, developed a succession of "artificial reality" experiences using computers and video systems. He created computer-generated environments that responded to the people in it. These projects led to VIDEOPLACE technology which is mentioned later.

1972

General Electric Corporation built a computerised flight simulator which featured a 180-degree field of vision by using three screens surrounding the cockpit.

1975

Krueger's VIDEOPLACE, the first interactive VR platform, was displayed at the Milwaukee Art Center. It used computer graphics, projectors, video cameras, video displays and position-sensing technology and it didn't use goggles or gloves. VIDEOPLACE consisted of dark rooms with large video screens to surround the user in "VR".

The users could see their computer-generated silhouettes imitating their own movements and actions - the users' movements were recorded on camera and transferred onto the silhouette. Also, users in different rooms could interact with other users' silhouettes in the same virtual world. This encouraged the idea that people could communicate within a virtual world even if they weren't physically close.

1977

Aspen Movie Map was created by MIT. This program enabled users to virtually wander through Aspen city in Colorado, like with Google Street View. There were three modes: summer, winter and polygons.

It was created using photographs from a car driving through the city. There were no HMDs but it was the use of first-person interactivity and it suggested that VR could transport people to other places.

1979

McDonnell-Douglas Corporation integrated VR into its HMD, the VITAL helmet, for military use. A head tracker in the HMD followed the pilot's eye movements to match computer-generated images.

1980

StereoGraphics company created stereo vision glasses.

1982

Sayre gloves were created by Sandin and Defanti. These gloves were the first wired gloves. They monitored hand movements by using light emitters and photocells in the gloves' fingers. So, when the user moved their fingers the amount of light hitting the photocell varied which then converted the finger movements into electrical signals. This may have been the beginning of gesture recognition.

Furness created a working model of a virtual flight simulator, for the military, called the Visually Coupled Airborne Systems Simulator (VCASS).

1985

Jaron Lanier and Thomas Zimmerman founded VPL Research, Inc. This company is known as the first company to sell VR goggles and gloves. They developed a range of VR equipment, such as, the DataGlove, EyePhone HMD and the Audio Sphere.
VPL Research developed a range of VR equipment.
1986

Furness developed a flight simulator between 1986-1989 known as the Super Cockpit. The training cockpit featured: computer-generated 3D maps, advanced infrared and radar imagery and the pilot could see and hear in real-time.

The helmet's tracking system and sensors allowed the pilot to control the aircraft using gestures, speech and eye movements. Read more about Thomas Furness.

1987

British Aerospace used the HMD similarly to Furness' Super Cockpit and developed the Virtual Cockpit which also featured speech recognition.

Jaron Lanier popularised the term "Virtual Reality" while at VPL Research. The VR and graphics-related patents were later bought by Sun Microsystems.

The company Dimension International created a software that could build 3D worlds in a PC.

1989

Scott Foster founded Crystal River Engineering Inc after receiving a contract from NASA to develop the audio element of the Virtual Environment Workstation Project ( VIEW) - a VR training simulator for astronauts. Through this company real-time binaural 3D audio processing was developed.

Mattel, Inc released the Power Glove, based on VPL's DataGlove. The Power Glove was a controller accessory for the Nintendo Entertainment System, but it never took off as it was difficult to use.

1990

Jonathan Waldern exhibited Virtuality, a VR arcade machine, at the Computer Graphics 90 exhibition in London.

Start a Free Trial

1991

Antonio Medina, a NASA scientist, designed a VR system to drive the Mars robot rovers from Earth in supposed real-time despite signal delays between the planets. This system is called "Computer Simulated Teleoperation".

The Virtuality Group launched Virtuality. These were VR arcade machines where gamers could play in a 3D gaming world. This was the first mass-produced VR entertainment system.

A Virtuality pod featured VR headsets and real-time immersive stereoscopic 3D images. Some of the machines could be networked together for multi-player games. Eventually some of the very popular arcade games, like Pac-Man, had VR versions.

SEGA announced that they were working on the SEGA VR headset which would be available for the general public to purchase. This headset was meant to be used for arcade games and the Mega Drive console. It had a visor-like look due to the influence of popular films, such as, RoboCop. LCD displays were placed in the visor, as well as stereo headphones and sensors for tracking head movement.

