Columbus: 1620

And therefore it is fit that I publish and set forth those conjectures of mine which make hope in this matter reasonable ; just as Columbus did, before that wonderful voyage of his across the Atlantic, when he gave the reasons for his conviction that new lands and continents might be discovered besides those which were known before; which reasons, though rejected at first, were afterwards made good by experience, and were the causes and beginnings of great events.

--From The New Organum--

Writing down your theories, conducting an experiment based on those theories, and then learning from your experiences. Sounds like a scientist to me.

Physics: 1620

Nor shall we thus be led to the doctrine of atoms, which implies the hypothesis of a vacuum and that of the unchangeableness of matter (both false assumptions); we shall be led only to real particles, such as really exist.

--From The New Organum--

 Now I want to go back in time and chase Francis Bacon around with a vacuum cleaner.

Science projects: 1620

For instance, if a man wishes to superinduce upon silver the yellow colour of gold or an increase of weight (observing the laws of matter), or transparency on an opaque stone, or tenacity on glass, or vegetation on some substance that is not vegetable, — we must consider, I say, what kind of rule or guidance he would most desire.

Bacon had the idea that it would be possible to modify one property of a substance at a time, like making something change color or making something denser.

In gold, for example, the following properties meet. It is yellow in colour, heavy up to a certain weight; malleable or ductile to a certain degree of extension; it is not volatile, and loses none of its substance by the action of fire; it turns into a liquid with a certain degree of fluidity; it is separated and dissolved by particular means; and so on for the other natures which meet in gold.

If you were able to modify each quality of a substance you could eventually turn base metals into gold.   This sounds ridiculous now, but by using Bacon's methods we do in fact know how to turn base metals into gold: just put them in a star and wait for it to explode.  Some day we may be able to it more conveniently; you never know.

--From The New Organum--

Antiquity: 1620

As for antiquity, the opinion touching it which men entertain is quite a negligent one, and scarcely consonant with the word itself. For the old age of the world is to be accounted the true antiquity; and this is the attribute of our own times, not of that earlier age of the world in which the ancients lived; and which, though in respect of us it was the elder, yet in respect of the world it was the younger.

--From The New Organum--

We are the ancients.

Our predecessors didn't have the same concept of history as we do, didn't have all the experiences and information that we do. These are the things which make you old--memories of experiences--and we have a lot of them.

If you want to be a human encyclopedia now you have to settle for a much abridged version. Humans have recorded so many experiences, that no single person can absorb them all. But then, old people often have trouble remembering things.

Product life cycles: 1620

Whereas in the mechanical arts, which are founded on nature and the light of experience, we see the contrary happen, for these (as long as they are popular) are continually thriving and growing, as having in them a breath of life; at first rude, then convenient, afterwards adorned, and at all times advancing.

--From The New Organum--

Bacon isn't inspired by Greek philosophies, in fact he points out the lack of progress they have achieved over their two thousand years of existence.  Instead he is inspired by the product life cycle of machines, which he is able to notice in 1620.  He wants to let human senses and understanding improve in the same way he sees technology improving around him.

Bacon solves a (non-food) problem:1620

Whence it comes to pass that the high and formal discussions of learned men end oftentimes in disputes about words and names; with which (according to the use and wisdom of the mathematicians) it would be more prudent to begin, and so by means of definitions reduce them to order.

--From The New Organum--

Many art classes have a huge discussion regarding the question "What is Art?"  And many buildings are full of things which are supposed to make us question what art is.  It's perfectly clear where this line of thinking is going to end--with lots of stuff people aren't sure if they can throw away.  So I'll take a page from Francis Bacon and make up a definition, which probably isn't even original.

Art: Something made by humans for the purpose of expression.

Whenever someone asks,"What is art?" I'll immediately shoot out that answer.

 I can even use the definition to determine how good a piece of art is (How expressive is it, and do I like what is trying to be expressed?).

Thanks Bacon!

Kaleidoscopes: 1620

...human understanding is like a false mirror, which, receiving rays irregularly, distorts and discolours the nature of things by mingling its own nature with it.

--From The New Organon--

Lots of people would have used such an observation to say that knowledge of anything is impossible.  Bacon said if our senses are distorted we should seek to improve them.

In that sense every scientific experiment and every piece of equipment is like a pair of glasses or a hearing aid (and every one of us is like someone who is deaf and blind and can barely think).

Science: 1620

Nay more, I declare openly that for these uses the philosophy which I bring forward will not be much available. It does not lie in the way. It cannot be caught up in passage. It does not flatter the understanding by conformity with preconceived notions. Nor will it come down to the apprehension of the vulgar except by its utility and effects.

--From The New Organon--

Considering that the most "enlightened" members of our government seem sure science is about consensus I would say Bacon's prediction has definitely come to pass.

But beyond that, it's true.  How many of our possessions could we make from scratch, could even tell someone how to make?

Logic: 1620

The necessity of this was felt no doubt by those who attributed so much importance to Logic; showing thereby that they were in search of helps for the understanding, and had no confidence in the native and spontaneous process of the mind. But this remedy comes too late to do any good, when the mind is already, through the daily intercourse and conversation of life, occupied with unsound doctrines and beset on all sides by vain imaginations.

--From The New Organon--

 I wonder what Dr. Spock would have said if Dr. McCoy had quoted this to him.  Logic wont help if your givens are faulty and all errors in thought do not arise from emotions.

The cause of ignorance: 1620

Those who have taken upon them to lay down the law of nature as a thing already searched out and understood, whether they have spoken in simple assurance or professional affectation, have therein done philosophy and the sciences great injury. For as they have been successful in inducing belief, so they have been effective in quenching and stopping inquiry; and have done more harm by spoiling and putting an end to other men's efforts than good by their own.

--From The New Organon--

Looking at 1620 from the present it's obvious how people being sure they knew certain "truths" was a problem, especially truths we now consider false.  But what errors are we preserving in our own textbooks, today?