The chief peculiarity of Bacon's philosophy seems to us to have been this, that it aimed at things altogether different from those which his predecessors had proposed to themselves.This was his own opinion." Finis scientiarum," says he, "a nemine adhuc bene positus est."[Novum Organum, Lib.i.Aph.81.] And again, "Omnium gravissimus error in deviatione ab ultimo doctrinarum fine consistit." [De Augmentis, Lib.i.] " Nec ipsa meta," says he elsewhere, "adhuc ulli, quod sciam, mortalium posita est et defixa."[Cogitata et visa.] The more carefully his works are examined, the more clearly, we think, it will appear that this is the real clue to his whole system, and that he used means different from those used by other philosophers, because he wished to arrive at an end altogether different from theirs.
What then was the end which Bacon proposed to himself? It was, to use his own emphatic expression, "fruit." It was the multiplying of human enjoyments and the mitigating of human sufferings.It was "the relief of man's estate." [Advancement of Learning, Book i.] It was "commodis humanis inservire." [De Augmentis, Lib.vii.
Cap.i.] It was "efficaciter operari ad sublevanda vitae humanae incommoda." [Ib., Lib.ii.Cap.ii.] It was "dotare vitam humanam novis inventis et copiis." [Novum Organum, Lib.i., Aph.81.] It was "genus humanum novis operibus et potestatibus continuo dotare." [Cogitata et visa.] This was the object of all his speculations in every department of science, in natural philosophy, in legislation, in politics, in morals.
Two words form the key of the Baconian doctrine, Utility and Progress.The ancient philosophy disdained to be useful, and was content to be stationary.It dealt largely in theories of moral perfection, which were so sublime that they never could be more than theories; in attempts to solve insoluble enigmas; in exhortations to the attainment of unattainable frames of mind.It could not condescend to the humble office of ministering to the comfort of human beings.All the schools contemned that office as degrading; some censured it as immoral.Once indeed Posidonius, a distinguished writer of the age of Cicero and Caesar, so far forgot himself as to enumerate, among the humbler blessings which mankind owed to philosophy, the discovery of the principle of the arch, and the introduction of the use of metals.This eulogy was considered as an affront, and was taken up with proper spirit.
Seneca vehemently disclaims these insulting compliments.[Seneca, Epist.90.] Philosophy, according to him, has nothing to do with teaching men to rear arched roofs over their heads.The true philosopher does not care whether he has an arched roof or any roof, Philosophy has nothing to do with teaching men the uses of metals.She teaches us to be independent of all material substances, of all mechanical contrivances.The wise man lives according to nature.Instead of attempting to add to the physical comforts of his species, he regrets that his lot was not cast in that golden age when the human race had no protection against the cold but the skins of wild beasts, no screen from the sun but a cavern.To impute to such a man any share in the invention or improvement of a plough, a ship, or a mill is an insult."In my own time," says Seneca, "there have been inventions of this sort, transparent windows, tubes for diffusing warmth equally through all parts of a building, shorthand, which has been carried to such a perfection that a writer can keep pace with the most rapid speaker.But the inventing of such things is drudgery for the lowest slaves; philosophy lies deeper.It is not her office to teach men how to use their hands.The object of her lessons is to form the soul.Non est, inquam, instrumentorum ad usus necessarios opifex." If the non were left out, this last sentence would be no bad description of the Baconian philosophy, and would, indeed, very much resemble several expressions in the Novum Organum."We shall next be told," exclaims Seneca, "that the first shoemaker was a philosopher." For our own part, if we are forced to make our choice between the first shoemaker and the author of the three books "On Anger," we pronounce for the shoemaker.It may be worse to be angry than to be wet.But shoes have kept millions from being wet; and we doubt whether Seneca ever kept anybody from being angry.
It is very reluctantly that Seneca can be brought to confess that any philosopher had ever paid the smallest attention to anything that could possibly promote what vulgar people would consider as the well-being of mankind.He labours to clear Democritus from the disgraceful imputation of having made the first arch, and Anacharsis from the charge of having contrived the potter's wheel.He is forced to own that such a thing might happen; and it may also happen, he tells us, that a philosopher may be swift of foot.But it is not in his character of philosopher that he either wins a race or invents a machine.No, to be sure.The business of a philosopher was to declaim in praise of poverty with two millions sterling out at usury, to meditate epigrammatic conceits about the evils of luxury, in gardens which moved the envy of sovereigns, to rant about liberty, while fawning on the insolent and pampered freedmen of a tyrant, to celebrate the divine beauty of virtue with the same pen which had just before written a defence of the murder of a mother by a son.