However, it was never released even though four games were made for it. One of the explanations for the termination was SEGA's concern of people injuring themselves as the VR effect was too realistic. However, this seems unlikely due to the limited processing power.

1994

SEGA released SEGA VR-1, a motion simulator arcade machine.

VictorMaxx released a VR headset called CyberMaxx.

1995

Nintendo launched the Virtual Boy console which played 3D monochrome video games. It was the first portable console to display 3D graphics. But it was a commercial failure due to:

The lack of colour graphics

The lack of software support

It wasn't comfortable to use

One year later it was discontinued.

Affordable home VR headsets were released:

1. Virtual IO released the I-Glasses.

2. VFX1 Headgear was released by Forte.

1997

Georgia Tech and Emory University researchers used VR to create war zone scenarios for veterans receiving exposure therapy for PTSD. This was known-as Virtual Vietnam [link 1][link 2].

2001

SAS Cube was the first PC based cubic room. It led to Virtools VR Pack.

2007

Google introduced Street View.

Immersive Media was identified as the contractor that captured the imagery for four of the five cities initially mapped by Street View, using its patented dodecahedral camera array on a moving car.

2010

Google introduced a stereoscopic 3D mode for Street View.

Palmer Luckey, an 18-year-old entrepreneur, created the first prototype of the Oculus Rift headset. It featured a 90-degree field of vision, which had never been seen before, and relied on a computer's processing power to deliver the images. This new development boosted and refreshed interest in VR.

2012

Luckey launched a Kickstarter campaign for the Oculus Rift which raised $2.4 million.

2014

Facebook bought the Oculus VR company for $2 billion. This was a defining moment in VR's history because VR gained momentum rapidly after this.

Sony announced that they were working on Project Morpheus, a VR headset for the PlayStation 4 (PS4).

Google released the Cardboard - a low-cost and do-it-yourself stereoscopic viewer for smartphones.

Samsung announced the Samsung Gear VR, a headset that uses a Samsung Galaxy smartphone as a viewer.

More people started exploring the possibilities of VR, including adding innovative accessories, for example Cratesmith, an independent developer, recreated a hoverboard scene from Back to the Future by pairing the Oculus Rift with a Wii's balance board.

2015

VR possibilities started becoming widely available to the general public, for example:

The Wall Street Journal launched a VR roller coaster that followed the ups and downs of the Nasdaq Stock Market.

The BBC created a 360-degree video where users view a Syrian migrant camp.

The Washington Post released a VR experience of the Oval Office at the White House Correspondents' Association Dinner.

RYOT, a media company, exhibited Confinement, a short VR film about solitary confinement in US prisons.

Etc.

Gloveone was successful in its Kickstarter campaign. These gloves let users feel and interact with virtual objects.

2016

By 2016 hundreds of companies were developing VR products.

Most of the headsets had dynamic binaural audio.

Haptic interfaces were underdeveloped. Haptic interfaces are systems that allow humans to interact with a computer using their touch and movements - like the Gloveone gloves that were being developed. This meant that handsets were typically button-operated.

HTC released its HTC VIVE SteamVR headset. This was the first commercial release of a headset with sensor-based tracking which allowed users to move freely in a space.

2017

Many companies are developing their own VR headsets, including HTC, Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft Sony, Samsung etc.

Sony may be developing a similar location tracking tech to HTC's VIVE for the PlayStation 4.

2018

At Facebook F8, Oculus demonstrated a new headset prototype, the Half Dome. This is a varifocal headset with a 140 degrees field of vision.

Virtual reality has significantly progressed and is now being used in a variety of ways, from providing immersive gaming experiences, to helping treat psychological disorders, to teaching new skills and even taking terminally ill people on virtual journeys. VR has many applications and with the rise in smartphone technology VR will be even more accessible.

2019

Forbes describes this as The Year Virtual Reality Gets Real. Oculus Quest, Facebook's standalone headset, created a lot of interest and momentum, selling out in many locations and generating $5 million worth of content sales.

