Abstract
It should be clear by now why the riddle of Bacon arose. Generations of researchers admired him for his theory, and this theory did not allow them to criticize this theory respectfully. So the individual Bacon was criticized to save his theory. Stubbe criticized his plagiarism and fake experiments. This criticism was ignored until Liebig repeated it with some bitterness. Here is Liebig’s conclusion to his comment on Bacon’s natural history (Liebig 1863, 244):
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Thomas Fowler criticizes Liebig’s style (Fowler 1878, 133 note) rather than his views: “it almost seems, as if Bacon had been a personal enemy of” Liebig. Indeed, when he could criticize a contention of Liebig’s he did so, and with no less hostility, although it was on a minor point: Liebig conjectured that Bacon was not in full command over the Latin language and so he surmised that the originals of Bacon’s Latin texts were written in English; and Fowler refuted this conjecture. Even on style Fowler had a point: his expressions of hostility greatly differed in style from that of Liebig. The difference is between the reserve of the English style and the expression of frankness more appreciated on the Continent. Fowler claimed that Liebig’s arguments exhibit preconceived opinions (157). Not so: its nastiness reveals the source of the notorious and tremendous hostility that German professors show towards any criticism whatsoever. This is a mix of psychological sensitivity (that was already manifest in Newton’s conduct), the authoritarian status of most old-style German professors, and Bacon’s doctrine of prejudice. For Liebig’s excellent character see Holmyard (1928, 103).
References
Evelyn, John, and William Bray. 1854. Diary and correspondence of John Evelyn, vol. 3. London: Colburn.
Fowler, Thomas. 1878. See Bacon, 1878.
Holmyard, E.J. 1928. Great chemists. London: Methuen.
Liebig, Justus von. 1863. Bacon as a natural philosopher, Macmillan’s Magazine.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Agassi, J. (2013). Conclusion: The Rise of the Riddle of Bacon. In: The Very Idea of Modern Science. Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, vol 298. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5351-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5351-8_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-5350-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-5351-8
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)