6

The Sylva Sylvarum (1627) is recognized as the first 'treatise on natural history'. Some regard it as the most-complete work, for its day.

But as early as 70AD, other works existed, such as Pliny's work on Natural History.

Why was the modern of F. Bacon such a landmark? Did he introduce some style of communicating that was wholly different?

  • 1
    "Science (as we think of it today), and knowledge in general, doesn't change." I commend to you the works of Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyerabend as a start on disabusing you of this assumption. – Samuel Russell Nov 5 '14 at 20:51
  • 1
    I welcome edits rather the outright removal. The point of the now-edited portion is that examples, like physical laws, do not change. We can have misinterpreted the mechanism that caused the phenomena of which we made observations, but there exists an immutability to 'the things' that drove/underlaid the occurrences. As such, was it the quality of Bacon's observations that made his work a milestone? Was it something else? – New Alexandria Nov 5 '14 at 23:25
  • "We can have misinterpreted the mechanism that caused the phenomena of which we made observations, but there exists an immutability to 'the things' that drove/underlaid the occurrences." I still have to recommend more, much more, philosophy of science. It isn't a wrong conception, but it isn't a conception that can be demonstrated to be correct. – Samuel Russell Nov 6 '14 at 4:59
  • 1
    So improve, rather than remove. We're all in this together. Look forward to your edits – New Alexandria Nov 6 '14 at 13:55

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.