The shift from tethered to standalone VR headsets represented a shift within the immersive ecosystem, as standalone headsets are much easier to use for the average consumer.

Road to VR reported that the monthly-connected VR headsets on Steam had surpassed 1 million for the first time.

Nintendo entered the VR market with the Labo: VR kit for Nintendo Switch on April 12.

In March, Beat Saber became the first application to sell over 1 million copies in under a year.

2020

The Oculus Quest 2 was unveiled on September 16, 2020, during the Facebook Connect 7 event.

The Quest 2 received mostly positive reviews as an incremental update to the Quest and continues to sell in the millions around the world.

2021

Pico launches the Pico Neo 3 headset, a competitor to the Oculus Quest 2 headset.

The Chinese company ByteDance, which owns TikTok, acquired Pico in a push to diversify its business.

Facebook (now Meta) plans to spend at least $10 billion this year on Facebook Reality Labs, its metaverse division tasked with creating AR and VR hardware, software, and content.

2023

Apple announced its entry into the VR market with the Apple Vision Pro, an upcoming mixed-reality headset announced on June 5, 2023, at its 2023 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC). The headset will sell for $3,499.

Meta announced the Meta Quest 3 on June 1, 2023. The headset will sell for $499.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
History of VR - Timeline of Events and Tech Development

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A timeline of virtual reality, including important inventions and developments from 1956 to today. Images show how much technology has improved over time and how VR has evolved through recent history.

# data[].attributes.body
La evolución de los celulares 30 años después 1983-2021 - Social Geek

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
5 julio, 2013

Muchos creen que es una tecnología nueva, una tecnología que solo se asemeja a lo que hoy llamamos los smartphones, mucho hablamos, usamos, criticamos y pensamos acerca de la telefonía móvil, pero.. ¿Qué tanto sabemos de ella?

(1983) Motorola Dynatac 8000X

Ya se podrán imaginar cuánto pesaba esta belleza de celular (alrededor de 800 gramos). En el año de 1973 Motorola presentó el prototipo del primer teléfono portátil en el mundo, este equipo fue lanzado al mercado en el año de 1983 por un módico costo de 4.000 dólares (sigan quejándose del precio del iPhone). Una de las principales características de este súper celular, era que podía almacenar hasta 30 número telefónicos en su agenda, adicional a que la batería tenía duración de 1 hora 🙂 Este equipo funcionaba bastante bien para la época, hacía y recibía llamadas de forma natural, eso sí, desde que la persona que quisiera hablar pudiera levantarlo.

(1983) Nokia Mobira Senator

A todo se parece este celular menos a un celular... Ok, para la época apenas es. Lo que ven en la imagen fue el primer móvil de Nokia, tenía un peso de aproximadamente 10 kilos, sí, leíste bien, 10 Kilos. Este equipo fue diseñado principalmente para llevar al viajar en auto. Solo imagínate andar por la calle con 10 kilos al hombro.

(1993) Bellsouth/Ibm Simon Personal Communicator

¿Si se grabó el nombre? El Simon Personal Communicator es considerado el primer teléfono PDA. Fue vendido por IBM en conjunto con BellSouth, el teléfono tenía cualidades de calculadora, fax, correo electrónico. Su peso era de aproximadamente 500 gramos y tenía el módico precio de 900 dólares.

(1996) Motorola Startac

Empezamos a ver un poco más de forma en el diseño de los teléfonos celulares, el equipo en la imagen es el Motorola Startac lanzado en 1996. Es prácticamente el primer teléfono que le dio una mayor importancia al diseño, anteriormente siempre se realizaban diseños pensando 100% en la funcionalidad del equipo, sin embargo, Motorola fue el primero que vio la importancia de no dejar a un lado el estilo. Para la fecha este celular era el más pequeño y ligero del mercado.

(1998) Nokia 6160

Para este año las antenas en los celulares ya empezaban a desaparecer, algo que mejoró considerablemente su aspecto. El celular en la imagen es el Nokia 6160, este perteneció al formato "Candybar" pesaba aproximadamente 170 gramos y tenía 13.5 cm de diámetro. Fue uno de los más vendidos por Nokia en la década de los 90. Si tienes más de 20 años (como yo) posiblemente lo recuerdas.

