tention is manifested and made efficient. If this question is not to be asked, there is in the first place an end of physical science, so far as relates to every case in which a benevolent intention has been or can be recognised; and in the second, the argument à posteriori founded on the contrivance displayed in the works of creation is entirely taken away.

This is, in effect, what Bacon says in the passage of the De Augmentis in which he'complains of the abuse of final causes. If, he affirms, the physical cause of any phenomenon can be assigned as well as the final, so far is this from derogating from our idea of the divine wisdom, that on the contrary it does but confirm and exalt it. "Dei sapientia effulget mirabilius cum natura aliud agit, providentia aliud elicit, quam si singulis schematibus et motibus naturalibus providentiæ characteres essent impressi 67." And a little farther on he expresses an opinion which we shall do well always to remember, namely that so far is the study of physical causes from withdrawing men from God and providence, that on the contrary those who have occupied themselves in searching them out have never been able to find the end of the matter without having recourse at length to the doctrine of divine providence.

In one respect Bacon seems to have overlooked the advantage which is to be derived from the study of final causes. In the sciences which relate to animal and vegetable life, the conviction that every part of the organisation has its appropriate function which conduces to the well-being of the whole, serves not only to direct our thoughts to the wisdom of the Creator, but also to guide our investigation into the nature of the organisation itself.

(18) It will now, I think, be well to attempt to arrange the fundamental ideas of Bacon's system in the order in which, as we may conceive, they presented themselves to his mind. To do this will necessarily involve some degree of repetition; but it will enable us to form a better idea of the scope and spirit of his philosophy. When, at the outset of his philosophical life, he looked round on the visible universe, it would seem that to him the starry heavens, notwithstanding the grandeur of the spectacle they present to us, were of less interest than things on earth. The stars in their courses declare the glory of God; but, excepting the great lights which rule the day and night, they exert no conspicuous influence on the welfare of mankind. And on the other hand it is certain that we can in nowise affect the causes by which these phenomena are produced. But on the earth beneath, and in the waters under the earth, Nature is perpetually working in ways which it is conceivable that we may be able to imitate, and in which the beneficence of the Creator, wherein His glory is to us chiefly visible, is everywhere to be traced. Wherever we turn, we see the same spectacle of unceasing and benevolent activity. From the seed of corn Nature develops the stalk, the blade, and the ear, and superinduces on the yet immature produce the qualities which make it fit for the sustenance of man. And so, too, animal life is developed from its first rudiments to all the perfection which it is capable of attaining. And though this perfection is necessarily transitory, yet Nature, though she cannot perpetuate the individual, yet continues the species by unceasing reproduction.

But the contemplation of God's works, glorious as they are, is not the whole of man's business here on earth. For in losing his first estate he lost the dominion over the creatures which was its highest privilege, and ever since has worn out few and evil days, exposed to want, sickness, and death. His works have all been vanity and vexation of spirit, his labour nearly profitless, his knowledge for the most part useless. Is his condition altogether hopeless, or may it not be possible to soften, though not to set aside, the effects of the primal curse? To this question Bacon unhesitatingly made answer, that of His great mercy God would bless our humble endeavours to restore to suffering humanity some part at least of what it had lost; and thus he has more than once described the instauration of the sciences as an attempt to regain, so far as may be, that of which the Fall deprived us. A deep sense of the misery of mankind is visible throughout his writings. The principal speaker in the Redargutio Philosophiarum, and the son [father] of Solomon's House in the New Atlantis, both express Bacon's idea of what the philos 67 De Aug. iii. 4.

B.W.

D

opher ought to be; and of both it is said that their countenance was as the countenance of one who pities men. Herein we see the reason why Bacon has often been called an utilitarian; not because he loved truth less than others, but because he loved men more.

