kind of square battalion, and that each element contained species of beings corresponding to each other, and possessing, as it were, parallel properties." And again, men make themselves, as it were, the mirror and rule of nature. It is incredible what a number of idols have been introduced into philosophy by the reduction of natural operations to a correspondence with human actions; that is, by imagining nature acts as man does, which is not much better than the heresy of the anthropomorphites, that sprung up in the cells and solitude of ignorant monks;" or the opinion of Epicurus, who attributed a human figure to the gods. Velleius the Epicurean need not, therefore, have asked why God should have adorned the heavens with stars and lights, as master of the works? For if the grand architect had acted a human part, he would have ranged the stars into some beautiful and elegant order, as we see in the vaulted roofs of palaces; whereas we scarce find among such an infinite multitude of stars any figure either square, triangular, or rectilinear; so great a difference is there between the spirit of man, and the spirit of the universe.

The idols of the den have their origin from the peculiar nature, both of mind and body, in each person; as also from education, custom, and the accidents of particular persons. It is a beautiful emblem, that of Plato's den;" for, to drop the exquisite subtilty of the parable, if any one should be educated from his infancy in a dark cave till he were of full age, and should then of a sudden be brought into broad daylight, and behold this apparatus of the heavens and of things, no doubt but many strange and absurd fancies would arise in his mind; and though men live indeed in the view of the heavens, yet our minds are confined in the caverns of our bodies; whence of necessity we receive infinite images of errors and falsehoods, if the mind does but seldom, and only for a short continuance, leave its den, and not con

13 This hypothesis gave rise to the romance of Lamekis.

14 Epiphanius, adv. Hær. p. 811, in which the heresy of Audius is explained. 15 Repub. vii.

SCIENCE-Vol. 21-11

stantly dwell in the contemplation of nature, as it were, in the open daylight. And with this emblem of Plato's den agrees the saying of Heraclitus; viz., that men seek the sciences in their own narrow worlds, and not in the wide one.

But the idols of the market give the greatest disturbance, and from a tacit agreement among mankind, with regard to the imposition of words and names, insinuate themselves into the understanding: for words are generally given according to vulgar conception, and divide things by such differences as the common people are capable of: but when a more acute understanding, or a more careful observation, would distinguish things better, words murmur against it. The remedy of this lies in definitions; but these themselves are in many respects irremediable, as consisting of words: for words generate words, however men may imagine they have a command over words, and can easily say they will speak with the vulgar, and think with the wise. Terms of art also, which prevail only among the skilful, may seem to remedy the mischief, and definitions premised to arts in the prudent mathematical manner, to correct the wrong acceptation of words; yet all this is insufficient to prevent the seducing incantation of names in numerous respects, their doing violence to the understanding, and recoiling upon it, from whence they proceeded. This evil, therefore, requires a new and a deeper remedy; but these things we touch lightly at present, in the meantime noting this doctrine of grand confutations, or the doctrine of the native and adventitious idols of the mind, for deficient.

There is also wanting a considerable appendix to the art of judgment. Aristotle indeed marks out the thing, but has nowhere delivered the manner of effecting it. The design is to show what demonstrations should be applied to what subjects, so that this doctrine should contain the judging of judgments. For Aristotle well observes, that we should not require demonstrations from orators, nor persuasion from mathematicians;" so that if we err in the kind of 16 Ethics, xiii. 1.

proof, judgment itself cannot be perfect. And as there are four kinds of demonstration, viz., 1, by immediate consent and common notions; 2, by induction; 3, by syllogism; and 4, by congruity," which Aristotle justly calls demonstration in circle,1a each of these demonstrations has its peculiar subjects, and parts of the sciences, wherein they are of force, and others again from which they are excluded; for insisting upon too strict proofs in some cases, and still more the facility and remissness in resting upon slight proofs in others, is what has greatly prejudiced and obstructed the sciences. And so much for the art of judgment.

17 Analogical demonstration, or proof à latere, to which Bacon seems to refer, consists in showing that the disputed attribute may be affirmed of several subjects analogical to the one proposed, and thence proceeds to draw the inference that such attribute enters also into the subject in question. In addition to these last three kinds of mediate positive proof, there are three others, which may be called mediate negative; viz., 1, à posteriori, which in inferring conclusions erroneous from the contradictory of that which is sought to be maintained, shows that the opposition is formed on false principles, and establishes the truth of their contradictories. 2, à priori, which in showing that the contradictory of the original proposition is a necessary consequence of some exploded principle, and also contradictory to the principle of which the contested proposition is also a consequence, infers the truth of such proposition with the principle of which it is a corollary. 3, à latere, whose object is to show that the attribute diametrically opposite to the one in question, agrees with a subject also diametrically opposite to the one proposed, that the last attribute may be inferred to agree with the last subject.-Ed.

