|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Francis Bacon article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, realise, defence), and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|Francis Bacon has been listed as a level-4 vital article in People. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as B-Class.|
|Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
The page states Francis Bacon has been attribute with being the creator of empiricism and practitioner of the Scientific Method sometimes called the Baconian Method. This suggests to me that Bacon is attributed with being the founder, or one of the founders, of scientific method. I notice that the page on Scientific Method (the?) includes only a few reference to Francis Bacon and describes him as a follower of the scientific method and creator of 'a new system of logic'. The impression I get is that Bacon was by no means one of the founders of scientific method but rather an influential advocate of the method which was a base for his development of another or other scientific theories. Is this correct? If yes it needs to be made clearer because at the moment the two pages are at odds with one another.
It is hard to say. Bacon was the really the first to formulate the notion of an empirical study of nature that would be devoted to ameliorating the material existence of humanity. (Although the notion that knowledge should be directed to our physical well-being was circulating throughout Renaissance Europe. Bacon cites alchemists, such as Roger Bacon and Paracelsus, as informing his thinking.) By no means was Bacon the first to suggest basing knowledge on empirical data. Consider that Copernicus had written Of the Revolution of Celestial Spheres in 1543, in which he challenged geocentric cosmology based on his observations. (Bacon actually rejected Copernicus' heliocentric universe.)While he never really was much of a scientist, Bacon was a propagandist for the "new science." I guess the reason why he has garnered the title of founder of the Scientific Method is due to how much the Royal Society was influenced by his writings. The members based their organization on the House of Salomon that Bacon writes about in his New Atlantis. So to return to your question: it is not just that bacon was an influential advocate for the new science but was the advocate for the new science. Early scientific authors, such as Robert Boyle or Robert Hooke, cite Bacon as structuring the foundation for their thought. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atownnative (talk • contribs) 22:49, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, but how can a man who was no scientist at all lay the foundation of modern science? Besides, we can't credit anyone as the "Father of Scientific Method" for the simple reason of "What is the Scientific Method?" There're many concepts. Futhermore, before Bacon, the experimental methodology was already largely used in many places through Europe. We should take a more measured view and avoid biased positions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 14:02, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I think you are missing a very fundamental point here about how Bacon promulgated what we now consider to be the scientific method. Yes, we can go find examples of proto-scientists throughout Europe before Bacon, such as the alchemist Paracelesus. However, what Bacon did was to theorize what these proto-scientists were doing into a philosophy. His greatest contribution to Western Scientific thought was to argue for the belief that knowledge should be used to better humanity's physical existence. (By the way, to say he was not a scientists, or at least one who did conduct experiments, is historically untrue. I would suggest reading a biography on him before making such claims.)Atownnative (talk) 17:09, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
Two points: (1) The discussion confuses arguing "for the belief that knowledge should be used to better humanity's physical existence" with founding the scientific method. Having a view about the end of knowledge is very different from laying out the principles to be followed in advancing knowledge. The scientific method is a means, not an end. (2) "His works established .. the scientific method" while repeating a popular myth, is historically myopic and flatly wrong. The much maligned Aristotle was thorough empiricist in approach and urged empiricism on his followers, even insisting that aristocratic students dirty their hands with dissections. (Yes, I know that he is seen as a bastion of authoritarianism, but that view is without support in the Aristotelian corpus.) Aristotle's Posterior Analytics contains the principles of the scientific method . Robert "Grosseteste did introduce to the Latin West the notion of controlled experiment and related it to demonstrative science, as one among many ways of arriving at such knowledge." () He also clearly articulated the need for parsimony and the method of hypothesizing, deducing consequences, and testing those consequences with experiments and observations, and applied it to studying the rainbow. . This is the scientific method, just as we have it today. Dfpolis (talk) 20:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dfpolis (talk • contribs)
Might I mention that no where in the article is it mentioned what religion Bacon believed in, if he did at all. I had to look through his works to get to the idea that he might be Christian. If any one knows the answer, please add it to the table or the article, if possible. -- Orduin ⋠T⋡ 17:25, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
edits by user:RyanTQuinn
i don't have time to keep trolling bacon's wiki page (as much as i love doing it), but as a heads up i suspect user:RyanTQuinn will try to remove jefferson's quote on bacon, locke & newton's influence on america.
i'm hoping either a discussion occur as to why it should be removed (it is not uncited, as quinn tried to claim in his edit), or why quinn has the right to lie about something that's clearly show.
does he want someone to pull historical records to verify the quote from a government repository? it seems like these letters would be in the trust of an american government entity (just as english thinkers' are held by repositories in london).
please be mindful and revert his edit (if he tries to remove it), as i feel it is deserved. america is a copycat nation. PERIOD.
further to my point, please consult link: https://www.google.com/search?q=%22bacon%2C+locke%2C+newton%22+jefferson&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 to see obvious existence of the quote by jefferson (saying bacon, locke, newton are the three all-time greats).
Reliability of Nieves Mathews.
Is her opinion about Bacon's homosexuality really reliable ? On her wikipedia page, it is stated that she was deeply influenced by Rajneesh who suggested and "blessed" the writing of this biography, the same man for whom "Homosexuals, because they were perverted, created the disease AIDS" and who said to "a gay sannyasin" that "as a homosexual, (he was) not even a human being". Isn't it a big bias ? […]." 126.96.36.199 (talk) 04:24, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- Her work is cited here for non-controversial details, or for examples of opinions in the debate about his sexuality, so I don't see this as an issue. Lot's of people, including academics, have belonged to religious groups who's leaders have disparaged homosexuality or held regressive views, but we don't automatically dismiss them for it. Even if we accepted the connection between her religion and her position on Bacon's sexuality, WP:BIASED sources are not necessarily unreliable sources. So did Rajneesh say something relevant specifically about Bacon? More importantly, did Mathews say that about Bacon, or did she cite her religious beliefs as part of her work? If so, that might be a problem, but even so it's all about context. Grayfell (talk) 04:48, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- I thank you for you answer. I think it's a problem because on the one hand, Nieves Mathews stated herself candidly that this book was Rajneesh's idea ; the same Rajneesh who, she wrote, "thought highly of Sir Francis Bacon" and who, otherwise, was clearly homophobic. And on the other hand, the title of the book itself "Francis Bacon: The History of a Character Assassination" suggest the aim to whitewash a priori all "unpleasant" sides (homosexuality is clearly part of these in their mind) of the character. I just think all of this isn't uninteresting, but anyway it's just an observation that had to be made -on the PD at least-, I believe. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 05:10, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
- It's worth considering. Looking at the talk page archives, it appears someone brought this up back in October 2007, but it couldn't hurt to readdress it every ten years or so. I think it would be a mistake to hold her religious life against her. Her assessment of Bacon may possibly be biased or opinionated, but that doesn't necessarily make the factual aspects false. We usually give the fact-checking of reputable academic publishers like Yale University Press the benefit of the doubt. It also sets a dangerous and unpleasant precedent to discount her through guilt by association. Frankly, I'm also cautious of her work with Velikovsky, as his theories are at the extreme edges of academia. There, also, I think dismissing her work would be an overreaction, but it's worth treating with caution. Grayfell (talk) 05:41, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
So many odd people have approached me knowing of his death and "no issue", so how does that usually work? Next of kin? I'm a 1st cousin (14 X removed) down 4 lines of so. I would guess the others have used my DNA to confirm that. So, can we get dibs on the byproducts of any developments that resulted in his labor of life in refrigeration? This is strictly for conversationally purposes, naturally. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 07:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)