(1999) Nokia 3210

Este fue el inicio de lo que fue por mucho tiempo la cima de Nokia, el 3210 fue otro participante del formato "CandyBar" su principal característica fue los colores fríos que marcaron una diferencia hasta la fecha en el diseño de celulares.

(2000) Nokia 8260

El Nokia 8260 fue otro de los equipos que perteneció al formato "CandyBar" igual que el 6160 y el 3210, a diferencia de su antecesor este era más liso, fue introducido en el año 2000, aproximadamente 10 cm y 113 gramos de peso.

(2000) Kyocera QCP6035

Fue un completo hit en el mercado entrando en furor a inicios del 2001, el Kyocera QCP6035 tenía 8 MB de memoria y costaba alrededor de 450 dólares, adicional a este lanzamiento en el año 2.000 se empezaban a ver los primeros prototipos lanzados por Motorola con pantalla táctil.

(2001) Handspring Treo 180

El 2001 le dio el adiós a las pantallas a blanco y negro y le dio la bienvenida a las pantallas monocromáticas. En la imagen vemos el Treo 180 de la empresa Handspring, fabricante del Treo, hizo olas con su modelo 180. Más PDA que teléfono, el Treo 180 se produjo en dos versiones: una con un teclado QWERTY para escribir (ver foto), y otra, que contaba con el sistema de entrada de texto "Graffiti", el Treo 180g. Al igual que el Kyocera QCP6035, contaba con una pantalla monocromática, pero con la ventaja de sus 16 Mb de memoria de almacenamiento.

(2001) Nokia 8250

Para el 2001 Nokia presentaba su primer celular con pantalla de un solo color, la pantalla ya no era un solo color, era de diferentes colores, fue la locura para la fecha. El Nokia 8250 dividió en dos la historia de los celulares para ese año.

(2002) T-MOBILE Sidekick

El 2002 también fue un año de grandes avances en la telefonía móvil. con el T-MOBILE Sidekick llegó la navegación por internet a los celulares, adicional Nokia lanzaba productos móviles integrados con cámaras y pantallas a todo color.

(2002) Blackberry 5810

Para el 2002 Blackberry ya tenía cierto segmento del mercado ganado, ya se relacionaban sus productos con el mundo corporativo y de negocios, el BlackBerry 5810 permitía el envío y recepción de emails de manera sencilla. Una de las características (incómodas) que tenía este dispositivo, era que no tenía ni micrófono ni altavoz, por lo que era necesario utilizar manos libres.

(2003) Nokia N-Gage

Un celular que dio mucho de qué hablar, sin embargo, todo lo hablado fue negativo para este dispositivo de Nokia. Según la hipótesis que tenía Nokia, lanzar al mercado un dispositivo que combinara la telefonía celular con los videojuegos,atraería la atención de los jugadores de consolas portátiles, sin embargo, fallaron y fue un fracaso total que trataron de remediar con versiones futuras que no tuvieron máxima repercusión.

(2004) Motorola Razr V3

El mundo vio nacer el V3, posiblemente no tienes que ser tan viejo para recordar este equipo, Motorola marcó una línea en el diseño de su producto que llamó la atención de todo el mundo. Era de unas proporciones realmente impresionantes, demasiado delgado y con apariencia metálica lisa. Su popularidad duró largo tiempo, hasta el 2007 seguía siendo uno de los teléfonos más populares del mercado.

(2005) Sony Ericsson W810i

El 2005 vio nacer el primer celular Walkman, el W810i fue el teléfono más representativo de la serie Walkman. Pensado inicialmente para que el usuario viviera una completa experiencia musical y tomando como ancla lo que fue en su momento el Walkman, Sony lanzó una serie de celulares los cuales contaban con botones dedicados para la reproducción de música, soporte para Memory Stick, lo convirtió en un excelente dispositivo para disfrutar la música en cualquier momento y lugar.

