Francis Bacon is known as the Father of Empiricism, emphasizing the importance of experience and observation over mere reasoning. His seminal work, Novum Organum (1620), introduced a new logical system to replace Aristotle’s deductive reasoning. It contains two crucial parts: the Idols and the Scientific Method.

Idols: Errors or Fallacies in Humans

The concept of Idols refers to errors or fallacies in human thinking that prevent individuals from discovering truth.

Bacon explained that every concept, when it is developed, leads to two possibilities:

• If the concept is true, it means the reasoning is accurate.
• If the concept is false, then either the method used is flawed, or the failure is due to one of four types of Idols.

Types of Idols

1. Idols of the Tribe

These are errors common to all humans, rooted in our nature. They include the natural weaknesses and tendencies of human cognition. These are innate flaws that cannot be fully eliminated but can be recognized and minimized.

Examples:

• Human senses are limited, dull, and prone to deception.
• Biases lead us to accept or prefer ideas that feel comfortable or familiar.
• People make premature judgments based on insufficient evidence.
• Individuals often conform to social pressures, neglecting their own reasoning.

2. Idols of the Cave

These errors are unique to individuals, shaped by personal experiences and environments. They are influenced by background, education, preferences, and psychological tendencies.

Influences include:

• Family upbringing
• Childhood experiences
• Gender, religion, and education

Examples:

• Misandry or deep-seated prejudices.
• Varying interpretations of the same reality based on social class, e.g., middle-class vs. poor perspectives.

3. Idols of the Marketplace

These arise from the misuse of language. Words can obscure meaning and lead to misunderstanding or controversy when their definitions are vague or contradictory.

Example:

• The statement “Morality is the end of life” is ambiguous: Does “end” mean goal or death?

4. Idols of the Theatre

These are the illusions instilled by philosophical systems, religions, and false scientific dogmas—ideas inherited from traditions or cultural “dramas” that people follow blindly.

Example:

• People may believe in myths or superstitions without questioning, mistaking them for reality.

Bacon argued that these idols must be recognized and removed for a true and accurate understanding of nature.

Criticism of Bacon’s View on Idols

Some critics argue that Bacon’s concept of eliminating all idols would leave the human mind a “blank slate”, devoid of creativity or intuition. This could result in over-reliance on sensory data while disregarding valuable past knowledge.

Inductive Method of Bacon

According to Bacon, if the results are true, the method used must be valid. If not, then the failure can be traced either to:

• The four idols inherent in human nature, or
• A flawed inductive method.

Flawed Methods in Induction

1. Syllogism

Bacon criticized Aristotle’s syllogism, a method of deductive reasoning, claiming it had hindered scientific progress for 2000 years.

Example:

• “All birds can fly. Kiwi is a bird. Therefore, Kiwi can fly.”
• This conclusion is logically valid, but factually incorrect, because the first premise is false.

Bacon’s solution was to test every proposition through induction, emphasizing the importance of observation over assumption. Faulty induction leads to false knowledge.

2. Classical Inductive Method

Bacon identified flaws in traditional induction, especially hasty generalizations that result in uncertain conclusions.

His own approach emphasized:

• Deriving general propositions from a large number of observations,
• Then testing them deductively.

Example of flawed induction:

• Observing that “all new cars are shiny” from a few examples can lead to a false conclusion.

Contradictory example:

• Observing that the train was late 100 times when it rained does not prove that rain causes delay. Correlation does not mean causation.

Bacon’s Method

Bacon sought to replace Aristotle’s deductive method with a more reliable and efficient inductive system. His method aimed to make scientific investigation more structured and rigorous.

Steps of Bacon’s Method

1. Clear the Mind of All Preconceptions (Idols)
   Begin by recognizing and removing all biases or preconceived notions that cloud judgment.
2. Observe as Many Facts as Possible
   Perform detailed and extensive observations to collect raw data.
3. Tabulation
   Sort observations into categories:
   • Instances of Presence: where the effect occurs,
   • Instances of Absence: where the effect does not occur,
   • Instances of Presence in Varying Degrees: where the effect is partial or inconsistent.

This forms what Bacon called the “First Vintage”.

1. Indulgence of Understanding or Hypothesis
   Examine the data to form a careful hypothesis. Discard anything irrelevant and identify potential causes of the observed effects.
2. Experiments to Disprove the Hypothesis (Falsification/Refutation)
   Subject the hypothesis to rigorous testing:
   • If it is not disproven, it becomes a theory.
   • If further tested and confirmed, it becomes a scientific law.

Thus, a specific, repeated instance becomes a general principle.

Bacon’s Inquiry for Truth

Bacon acknowledged that his method is laborious and time-consuming, but it produces solid and dependable knowledge. Discovering false generalizations early helps avoid future errors and saves time in scientific discovery.

Is It a Reliable Procedure?

• There is still uncertainty about when to abstract a general rule from data. How many observations are enough—10, 100, or 1000?
• The process can turn into an endless cycle of data collection and experimentation.
• Bacon compared the ideal researcher to a busy bee, constantly gathering and organizing information.

Science and Bacon’s Induction

Although Bacon’s method was foundational, modern science does not follow it strictly. Scientific breakthroughs often involve imagination, creativity, and intuition.

Example:

• Galileo dropped objects of different weights not to test if they fall equally (as Bacon would require), but already knowing the outcome, based on theoretical reasoning.