Descartes and Bacon: two donkeys on two legs: But metaphysics triumph over science

Descartes and Bacon: two donkeys on two legs: But metaphysics triumph over science

Descartes and Bacon: two donkeys on two legs: But metaphysics triumph over science

Some five centuries ago two donkeys on two legs proclaimed scientific reasoning. Their assertions of the so-called scientific method to find about the truth in things has misled sciences ever since.

Rene Descartes proclaimed the following presumptions in his treatise Discourse on Method for looking for the truth in our world:

- The first rule was never to accept anything as true unless I recognized it to be evidently such: that is, carefully to avoid precipitation and prejudgment, and to include nothing in my conclusions unless it presented itself so clearly and distinctly to my mind that there was no occasion to doubt it.

- The second was to divide each of the difficulties which I encountered into as many parts as possible, and as might be required for an easier solution.

- The third was to think in an orderly fashion, beginning with the things which were simplest and easiest to understand, and gradually and by degrees reaching toward more complex knowledge, even treating as though ordered materials which were not necessarily so.

- The last was always to make enumerations so complete, and reviews so general, that I would be certain that nothing was omitted.

This reasoning does not admit anything except what is visible to the naked eye, nothing else. We believe in what is exposed to our senses. If a thing is not subject to our senses then, according to the genius Descartes, this thing is non-existent. So for example if three billions of people today believe in God and we cannot see God or hear God then God does not exist.

What bullshit!

The entire intelligible world is dismissed by this idiot at an abrupt sweep of his hand.

Thus and according to Descartes we cannot believe in religious texts for there is no proof they are divine scriptures. We cannot neither believe in God's word for we need proof. We cannot believe in God's angels, God's messengers, God's messages, nor can we believe in a day of judgment, where everyone shall be brought up to account for his, or her, own deeds in this life. No more belief in the Hereafter is necessary, for according to Descartes we cannot have proof of it. In this way the whole metaphysical existence that explains our reality is dismissed.

But with his wisdom Descartes forgets the big essential questions and that humans are in need for that. Who cares! As long as Descartes explains things. But he does not explain anything, nothing at all. Blind as he is to close his eyes to reality and truth in its ultimate sense, he recommends some erroneous rules to understand the universe, our existence and our purpose in life.

According to Descartes, there is no purpose for man's existence for e cannot verify the empiric validity of such assumption.

Cartesian Scientific thinking and reasoning has dominated the world ever since the time of Descartes. Annulling all intelligible knowledge and reducing things to material existence. But in his superficial thinking Descartes omits from thought the most important questions of ultimate knowledge. He was blinded to the enigmatic problematic of the universe including his own existence and thought. No science, then ventures into such mysteries looking for explanations and light.

Francis Bacon, another genius on two legs, suggests in his scientific method in his treatise Novum Organum:

That such a method required:

(1) accepting as "truth" only clear, distinct ideas that could not be doubted, (2) breaking a problem down into parts, (3) deducing one conclusion from another, and (4) conducting a systematic synthesis of all things.

Descartes based his entire philosophical approach to science on this deductive method of reasoning.

In short, Bacon's method required (1) accumulating a store of particular empirical observations, (2) from these inductively inferring lesser axioms, (3) from these inductively inferring middle axioms, (4) and then proposing the most general of notions, each in progressive steps.

If we read modern meaning into the language used by Bacon, we might see a foreshadowing of the idea of a hypothesis in a "lesser axiom" and a theory in the "middle axiom." This would make his method agree with the mature conception of science in use today; however, the context indicates that his ideas were not yet so fully developed.

Bacon also argued that this inductive method "must be used not only to discover axioms, but also notions," which may be taken to correspond to the concept of a paradigm, but again this may be reading into the text. In any case, it is clear that Bacon's view of the scientific method is progressive and cumulative.

The radical commitment to empiricism advocated by Bacon may imply for some that he did not accept any knowledge that was not received by personal observation.

In the same way we observe how Bacon advises us to use a certain method to find truth about knowledge. He like Descartes suggests that we do not believe in anything except of what we can verify and prove.

Again, another genius blinds himself to the intelligible world and limits his vision and knowledge to what he sees and can experience.

For such a genius there is no need for a God for we cannot see or hear or smell God and thus the whole religious argument is brought to ashes just like the bones of Bacon and Descartes.

The who question of what we see is presumably what we see. There is no one proof for what we see. There is no one proof for matter, its presence, its origin, its function, its nature and its finality. How did matter, subject of human knowledge come about? What made it in its shape and form, color and what controls its atoms? Who has created atoms? Who has assembled atoms together to be what it is?

But according to these two geniuses there is no need to break our heads of such problems. Matter is there in all shapes and forms, but in order to explain it we simply have to apply four idiotic rules, dismissing all other ultimate questions of the reality of matter, time, space and energy.

No one has access to what atoms are, quarks or strings, how did they come about and why? No one knows, not even Einstein had access to such knowledge, the reality and truth of things.

How nave can Descartes and Bacon bealong sidetheir imbecile scientific followers.

What they see is false knowledge and what they miss is real knowledge.

POST COMMENT

Salad is really healthy? Kevin Riley Natural Blood Pressure - Home Remedy For High Blood Review Natural Organic Health With Tea Tree Oil Effective Herbs for Liver Cleansing Interior Vegetation May Have A Number of Fantastic Health Benefits The Winter Wonderland of Windermere Exercise To Get Rid of Cellulite? - All-natural Cellulite Treatment How To Get Cellulite Free Pest and Disease Control with Hydroponics Overactive Bladder (OAB) – Symptoms, Causes and Treatments Adjustable Beds - for a good night sleep Stop Smoking To Improve Your Own Health And Fitness Changing Medicare Health supplement (Medigap) Procedures