And when he tells us, that the first step in the New Science is _the dissection_ of _character_, and the production and exhibition of certain scientifically constructed portraits, by means of which this may be effected, portraits which shall represent in their type-form by means of 'illustrious instances,' the several characters and tempers of men's _natures_ and _dispositions_ 'that the _secret disposition of each particular man_ may be laid open, and from a knowledge of the whole, the precepts concerning the cures of the mind may be more rightly concluded,'--surely _here_, to a man of learning, _the form_,--the form in which these artistically composed diagrams will be found, is not doubtfully indicated.
And when, at the next step, we come to the history of 'the affections,' and are told distinctly that _here_ philosophy, the philosophy of practice, must needs descend from the abstraction, and generalities of the ancient morality, for those observations and experiments which it is the legitimate business of the poet to conduct, though the poet, in conducting these observations and experiments, has hitherto been wanting in the rigor which science requires, when we are told that philosophy must _inevitably_ enter here, that department of learning, of which the true poet is 'the doctor,'--surely here at least, we know where we are. Certainly it is not the fault of the author of the Great Instauration if we do _not_ know what department of learning the collections of the new learning which he claims to have made will be found in--if found at all, _must_ be found in. It is not his fault if we do not know in what department to look for the applications of the Novum Organum to those 'noblest subjects' on which he preferred to try its powers, he tells us. Here at least--the Index to these missing books--is clear enough.
But in his treatment of Poetry, as one of the three grand departments of Human Learning, for not less noble than that is the place he openly assigns to it, though that open and primary treatment of it, is superficially brief, he contrives to insert in it, his deliberate, scientific preference of it, as a means of effective scientific exhibition, to either of the two graver parts, which he has associated with it--to history on the one hand, as corresponding to the faculty of memory, and to philosophy or mere abstract statement on the other, as corresponding to the faculty of Reason; for it is that great radical department of learning, which is referred to the Imagination, that constitutes in this distribution of learning the third grand division of it. He shows us here, in a few words, under different points and heads, what masterly facilities, what indispensable, incomparable powers it has for that purpose. There is a form of it, 'which is as A VISIBLE HISTORY, and is an image of actions as if _they were present_, as history is, of actions that _are past_.' There is a form of it which is applied only to express some _special purpose_ or _conceit_, which was used of old by _philosophers_ to express any point of _reason_ more sharp and subtle than the vulgar, and, nevertheless, _now and at all times_ these _allusive parabolical_ poems do retain much life and vigour because--note it,--note that because,--that _two-fold because_, because REASON CANNOT be so SENSIBLE, nor EXAMPLES SO FIT. And he adds, also, 'there remains another use of this poesy, opposite to the one just mentioned, for that use tendeth to _demonstrate_ and _illustrate_ that which is taught or delivered; and this other to _retire_ and _obscure_ it: that is, when the secrets and mysteries of _religion, policy or philosophy_ are involved in fables and parables.'