(2006) Blackberry Pearl

Research In Motion continuó sus esfuerzos por cambiar su imagen estrictamente empresarial con el amistoso Pearl. Este teléfono, con su fino diseño y teclado SureType fue el primer Blackberry en incluir una cámara y un reproductor de audio y video. Combinando estas características multimedia, con el excelente servicio de correo electrónico de Blackberry, encontrabas un impresionante dispositivo móvil.

(2007) iPhone

El 9 de enero de 2007 la historia de los teléfonos celulares se parte en dos, el mundo vio nacer el que serie el equipo que revolucionaria por varios años el mundo de la tecnología. Apple presentó al mundo lo que llamaron la Reinvención del teléfono. Con un diseño innovador, una sola tecla y pantalla táctil, cámara fotográfica de 2 megapíxeles, la habilidad de sincronizar iTunes con el teléfono y características que lo hacían el deseado por todos.

(2008) HTC G1

El auge por el manejo de tareas desde computadores portátiles, abrió la posibilidad de ejecutar varias tareas a los celulares, con esta necesidad nace el HTC G1, un equipo diseñado especialmente como multitask. Introducido al mercado con teclado QWERTY y sistema operativo Android.

(2009) Motorola Milestone

Las pantallas grandes se empiezan a ver en los celulares, empieza el auge en el mercado para Android, se lanza al mercado el Motorola Milestone, un celular con teclado QWERTY.

(2011) Samsung Galaxy SII

Dominó las aplicaciones junto a un potente hardware y un aspecto elegante. En la imagen tenemos al Samsung Galaxy SII, que tiene casi todas las cosas que un teléfono móvil y su propietario necesitan en esta edad moderna. Tiene una cámara de 8 megapixeles y pantalla AMOLED, se ejecuta en el sistema operativo Android, tiene menos de 1cm de espesor y cuenta con GPS. Este fue el celular del 2011.

(2012) iPhone 5

Los smartphones han evolucionado hasta el punto de generar reacciones inesperadas en los usuarios, alrededor del mundo se conocían casos de personas que hasta vendían su virginidad por un iPhone. Apple presentó su última maravilla, el iPhone 5, un equipo que para el 2012 revolucionó el mercado de los smartphones. Con un diseño similar al de su antecesor el iPhone 4S pero a diferencia de este, tiene una pantalla de mayores proporciones, tecnología 4G LTE para conexión de alta velocidad a Internet

(2013) Samsung Galaxy S4

El mundo Android da un salto con el Samsung Galaxy SIV, el smartphone más vendido para el 2013, sus características lo convierten en el más deseado entre los Geeks que buscan tener siempre lo último en tecnología.

(2014) iPhone 6 y 6 Plus

El año 2014 será recordado por los fans de Apple por representar un cambio que ni el propio Steve Jobs pronosticó: la pantalla del iPhone por primera vez superó las 4 pulgadas.

Esta vez la innovación de la marca se centró en ofrecer enormes pantallas, y la firma lanzó por primera vez dos versiones con diferentes tamaños. En primer lugar el iPhone 6 de 4,7 pulgadas, que llegó acompañado del iPhone 6 Plus, destacado por tener una gran pantalla de 5,5 pulgadas.

Apple además incluyó otros avances representativos en hardware como el procesador A8, 1 GB de RAM, versiones con mayor capacidad de almacenamiento (16GB, 64GB o 128GB), cámara principal de 8 megapíxeles, cámara frontal de 1.2MP, conectividad 4G LTE y el sistema operativo iOS 8.

OnePlus One y otros lanzamientos destacados del año

Además del iPhone 6, 2014 representó grandes innovaciones en el mercado móvil.

La naciente compañía china OnePlus apareció este año con un propuesta que nadie se esperaba: smartphones Android con increíbles características y precios muy por debajo del promedio del mercado de alta gama.

El OnePlus One llega al mercado con 3GB de RAM, una gran pantalla Full HD de 5.5 pulgadas, procesador Snapdragon 801 a 2.5GHz, cámara trasera de 13 megapixels con grabación en 4K y dual Flash, batería de 3100 mAh, 64 GB de almacenamiento, y conectividad 4G LTE. Todo ello por un increíble precio que rondaba los $ 300 dólares.

