sicT. ii.] DISSERTATION SECOND. 59 



stract, they convey ideas tolerably precise and well defin- 

 ed. For such imperfections there seems to be no remedy, 

 but by having recourse fo particular instances, and diligent- 

 ly comparing the meanings of words with the external arche- 

 types from which they are derived. 



4. The idols of the theatre are the last, and are the de- 

 ceptions which have taken their rise from the systems or 

 dogmas of the different schools of philosophy. In the opi- 

 nion of Bacon, as many of these systems as had been invent- 

 ed, so many representations of imaginary worlds had been 

 brought upon the stage. Hence the name of idola Iheatri. 

 They do not enter the mind imperceptibly like the oth- 

 er three ; a man must labour to acquire 'hem, and they are 

 often the result of great learning and srudj. 



" Philosophy," said he, " as hitherto pursued, has taken 

 much from a few things, or a little from a great many ; and, 

 in both cases, has too narrow a basis to hoof much duration 

 or utility." The Aristotelian philosopuv is of the latter 

 kind ; it has taken its principles from common experience, 

 but without due attention to the evidence or the precise 

 nature of the facts; the philosopher is left to work out the 

 rest from his own invention. Of this kind, called by Ba- 

 con the sophistical, were almost all the physical systems of 

 antiquity. 



When philosophy takes all its principles from a few 

 facts, he calls it empirical, — such as was that of Gilbert, 

 and of the chemists. 



It should be observed, that Bacon does not charge the 

 physicks of antiquity with being absolutely regardless of 

 experiment. No system, indeed, however fantastical, has 

 ever existed, to which that reproach could be applied in 

 its full extent ; because, without some regard to fact, no 

 theory can ever become in the least degree plausible. 

 The fault lies not, therefore, in the absolute rejection of ex- 



