{\rtf1\ansi \deff0\deflang{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2 Times New Roman;}{\f1\froman\fcharset2\fprq2 Symbol;}{\f2\fswiss\fcharset0\fprq2 Arial;}{\f3\fswiss\fcharset0\fprq2 Arial Black;}{\f4\fnil\fcharset2\fprq2 Wingdings;}{\f5\fswiss\fcharset0\fprq2 MS Sans Serif;}} {\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0; \red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;} {\stylesheet{\lotusoutlinelevel0\fs20 \sbasedon0\snext0 Normal;}{\s1 \sb280\lotusoutlinelevel0\f3\fs28 \sbasedon0\snext1 Heading 1;}{\s2 \sb120\lotusoutlinelevel0\b\f2\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext2 Heading 2;}{\s3 \sb120\lotusoutlinelevel0\b\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext3 Heading 3;}{\s4 \qc\sa240\lotusoutlinelevel0\f3\fs48 \sbasedon0\snext4 Title;}{\s5 \fi-360\li360\lotusoutlinelevel1{\*\pn \pnlvlbody\pnucrm\pnindent360\pnhang\pnf0\pnql\pnstart1{\pntxta .}}\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext5 Outline (Not Indented) ;}{\s6 \fi-360\li360\lotusoutlinelevel1{\*\pn \pnlvlbody\pnucrm\pnindent360\pnhang\pnf0\pnql\pnstart1{\pntxta .}}\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext6 Outline (Indented);}{\s7 \qr\lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext7 Table Text;}{ \s8 \fi-360\li360\lotusoutlinelevel3{\*\pn \pnlvlbody\pndec\pnindent360\pnhang\pnf0\pnql\pnstart1{\pntxta .}}\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext8 Number List;}{\s9 \fi720\li0\lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext9 First Line Indent;}{ \s10 \fi-360\li360\lotusoutlinelevel1{\*\pn \pnlvlblt\pnindent360\pnhang\pnf4\pnfs24\pnql{\pntxtb \'76}}\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext10 Bullet 2;}{\s11 \fi-360\li360\lotusoutlinelevel1{\*\pn \pnlvlblt\pnindent360\pnhang\pnf4\pnfs24\pnql{\pntxtb \'9f}}\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext11 Bullet 1;}{\s12 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext12 Body Single;}{\s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \sbasedon0\snext13 Default Text;}}{\info{\author }{\*\category Miscellaneous}}\deftab432\widowctrl \fet2 \margl1440\margr1440\sectd \headery648\footery648\pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab}{\fs24 Jason }{\fs24 Sondhi}{\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab \tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab}{\fs24 Jennifer }{\fs24 Beeman}{\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab}{\fs24 Lucas Miller}{\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab\tab}{\fs24 Chase ???}{\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \qc{\b\fs24 Commentary on }{\b\i\fs24 The New }{\b\i\fs24 Organon}{\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \fi0\li720\ri720{\fs24 \tab}{\i\fs24 The syllogism consists of propositions, propositions consist of words, words are symbols of notions. Therefore if notions themselves (which is the root of the matter) are confused and over-hastily abstracted from the facts, there can be no firmness in the superstructure. Our only hope ther }{\i\fs24 efore lies in a true }{\i\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \fi0\li720\ri720{\b\i\fs24 (Bacon, New Organon I, XIV)}{\i\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \tab}{\fs24 Bacon\'92s ideas as presented in }{\i\fs24 The New }{\i\fs24 Organon}{\fs24 represent a decided break with his intellectual forebears, most specifically the legacy left by the classical Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle. Bacon is conscious of the radical nature of his shift and often throughout the aphorisms listed in }{ \i\fs24 The New Organon}{\fs24 he tries to explain his philosophy through direct contrast with the classical style that was predominant at the time. Perhaps aware at the furor in intellectual communities that might erupt in the aftermath of his work, which essentially demand}{\fs24 s a revolutionary change in the nature of thought and in the pursuit of knowledge, Bacon suggests that academia could split into two camps; one, preserving the former method, a method Bacon terms }{\i\fs24 \'93Anticipation of Nature\'94}{\fs24 and the other embracing his new method, }{\i\fs24 \'93Interpretations of Nature\'94.}{\fs24 Later thinkers would come to agree with Bacon\'92 s ideas, as induction and the scientific method, both pioneered by Bacon, revolutionized the scientific world. And though Bacon proposed the continuation of the former school of thought in conjunction with his own, his savage attacks on the conventions of classical models suggest he thought little of it. }{\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \tab}{\fs24 The above passage in particular attacks the syllogism, the logic technique formally established by Aristotle}{\fs24 in chapter 3 of his work, }{\i\fs24 Categories}{\fs24 . Knowledge of the conventions of a syllogism are assumed by Bacon in the first line as he breaks down for us the its component parts, starting from that which is most specific and complex, the syllogism itself, to its most general, deconstructed part, notions. In doing so Bacon creates a logic chain; syllogisms necessarily following only from propositions, propositions following only from words, with notions being the base. This sets up a situation where if the reader accepts the proposition presented in Bacon \'92s next statement, \'93}{\i\fs24 Therefore if notions themselves (which is the root of the matter) are confused...