NanoEthics

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 29–41 | Cite as

The Renaissance of Francis Bacon

On Bacon’s Account of Recent Nano-Technoscience
Original Paper

Abstract

The program of intervening, manipulating, constructing and creating is central to natural and engineering sciences. A renewed wave of interest in this program has emerged within the recent practices and discourse of nano-technoscience. However, it is striking that, framed from the perspective of well-established epistemologies, the constructed technoscientific objects and engineered things remain invisible. Their ontological and epistemological status is unclear. The purpose of the present paper is to support present-day approaches to techno-objects (“ontology”) insofar as they make these hidden objects epistemologically perceivable. To accomplish this goal, it is inspiring to look back to the origin of the project of modernity and to its founding father: Francis Bacon. The thesis is that everything we need today for an adequate (dialectic-materialist), ontologically well-informed epistemology of technoscience can be found in the works of Bacon—this position will be called epistemological real-constructivism. Rather than describing it as realist or constructivist, empiricist or rationalist, Bacon’s position can best be understood as real-constructivist since it challenges modern dichotomies, including the dichotomy between epistemology and ontology. Such real-constructive turn might serve to promote the acknowledgement that natural and engineering sciences, in particular recent technosciences, are creating and producing the world we live in. Reflection upon the contemporary relevance of Bacon is intended as a contribution to the expanding and critical discussion on nano-technoscience.

Keywords

Technology Philosophy and history of technoscience Nanotechnology Epistemology Real-constructivism Francis Bacon 

