There are two books laid before us to study, to prevent our falling into error: first, the volume of the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then the volume of the Creatures, which express His power.-Francis Bacon, Scientific Method
Francis Bacon is roundly considered one of the fathers of
modern science. He is certainly considered the father of the scientific method.
He was a 16th-17th century philosopher, scientist and writer. He has remained extraordinarily influential even posthumously due to his writings. The most
influential were his writing on the scientific revolution and with it the scientific
method. The scientific method being the processes or techniques for
investigating phenomena to gain new knowledge or correcting and integrating
previous knowledge.
Because of his philosophical theories Bacon is also considered the father of empiricism. Empiricism being the belief that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience. Right within the definition of empiricism is a self-limitation for its abilities. It precludes anything outside the senses or a priori knowledge. Yet, Bacon himself did not personally deny the supernatural. If anything he did the opposite in his writing. It was later atheistic/agnostic protégées that would inevitably separate Bacon's method from its theological underpinnings and totally discard or ignore them.
For knowledge to now be considered scientific knowledge it needs to be based in empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning (interestingly it doesn't always have to be logical). This is more currently referred to as logical empiricism/positivism. Furthermore, since today's scientific method does not deal with non-sensory data, it ignores the supernatural or metaphysical. Sadly, this method is all-pervasive in society. Due to militant atheism in the echelons of science, science tries to dictate that only scientific knowledge gained from empiricism, etc. is valid knowledge and usually discounts the entire metaphysical realm.
In this way, adherents of scientific proofs end up not taking in the full range of reality by precluding anything that falls outside of the realm of empiricism, logical positivism or the ability to be measurable or observable. The problem with these theories isn't just that they limit knowledge, it is that they are logically flawed. Why? Logical positivism essentially says that anything that cannot be proven empirically or through sense experience is meaningless. That means in the end empiricism and logical positivism are self-referentially absurd. Why? The theories themselves cannot be proven sound through empirical means (because they are ideas, issues of consciousness, metaphysical). They therefore negate themselves as meaningless. The philosophy or theory invalidates itself. Yet we are to take them seriously in scientific reasoning or as sound philosophy? Geez Louise, get a grip.
So all of this information about Bacon then becomes somewhat ironic and bittersweet.
What is ironic about Bacon being the father of modern science through his scientific method is the basis for his technique. Why is it the technique itself ironic? Well firstly, Bacon formulated his scientific methodologies based on his work Instauratio Magna or The Great Insaturation.
The Great Instauration is composed of two parts. The first is essentially a letter to King James (yes, that King James **see note) explaining his work. The second part is a statement of what is often called 'Baconian' philosophy. It is a systematic plan for a complete revolution in learning and intellectual reform. The published work (second part) was an outline divided into six parts: (i) the division of the sciences, (ii) the new organon or directions concerning the interpretation of nature, (iii) the phenomena of the universe, (iv) the ladder of intellect, (v) the forerunners of Bacon's view and (vi) his new philosophy. The first part (i) described the divisions of science in Bacon's time and suggests that there are further branches that should be added. This is important to note because it shows he does not hedge himself in intellectually. He will do the same with religion and a belief in God unlike his protégées in later centuries. The second (ii) developed a new inductive method of scientific inquiry which is, in effect, an early sketch of the scientific method. The work continues and contains ideas on new epistemologies (study of knowledge), new ontologies (study of being/existence), and forms of logic. For the sake of clarity I will not go into detail on them. In the end the logic of this outline was intended to help understand and command nature and not to win arguments against religion. Sadly, that is exactly what the scientific method has become today. In fact, using the scientific methods to discredit belief in God is totally contrary to what its creator devised it for. It is apparent that Satan hijacked another great idea.
So again I ask, why is The Great Insaturation ironic? It is ironic because it is based in Bacon’s religious beliefs that stand in direct contrast to the atheist beliefs of later adherents of his process in the modern realm of science. It stands on Bacon's Biblical beliefs. Many of modern adherents of Bacon’s method being scientists are avowed atheists….yet they don’t have to be. They chose to be. Many of them will not consider anything a valid explanation of phenomena in the universe outside of empiricism, positivism or the laws of naturalism. In other words anything in the Bible is ruled out solely on ideological grounds.
The irony therefore arises out of the structure of The Great Insaturation. As noted above, it was marked or was to be delineated in the six parts noted above. These six parts were to be an imitation of the Divine work…they were to be an imitation of the six days of Creation as defined in the Bible in the Book of Genesis.
Okay. Stop.