Esto fue suficiente para que el público pusiera sus ojos en esta marca, que actualmente sigue siendo una de las más deseadas por los conocedores de tecnología gracias a la potencia de sus smartphones.

Este año además el mercado móvil recibió otros celulares destacados: Nexus 6, HTC One M8, LG G3, Sony Xperia Z3, Nokia Lumia 1520, BlackBerry Passport, y Galaxy Note 4

(2015) Samsung Galaxy Note 5

Tras un año no tan bueno con el Galaxy S5, en 2015 Samsung vuelve a la carga con un celular realmente innovador, el Samsung Galaxy Note 5.

En 2015 la competencia fue mucho más fuerte, pero el Galaxy Note 5 logró triunfar este año por su diseño, que incluía una parte trasera curvada, y una pantalla de 5,7 que se veía enorme para la época, un aspecto tradicional en la línea Galaxy Note.

El Galaxy Note 5 se destacó por ofrecer la mejor pantalla del mercado, avances importantes en el S Pen, y su hardware interno era realmente poderoso, con un procesador Octa-Core, 4GB de memoria RAM (la más rápida del mercado), pantalla de 5,760 x 6040 píxeles, cámara principal de 16 megapíxeles, batería de 3000 mAh, y la tecnología de transmisión segura magnética (MST por sus siglas en inglés) que le daba mucho más valor al entonces nuevo sistema de pagos Samsung Pay, poniéndolo por encima de Android Pay y Apple Pay por su seguridad.

Otros smartphones que merecen mención este año son los iPhone 6s Plus, LG G4, Nexus 6P, Huawei Mate S, Sony Xperia Z5, Nokia Lumia 950, y Huawei P8.

(2016) OnePlus 3T

Este año una compañía no tradicional dio la sorpresa. Diversos medios especializados lo catalogaron como el mejor smartphone del año gracias a su increíble potencia. Este smartphone sorprendió al incluir 6 GB de memoria RAM, junto a un procesador Snapdragon 821, batería de 3400 mAh, almacenamiento hasta 128 GB y una cámara frontal de 16 megapíxeles y trasera de igual número pero con el sensor Sony IMX298.

El OnePlus 3T también fue lanzado con pantalla Optic AMOLED de 5.5 pulgadas y resolución 1080p, lector de huellas dactilares, puerto USB-C y un diseño unibody metálico.

Mejor Smartphone 2017: iPhone X

Comienzan a llegar cambios importantes a nivel pantalla, c on la reubicación o cambio de formato para la cámara frontal, este año se busca ampliar la pantalla de los dispositivos sin extender más su cuerpo, todo a través de la reducción de los bordes.

Aunque en Android se venían explorando formatos como el notch (la pestaña negra superior), Apple sorprendió con un notch amplio pero bastante funcional que introdujo en los celulares un avanzado sistema de desbloqueo con el rostro a través de multiples sensores infrarrojos y 3D.

De todos los smartphones presentados en 2017, el iPhone X sin duda fue el que más llamó la atención. Este modelo fue anunciado como una versión especial que rendía homenaje a los 10 años del iPhone, razón suficiente para que Apple decidiera introducir grandes cambios en comparación con los iPhone 8 y iPhone 8 Plus también lanzados en el mismo evento.

El iPhone X eliminó por completo el popular botón circular 'home', por lo que el sensor de huellas Touch ID tampoco está presente. En su lugar, Apple introdujo un avanzado sistema de reconocimiento facial llamado FaceID, destacado por su precisión y seguridad incluso en condiciones de poca luz.

Otra novedad de este equipo fue su pantalla Super Retina OLED de 5,8 pulgadas con resolución de 2436×1125, y soporte HDR, que gracias a la eliminación del botón home permitió no solo permite una mejor relación entre pantalla-cuerpo, sino que a su vez trajo consigo una nueva navegación del sistema a través de acciones gestuales.

La cámara dual, Animojis, el chip A11 Bionic y la carga inalámbrica, fueron otras de las características más valoradas por los usuarios de Apple en este modelo. A pesar de las novedades, las malas críticas no se hicieron esperar, pues este smartphone fue lanzado con un precio desde $1.000 dólares.

