47

Francis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun
SHEN Guowei*

Abstract
Previous studies of the sources of thought in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun have failed
to give sufficient attention to Francis Bacon. The source of Yan Fu’s ideal ofa strong and prosperous China is, I think, none other than Bacon. This paper
discusses Bacon as he appeared in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun and political essays
written at the time of Tianyan lun, and Bacon’s influence on Yan Fu.
Keywords: science, Bacon, Western studies, Tianyan lun, Yan Fu

1Bacon in Tianyan lun

Tianyan lun 天演論 was the first translation that Yan Fu 嚴復 published.1
This was a translation of the 1893 Romanes Lecture, Evolution and Ethics, byThomas Henry Huxley (1826–1895), a British philosopher and naturalist, andan introduction, written in 1894, to guide readers through this somewhat
abstruse lecture.2 Huxley’s lecture and introduction discussed the connection
between Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and ethics in human society.
Yan Fu, especially in book 2 of Tianyan lun, shows an uncommon interestin science—including its purpose, use, method, and content—even thoughscience was not emphasized in Huxley’s original work. For example, Yan Fu,
in book 2 of this work, clearly states at the outset,
In metaphysics 道, we approach the truth the closer we get to particulars每下而愈況. Even though we reach the ultimately fine, by exhausting thenature of things we get to know their ultimate nature, and by exhausting
the principles of things we come to know their ultimate principles. This
* Shen Guowei 沈国威 is a professor in the Faculty of Foreign Studies of Kansai
University and associate editor of the Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia.
1 Page references are to Yan Fu, Tianyan lun 天演论, Yan yi mingzhu zongkan 严译名著丛刊 (Beijing: Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1981). Some quotes, however, follow citations in other works.
2 Evolution and Ethics and Other Essays, by T. H. Huxley (1894). Here I use the 1902
reprint published by D. Appleton and Co.

48

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

requires cleverly using only what we know. How can we achieve something great by rushing to distant vistas and soaring high?3
The phrase 每下而愈況 is a loose quote of 每下愈況 in Zhuangzi. In an interlinear note Yan Fu explains,
Bacon was the first to state these ideas. His words were, “The businessof science 格致 is to describe all the richness that Nature 真宰 has
produced. The things that Nature produces are neither noble or base.
Hence, man’s taking them to be noble or base is a wide departure fromthe way of science. When we do this, how can we still be doing
science?4“Bacon” here is a reference to Francis Bacon (1561–1626). This paragraphreflects Bacon’s basic idea of science. Though Huxley did not explicitly state
this, we should understand what he wrote as follows: the metaphysical 道 canmanifest itself only in the physical, and the essences and principles of themetaphysical and the physical interact. As Bacon said, the object of our study
is the physical. Hence, we should investigate whatever has an objective existence. In the object of our inquiries, there is no innate distinction between themetaphysical and the physical. Any artificial distinction between noble andbase is already a departure from the nature of our study. If we pursue such a
departure, how can we properly carry out our inquiries? The ideas that Bacon
was the first to state, according to Yan Fu, came from book 2, aphorisms 119
and 120, of Bacon’s Novum Organum. Here are the original passages:
There will be met with also in my history and experiments many things
which are trivial and commonly known; many which are mean andlow. . . . But I—who am well aware that no judgment can be passed on
uncommon or remarkable things, much less anything new brought tolight, unless the causes of common things, and the causes of thosecauses, be first duly examined and found out—am of necessity
compelled to admit the commonest things into my history. (Book 1,
aphorism 119)5
And for things that are mean or even filthy, . . . such things, no less thanthe most splendid and costly, must be admitted into natural history. Noris natural history polluted thereby; for the sun enters the sewer no less
3 Tianyan lun, book 2, discourse 1, “Neng shi” 能實 (Attaining Reality), p. 49.
4 Tianyan lun, book 2, discourse 1, “Neng shi,” p. 49 n. This note does not appear in
Yan Fu’s edited manuscript of Tainyan lun dated lunar sixth month 1897.
5 Here and below, quotations of Bacon’s Novum Organum are from the translation by
James Spedding et al.