The philosopher is therefore not merely to contemplate the works of the Creator, but also to employ the knowledge thus obtained for the relief of man's estate. If we ask how this is to be done, we find, Bacon tells us (and here he still seems to recur to the idea that the new philosophy is to be in some sort a restoration to man of his original condition), that as no one can enter into the kingdom of heaven "nisi sub personâ infantis," so, too, in order to obtain a real and fruitful insight into Nature, it is necessary to become as a little child, to abnegate received dogmas and the idols by which the mind is most easily beset, and then to follow with childlike singleness of purpose the indications which Nature gives us as to how her operations are performed. For we can command Nature only by obeying her; nor can Art avail anything except as Nature's handmaiden. We can affect the conditions under which Nature works; but things artificial as well as things natural are in reality produced not by Art but Nature. Our power is merely based upon our knowledge of the procedure which Nature follows. She is never really thwarted or controlled by our operations, though she may be induced to depart from her usual course, and under new and artificial conditions to produce new phenomena and new substances.

Natural philosophy, considered from this point of view, is therefore only an answer to the question, How does Nature work in the production of phenomena ? When, to take a trivial instance, she superinduces yellowness on the green leaf, or silently and gradually transforms ice into crystal, we ask how are these changes brought about?-what conditions are necessary and sufficient in order that the phenomena we observe may be engendered? If we knew what these conditions are, we might ourselves be able to determine their existence, and then the corresponding phenomena would necessarily follow, since the course of Nature is absolutely uniform.

At this point of the development of Bacon's system, the question of method would naturally present itself to him. Having determined what the object of our inquiries is to be, we must endeavour to find a way of attaining it.

For this end Bacon, as we have seen, proposes to examine all the cases in which the phenomenon to be reproduced has been observed, and to note all the conditions which in each case accompany its production. Of all these those only can be necessary which are universally concomitant. Again he proposes to observe all the cognate cases in which, though certain of the conditions before mentioned are present, they are not accompanied by the required phenomenon. By these two classes of observations all the superfluous conditions may be rejected, and those which remain are what we seek. Wherever we can determine their existence we can produce the phenomenon in question.

This process is what Bacon calls, in Valerius Terminus, the freeing of a direction, and in his later writings the investigation of the Form.

His thinking that this process would in all cases, or even generally, be successful, arose from his not having sufficiently appreciated the infinite variety and complexity of Nature. Thus he strongly condemns as most false and pernicious the common opinion that the number of individual phenomena to be observed is sensibly infinite, and commends Democritus (a commendation which seems rather to belong to Lucretius) for having perceived that the appearance of limitless variety which the first aspect of Nature presents to us disappears on a closer inspection.

The transition from this view of Nature to the idea that it was possible to form an alphabet of the universe, and to analyse all phenomena into their real elements, is manifestly easy.

By the new method of induction it would be possible to ascertain the conditions requisite and sufficient for the production of any phenomenon; and as this determination was meant chiefly to enable us to imitate Nature, or rather to direct her operations, Bacon was naturally led to assume that the conditions in question would be such that it would in all cases be possible to produce them artificially.

Now the power of man is limited to the relations of space. He brings bodies together; he separates them; but Nature must do the rest. On the other hand the conditions of the existence of any phenomenon must be something which inheres more closely in the essence of the substance by which that phenomenon is exhibited than the phenomenon itself. And this something is clearly the inward configuration of the substance; that is, the form and arrangement etc. of its ultimate particles. Whiteness, for instance, depends on an even arrangement of these particles in space; and herein we perceive a perfect analogy between what man can do and what Nature requires to be done. The familiar processes of the arts consist simply in giving particular forms to portions of matter, in arranging them and setting them in motion according to certain rules. Between arranging stones so as to form a house, and arranging particles so as to produce whiteness, there is no difference but that of scale. So in other cases. The difference of scale once set aside, it seemed to follow that the knowledge of the Form would in all cases lead to great practical results.

Thus far of the end which the new philosophy proposes to itself, and of the method which it must employ. The next question relates to the mode of procuring and arranging the materials on which this method is to work. In this part of the subject we again perceive the influence of Bacon's opinion touching the limitedness of Nature. No one acquainted with the history of natural philosophy would think it possible to form a collection of all the facts which are to be the materials on which any science is to operate, antecedently to the formation of the science itself.

