Philosophy's Smackdown Match

Philosophy is not a linear subject. Some schmuck who lived in 1800 is not necessarily following the line of thought that some other schmuck who lived in 1600 started. It's not like music, or science, or other things where we are constantly building on other things. Bacon is a good example.

Science in Bacon's day was full of Aristotlean philosophy and ruled by the church. Experiments were deemed silly -- after all, everybody knew what the bible said about nature. Long arguments were made about the various properties of things but nobody tested anything! The scientific method had not been invented. Looking back, this was Bacon's job. But at the time, somebody had to make the case that people had to form hypothesis and experiement, for goodness sake! Listen to Bacon's words about how well the current sytem was working. If this isn't the 17th century's version of Smackdown, I don't know what is. Bacon first talks about the current great discoveries, then complains about not having a system to make progress in inventing things, make a religious argument against the current relgion-dominated culture, and finally calls the current philosophers a bunch of girlie-boys.

"Again, it is well to observe the force and virtue and consequence of discoveries, and these are to be seen nowhere more conspicuously than in those three which were unknown to the ancients... namely printing, gunpowder and the magnet. For these three have changed the whole face and state of things throughout the world... no empire, no sect, no star seems to have exerted greater power and influence in human affairs than these mechanical discoveries."

"The science we now possess are merely systems for the nice ordering and setting forth of things already invented; not methods of invention or directions for new works."

"There is no sign more certain and more noble than that from fruits. In religion we are warned that faith is shown by works. It is altogether right to apply the same test to philosophy. If it is barren let it be set at naught. All the more so should if instead of the fruits of grape or olive, it bears the thistles and thorns of dispute and controversy."

"All the philosophy of nature that is now received, is either the philosophy of the Grecians or that of the alchemists... the one never faileth to multiply words, the other ever faileth to multiply gold."

"The wisdom of the Greeks has the characteristic property of boys: it can talk, but it cannot generate; for it is fruitful of controversy but barren of works."

Note Bacon (in bold) saying something like "hey. If it ain't working, let's throw it all away and start over, guys" This is similar to a systems architect working through a series of patterns and conceits and finally saying "time for version 2.0"

In general, there are large themes one can find in philosophy: the sophists versus the platonist, for instance. It's probably better, once having learned the history of philosophy, to go back and explore the themes in depth. For the average person, however, philosophy seems to skip around like my I-pod, a bunch of guys in togas not doing much of practical value. That's a shame, becasue the reality is very far away from this. Philosophy is the basis of all science, and the basis of all future science. Philosophy teaches us what is good and what is right. Sometimes It's just very difficult material to approach.