Francis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

49

than the palace, yet takes no pollution. (Book 1, aphorism 120)
For whatever deserves to exist deserves also to be known, for knowledge is the image of existence; and things mean and splendid exist alike.
(Book 1, aphorism 120)6This was the first time that Yan Fu mentioned Bacon in his translation.
Later, in Tianyan lun, book 2, discourse 3 “Jiao yuan” 教源 (The Origin ofDoctrine), Yan Fu again mentioned Bacon:
If we view matters as Bacon dictates, we can take our probes into theprinciples of things as providing the rationale for the way of man 人道.
Those who fuss around in the realm between Heaven and man takethemselves to be engaged in serious business, but are they not playing
around in the void and exerting themselves to no avail?7
That is, investigating why the physical is as it is, is just investigating why
the metaphysical is as it is. Theologians and scholastics who look down upon
the physical are only dallying about in an empirically unverifiable world ofillusion. Their work produces nothing of value. Huxley, in the fourth sectionof his lecture (pp. 63–66), discussed such early Indian philosophical mattersas the relationship between the Atman (soul) and substance, between
suffering and release, etc. Yan Fu translated this discussion as discourse 8“Mingwang” 冥往 (Death) and discourse 9 “Zhen huan” 真幻 (The Real andthe Illusory) in his Tianyan lun, and he also expanded the discussion to include
mind and existence. The text of these two short discourses differ hardly at all
between the manuscript and the printed work, but there are quite a few
discrepancies in the translator’s notes. In a note in the manuscript version,
Yan Fu writes,

6 Bacon expressed similar ideas in The Advancement of Learning: “But the truth is,they be not the highest instances that give the securest information, as may be well
expressed in the tale so common of the philosopher [Thales (624? 546? BCE), a
Greek philosopher, mathematician, and astronomer] that, while he gazed upwards tothe stars, fell into the water; for if he had looked down he might have seen the stars
in the water, but looking aloft he could not see the water in the stars. So it comethoften to pass that mean and small things discover great, better than great candiscover the small; and therefore Aristotle noteth well, ‘That the nature of everything is best seen in his smallest portions’” (book II.i.5). “But if my judgment be of
any weight, the use of History Mechanical is of all others the most radical andfundamental towards natural philosophy; such natural philosophy as shall not vanishin the fume of subtle, sublime, or delectable speculation, but such as shall be operative to the endowment and benefit of man’s life” (book II.i.6).
7 Tianyan lun, book 2, discourse 3, “Jiao yuan,” p. 54. This passage does not appear
in Yan Fu’s manuscript for Tianyan lun.

