Philosophy Expository Paper Outline:
Thesis: Bacon intends for ‘true induction’ to hold general principles as subject to revision.
Thesis: Bacon’s true induction intends for us to re-examine how we got the premise in the first place.
Evidence to support thesis: Late scholastic method vs. Bacon’s new method
- syllogisms & axioms (Show how revision can be possible)
- Human Understandint of the mind & its tendencies: Idols (show perception distortion that could lead to false premise.)
- Tradition vs. Many Scientists (which would lead to revision if error was found)
- Bacons ‘subject to revision’ vs. Aristotle’s ‘absolute truth’
- Getting to the conclusion & running with it (error of the old way)
- Gradual conclusion over time plus many many evidence (Prove Bacon tell us that true induction enables us to see that general principles must be held open to change.)
- Because our human tendencies are distorted.
Evidence to support thesis: Human understanding of the mind & its tendencies
If Bacon intends for true induction to allow general principles to be revised then general principles cannot be absolute.
Notes from class:
1561-1626 Francis Bacon
Period of Late Scholasticism
All human beings are mortal. Socrates is a human being Socrates is mortal.
What Bacon introduces: You know after 1,000 years we’re pretty darn sure that humans are mortal. But there could be one person alive that isn’t.
Bacon says: Hold this privion and recognize, this principle could be wrong.
Bacon says: That’s why we need a lot of evidence,. A lot of contribution form other scientists. (it was not this way before. It was individualistic before Bacon’s time.)
All wandering heavenly bodies are planets. No planets twinkle. No wandering heavenly bodies twinkle.
- As long as the premises are true, the conclusion follows.
- (Note: planet: is abstraction from experience)
All mornings include breakfast from the farmer. All breakfast foretakens a happy day. All mornings foretokens a happy day.
- Is there a problem with it?
- Bacon is not attacking the structure.
- He is attacking the overuse of syllogisms in scientific investigation.
- He thinks we should pay more attention, to how we got the premises in the first place.