348 APPENDIX C. 



joices over him. and claims him as a friend and a brother. 

 The former may bo sad. the latter is fearful. The former is 

 easily confuted by an appeal to fact, and to Bacon s own 

 earnest and wise language : the latter, as we have seen, tries 

 to hinder us from nsino- Bacon as a witness against it; or, as 



_ ~ 



we would rather say, as a witness for himself. 



Every fair mind must allow that the burden of proof rests 

 with the Positivists. Bacon s lanii iian e must be proved to be 

 the same with theirs: for the position he held, and the times 

 lie lived in, allow of no a priori presumption that his views co 

 incided with theirs. It is true that the materialist theory of 

 the Universe was in existence : modern forms of error art; 

 usually modifications of ancient forms ; and our modern Mate 

 rialists are the Atomists of the Ancients, with the modifications 

 introduced by the modern Inductive System of investigation : 

 but in Bacon s days it was not an acknowledged view, and un- 

 le - he can bo shown to have held language such as declares 

 his mind to have been materialist, the Positivists have no right 

 whatever to claim him as theirs. To most persons those few 

 passages from his writings which I shall presently refer to will 

 be. I think, quite, conclusive against this ; for they shew a 

 warm as well as an exact Faith : but it will be as well to in 

 vestigate briefly the grounds on which he has been claimed as 

 a Materialist. 



First, then, his statements as to an Inductive method for the 

 discovery of facts in man s Moral Nature are alleged, as 



*j o 



showing that he took a materialist view of the functions of the 

 moral life of man, as though he hold that feelings are nervous 

 sensations. &c. Then he speaks most favourably of Dcmocri- 

 tus, and shows great partiality towards the Atheistic Philo 

 sophy of the Ancients. Then he speaks of a &quot;commune vin- 

 culum animi ct corporis,&quot; as though mind and body were alike 

 in kind, alike material. He also regards Final Causes with 

 little favour. 



Does this not seem a narrow foundation for such a structure, 

 even granting the monstrous position that we may allow that 

 Bacon s language one way is honest, and the other way not? 



An Inductive treatment of moral phenomena in no way 