50

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

In the Jiajing, Longqing, and Wanli reign periods of the Ming dynasty,or the sixteenth century in the West, the Dark Ages were already in thepast and the Renaissance was in full bloom. During this period suchgreat scientists as Bacon, Newton, Spinoza, Leibniz, and Locke appearedin considerable numbers, producing seminal theories and writing notablebooks, and the Frenchman Descartes advocated skepticism and following
one’s own mind, breaking the hold of such ingrained thinking as
Catholicism and Aristotelianism.8
This was Yan Fu’s first mention of Bacon in his June 1897 edited manuscript for Tianyan lun. In a translator’s note in the published version, Yan Fu
states that discourses 8 and 9 contain the most subtle theories on the principles of physical observation, and that beginners will find them difficult tounderstand on a first pass. But because they provide the keys to Westernstudies and these matters are important, he accepted the challenge andapplied himself ever more diligently to making the author’s intent clear, eventhough he felt himself not up to the task of getting at the author’s deep
meaning.
In discourse 11, “Xuepai” 學派 (Schools of Thought), Yan Fu continues
to introduce sources of Western thought to China: Heraclitus (ca. 530–ca. 470
BCE) created a theory of the universe to elucidate the sources of Nature, andthereby acted as a harbinger of science of future millennia. His theories havenothing to do with daily life or with moral cultivation of the individual. Thus
we can say that Heraclitus’s theories were profound and broad. In contrast,
Socrates (469–399 BCE) and his follower Plato (ca. 427–347 BCE) thoughtthat the universe was too vast, and its principles too complicated, for mere
mortals to reason clearly about. So they gave up studying the universe andreturned to the study of morality in human society. Yan Fu criticizes Socrates
for not understanding that truth cannot be divided into major truths and minor
truths, that all natural phenomena entwined in causal connections reflect thetruth, and that all such phenomena can be studied. There is no reason to thinkthat principles of the natural world are difficult, and that matters concerning
human society are easy. The constant natural phenomena around us operateaccording to mysterious principles requiring the methods of science—logic,
mathematics, physics, chemistry, and probing—to understand them. One of
the failings of Socrates’s view is that it elevates natural phenomena tangled ina web of causal relations to the level of unattainable knowledge, treats suchphenomena as outside the purview of human society, and regards moral culti8 “Tianyan lun shougao” 天演论手稿 (Manuscript for Tianyan lun), in Yan Fu, Yan Fu
ji 严复集 (The Collected Works of Yan Fu), edited by Wang Shi 王栻 (Beijing:
Zhonghua Shuju, 1986), vol. 5, p. 1455.

Francis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

51

vation of the individual as most important. Proceeding in this fashion ostensibly seems practical and realistic, but in fact is forsaking the whole for a partand jettisoning the near at hand for the remote. Hence, Socrates contributed
nothing to the theories of Heraclitus. Huxley, in his original work, did notcriticize Socrates. Yan Fu added this criticism in his translation of Huxley’swork. The idea for this criticism can be found in the quote from Bacon given
above. Huxley only pointed out that Heraclitus’s intellectual heir was neither
Socrates nor Plato nor Aristotle. In an author’s comment, Yan Fu elaborates:
Aristotle accommodated the theories of his predecessors. Then in thesixteenth century (the middle of the Ming period), Bacon in England andDescartes in France advocated empirical and inductive science, breaking
through the stagnation of the Dark Ages. Newton, Galileo, and Harvey
discovered new principles, establishing new sciences that replaced the old.
There was excess rejection of the past, and Aristotle’s theories fell intoneglect, but in the last century, according to Yan Fu, people came to reappreciate Aristotle’s theories and ideas, and appropriated the best of them.9 Yan Fu
praises Bacon for founding the modern scientific method and for “sweeping
away the cobwebs of the old learning.”10
What Yan Fu calls the ninth discourse of Huxley’s lecture is the conclusion of the lecture and its crucial points. After reviewing the history of Indianand Greek philosophy, Huxley turns his attention to late-nineteenth-century
Europe, a leap of twenty-six centuries. At that time Darwin’s theory of
evolution had already been in circulation for more than forty years, and the
optimism of a perfect world that the theory ushered in had begun to dissipate.
People began to wonder what sort of relationship there was between theevolution of species and the evolution of ethics. Huxley points out that there
is no necessary connection between the two, that the evolution of species
need not further the evolution of human ethics, and that humanity ought toconsciously promote ethical progress in a world fashioned by humans.
Huxley writes,
Finally, to my knowledge, nobody professes to doubt that, so far forth as
we possess a power of bettering things, it is our paramount duty to use
it and to train all our intellect and energy to this supreme service of ourkind.
Hence the pressing interest of the question, to what extent modern
progress in natural knowledge, and, more especially, the general
9 Tianyan lun, book 2, discourse 11, “Xuepai,” p. 80. In the manuscript version, thisnote is very concise (Yan Fu, Yan Fu quanji, vol. 1, p. 57).
修訂稿 (The Sources of Strength, Revised
10 From “Yuanqiang xiuding gao” 原強修訂稿
Version). More on this work below.