Read that again and let it sink in. Bacon’s great reformation therefore looked like this:
Because of his philosophical theories Bacon is also considered the father of empiricism. Empiricism being the belief that knowledge comes only or primarily from sensory experience. Right within the definition of empiricism is a self-limitation for its abilities. It precludes anything outside the senses or a priori knowledge. Yet, Bacon himself did not personally deny the supernatural. If anything he did the opposite in his writing. It was later atheistic/agnostic protégées that would inevitably separate Bacon's method from its theological underpinnings and totally discard or ignore them.
For knowledge to now be considered scientific knowledge it needs to be based in empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning (interestingly it doesn't always have to be logical). This is more currently referred to as logical empiricism/positivism. Furthermore, since today's scientific method does not deal with non-sensory data, it ignores the supernatural or metaphysical. Sadly, this method is all-pervasive in society. Due to militant atheism in the echelons of science, science tries to dictate that only scientific knowledge gained from empiricism, etc. is valid knowledge and usually discounts the entire metaphysical realm.
In this way, adherents of scientific proofs end up not taking in the full range of reality by precluding anything that falls outside of the realm of empiricism, logical positivism or the ability to be measurable or observable. The problem with these theories isn't just that they limit knowledge, it is that they are logically flawed. Why? Logical positivism essentially says that anything that cannot be proven empirically or through sense experience is meaningless. That means in the end empiricism and logical positivism are self-referentially absurd. Why? The theories themselves cannot be proven sound through empirical means (because they are ideas, issues of consciousness, metaphysical). They therefore negate themselves as meaningless. The philosophy or theory invalidates itself. Yet we are to take them seriously in scientific reasoning or as sound philosophy? Geez Louise, get a grip.
So all of this information about Bacon then becomes somewhat ironic and bittersweet.
What is ironic about Bacon being the father of modern science through his scientific method is the basis for his technique. Why is it the technique itself ironic? Well firstly, Bacon formulated his scientific methodologies based on his work Instauratio Magna or The Great Insaturation.
The Great Instauration is composed of two parts. The first is essentially a letter to King James (yes, that King James **see note) explaining his work. The second part is a statement of what is often called 'Baconian' philosophy. It is a systematic plan for a complete revolution in learning and intellectual reform. The published work (second part) was an outline divided into six parts: (i) the division of the sciences, (ii) the new organon or directions concerning the interpretation of nature, (iii) the phenomena of the universe, (iv) the ladder of intellect, (v) the forerunners of Bacon's view and (vi) his new philosophy. The first part (i) described the divisions of science in Bacon's time and suggests that there are further branches that should be added. This is important to note because it shows he does not hedge himself in intellectually. He will do the same with religion and a belief in God unlike his protégées in later centuries. The second (ii) developed a new inductive method of scientific inquiry which is, in effect, an early sketch of the scientific method. The work continues and contains ideas on new epistemologies (study of knowledge), new ontologies (study of being/existence), and forms of logic. For the sake of clarity I will not go into detail on them. In the end the logic of this outline was intended to help understand and command nature and not to win arguments against religion. Sadly, that is exactly what the scientific method has become today. In fact, using the scientific methods to discredit belief in God is totally contrary to what its creator devised it for. It is apparent that Satan hijacked another great idea.
So again I ask, why is The Great Insaturation ironic? It is ironic because it is based in Bacon’s religious beliefs that stand in direct contrast to the atheist beliefs of later adherents of his process in the modern realm of science. It stands on Bacon's Biblical beliefs. Many of modern adherents of Bacon’s method being scientists are avowed atheists….yet they don’t have to be. They chose to be. Many of them will not consider anything a valid explanation of phenomena in the universe outside of empiricism, positivism or the laws of naturalism. In other words anything in the Bible is ruled out solely on ideological grounds.
The irony therefore arises out of the structure of The Great Insaturation. As noted above, it was marked or was to be delineated in the six parts noted above. These six parts were to be an imitation of the Divine work…they were to be an imitation of the six days of Creation as defined in the Bible in the Book of Genesis.
Okay. Stop.
Read that again and let it sink in. Bacon’s great reformation therefore looked like this:
- Partitions of the Sciences (De Augmentis Scientiarum)
- New Method (Novum Organum)
- Natural History (Historia Naturalis)
- Ladder of the Intellect (Scala Intellectus)
- Anticipations of the 2nd Philosophy (Anticipationes Philosophiæ Secunda)
- Second Philosophy or Active Science (Philosophia Secunda aut Scientia Activæ)
In the second step of his treatise above, the Novum Organum or
New Method, Bacon stated his view was that his reformation would allow science to
aid in the... "partial returning of mankind to the state it lived before the
Fall.” This restoration would restore mankind’s dominion over creation, while faith would restore mankind's original state of
innocence, purity or holiness.
