Ars Examinis seu Judicii; Ars Custodiæ seu Memoriæ; et Ars Elocutionis seu Traditionis.1 De quibus jam sigillatim dicemus. CAPUT II. Partitio Inventive in Inventivam Artium, et Argumentorum: quodque prior harum (quæ eminet) desideretur. Partitio Inventive Artium in Experientiam. Literatam, et Organum Novum. Delineatio Experientiæ Literatæ. INVENTIONIS duæ sunt species, valde profecto inter se discrepantes; una Artium et Scientiarum, altera Argumentorum et Sermonum. Priorem harum desiderari prorsus pronuncio. Qui quidem talis mihi videtur esse defectus, ac si quis in inventario conficiendo bonorum alicujus defuncti ita referat, Numeratæ pecuniæ nihil. Ut enim cætera omnia pecunia parantur, ita et per hanc artem reliquæ acquiruntur. Atque sicut India Occidentalis nunquam nobis inventa fuisset nisi præcessisset acus nauticæ inventio, licet regiones illæ immensæ, versoriæ motus pusillus sit; ita non est cur miretur quispiam in Artibus perlustrandis et promovendis ampliores progressus factos non esse, quandoquidem Ars ipsa Inveniendi et Perlustrandi Scientias hactenus ignoretur. est. Hanc Scientiæ desiderari partem plane in confesso Primo enim Dialectica nihil profitetur, imo ne 1 These divisions are adopted from Peter Ramus; the artes logicæ including what Ramus calls Dialectic and Rhetoric, of which the former is divided into Inventio and Judicium, and the latter into Elocutio and Pronunciatio. cogitat quidem, de Inveniendis Artibus, sive Mechanicis sive (quas vocant) Liberalibus; aut etiam de illarum Operibus, harum vero Axiomatibus eliciendis; sed quasi præteriens homines alloquitur et dimittit, edicens ut cuique in sua arte credant.1 Celsus, vir prudens, non solum medicus, (licet moris sit omnibus in laudes artis propriæ effundi) graviter et ingenue de empiricis et dogmaticis medicorum sectis loquens, fatetur, Medicamenta et remedia prius fuisse inventa, de causis vero et rationibus posterius disceptatum: non ordine converso, causas ex natura rerum primo erutas fuisse, easque inventioni remediorum præluxisse. At Plato non semel innuit, Particularia infinita esse; maxime rursus generalia minus certa documenta exhibere; medullam igitur scientiarum, qua artifex ab imperito distinguitur, in mediis propositionibus consistere, quas per singulas scientias tradidit et docuit experientia.3 Quin et illi qui de primis rerum inventoribus aut scientiarum originibus verba fecerunt, casum potius quam artem celebrarunt ; atque animalia bruta, quadrupedes, aves, pisces, serpentes, magis quam homines, tanquam Scientiarum doctores introduxerunt: Dictamnum Genitrix Cretæa 4 carpit ab Ida 1 See Arist. Prior. Analyt. i. 30. 2 See Nov. Org. i. 73. This is not what Celsus himself confesses, in the passage to which Bacon apparently refers; but what he represents the Empirics as urging against the Rationalists. — J. S. 3 Bacon appears to refer principally to the passage in the Philebus, p. 17., which has already been mentioned. See note at p. 289. In the corresponding passage in the Advancement of Learning, he refers to the Theatetus, which is certainly a mistake, as no such remark is to be found there. The nearest approach to it is, I think, τὰ μὲν στοιχεῖα ἄλογα καὶ ἀγνωστα eivai, aiovηtù dé, &c., the relation of letters to syllables and words being here as elsewhere typical of the nature of knowledge. 4 The original has Dictœa. Purpureo: non illa feris incognita capris Adeo ut minime mirum sit (cum in more apud antiquos fuerit rerum utilium inventores consecrare) apud Ægyptios, gentem priscam (cui plurimæ Artes initia sua debent), templa plena fuisse simulachris brutorum, hominum vero simulachris prope vacua ; Omnigenumque Deum monstra, et latrator Anubis, Contra Neptunum, et Venerem, contraque Minervam, &c.2 Quod si malis, ex traditione Græcorum, Artes potius hominibus ut inventoribus tribuere; haudquaquam tamen dixeris Prometheum ad ignis inventionem contemplationes adhibuisse; aut cum silicem primo percuteret scintillas expectasse; sed casu in illud incidisse, atque (ut aiunt) furtum Jovi fecisse. Ita ut ad artium inventionem quod attinet, capræ silvestri pro emplastris, Philomelæ pro modulationibus musicis, Ibidi pro lavationibus intestinorum,3 operculo ollæ quod dissiliit pro re tormentaria, denique (ut verbo dicamus) casui aut cuivis alteri rei plus debeamus, quam dialecticæ. Nec vero multo aliter se habet modus ille inveniendi, quem recte describit Virgilius, Ut varias usus meditando extunderet artes Non enim alia hic proponitur inveniendi methodus quam cujus bruta ipsa sunt capacia, et quam crebro 1 Virg. Æn. xii. 412. 