Descartes and Bacon on the Nature of Scientific Method - Essay Example

RENE DESCARTES AND FRANCIS BACON ON THE NATURE OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD Introduction The excellence and success of science can be traced back to the years between 1550 and 1789 when thinkers applied reason and logic to solve environmental problems. It is from this movement that the idea of scientific evolution evolved, which involved a different way of thinking about the world and replacing old ideas with new ones. History credits two brilliant philosophers who lived during the Scientific Revolution, for their contribution in changing the way people think.1Their names are Rene Descartes and Francis Bacon. The impacts of Rene and Bacon’s contributions changed society in the past have done so presently and seek to change future generations. Over time, science’s major focus has been on changing perception and the way people understand the world in which they live, not to mention explanations for different phenomena. Nevertheless, the two philosophers had contrasting views on scientific methods, which forms the basis of this paper. Most importantly, Descartes rejected tradition and to an extent braced Bacon’s method. Contrastingly, however, Descartes emphasized on logic and rationalization rather than basing science on one’s experience. History and Bibliographies Francis Bacon was born on January 22, 1561 in London. He was the son of the famous Sir Nicholas Bacon, who kept the mighty seal for Elizabeth I. Bacon studied at Gray’s Inn and Cambridge University to become a member of parliament in 1584 aged 23.2 Despite being the son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, he never gained popularity with Elizabeth I, and it was in 1603 when James I’s accession sparked a rise in Bacon’s career. In the same year, he was appointed keeper of the great seal, a position previously held by his father. Contrastingly, Bacon’s real concern was in science. It is notable that much of the science during this time centered on the work of great philosopher Aristotle. Further, Aristotle’s methodologies were still in use even though majority of his ideas were already overruled. It was believed that truth in science could be found through authoritative arguments. In essence, if many ‘wise’ men discussed an issue at length, the truth would eventually come to surface. The belief was Bacon’s greatest inspiration to teach about changes in the society and environment. He further challenged the belief arguing truth is truth only with evidence in the real world. As a result, he produced the first publication in 1620 called Novum Organum (1620) that accounted appropriate process of gaining ordinary knowledge.3 It is significant to note that Bacon’s political ascent was also on the rise. Most notably, he was appointed Lord Chancellor in 1618, a position of the most powerful person in England. Notwithstanding, his downfall began when he was charged for accepting bribes, which he admitted. This marked the end of Bacon’s public life, and upon receiving the court’s pardon, Bacon retired to his home in Hertfordshire, continued to write until he died on April 9, 1626. On the other hand, Rene Descartes was a famous French philosopher, scientist and mathematician. Arguably, he was the first philosopher in history to make concerted efforts and argue against cynicism. As a result, his views on certainty and knowledge, and relationship between body and mind have become very influential over the past three decades. Descartes was born in La Haye on March 31, 1596. His mother died when he was a year old. By then, his father was a member of parliament at Rennes. He received his education at the Jesuit College of La Fleche between 1606 and 1614. Nevertheless, he claimed education gave him little substantial value except what he gained in mathematics. This prompted the move to join a group of seventeenth century philosophers including Francis Bacon. Most notably, Descartes was fascinated by many discoveries made by Euclid and Archimedes. He noted that the way discoveries were made differed from how they are presented. In effect, his view on science focused on how people gain knowledge. Rene Descartes on Scientific Methods It is generally believed that both modern mathematics and modern philosophy started with the work of Rene Descartes. Rene’s analytical way of thinking referred to as epistemology centered on how people know things. It was quite was an issue of great concern to many philosophers during his time. Majority of scientists came up with discoveries and expounded on the same, but no one ever questioned how people knew things. In the beginning of his career, Descartes volunteered at the military to expand his career, even though he had a law degree. This did not hamper his studies in science and mathematics. As a result, his dissatisfaction with unsystematic techniques used by previous authorities increased. In his remarks, he concludes all that was produced by previous authority was non-disputable and no one doubted his or her ideas. In addition, even his understanding of the book of nature did not help much. In effect, after considering previous approaches, Descartes concluded there should be a better way, and in his book, “Discourse on Method” he writes, “I eventually reached the decision to study my own self and choose the correct path.” Furthermore, Descartes discredited the belief that informed people what they see in dreams is accurate. He concluded this after a revelation in 1619 that led to his intellectual rebirth. As a result, the first step was to conquer the very foundation of misconception: the belief that sense perception carries truthful information. More interestingly, in the “Deceiving God and Evil Demon” arguments, Descartes concluded that he may be under control of an invincible being focused on deceiving him. In so doing, Descartes proposed that scientific observations should be interpretive and accompanied by cautious monitoring. Basing Science on Reason Descartes discarded information provided through sense, but still believed that some knowledge is acquirable by other means. In effect, he believed stringent application of purpose to problems is the best way to realize certainty in science. In one writing, “Rules for the Direction of the Mind”, he argued