18 Bacon seems to imply that Aristotle not only admitted demonstration in a circle, but even understood it in the sense of analogical proof or demonstration à latere; whereas the Stagyrite only introduced the term for the purpose of controverting it. Some of the ancient materialists, in order to rid themselves of the illogical consequences of a series of proofs ad infinitum, in which the denial of first principles involved them, asserted the possibility of demonstrating all things from each other, a line of argument in which the chain of proof would run into itself: ἀλλὰ πάντων εἶναι, ἀπόδειξιν οὐδὲν κωλύει· ἐνδέχεται γὰρ κύκλῳ γενέσθαι τὴν ἀπόδειξιν kaì ég áddýλwv. (Arist. Anal. Post. i. 3.) The Stagyrite, however, confronted this assertion with the reason, that demonstration could only be effected by evolving new truths out of things prior and more known, and pronounced the formation of a body of scientific truths without admitting first principles more palpable to the mind than any proof could make them, impossible. See, also, Arist. Analyt. Pri. ii. 5, 1.—Ed.

CHAPTER V

Division of the Retentive Art into the Aids of the Memory and the Nature of the Memory itself. Division of the Doctrine of Memory

WR

into Prenotion and Emblem

E DIVIDE the art of memory, or the keeping and retaining of knowledge, into two parts; viz., the doctrine of helps for the memory, and the doctrine of the memory itself. The help for the memory is writing; and we must observe, that the memory, without this assistance, is unequal to things of length and accuracy, and ought not otherwise to be trusted. And this holds particularly in inductive philosophy, and in the interpretation of nature; for one might as well undertake to make an almanac by the memory, without writing, as to interpret nature by bare contemplation. Scarce anything can be more useful in the ancient and popular sciences than a true and solid help for the memory, that is, a just and learned digest of commonplaces. Some, indeed, condemn this method as prejudicial to erudition, hindering the course of reading, and rendering the memory indolent; but as it is a wrong procedure in the sciences to be over-hasty and quick, we judge it is of great service in studies, unless a man be solid, and completely instructed, to bestow diligence and labor in setting down commonplaces; as it affords matter to invention, and collects and strengthens the judg ment. But among all the methods and commonplace books we have hitherto seen, there is not one of value;' as savoring of the school rather than the world, and using rather vulgar and pedantical divisions than such as any way penetrate things.

1 Upon the subject of commonplace, consult Morhof's "Polyhistor," tom. i lib. i. cap. 21, de Locorum Communium Scriptoribus; Mr. Locke's commonplace, in his "Discourse of the Conduct of the Understanding"; and Julian's "Emploi du Temps."-Shaw.

And for the memory itself, it seems hitherto to have been negligently and superficially inquired into. There is, indeed, some art of memory extant; but I know that much better precepts for confirming and enlarging the memory may be had than this art contains, and that a better practice of the art itself may be formed than what is at present received. And I doubt not, if any one were disposed to make an ostentatious show of this art, that many surprising things might be performed by it; and yet, as now managed, it is but barren and useless. We do not, however, pretend that it spoils or surcharges the natural memory, which is the common objection, but that it is not dexterously applied for assisting the memory in real business, and serious affairs. But this turn, perhaps, I may receive from the political course of life I have led, never to value what has the appearance of art without any use. For immediately to repeat a multitude of names, or words, once repeated before, or offhand to compose a great number of verses upon a subject, or to touch any matter that occasionally turns up with a satirical comparison, or to turn serious things into jest, or to elude anything by contradiction, or cavil, etc., of all which faculties there is a great fund in the mind, and which may, by a proper capacity and exercise, be carried to almost a miraculous height; yet I esteem all the things of this kind no more than rope-dancing, antic postures, and feats of activity. And indeed they are nearly the same things, the one being an abuse of the bodily, as the other is of the mental powers; and though they may cause admiration, they cannot be highly esteemed.

This art of memory has two intentions; viz., prenotion and emblem. By prenotion we understand the breaking off of an endless search; for when one endeavors to call anything to mind without some previous notion, or perception of what is sought for, the mind strives and exerts itself, endeavors and casts about in an endless manner; but if it has any certain notion beforehand, the infinity of the search is presently cut short, and the mind hunts nearer home as