Learning and its enemies
Is the pursuit of knowledge dangerous — to faith, to the state, to character? Bacon takes the accusation head on, and turns part of it back on the scholars themselves.
Book One answers three sets of enemies: theologians who thought learning bred impiety, politicians who thought it softened men for the state, and scholars whose own pedantry had brought knowledge into contempt. Bacon defends learning against the first two and concedes the third, blaming vain, word-bound scholarship for discrediting the thing he wants to advance. The defence is addressed to James I, a king who wrote books himself, and it reframes learning not as a threat to piety or civic order but as their support — provided it is real inquiry into things rather than the empty disputation Bacon holds responsible for its bad name.
- education
- authority
- theology
- political philosophy
- human nature
- rhetoric
- intellectual history
- virtue
Enter a dialogue
- Critics blame the hunger for knowledge for the fall of man. You note that Adam already named the creatures. What was different about the forbidden knowledge?
- Scholars who love fine words more than the things they name resemble Pygmalion, who fell for his own statue. Why does that vice discredit learning?
- Learning cures vain admiration, which you call the root of all weakness. Would a mind without wonder be wiser or poorer?
- Amid the luxury of princes, the poverty of learned men has helped keep civility and honour alive. Why would scholars' poverty protect a society's manners?
- You defend learning against those who say it breeds impiety or softens men for the state. But haven't clever men often done real harm with it?