\'94,}{\fs24 then it logically follows that the syllogism itself must be rejected, for if we follow the chain created in his first statement then we arrive at a conclusion that syllogisms are derived from notions, and something true cannot be derived from that which is false. }{\fs24 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 \tab}{\fs24 The hinge}{\fs24 -point of this argument and therefore the question that deserves scrutiny is Bacon\'92 s position on notions. His feelings on syllogisms are made clear this passage and earlier in the prior aphorism, number XIII, where he rejects the careless use of unsound prepositions such as are typified in Plato. Examples of this fallacy include the arguments concerning the human soul found in }{\i\fs24 Phaedo}{\fs24 . When s}{\fs24 crutinizing this argument under an }{\i\fs24 Interpretations of Nature}{\fs24 style of methodology two weaknesses become apparent. First Plato delivers an unsound universal. Plato begins with asserting that all men have souls, but has no solid evidence to arrive at such a statement; Plato has not observed the soul firsthand. Despite this, }{\fs24 using his in}{\fs24 i}{\fs24 tial universal as the basis of his argument, }{\fs24 } \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs24 Plato begins deducing characteristics and arriving at conclusions about the soul and its relationship to the body; conclusions which have no stability, for an adequate conception or \'93notion\'94 of the soul is not clarified first.}{\fs24 In fact though, Bacon does not believe with any surety in man\'92s conception of notions. He elaborates on his po}{\fs24 s}{\fs24 ition in aphorism XV of }{\i\fs24 New }{\i\fs24 Organon}{\i\fs24 I}{\fs24 when he writes, \'93}{\i\fs22 There is no soundness in our notions, whether logical or physical. Substance, Quality, Action, Passion, Essence itself, are not sound notions; much less are Heavy, Light, Dense, Rare, Moist, Dry, Generation, Corruption, Attraction, Repulsion, Element, Matter, Form, and the like; but all are fantastical and ill defined. \'94. }{\fs22 Aristotle, to his credit, recognized the ambiguity of the conception of notions and the danger they imposed on his logical system and attempted to rectify this unsoundness through explication and definition in his work }{\i\fs22 Categories. }{\fs22 Bacon, being well schooled in the classical works, knows of Aristotle\'92 s attempts to address this point, yet still finds his solutions of categorization lacking. His attitude can be inferred by another of his aphorisms, number XII where he writes, }{\i\fs22 \'93 The logic now in use serves rather to fix and give stability to the errors which have their foundation in commonly received notions than to help the search after truth. So it does more harm than good.\'94 }{\fs22 For Bacon any logic that Aristotle applies to his problems is futile, it glosses over and patches superficial problems in what is an inherently flawed system, a system that does not rely on what Bacon introduces in the last line of our initial passa}{\fs22 ge, induction. }{\fs22 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs22 \tab}{\fs22 Bacon, after undermining the syllogism counters with the central technique of his new school of thought, induction, in the last line of the passage, (}{\i\fs24 Our only hope ther}{\i\fs24 e}{\i\fs24 fore lies in a true induction}{\fs22 \'94 ). Induction is in many ways the reverse of a syllogism which is a form of deductive argument. Whereas the syllogism starts at the general, using some sort of universal (i.e. All men are mortal) to arrive at a particular (Prof. }{\fs22 Searle}{\fs22 is mortal), Induction does the opposite, hoping to arrive at the general through repeated observation of the specific. Bacon describes the differences between the two methods best in Aphorism XIX; \'93}{\i\fs22 There are and can be only two ways of searching into and discovering truth. The one flies from the senses and particulars to the most general axioms, and from these principles, the truth of which it takes for settled and immovable, proceeds to judgment and to the discovery of middle axioms. And this way is now in fashion. The other derives axioms from the senses and particulars, rising by a gradual and unbroken ascent, so that it arrives at the most general axioms last of all. This is the true way, but as yet untried. \'94 }{\fs22 }{\fs22 Bacon believes that we can only arrive at a valid conclusion if we study that which can be physically studied, whether it is with our own eyes and hands, or by the aid of instruments for the mind and body. The difficulty of this argument is that Bacon cannot make affirmative claims to the superiority of this method, like other notions or philosophies or methods, it cannot be proven. Instead what he can do, and what he does in the passage we have analyzed, is to contrast this method with previous methods and show where and how they are lacking in comparison to his own. Plato \'92s arguments ran in tangents without structure or }{\fs22 formalization,}{\fs22 tripping up on their own argumentative threads due to the fact that }{\i\fs22 \'93}{\i\fs22 The subtlety of nature is greater many times over than the subtlety of the senses and understanding}{\i\fs22 ...\'94}{\fs22 Aristotle attempted to apply more formal methodology to his arguments but ultimately placed too much faith in the powers of the mind and in deductive reasoning. In this passage analyzed, the deductive reasoning of the syllogism is itself defeated logically by Bacon. }{\fs22 \par} \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 {\fs22 \tab}{\fs22 Ultimately Bacon\'92s proposition of a splitting of old and new schools of thought would prove to be a prudent proposal. Indeed though Bacon\'92 s inductive methods have proved tremendously in}{\fs22 f}{\fs22 luential in the sciences and in philosophy, by no means has the impact of Plato and Aristotle been lost upon us. The difficulty with induction is that it is restricted to the world of observable phenomena, greatly limiting the scope of questions or possibilities that can be explored. Questions outside this realm, questions of the nature of the soul, of the divine, seem to have no place in Bacon \'92 s system. Questions of ethics and justice are not observable phenomena. Bacon seeks to differentiate himself and the new pursuit of knowledge away from the examples given by the classical thinkers, but they are still necessary. Bacon instead succeeded in establishing himself as a natural scientist and a person to whom which science in its modern form is indebted to. }{\fs22 \par}{\fs24 } \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \pard\plain \s13 \lotusoutlinelevel0\fs24 \par}