References

  1. 1.
    Achterhuis H (2001) Introduction: American Philosophers of Technology. In: Achterhuis H (ed) American Philosophy of Technology: The Empirical Turn. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Adorno TW (1969) Zu Subjekt und Objekt; In: Stichworte. Kritische Modelle. Suhrkamp, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Astington JW (2000) Constructivist to the Core. In: Astington JW (ed) Minds in the Making: Essays in Honor of David R. Olson. Blackwell Publishing, New York, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bacon F (2004/1620) The Instauration magna Part II: Novum organon and Associated Texts (ed. Graham Rees and Maria Wakely). Clarendon Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bacon F (1966) The Advancement of Learning and New Atlantis. London, Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baird D (2004) Thing Knowledge. A Philosophy of Scientific Instruments. University of California Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Baird D, Nordmann A, Schummer J (eds) (2004) Discovering the Nanoscale. IOS, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baird D, Shew A (2004) Probing the History of Scanning Tunneling Microscopy. In: Baird D et al (eds) Discovering the Nanoscale. IOS, Amsterdam, pp 145–156Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bell D (1973) The Coming of Post-Industrial Society. A Venture in Social Forecasting. Basic Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bloor D (1999) AntiLatour Stud Hist Phil Sci 30(1):81–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Blumenberg H (1996) Die Legitimation der Neuzeit. Suhrkamp, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Böhme G (1993) Am Ende des Baconschen Zeitalters. Suhrkamp, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Böhme G, Stehr N (1986) The Knowledge Society. Reidel, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Böhme G, Manzei A (Eds.) (2003) Kritische Theorie der Technik und der Natur. Fink, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bono JJ (1995) The Word of God and the Languages of Man. Interpreting Nature in Early Modern Science and Medicine. University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Briggs JC (1989) Francis Bacon and the Rhetoric of Nature. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cozzens SE, Gieryn TF (eds) (1990) Theories of Science in Society. Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Daston L, Galison P (2007) Objectivity. Zone Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dewey J (1929) The Quest for Certainty: A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action. Minton, Balch & Co., New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Drexler KE (1990) Engines of Creation: The Coming Era of Nanotechnology. Fourth Estate, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dupuy J-P (2005) Philosophical Foundations of Nanoethics; Lecture at the Nanoethics Conference, University of South Carolina, March 2–5, 2005Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Farrington B (1953) On misunderstanding the philosophy of Francis Bacon. Sci Med Hist 1:439–450Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Farrington B (1979 (1949)) Francis Bacon. Philosopher of Industrial Science. Henry Schuman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Feenberg A (2002) Transforming Technology. A Critical Theory Revisited. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Feenberg A (2004) Questioning Technology. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Forman P (2007) The Primacy of Science in Modernity, of Technology in Postmodernity, and of Ideology in the History of Technology. Hist Technol 23(1–2):1–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gaukroger S (2001) Francis Bacon and the Transformation of Early-Modern Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Grunwald A (2008) Auf dem Weg in eine nanotechnologische Zukunft. Philosophisch-ethische Fragen. Alber Verlag, FreiburgGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Grunwald A (2010) From Speculative Nanoethics to Explorative Philosophy of Nanotechnology. Nanoethics 4:91–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hackett EJ et al (eds) (2008) The Handbook of Science and Technology Studies, 3rd ed. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hacking I (1983) Representing and intervening. Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural sciences. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Haraway D (1991) Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. The Reinvitation of Nature. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Heussler H (1889) Francis Bacon und seine geschichtliche Stellung. Ein analytischer Versuch. Koebner, BreslauGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Horkheimer M, Adorno TW (1972) Dialectic of enlightenment (translated by John Cumming). Herder and Herder, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ihde D (1991) Instrumental realism: the interface between philosophy of science and philosophy of technology. Indiana University Press, Bloomington &IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ihde D (2002) Bodies in technology. University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ihde D, Selinger E (Eds.) (2003) Chasing Technoscience: Matrix for Materiality. Indiana University Press, Bloomington & IndianapolisGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jasanoff S, Markle GE, Petersen JC, Pinch T (eds) (1995) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks/CAGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Jonas H (1984) The Imperative of Responsibility. In Search of an Ethics for the Technological Age. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kaku M (1998) Zukunftsvisionen. Wie Wissenschaft und Technik des 21. Jahrhunderts unser Leben revolutionieren. Lichtenberg, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kant I (1989 (1781/1787)) Kritik der reinen Vernunft. Reclam, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Keller S (2005) Experiment versus Dogma. Francis Bacons Erkenntnis— und Lernprogramm. Peter Lang, Bern/FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Krohn W (1987) Francis Bacon. Beck, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Latour B (1987) Science in Action. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Latour B (1993) We have never been modern. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Latour B (1999) Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Latour B (1999) For David Bloor ... and Beyond: A Reply to David Bloor’s ‘Anti-Latour’. Stud Hist Phil Sci 30(1):113–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Liebert W, Schmidt JC (2010) Towards a prospective technology assessment. Challenges for technology assessment (TA) in the age of technoscience. Prax Poiesis 7(1–2):99–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Lyotard J-F (1984) The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Martin J (1992) Francis Bacon, the State, and the Reform of Natural Philosophy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Merchant C (1987) Der Tod der Natur. Beck, MünchenGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Mitcham C (1994) Thinking through Technology. The Path between Engineering and Philosophy. Chicago University Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mumford L (1961) Bacon: Science as Technology. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, October; as reprinted in Mumford, Interpretations and Forecasts 1922–1972: Studies in Literature, History, Biography, Technics, and Contemporary Society. Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, New York, 1973Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Muntersbjorn MM (2003) Francis Bacon’s Philosophy of Science: Machina intellectus and Forma indita. Philos Sci 70:1137–1148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Nordmann A (2003) Shaping the World Atom by Atom: Eine nanowissenschaftliche WeltBildanalyse. In: Grunwald A (ed) Technikgestaltung. Springer, Berlin, pp 191–199Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Nordmann A (2004) Was ist TechnoWissenschaft? Zum Wandel der Wissenschaftskultur am Beispiel von Nanoforschung und Bionik. In: Rossman T, Tropea C (eds) Bionik: Aktuelle Forschungsergebnisse in Natur-, Ingenieur- und Geisteswissenschaften. Springer, Berlin, pp 209–218Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Nordmann A (2004) Molecular Disjunctions: Staking Claims at the Nanoscale. In: Baird D et al (eds) Discovering the Nanoscale. IOS, Amsterdam, pp 51–62Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Nordmann A et al. (2004) High Level Expert Group “Foresighting the New Technology Wave”: Converging Technologies – Shaping the Future of European Societies; European Commission, Brussels (ftp://ftp.cordis.lu/pub/foresight/docs/ntw_report_nordmann_final_en.pdf) (download: 07/24 2010)
  59. 59.
    Nordmann A (2006) Collapse of Distance: Epistemic Strategies of Science and Technoscience. Dan Yearb Philos 41:7–34Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Nordmann A (2008) Philosophy of NanoTechnoScience. In: Fuchs HH et al (eds) Nanotechnology. Wiley, Weinheim, pp 217–244Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Pickering A (1984) Constructing Quarks. A Sociological History of Particle Physics. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Radder H (ed) (2003) The Philosophy of Scientific Experimentation. University Press, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Rees G (1986) Mathematics and Francis Bacon’s natural philosophy. Revue internationale de philosophie 159: 399–426Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Rees G, Wakely M (2004) Introduction to Novum Organon; In: Bacon, F. (2004 (1620)). The Instauration magna Part II: Novum organon and Associated Texts; (ed. Graham Rees and Maria Wakely). Clarendon Press, New York, p. xviii–cxxviiiGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Roco MC, Bainbridge WS (eds) (2002) Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance. Nanotechnology, Biotechnology, Information Technology, and Cognitive Science. National Science Foundation, ArlingtonGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rouse J (1987) Knowledge and Power. Toward a Political Philosophy a Science. Cornell Uni Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Schäfer L (1999) Das Bacon-Projekt. Suhrkamp, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Schmid G (2006) Nanotechnology. Assessment and Perspectives; Bd. 27. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Schmidt JC (2004) Unbounded Technologies. Working Through the Technological Reductionism of Nanotechnology”. In: Baird D et al (eds) Discovering the Nanoscale. IOS, Amsterdam, pp 25–51Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Schmidt JC (2007) Knowledge Politics of Interdisciplinarity. Specifying the Type of Interdisciplinarity in NSF’s NBIC Scenario. Innovation. Eur J Soc Sci Res 20(4):313–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Schmidt JC (2008) Tracing Interdisciplinarity of Converging Technologies at the Nanoscale. Technol Anal Strateg Manage 20(1):45–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Siltala J (1998) Psychoanalysis and Social Constructivism: Real Constructivism or Manic Omnipotence? Tapestry. J Hist Motivations Soc Fabric 1(1):45–61Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Smith PH (2006) Art, Science, and Visual Culture in Early Modern Europe. ISIS 97:83–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Smith PH, Schmidt B (Eds.) (2007). Making Knowledge in Early Modern Europe. Practices, Objects, and Texts, 1400–1800. Uni Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Sonntag O (1974) Liebig on Francis Bacon and the utility of Science. Ann Sci 31:373–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Whitney C (1989) Francis Bacon. Die Begründung der Moderne. Fischer, FrankfurtGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Winner L (1980) Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus 109(1) (Reprinted in A.H. Teich (ed.), 2006: Technology and the Future (pp. 50–66). Thomson, WardsworthGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Wright GHv (1971) Explanation and Understanding. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Zittel C, Engel G, Nanni R, Karafyllis NC (Eds.) (2008) Philosophies of Technology: Francis Bacon and his Contemporaries. Bril, LeidenGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Unit of Social, Culture and Technology StudiesDarmstadt University of Applied SciencesDarmstadtGermany

Personalised recommendations