that all problems can be broken into smaller parts to represent a problem as an abstract. Here, Descartes hoped to eliminate or minimize role of undependable sense perception in science. The implication is that objective reason is applicable to solve a problem when all problems are reduced to their abstract elements, usually less sense-dependent. The idea of using one’s senses to draw conclusions in science is misleading according to Descartes. Therefore, scientific facts must arise from objective reason and reliable cause that erase any potential doubt.4Most notably, Descartes’ work that combines geometry and algebra is an ideal application of the above concept. He developed a visual vocabulary for algebraic and arithmetic ideas by generating a two-dimensional graph on which to plot problems. In other words, Descartes made it possible to express both algebra and mathematics in geometric forms. Furthermore, he came up with a technique to understand properties of objects in the real world by minimizing their shapes and using reason rather than sense perception to approach them. Reason as the Core of Humanity “I think, therefore I exist” is Descartes’ most famous statement. In the statement, he presupposes that the small act of thinking is enough proof of existence of humanity.5He argues that every thought has a cause, and is accompanied by an “I” for whoever does the thinking. Most notable assertion is the belief that a human would still be a human with or without hands, face and legs. Nonetheless, thought and reason form the basis of existence, without which there is no humanity. On the same note, science should focus on thought and reason if it is to gain acceptance among humans. Mere perceptions make people discard information even when it is credible. Attainability of Scientific Knowledge Descartes believed that reason is a valuable gift to humans and that reliable knowledge in science is found in application of knowledge rather than by reading books. Science, he believes, is a result of what people observe and the ability to comprehend what one sees in the context of environment. In effect, he expressed complex philosophic and scientific ideas in such a way that even the least erudite readers could understand them. Most notably, Descartes wrote some of his books in French rather than Latin to allow least sophisticated readers understand, as well.6 Underlying Rules to Acceptance of Science The scientific method advocated by Descartes was based on a number of rules. The first rules stated that nothing is acceptable as the truth unless there is satisfactory evidence on the same. This requires careful avoidance of prejudgment and perception and not drawing conclusions unless a situation presents itself distinctly and clearly to the mind. In essence, there should be no reason to doubt anything with sufficient evidence to prove it is the truth. The second scientific approach is to divide every problem into as many parts as possible and allow synthesis. It also eliminates chances of perception and failure to use evidence in problem solving. The third rule states that one should think in an orderly manner. Thinking with fashion begins with things, which are simple and easier to understand, gradually culminating to situations that are more complex. Finally, Descartes’ last rule endeavors to make details complete with general reviews to increase certainty that none of what is necessary is omitted.7In other words, Descartes’ scientific process involved accepting as truth only distinct and clear ideas that are not doubtful, breaking a problem into subparts, deducing a conclusion from every subpart, and carrying out a methodical synthesis of everything. In so doing, Descartes’ entire logical approach to science is based on deductive method of reasoning. The result was a more optimistic approach to constructing a fully reliable body of knowledge. Francis Bacon on Scientific Methods On the other hand, Bacon studies the world as a second party observer with attempts to let his prejudices and preconceptions affect understanding of the universe. On a general perspective, he proposes that to accurately understand the world, an individual must become aware of various distractions and obstacles that prevent them from seeing situations clearly. In effect, these impediments are called Idols. In other words, not anything is what it appears to be, and people must be aware of that. Bacon identifies four main idols that hinder clear understanding of things. For instance, idols of the cave concerns people’s tendency to generalize about the world at large based on little experience obtained from small place in which people live. In effect, it concludes there should not be an assumption on anything. In addition, idols of the marketplace concerns imperfect use of language as a means of communication. As a result, a majority understands wonders around them, but is unable to express because of limited language. It does no one any good when it is impossible to comprehend some of these things. On the other hand, he refers to the intrinsic flaws of philosophy as idols of the theatre. Here, Bacon asserts that Greek thinkers devise and implement disdainful concepts about things, even though they are mere beliefs founded on people’s faulty perception. Bacon, therefore, supposes that once an individual notices the effects idols have, he or she avoids them, hence improving understanding and knowledge of nature and science. As a result, he challenges fellow philosophers to forget the books for a while and try to empirically and scientifically discover the environment. Bacon’s Scientific Method Bacon made few, if any, scientific discoveries. Nevertheless, he gets credit as the prophet in the entire new era; he wrote scientific laws and provided inspiration for science. The vision he had for science enabled him realize new and better scientific way to study the world even before it even existed. Undoubtedly, his true genius is methods he proposed to make the vision a reality. He recognizes that fellow Europeans will never learn anything new provided they continue to seek ideas from philosophers and the Bible. No matter how many intense discussions people have, no matter how deeply they think about certain concepts, there is no progress if reasoning is based on prejudice and presumptions. As a result, Bacon proposed the use of scientific experiment as a new means to reveal deep natural secrets. In the first instance, he recognizes that nature in itself is very chaotic. For instance, the meek fall of a leaf is associated with the law of gravity, further; laws of meteorology govern the wind, and aerodynamics influence response of the leaf to the wind. Bacon concludes that this is a misjudged conception of nature and does not help in understanding science. It follows that nature is so disorderly that one cannot possible learn anything comprehensive from nature. A more scientific approach provided by Bacon requires that ‘we pull nature out of her comfort zone.’ In addition, this goes in handy with the idea of experimental science that presupposes the need for carrying out numerous experimentations.8 The process aims to unravel things unknown to humanity and make simple the more complex scientific concepts. Further, Bacon’s idea of experimental sciences endeavors to refute belief that nature is an issue that regulates science. There is a need to make science a reliable and substantial area by separating it from nature. As a result, this requires repeated experiments to prove that humanity can control as many natural factors as possible. A comparison between the two scientists shows close yet contrasting opinions and beliefs. Descartes, for instance, observed lack of clarity in science and focused on discoveries rather than explanation of how one obtains knowledge. In effect, he published the famous book, “Discourse”, that discusses how to execute scientific studies and achieve clarity and purpose. The test of truth depends on level of clarity, which one can prove it. In addition, Descartes experimented widely with cosmology and nature of matter. The result is theories about matter and facts surrounding existence of heavenly bodies. Most notably, Descartes discarded tradition in science and asserted the need for logic and rationality rather than basing conclusions on human experience. There are underlying reasons why things are the way they are, and rather than talking about what exists, Descartes strives to explain why such things are as people see them. In addition, Descartes is credited as the founder of analytical geometry in mathematics thanks in part to realization of Cartesian coordinates. Further, he asserts the need for reason and use of human mind to understand what happens in the environment. Mostly referred as the father of modern philosophy, Rene Descartes pursued nothing less than the challenging task of a profoundly revisionist look at science.9To substantiate scientific evidence, Descartes begins with the idea of doubt, where he doubts everything with the belief that all he knew originate from his senses. Nevertheless, he calls senses unreliable witness that mislead understanding of science. He asserts that whatever is found to be unreliable witness is never trusted especially one’s senses. In so doing, it is practical to question everything in an attempt to understand science. Contrastingly, Bacon’s major interest was to have science harness nature and improve people’s lives in every way possible. Nature and science co-exist and support one another in many ways. People believe many things about nature, but do not question why nature controls majority of things. The belief in nature undermines scientific concepts, which are central to understanding the universe. In addition, Bacon believes that new discoveries are inappropriate if they are results of deductions. It is important to apply prevailing knowledge to solve scientific problems. In effect, acquisition of new knowledge ought to progress by induction. A typical scientific process starts by data collection through observations, drawing conclusions from observations and finally testing conclusions via new observations. It asserts the need for evidence to support scientific claims, usually deductive reasoning. Moreover, Bacon’s scientific approach is skeptical over theorizing before one observes what happens. It is notable that Bacon was less enthusiastic about mathematics than most philosophers and scientists of his time since mathematics is deductive. Deduction implies repeated observation until there is no doubt over an answer. For instance, mathematics uses inductive reasoning to conclude that 2+2=4, which is contrary to Bacon’s idea of repeated scientific experiments to prove the same.10Even though Francis Bacon made no recognized scientific discoveries, he gets recognition for changing people’s perception on science and the relationship between science and nature. Conclusion In summary, there are remarkable contributions by Francis Bacon and Rene Descartes towards progress made by science. Descartes refutes the idea of belief in an ‘unreliable witness’, in this case one’s senses. In essence, he proposes that it is inappropriate to base scientific facts on experience and sense. He prefers application of reason and thinking towards understanding scientific concepts. On the other hand, Francis Bacon identifies the need to know obstacles that prevent people from seeing things clearly. He provides a distinction between science and nature, but wants science to harness nature and advance people’s lives. Bibliography Bacon, Francis, Michael Silverthorne, and Lisa Jardine. 2000. The new organon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Descartes, René. 1981. Discourse on method. Bobbs-Merrill Educational Publishing. Gauch, Hugh G. 2012. Scientific method in brief. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Greer, Thomas H., and Gavin Lewis. 2005. A brief history of the Western world. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt College Publishers. Lampert, Laurence. 1993. Nietzsche and modern times: a study of Bacon, Descartes, and Nietzsche. New Haven: Yale Univ. Press. Lindberg, David C., and Robert S. Westman. 1990. Reappraisals of the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Nickles, Thomas. 2009. "The Strange Story of Scientific Method". Osler, Margaret J. 2000. Rethinking the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von, and Andrew Bowie. 1994. On the history of modern philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Winsor, Denise L., and Sally L. Blake. 2012. "Socrates and Descartes Meet the E*Trade Baby". Read More