7 
384 ON THE SCOPE AND INFLUENCE OF THE 
discoveries furnished some fortunate illustrations of its princi- 
ples. To explain these principles was no object of his; nor 
does he manifest any great anxiety to recommend their adoption, 
with a view to the general improvement of science. The Ari- 
stotelian disputant, in his celebrated Dialogues, is made fre- 
quently to appeal to observation and experiment; but the in- 
terlocutor through whom Gatitro himself speaks, nowhere 
takes occasion to distinguish between the flimsy inductions of 
the Stagyrite, in regard to the subjects in dispute, and those 
which he himself had instituted ; or to hint at the very differ- 
ent complexion which philosophy must assume, according as 
the one kind or the other is resorted to. Thus, though Gaut- 
LEO wasa great discoverer, it cannot be said that he had any 
distinction from having taught the principles of the art by 
which discoveries are made. That distinction belongs wholly 
to Bacon. ‘No man,” says one of the most eminent of our 
earlier philosophers, “ except the incomparable Veruiam, has 
“ had any thoughts of an art for directing the mind in physi- 
“ cal inquiries *.” 
Some late writers have, elite advanced an opinion, that 
this: distinction does not belong exclusively to any of the 
moderns +. ‘“ It is an error,” we are told, “ to represent Bacon 
“ as professing his principle of induction to be a discovery. 
“ The method of induction, which is the art of discovery, was 
“ so. far from being unknown to Anistot.e, that it was often 
“ faithfully pursued by that great observer. What Bacon aim- 
“ ed at; he accomplished; which was, not to discover new 
“ principles, but to excite a new spirit, and to render observa- 
“ tion 
* Hooxe.—Posthumous Works, p. 6. 
+ See some admirable remarks on this subject, in the second volume of Mr 
Srewart’s Philosophy of the Mind, Chap. 4. sect. 2.—On the induction of Arts- 
TOTLE compared with that of Bacon. 
See: tS an ee ee ee 