Finalmente, recordamos otros de los modelos emblemáticos lanzados en 2017: Samsung Galaxy S8, Galaxy Note8, Sony Xperia XZ Premium, HTC U11, Huawei Mate 10 Pro, Nokia 8, BlackBerry KEYone, Google Pixel 2 y Pixel 2 XL.

Mejor Smartphone 2018: Huawei Mate 20 Pro

Tras un rápido ascenso en los últimos años, en 2018 Huawei sorprendió a todos sus competidores al anunciar un smartphone con características únicas. El Huawei Mate 20 Pro llegó con una cámara súper versátil compuesta por un sistema de tres lentes Leica en su parte trasera, de 40, 20 y 8 megapíxeles, estos dos últimos con funciones de ultra gran angular y teleobjetivo respectivamente, junto a una cámara frontal de gran angular de 24 megapíxeles.

El Mate 20 Pro además se destacó por ser el primer smartphone del mundo en ofrecer carga inalámbrica reversible, una función que permite utilizar la batería del teléfono para cargar cualquier smartphone compatible con carga inalámbrica.

La enorme batería de 4,200 mAh de este equipo y su sistema de carga súper rápida proporciona largas horas de uso, y en caso de agotarse, reponer una gran cantidad de horas de uso en solo 30 minutos de carga.

El Huawei Mate 20 Pro también trajo consigo un escáner de huellas digitales debajo de la pantalla y un sistema de reconocimiento facial en la cámara frontal para desbloquear el dispositivo de forma rápida y segura.

Durante el 2018 el mercado de los smartphones se hizo aún más competitivo, y muchas marcas merecen un reconocimiento por sus lanzamientos este año: iPhone XR, Samsung Galaxy S9, Galaxy Note 9, Xiaomi Mi 8, Oppo Find X, LG V40, Google Pixel 3XL, y OnePlus 6T

2019: Llegan los smartphones de pantallas plegables

Tras años de exploración, finalmente llegan las pantallas flexibles y celulares plegables al mercado. A principios de este año se comenzó a hablar de un smartphone llamado Royole Flexpai, el primero en comercializarse (de forma muy limitada).

Seguidamente aparecieron los Samsung Galaxy Z Fold y el Huawei Mate X, y aunque los anuncios fueron un hit, las compañías tuveron que corregir algunos problemas en sus respectivos modelos hasta que finalmente llegaron al mercado a finales de año.

Otro de los Grandes anuncios fue el Motorola RAZR, con el cual la compañía quizo regresar al mercado moderno un teléfono inspirado en el mítico Razr V3; este lanzamiento sirvió de inspiración para que otras marcas apostaran también por flexibles de tipo flip.

Primeros teléfonos inteligentes con 5G (2019)

Luego de varios años hablando de la tecnología 5G, este se materializó a principios de 2019 con la llegada de una nueva generación de conectividad móvil. Esta nueva conectividad promete muchas mejoras significativas con respecto a 4G LTE, la generación anterior. El 5G prometía incrementar en 10 la velocidad de navegación, hasta a 10 GBps (gigabytes por segundo), a su vez esto reduciría la latencia al mínimo y por supuesto su mayor revolución es con respecto al internet de las cosas (IoT) al permitir que no solo smartphones sino otros dispositivos como autos, luces, y mucho más estuvieran conectados.

El primer celular en conectarse a 5G fue el Moto Z3 de Motorola. El dispositivo no tenía un chip 5G en su interior, pero estos modelos contaban con los poderosos Moto Mods, que al conectarse a la parte posterior brindaban funciones adicionales. En este caso Motorola construyó un Mod que permitía al smartphone conectarse a redes 5G, aunque solo estuvo disponible para clientes de Verizon, operador móvil estadounidense que en aquel entonces experimentaba con este tipo de redes. Luego llegaron muchos smartphones de alta gama que integraban en un interior soporte para 5G, y un año más tarde la mayoría de celulares de gama media en adelante soportaban redes 5G a medida que en el mundo se ampliaba la cobertura.