In the first place, the observations necessary in order to the recognition of these facts would never have been made except under the guidance of some preconceived idea as to the subject of observation; and in the second, the statement which embodies the result of observation always involves some portion of theory. According to the common use of language, it is a fact and not a theory that in ordinary refraction the sine of the angle of incidence is to the sine of the angle of refraction in a given ratio. But the observations on which this statement is based, and the statement itself, presuppose the recognition of a portion of the theory of light, namely that light is propagated in straight lines-in other words they presuppose the conception of a ray. Nor would these observations have been made but for the idea in the mind of the observers that the magnitude of the angle of refraction depends on that of the angle of incidence.

As we advance farther in any science, what we call facts involve more and more of theory. Thus it is a fact that the tangent of the angle of polarisation is equal to the index of refraction. But no one could have made the observations which prove it, or have stated their result in words, without a distinct conception, first of the law of refraction, and secondly of the distinguishing character of polarised light.

The history of science and the nature of the case concur in showing that observation and theory must go on together;-it is impossible that the one can be completed before the other begins. Now although Bacon did not think that observation and experiments might altogether be laid aside when once the process of interpretation had begun (we see on the contrary that one of the works of Solomon's House was the trying of experiments suggested by previously obtained conclusions), he certainly thought it possible so to sever observation from theory that the process of collecting facts and that of deriving consequences from them might be carried on independently and by different persons. This opinion was based on an imperfect apprehension of the connection between facts and theories; the connection appearing to him to be merely an external one, namely that the former are the materials of the latter. With these views that which has been already noticed touching the finiteness of Nature, namely that there are but a finite and not very large number of things which for scientific purposes require to be observed 68, is altogether in accordance.

The facts on which the new philosophy was to be based being conceivable apart from any portion of theory, and moreover not excessively numerous, they might

68 See the Phænomena Universi, and the Partis secundæ Del., &c.

be observed and recorded within a moderate length of time by persons of ordinary diligence.

If this registering of facts were made a royal work, it might, Bacon seems to have thought, be completed in a few years: he has at least remarked that unless this were done, the foundation of the new philosophy could not be laid in the lifetime of a single generation. The instauration, he has said in the general preface, is not to be thought of as something infinite and beyond the power of man to accomplish; nor does he believe that its mission can be fully completed (rem omnino perfici posse) within the limits of a single life. Something was therefore left for posterity to do; and probably the more Bacon meditated on the work he had in hand, the more was he convinced of its extent and difficulty. But the Distributio Operis sufficiently shows that he believed, when he wrote it, that the instauration of the sciences might speedily become an opus operatum. Of the Historia Naturalis on which it was to be based he there speaks, not less than of the Novum Organum, as of a work which he had himself accomplished,-" Tertia pars operis complectitur Phænomena Universi", not "complecti debet". Doubtless the preface was written before the work itself was commenced; still if he had not thought it possible to make good what he here proposes to do, he would have expressly said so 69.

In a letter to Fulgenzio, written probably when Bacon was "dagli anni e da fortuna oppresso", he remarks that "these things" (the instauration of the sciences) require some ages for the ripening of them. But though he despaired of completing his design himself, and even thought that some generations must pass before it received its consummation, yet he always regarded it as a thing which sooner or later would be effectually accomplished, and which would thenceforth remain as a kтîμa és ȧel. His instauration of the sciences had a definite end, in which when it was once attained it would finally acquiesce; nor is there anything in his writings to countenance the assumption which has been often made, that in his opinion the onward progress of knowledge was to continue throughout all time. On the contrary, the knowledge which man is capable of might, he thought, be attained, not certainly at once, but within the compass of no very long period. In this doubtless he erred; for knowledge must always continue to be imperfect, and therefore in its best estate progressive.

Bacon has been likened to the prophet who from Mount Pisgah surveyed the Promised Land, but left it for others to take possession of. Of this happy image perhaps part of the felicity was not perceived by its author. For though Pisgah was a place of large prospect, yet still the Promised Land was a land of definite extent and known boundaries, and moreover it was certain that after no long time the chosen people would be in possession of it all. And this agrees with what Bacon promised to himself and to mankind from the instauration of the sciences. A truer image of the progress of knowledge may be derived from the symbol which, though on other grounds, Bacon himself adopted. Those who strive to increase our knowledge of the outward universe may be said to put out upon an apparently boundless sea; they dedicate themselves

"To unpathed waters—undreamed shores";

and though they have a good hope of success, yet they know they can subdue but a small part of the new world which lies before them.

