Rossi, Paolo, Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science,   tr. Sacha Rabinovitch (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1968).
Reviewed by Jared Sutton (Hist 5040 - Spring 2003).

Paolo Rossi’s Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science provides a discussion on the works of Bacon and his attempt to mold the scientific philosophy during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. In order to support his development of Bacon’s philosophies and ideas, Rossi uses almost all of Bacon’s original works along with numerous other primary source materials from his contemporaries. It is interesting to note that Bacon did not develop a “single important scientific discovery,” but “an awareness of the social importance of scientific research, an amelioration of the conditions of human existence, and organized scientific collaboration were all consequences of his teachings” (xii). Therefore, Bacon is important to study because his thoughts and teachings led to important scientific discoveries and advances. Rossi re-examines Bacon’s works along side the works of his contemporaries in order to understand his philosophy and his aims as a scientist as they pertain to the development and change of scientific thought. Also, Rossi places his analysis of Bacon’s work in accordance with the time period Bacon was working under. Rossi begins his work by establishing Bacon’s involvement and thoughts on magic as it related to science. Bacon was heavily influenced by the work of George Agricola and Bernard Palissy, which helped to shape his scientific philosophy. From their works, Bacon developed a firm grasp on the idea of observation and fieldwork instead of a reliance on the ancient philosopher’s works. By removing these works, man could be reunited with nature and reality, where “collections of facts are a means of study, an instrument of scientific research” (9). Early on in his life, Bacon developed the idea of using nature to develop scientific research and discovery. Bacon rejected the idea of magic and alchemy for the development of scientific research. Although he tries to distance himself from magic and alchemy, Bacon uses alchemical and magical ideas to support his philosophy. For instance, Bacon used the ideas of “man’s scientific domination of nature, and the idea of man as nature’s servant and interpreter” to develop his own philosophy (16). Bacon praised magic for dominating and improving nature; however, he condemned it as fraud and an attempt by humans to solve the riddles of nature through an elixir or other form of quick fix. Bacon was devoted to scientific reform, pushing for the development of scientific communities that were concerned with the benefit of the entire human race. Bacon argued that magic and alchemy could not support a scientific community because the methods and ideas were not homogeneous enough for the entire scientific community to use and benefit from. In order to develop this community and take advantage of a time ripe for the change of scientific thought, Bacon had to refute the prevailing ideas of the ancient philosophers. By focusing on the ancient philosophers, the universities failed to encourage new observations, thoughts, and experiments. Therefore, the scientific movement was halted by the dominance of ancient thought, because these philosophers had already proposed a solution to all of the problems of nature. In the words of Bacon, traditional philosophy was inadequate due to “its sterility, its unco-operative, non-progressive, static nature… its confessed impotence and its lack of method and disregard for adequate intellectual tools” (48, 49). Plato received heavy criticism from Bacon, because he caused the “sterility and verbal evasiveness of traditional learning,” which forced man into contemplation instead of observation (55). Bacon also attacked Aristotle and his ideas, because they were mixed with religion and removed from public criticism, which left his conclusions untested. Bacon’s attack of the ancient philosophers was necessary to provide the foundation for his new philosophy, because in order to emphasize the need for scientific research, he had to distance himself from the ideas of the ancient philosophers. Rossi then discusses the use of fables in accordance with Bacon’s philosophy on science. According to Rossi, “five of Bacon’s thirty-nine philosophical works are either directly concerned with the problem of a hidden wisdom in classical myths and fables, or at least refer to it explicitly” (80). He used these fables to support his philosophical ideas dealing with the domination over nature, and the work of individuals for the betterment of society. Bacon’s use of the fables and myths were in line with society’s use of them for the expression of truth. Bacon believed in the ability of nature to determine truth; however, he also knew that his ideas and goals were in conflict with the dominating practice of the times. Therefore, Bacon knew he had to keep his thoughts from exploding into an outright attack on the accepted practices of science, in order to gain the backing of the State for the promotion of his ideas. Bacon used fables to popularize his plans for scientific reform, and also knew that the mass of uneducated people used these fables to determine truth. Therefore, it was logical for Bacon to use the fable in order to promote and encourage the adoption of his scientific philosophies. Rossi then discusses the role logic, rhetoric, imagination, and language played for Bacon in the development of scientific thought and research. Logic was essential in the development of research and discovery within nature. Bacon divides logic into four parts, “man finds what he is searching for; he judges what he has found; he records what he has judged; he communicates what he has recorded” (136). These four steps comprise Bacon’s scientific philosophy because it brings man back to nature, and allows him to distribute his findings to others for the public good. Rhetoric was important because the dissemination of the gathered information had to be understood by others. The public needed to be able to understand the new information, and the scientists had to maintain a common vocabulary and understanding to comprehend each others works. Bacon then established a way to analyze the new ideas and research developed by scientists. His analysis began with the invention of a new idea, which led to the judgment of that idea based on its worth and accuracy. Bacon also argued that a precise vocabulary, whether symbol or words was needed when dealing with scientific research. With the development of a universal system for invention and judgment, a precise vocabulary and mathematical system was necessary. The imagination is a powerful tool, and Bacon argues that rhetoric “must endeavor to make future gains as lifelike and visible as the present, thus drawing imagination onto the side of reason” (181). For it is through reason and logic that man finds truth in nature. Bacon understood that the reform of knowledge could only come with a push from the many towards a common cause. Once the development of a new logic occurred, knowledge could be used for the “improvement of the human condition” (193). Bacon sought to develop huge tables of natural knowledge that would give humans the ability to control and understand nature. Bacon strived to uncover the hidden aspects of the universe, which explains his drive to develop tables of knowledge. Bacon refused to accept the stagnation of the ancient philosophical thought. However, he never realized his goal of a new scientific philosophy. Overall, Rossi provides a well researched study of Bacon’s attempt to create a new scientific philosophy. However, Rossi leaves some questions unanswered. For instance, on page 188 Rossi mentions that Bacon wrote papers he did not intend to publish. This statement leaves the reader wondering why a man, who wholeheartedly supported the idea of a scientific community based on the exchange of information, would write papers he did not intend to publish. This is a small but important hole in Rossi’s work, because it could be used to prove whether Bacon lived what he believed. Also, Rossi spent too much time on the development of the fable section. A brief synopsis of a few of the fables would have been enough to understand Bacon’s relationship to the fable and its relationship to the public. Also, Rossi argued in his introduction that Bacon’s ideas played a large role in the development of scientific thought; however, he failed to include a chapter that provided examples of scientific discoveries or ideas relevant to Bacon’s scientific philosophy. Overall, Rossi successfully explains and delineates the basic arguments of Bacon’s scientific philosophy.