Mejor Smartphone 2019: OnePlus 7T Pro

Cada año se hace más difícil elegir solo un smartphone como el rey absoluto. Son muchas las opciones y cada usuario tiende a juzgar de acuerdo a la característica que más le llama la atención. Por ello ahora es común hablar de un smartphone que se destaca en un apartado en específico, como por ejemplo la mejor cámara, mejor pantalla, mejor rendimiento, mejor duración de batería, entre otros.

Pero si tenemos que elegir el mejor smartphone del 2019 nuestro candidato cumple con todo lo anterior y un punto extra en su precio. Hablamos del OnePlus 7T Pro, teléfono que llegó en la segunda mitad del año como una actualización del también destacado OnePlus 7 Pro (sin la "T"). Esta versión mantiene lo mejor del dispositivo y ofrece mejor cámara y mejoras en el sensor de huellas digitales en pantalla, siendo uno de los pioneros en esta tecnología.

El OnePlus 7T Pro sorprendió desde impresionante pantalla AMOLED de 6.67 pulgadas con resolución QHD+ y una tasa de refresco de 90Hz, lo que lo puso por encima de la competencia, que para este año se mantenía con pantallas de 60Hz. En la pantalla no hay notch ni agujeros para la cámara frontal, ya que esta es de tipo pop-up y solo sale cuando el usuario va a tomar una selfie.

En su interior, la compañía incluyó un procesador Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+, 8 GB de RAM y 256 GB de almacenamiento de tipo UFS3.0, suficiente para brindar un rendimiento óptimo.

A nivel de cámara, su parte posterior sorprendió con un sistema de cámara triple, con un sensor principal de 48MP, una cámara ultra gran angular de 16MP y una cámara de telefoto de 8MP.

Otros lanzamientos: En 2019 fueron lanzados otros smartphones de gran nivel, entre los cuales se destacan el Galaxy S10+, Huawei P30 Pro, Xiaomi Mi 9 y por supuesto el iPhone 11 Pro.

Mejor Smartphone del 2020: Samsung Galaxy S20 FE

En 2020 llegaron grandes lanzamientos que sin duda llenaron las expectativas de los fanáticos. Entre los más destacados están el OnePlus 8T, así como las renovaciones de los smartphones de alta gama más populares del mercado: Galaxy S20 Ultra, Galaxy Note 20 Ultra, Huawei 40 Pro, Xiaomi Mi 10 y iPhone 12 Pro Max. Apple llegó con su iPhone 12 Mini, misma potencia en menor pantalla, siendo esta otra de las novedades del año.

Sin embargo, la compañía que creó el mejor teléfono del 2020 en nuestro concepto fue Samsung con su Galaxy S20 FE (Fan Edition). Como su nombre lo indica, es un dispositivo pensado para satisfacer a los usuarios. El Galaxy S20 FE 5G no solo ofreció la mejor conectividad del momento; también llegó en múltiples opciones de colores y características de muy buen nivel con un precio significativamente más bajo que los smartphones más premium del año incluyendo los propios de Samsung.

Un panel de 120Hz con resolución a FHD+ con un brillo y nitidez exquisitos, una excelente duración de batería con soporte para carga inalámbrica e inalámbrica inversa, almacenamiento UFS 3.0 más ranura microSD, certificación IP68 y el software más actualizado de One UI (la capa de personalización de Samsung sobre Android), este equipo fue sin duda el gran ganador del 2020, especialmente por su excelente relación calidad-precio ($699 dólares).

Mejor Smartphone 2021: Por definir

Durante el año en curso han sido lanzados varios smartphones que se ubican entre lo más alto en cuanto a características y calificaciones. Espera pronto el veredicto final.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
La evolución de los celulares 30 años después 1983-2022 - Social Geek

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Muchos creen que es una tecnología nueva, una tecnología que solo se asemeja a lo que hoy llamamos los smartphones, mucho hablamos, usamos, criticamos y pensamos acerca de la telefonía móvil, pero.. ¿Qué tanto sabemos de ella? (1983) Motorola Dynatac 8000X Ya se podrán imaginar cuánto pesaba esta belleza de celular (alrededor de 800 gramos).