Comparisons of the Natural World

Comparisons of the Natural World Up until the 17th Century, an understanding of the natural world and how it operates was very limited and the general consensus was that there was God, and all things were created by him in a hierarchical order that sustained the balance of man. Although these Gods varied between ethnicities and religions, the general idea of a creator is consistent. However, with the extent of experiences and experimentation of Galileo, Bacon and Newton, the world was able to explore a new realm of reality in scientific discovery and analysis.

Although the works of Galileo, Bacon and Newton can be compared with each other in regard to the idea of experimentation and observation, their contrasting views and fields of science are what separated them from each other. This same method of constant experimentation would be adopted and incorporated by others who were dedicated to this new found field of science, and as will be seen in this paper, this same method used by Francis Bacon and Isaac Newton. Although their methods and ideologies varied, their methods and objectives remained consistent, to use scientific evidence to better understand and relate to the physical world.

Thorough the field of astronomy, Galileo strived to identify the plethora of myths, and tales that had shrouded the minds of many up until the 17th Century. In order to accomplish this, Galileo would have to construct and further develop an instrument that would enable him to closely observe the diverse elements of the night sky. It was Galileo that took the an earlier inventor’s idea of the spyglass and innovated it in order to view objects that were of great distance appear closer and therefore enable him to accurately observe them.

In his publication The Starry Messenger, Galileo describes the spyglass and the modifications that he made to it. This development of the spyglass is more evidence that science had developed existence in society. He writes, “I succeeded in constructing for myself so excellent an instrument that objects seen by means of it appeared nearly one thousand times larger and over thirty times closer than when regarded with our natural vision” (TOM 24).

This passage concludes that Galileo was able to implement a device that ould broaden the minds of man, for up until this point in time, the moon, stars and all elements concerned with the sky were concluded upon fictional stories of myth and legend. Upon publishing his research, he received much criticism about his findings, particularly about the view of the moon to the natural eye. In his research, using the spyglass, he was able to identify certain physical characteristics about the moon’s surface, characteristics such as peaks, ridges and craters.

The question of why the moon appeared perfectly round and not uneven or “toothed” as his findings described started to arise. However, with thorough, constant experimentation and documented findings, Galileo was able to provide sufficient evidence which would prove to be correct by later astronomers. His innovation in astronomy allowed the “natural vision” to see beyond what it could not have before, and through constant experimentation and observation using this device, he was able to document and conclude on other major findings of the natural world and particularly space.

His methods were innovative for the time, and caused much distress within society due to its outlandish ways, and conflicting ideologies against that of the church or God. Francis bacon is one other early scientist with similar methodologies as Galileo. However, unlike Galileo, Bacon’s ideologies are contrasting in a sense that he perceives that scientific innovation should only be accepting on the terms that man uses them to develop their own sense and knowledge of nature.

Francis Bacon is better known for his theories that man will better understand nature if he uses the mind as a tool rather than rely entirely on scientific discovery. It is Bacon that attempts to connect the science and understanding of the physical world with society. Bacon’s Novum Organum lists a series of aphorisms by which man should abide by in order to attain a better understanding of the natural world. These aphorisms are a guide to accepting science as the entire truth of the natural world.

His writings are peculiar because he lays down these guidelines and within them there seems to be a constant message that instructs doubt in scientific experimentation, where Bacon himself is a scientist that utilizes the use of experimentation and scientific method. Moreover, he outlines the four classes of “idols” that effect the thought and minds of man, “I have assigned names, calling the first class Idols of the Tribe; the second, Idols of the cave; the third, Idols of the Marketplace; the fourth, Idols of the Theatre” (TOM 29).

The first idol describes the need for man to “distort and discolor” nature by enforcing his own nature upon it. This idol can be seen constantly throughout scientists’ research as they constantly draw their own conclusions upon constant experimentation, much like the works of Galileo and Newton. The second idol speaks primarily on the nature of the man, their life experiences, and their own interpretation of nature itself. The third idol describes the use of language and interpretation used between the interactions of two people concerning the natural world.

The final idol is idol of theatre, which describes that man’s own nature is influenced by philosophies and teachings previously consumed by the man. Bacon’s ideologies are contrasting with the more mathematical ideologies of Galileo and Newton, he incorporates the nature of the mind and how man’s minds affect the results attained by scientific method. Moreover, Bacon’s aphorism’s state that scientific documentation should be taken in stride as not all findings are accurate, and according to these idols are affecting by the strictly mathematical but are constant with the theme of the natural world.

It is without any doubt that the findings of Isaac Newton have been monumental to further discovery of physics realm which has proven to provide ground breaking discoveries since its discovery in the late 17th Century. Newton was able to draw parallels between bodies in motion and the elements of space by discovering the effect of gravity on Earth, and in space. Much of Newton’s findings are carried over from earlier findings from Copernicus, Brahe, and Galileo, while also incorporating ideologies from Bacon’s own ideologies of the idols.

His correlation with Bacon may seem odd as he is a mathematical extremist, but like Bacon, used extensive experimentation in order to attain the results that he did, thus concluded his research plausible and acceptable by society. His research concluded that bodies that move within and directly around the Earth are influenced by gravitational forces depending on the mass of the body. He even draws upon Galileo’s findings of the moon to conclude that the moon is well within the proximity to be affected by the Earth’s gravitational force, allowing it to stay within close revolution around the Earth.

Using the ideologies of Bacon and Galileo, Newton was able to balance his findings with the acceptance of society. The use of extensive experimentation and one’s one experiences and knowledge, Galileo, Bacon, and Newton were all able to construct monumental discoveries. Each of these scientists used similar methods although their ideologies differed slightly. The differences in their ideologies was concerned with the field of science that each was dedicated to.

Bacon’s writings are contrasting however, as he writes more about the inability of man to define for himself a sense of doubt within the findings of scientists, who at the time were becoming increasingly popular. Moreover, Bacon concludes that man should be particularly wary when drawing conclusions for themselves that are dependent solely upon the findings of such scientists, he also states that doubt should only be shown when research is inconclusive or fails to provide enough evidence to believe otherwise.