Revisiting bacon’s critique on aristotle
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2019-05
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Addis Ababa University
Abstract
This thesis is intended mainly to revise Francis Bacon’s critique on Aristotle. Bacon’s view of attempting to blossom inductive mechanism as it helps man to enlarge substantive, sensible and scientific knowledge, I think, is a problematic or an implausible. Bacon develops The New Organon through an inductive method, is falsely a Renaming to the Aristotelian Organon. Due to the syllogistic logic is basically constituted by an inductive method, and in this thesis, I argue alternatively by setting out Bacon’s questionable arguments, that is, claims that are now anti-syllogism. As the Baconian inductive method is a process from the observed and passed by sorts of procedures or criteria about a particular thing/s to its general (universal), this method cannot help to Bacon to repudiate the Aristotelian syllogistic logic, due to he is arguing about the very same or the same species though his method lacks structure. Both Aristotle and Bacon are empiricists. This implies that they deny advocating for terms of things which are not perceived by experience, as both of them try to study and explain about existing things. Therefore, as empiricism depends on existence, so things that do exist should have also explained in their proper manner, that is, according to their practical way, for through pragmatism we can explain or define existing things for which we experience them through induction, that is, through sense perceptions. In this thesis, I employ a Critical Analysis of a qualitative research method which enables me to evaluate the Baconian works- introducing a new tool or instrument which offers man to acquire or extend his empirical and scientific knowledge using this inductive method is not a new one at all though Bacon has called (entitled) it a new; rather, it is lagged behind by a step from the syllogistic logic. Therefore, what Bacon has jotted down is unlike the Aristotelian knowledge of first principles; and this entails that the Aristotelian method of inference has gone over. Besides, if we critically study the arguments that Bacon introduces in his aphorisms to repudiate the syllogism are either bad arguments or not arguments at all. This implies that Bacon’s book is constituted by full of faults. Further, Bacon is backfired; owing to his inductive method is already the Aristotelian, that is, Bacon owed to Aristotle the inductive method itself. I have not seen a new method which is developed by Bacon that helps man to acquire or extend substantive, sensible and scientific knowledge, except his topic; rather, it leads into error, therefore.
Key words: Empirical knowledge, Baconian Method, Syllogistic Logic, Pragmatism
Description
Keywords
Empirical knowledge, Baconian Method, Syllogistic Logic, Pragmatism