I don’t know about you the reader but I’m suspecting that
most atheist scientists today are not using Bacon’s scientific method for
that purpose. In simpler terms, Bacon’s purposes for the creation of the method
were to bring glory to God by reflecting God's work in our work. Ironically, today’s “scientists” use it to deny and mock Him. It is a very sad irony, but irony none-the-less.
Intelligent and introspective as Bacon was, he went on to give a prophetic warnings in The Great
Insaturation. One of the warnings regarded the end use of science. It is as if Bacon in his wisdom foresaw the ends to which his ideas would be misused in the wrong hands. He said science
should respect things that were Divine but not believe that the very act of
scientific inquiry is forbidden by Divine law. Bacon believed science must be a
faithful attendant of religion to avoid superstitions.
He also believed that the modern sciences (in his time) were the fulfillment of prophecy made in the Book of Daniel that said:
He also believed that the modern sciences (in his time) were the fulfillment of prophecy made in the Book of Daniel that said:
Daniel 12:4 ~ "But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased"
As for Bacon’s faith which is clearly evident in the
formulation of his methodology he wrote the following in the first part of The
Great Insaturation called De Augmentis Scientiarum/Partitions of The Sciences.
"…the more discordant, therefore, and incredible, the divine mystery is, the more honor is shown to God in believing it, and the nobler is the victory of faith." ~ Francis Bacon [The Great Insaturation]
Bacon also wrote this in The Essays: Of Atheism concerning
religion:
“…a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion." ~Francis Bacon [Essay: Of Atheism]
Finally, I leave you below with one other quote from Of Atheism concerning
adherents of atheism. With this quote he effectively
and efficiently dismisses the arrogance of modern atheistic scientists. What he
says here is damning to those that will discount God from an explanation of
physical reality in science. Modern atheistic science should therefore be ashamed of
itself considering science takes Bacon’s methods while simultaneously
dismissing the belief system that they were founded on. We see people that are
willing to worship the Creation but not the Creator. We see them limit their
knowledge on purpose because they hate God. Because they hate God, their lack of logic and proper reasoning is obvious in their incoherent quotes that I publish on this blog routinely.
I seriously doubt Bacon would’ve ever done this. In this way, modern atheistic scientists are nothing like their predecessor. They are not fit to wear his shoes. In this comment we see that Bacon's view of God is in accordance with Christian theology. What is stated in the last quote is simple enough to understand. The quote speaks of the Imago Dei and how man is made in the image of God. Man might be physical but without the image of God in him, he is nothing more than an ignoble or immoral beast.
I seriously doubt Bacon would’ve ever done this. In this way, modern atheistic scientists are nothing like their predecessor. They are not fit to wear his shoes. In this comment we see that Bacon's view of God is in accordance with Christian theology. What is stated in the last quote is simple enough to understand. The quote speaks of the Imago Dei and how man is made in the image of God. Man might be physical but without the image of God in him, he is nothing more than an ignoble or immoral beast.
"They that deny a God destroy man's nobility; for certainly man is of kin to the beasts in his body; and, if he be not of kin to God by his spirit, he is a base and ignoble creature.” ~Francis Bacon [Essay: Of Atheism]
If we weigh everything Bacon has said in this post together,
we stumble upon this last thought that we can deduce from Bacon’s
writing. Modern science has borrowed Bacon’s methodologies but dismissed his
belief in God. This means that Bacon’s quote from Of Atheism speaks directly to his atheistic protégées in subsequent centuries that utilized his scientific
method. These so-called intellectual giants are ignoble or immoral creatures. Bacon specifically
tells us why and it is a theological statement. It's because they are not of the
Spirit of God. He has literally paraphrased Paul from 1 Corinthians 2.
1 Corinthians 2:14 ~ The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit.
It therefore stands to reason that anyone that does not
accept a belief in God, is nothing more than a beast. This comes directly from
the mouth of their scientific predecessor and father of the scientific method. I couldn't have said it any better myself being a theologian.
**Side note: It is believed Bacon was actually one of the editors of the King James Version Bible [1611]. It appears one of Bacon's other talents was as a linguist (1).
**Side note: It is believed Bacon was actually one of the editors of the King James Version Bible [1611]. It appears one of Bacon's other talents was as a linguist (1).
(1) Dodd, Alfred. Francis Bacon's Personal Life-story. Kila,
Mont.: Kessinger, 1995. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Intelligent Responses