2 Virg. Æn. viii. 698. 8 See Plutarch, De Solertiâ Animalium, or De Iside. Compare Pliny. The story of the accidental invention of gunpowder by Schwartz is well known. So too is it said that the Jesuit's bark was discovered by the lions who cured their fevers by drinking the water into which it had fallen. It is obvious that all stories of this kind are more or less mythical. The subject has been systematically discussed by Virey. (Journal de Pharmacie, 1818.) 4 Virg. Georg. i. 133. usurpant; nimirum attentissima circa unam rem sollicitudo, ejusque perpetua exercitatio, quas sui conservandi necessitas hujusmodi animantibus imponit. Cicero enim vere admodum; Usus uni rei deditus, et naturam et artem sæpe vincit.1 Quare si prædicetur de hominibus, Labor omnia vincit Improbus, et duris urgens in rebus egestas; 2 etiam de brutis similiter quæritur, Quis expedivit psittaco suum Χαῖρε ? 8 Corvo quis auctor fuit, ut magna siccitate lapillos immitteret arbori cavæ, ubi aquam forte conspexerit, ut surgentem laticem rostro posset attingere? Quis viam monstravit apibus, qui per aërem, tanquam vastum mare, agros floridos, licet multum ab alvearibus dissitos, solent petere, et favos suos denuo repetere?5 Quis 1 "Assiduus usus uni rei deditus et ingenium et artem sæpe vincit.". Cicero, Pro Balbo, c. 20. 2 Virg. Georg. i. 145. 3 Persius, Prolog. 4 Qui, as M. Bouillet remarks, is clearly a mistake for quæ. 5 Much more remarkable than the return of the bees to their hive is the appearance of mathematical knowledge shown in the construction of their cells. In every case of instinct, the impulse in obedience to which the instinctive act is performed is a matter at the nature of which we can only guess; but the case just mentioned has a difficulty of its own. The bees may be supposed to know when they have reached their hive; but how do they perceive that the cell has acquired its just proportions? Several attempts have been made to explain away this especial difficulty; but those which I am acquainted with appear to be quite unsatisfactory. It is worthy of remark that the degree of accuracy with which the cells are constructed has been exaggerated; one writer after another having repeated, on the supposed authority of Maraldi, what Maraldi never said. According to his observations the angles of the terminal rhomb are about 108° and 72°. He does not attempt to determine them more precisely, although he has generally been supposed to do so. It has been recently stated that the mathematical problem which the cells of bees suggest was first correctly solved formicam docuit, ut grana in colliculo suo reponenda circumroderet prius, ne reposita germinarent et spem suam illuderent? Quod si in versu illo Virgiliano quis notet verbum illud Extundere, quod difficultatem rei, et verbum illud Paulatim, quod tarditatem innuit, redibimus unde profecti sumus, ad Ægyptiorum illos Deos; cum hactenus homines modice rationis facultate, neutiquam vero officio artis, usi sint ad inventa. detegenda. Secundo, hoc ipsum quod asserimus (si advertatur paulo diligentius) demonstrat Inductionis forma, quam proponit Dialectica; qua scilicet scientiarum principia inveniantur et probentur; quæ vitiosa plane est et incompetens, et naturam tantum abest ut perficiat, ut etiam eam pervertat et detorqueat. Qui enim modum acute introspexerit quo ros iste æthereus scientiarum, similis illi de quo loquitur poëta, aërei mellis cœlestia dona,2 colligatur, (cum et scientiæ ipsæ ex exemplis singulis, partim naturalibus partim artificialibus, tanquam prati floribus et horti, extrahantur,) reperiet profecto animum suapte sponte et nativa indole Inductionem solertius conficere, quam quæ describitur a dialecticis ; siquidem ex nuda enumeratione particularium (ut dialectici solent) ubi non invenitur instantia contradictoria, vitiose concluditur; neque aliquid aliud huby Lord Brougham in the notes to his edition of Paley's Natural Theology; but this statement is, it need scarcely be said, erroneous. 1 This statement is probably taken from Plutarch, De Solertiâ Animalium. The supposed grains of corn are no doubt the nymphæ. Huber repeatedly observed ants in the act of tearing the integument in which the young ant was enclosed, in order to facilitate its exit. This practice is, it may be presumed, the origin of the notion mentioned in the text. 2 Virg. Georg. iv. 1. |