25 
agam be referred back to natural philosophy. Hence it arises that astronomy, 
optics, music, many mechanical arts, medicine itself, and what seems more 
wonderful, moral and political philosophy, have no depth, but only glide over 
e surface and variety of things ; because (mark this reason) these sciences, 
avmg once been partitioned out and established, are no longer nourished by 
natural philosophy Then there is little cause for wonder that the sciences 
do not grow, when they are separated from their roots” (Nov. Org., i., 80.) 
Again : — 
Generally let this be a rule, that all partitions of knowledges ['sciences! be 
aceepted rather for lines and veins, than for sections and separations ; and 
at the continuity and entireness of knowledge be preserved. For the con- 
trary hereof hath made particular sciences to become barren, shallow, and 
erromous, while they have not been nourished or maintained from the common 
fountain.”— (Adv. of Learn., B. ii.) 
It is very true that Bacon deprecated, as a “philoso- 
phical calamity, the excursions of final causes into the 
limits of physical causes. But he did not, therefore, as 
some have rashly concluded, banish final causes from his 
scheme of true philosophy altogether. On the contrary, 
he contemplates the sciences, generally, as all comprehended 
m one pyramid of the Truth of things or Philosophy 
proper founded, indeed, upon the basis of a knowledge of the 
varied facts of nature, but having an apex in the intelligence 
ot .Deity Par from participating, in the least, in any atheistic 
notions, he thus expresses himself:— “It is easier to believe 
the most absurd fables of the Koran, the Talmud, and the 
Legends, than to oelieve that the world was made without 
understanding Hence, God has wrought no miracles for the 
refutation of Atheism, because, to this end. His regular works 
m nature are sufficient.” (Ess. on Atheism.) And thus it 
was, also, that he regarded “ Natural Philosophy as properly 
yi e Handmaid of Religion,” and not, as some regard it in our 
day, as its antagonist. 
But nothing could be less Baconian than to endeavour to 
establish any philosophical position by an appeal to any 
authority, even though it were an appeal to his own great 
name. In thus vindicating his memory from misrepresentation, 
Jiav e had no wish to employ the argumentum ad verecundiam. 
Un the contrary, I would appeal to Bacon, mainly because he 
taught us to cast off all mere authority in science, and to trust 
to the mind itself, with all the independent aids to reason with 
which we are amply furnished by nature. Let me cite, how- 
ever, one other witness as to the present unsatisfactory condi- 
lon of science, attributable to its over- sub division into 
ranches, and the undue influence of scientific coteries in the 
c 2 