(19) In this respect, then, as in others, the hopes of Francis Bacon were not destined to be fulfilled. It is neither to the technical part of his method nor to the details of his view of the nature and progress of science that his great fame is justly owing. His merits are of another kind. They belong to the spirit rather than to the positive precepts of his philosophy.

He did good service when he declared with all the weight of his authority and of his eloquence that the true end of knowledge is the glory of the Creator and the relief of man's estate. The spirit of this declaration runs throughout his writings,

69 The sixth part containing the new philosophy itself is spoken of at the end of the Distributio as at least an inchoate work, which others must finish, but to which he hopes to give "initia non contemnenda ".

and we trust has worked for good upon the generations by which they have been studied. And as he showed his wisdom in coupling together things divine and human, so has he shown it also in tracing the demarcation between them, and in rebuking those who by confounding religion and philosophy were in danger of making the one heretical and the other superstitious.

When, not long before Bacon's time, philosophy freed itself from the tutelage of dogmatic theology, it became a grave question how their respective claims to authority might be most fitly co-ordinated. It was to meet, perhaps rather to evade, this question, that the distinction between that which is true in philosophy and that which is true in religion was proposed and adopted. But it is difficult to believe that the mind of any sincere and truth-loving man was satisfied by this distinction. Bacon has emphatically condemned it. "There is," he affirms, "no such opposition between God's word and his works". Both come from him who is the father of lights, the fountain of all truths, the author of all good; and both are therefore to be studied with diligence and humility. To those who wish to discourage philosophy in order that ignorance of second causes may lead men to refer all things to the immediate agency of the first, Bacon puts Job's question, "An oportet mentiri pro Deo,"--will you offer to the God of truth the unclean sacrifice of a lie ?

The religious earnestness of Bacon's writings becomes more remarkable when we contrast it with the tone of the most illustrious of his contemporaries. Galileo's works are full of insincere deference to authority and of an affected disbelief in his own discoveries. Surely he who loves truth earnestly will be slow to believe that the cause of truth is to be served by irony. But we must not forget the difference between the circumstances in which the two men were placed.

Next to his determination of the true end of natural philosophy and of the relation in which it stands to natural and to revealed theology, we may place among Bacon's merits his clear view of the essential unity of science. He often insists on the importance of this idea, and has especially commended Plato and Parmenides for affirming "that all things do by scale ascend to unity". The Creator is holy in the multitude of his works, holy in their disposition, holy in their unity: it is the prerogative of the doctrine of Forms to approach as nearly as possible towards the unity of Nature, and the subordinate science of Physics ought to contain two divisions relating to the same subject. One of these ought to treat of the first principles which govern all phenomena, and the other of the fabric of the universe 70. All classifications of the science ought to be as veins or markings, and not as sections or divisions; nor can any object of scientific inquiry be satisfactorily studied apart from the analogies which connect it with other similar objects.

But the greatest of all the services which Bacon rendered to natural philosophy was, that he perpetually enforced the necessity of laying aside all preconceived opinions and learning to be a follower of Nature. These counsels could not to their full extent be followed, nor has he himself attempted to do so. But they contain a great share of truth, and of truth never more needful than in Bacon's age. Before his time doubtless the authority of Aristotle, or rather that of the scholastic interpretation of his philosophy, was shaken, if not overthrown. Nevertheless the systematising spirit of the schoolmen still survived; and of the reformers of philosophy not a few attempted to substitute a dogmatic system of their own for that from which they dissented.

Nor were these attempts unsuccessful. For men still leaned upon authority, and accepted as a test of truth the appearance of completeness and sicentific consistency. This state of things was one of transition; and probably no one did more towards putting an end to it than Bacon. To the dealers in systems and to their adherents he opposed the solemn declaration, that they only who come in their own name will be received of men. He constantly exhorted the seeker after truth to seek it in intercourse with Nature, and has repeatedly professed that he was no founder of a sect or school. He condemned the arrogance of those who thought it beneath the dignity of the philosopher to dwell on matters of observa

70 The latter is in effect what is now called Kosmos.