Vitanza
Historiographic method match ~ Revisionary History as Self-Conscious Critical
Practices because of its awareness of past and current history research and
later critical reflection on how his work actually contributed more to a
democratic view of science rather than a positivistic one.
Histories
of Francis Bacon and his methods/ideas vary by investigator, and Zappen has his
own view: “...historians have upheld several different, even incompatible
and conflicting, views of science and scientific rhetoric and have found in
Bacon a precedent for each of these views: positivistic science (highly tied to
an absolute conception of reality) and the plain style (a view on language that
emphasizes simplicity and homogeneity — the “ornaments of speech”);
institutionalized science and a most recently, democratic science (everyone
gets to access to knowledge and is able to contribute), which, I shall argue,
also has a complement in the plain style” (Zappen 74).
Different Histories of Francis Bacon by:
...historians of Scientific Rhetoric from
1920-1950 (Haydn, Burtt)
-contended that he held
a positivistic view on science/rhetoric
...historians of Scientific Rhetoric from 1960-present
(Kuhn, Boas, Purver)
-Rejects the view of
Bacon as a “precedent to positivistic science and the plain style,” (76) but
instead sees him as a progenitor of “institutionalized science” (the
development of scientific communities, institutions, and disciplines).
...historians of Scientific Rhetoric from
1970-89 (Jones, Stephens, Halloran, and Bradford)
-Saw him as inspiring
institutionalized science, as well as inspiring a complex communication style
to suit it.
…(other historians) of science and technology
like Winner and Pacey
-acknowledge Bacon with
inspiring institutionalized science, but accuse him of developing an ideology
concerned with the “delivery of power...through the domination of nature” in
science.
-challenge the notion of
Bacon inspiring institutionalized science and contend that it was instead “a
precedent to a democratic and humanitarian view of science” (78)
...feminist critics like Keller and Harding
-contend that Bacon
found the link between science and ideological power, but finds an “expression
in ‘the sexual dialectic implicit in his metaphors,’ a dialectic that balances
power with the humane use of power, domination over nature with service and
obedience to nature,” and later a link to a puritanical- like stance on democratic
science (78)
...and contemporary Bacon scholars like
Weinburger and Whitney
-finds that Bacon has a
concern for the utility of science and how that affects how we conduct politics
and our relationship with nature
Zappen’s interpretation of Bacon’s history
...The
plain style might be construed not as a vehicle for positivistic or
institutionalized science but rather..for general participation in democratic
science and its applications as Bacon envisioned it” (79).
-The
plain style was not a general style applicable to all science, but rather to
the “writing of natural and experimental histories” (since, as per Zappen, it
is the style closest to the “things of the world” and sense), and that his
scientific method was designed to foster participation in science and engender
“respect for nature and hope in the ultimate utility of the method” (80)
“Democratic
science, in Bacon's view, is an invitation to almost everyone, or at least
every man, to participate in the task of gathering the things of the sense that
arc the foundation of the scientific method. Democratic science in this view is
both enabled and constrained by the limitations of the scientific method, but
it nonetheless demands that its participants accept Bacon's attitudes of respect
for nature and hope in the utility of the method lor human life, attitudes that
in turn hold the promise of mastery of the plain style most suitable for this
stage of the method” (83).
Source:
Zappen,
James. “Francis Bacon and the Historiography of Scientific Rhetoric.” Rhetoric
Review 8.1
(1989) 74-88. Print