52

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

outcome of that progress in the doctrine of evolution, is competent tohelp us in the great work of helping one another?
In an author’s comment in discourse 15, “Yan e” 演惡 (The Practice ofEvil), Yan Fu severely criticizes Huxley: “Huxley’s words here are very
superficial and not worthy of an intellectual.” “Of all seventeen discourses inthis work, this is the worst.” He even goes so far as to say, “Huxley here isjust flattering superficial scholars. This is not a serious argument.” I will leaveto intellectual historians to discern differences and similarities between Yan
Fu and Huxley on evolutionary theory and ethics. Here I will point out only
the scientific outlook reflected in Yan Fu’s translations. Huxley sought toimprove our ability to better things and change Nature, and he called this task
the “supreme service of our kind.” Yan Fu sought to point out our naturalability to use scientific training to improve ourselves and also to benefit
society as a whole. Whether it be the ability of natural science to improve
people’s habits of thought or the ability of abstract science to promote progress in society, the advances of science have a positive effect. Moreover, allbeings must follow the laws of evolution; there are no distinctions of noble orbase here. Hence scholar-scientists sooner or later realize that creation
proceeds from a single source, that no science is important or unimportant,worthwhile or worthless. Humans’ innate sense of right and wrong was
perfected through the process of evolution, which proceeds through systematic causal laws that we can discover. The development of the universe andthe evolution of society are intimately connected—a fact that we cannot failto recognize. In this discourse Yan Fu departs from a simple translation of
Huxley’s original lecture. We can readily detect Bacon’s influence: that thebusiness of science is to describe Nature in all its richness, that science does
not find the things of Nature either noble or base.
In Tianyan lun, Bacon is referred to four times: once in the interlinear
notes, twice in the text, and once in the author’s comments. But Huxley
never directly mentioned Bacon, either in his lecture or in the prolegomena to
his lecture, written later. Bacon was the father of modern British materialismand empiricism. An advocate of modern natural science and the earliest
proponent of the modern scientific view, he elaborated on the purpose andnature of science, and on a sure way to promote the development of science.
He opposed scholasticism and thought that in the pursuit of truth, physicalscience held a position on a par with that of metaphysics. Bacon advocatedobserving and learning from Nature. He pointed out that all knowledge
comes from Nature, that apart from Nature, there is no knowledge, that inseeking the truth, we must rid ourselves of preconceptions and prejudices,that observation and experiment are the only sources of knowledge, and that

Francis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

53

induction is the only scientific way of accurately knowing Nature. Bacon’s
criticism of scholasticism and traditional logical thinking cleared the way forthe development of modern science. Though Huxley never mentioned Baconby name, the ideas and views of this great thinker of two centuries prior were
well known to both Huxley and his audience and required no introduction.

2

Science in Yan Fu’s Three Essays on Western Learning

When did Yan Fu come in contact with Bacon, when did he read his
works, and why did he mention Bacon several times in his Tianyan lun? To
answer these questions, we have to look at Yan Fu’s three essays on Westernlearning—“Lun shibian zhi ji” 論世變之亟 (On the Urgency of Change in theWorld), “Yuan qiang” 原強 (The Sources of Strength), and “Jiuwang jue lun”
救亡決論 (On the National Salvation Decision)—which were written concurrently with Yan Fu’s translation Tianyan lun.11
Yan Fu, in the aftermath of defeat in the First Sino-Japanese War, said,“I felt a blockage in my chest and wanted to throw up,” and on February 28,
1895, he published his first commentary on current events, “Lun shibian zhiji.” In this commentary he took the opportunity to introduce the concept ofevolution, warned his countrymen of the danger of the loss of the country andthe extinction of the race, and affirmed that if China wants to be rich andpowerful, it must acquire Western technology.
One month later, on March 29, Yan Fu published the first of two installments of “Yuan qiang” in the newspaper Zhibao 直報. In this article Yan Fu
introduced Darwin’s theory of evolution to Chinese readers for the first time.
And then in May 24, 1895, he began publishing “Jiuwang jue lun” ininstallments, again in the Tianjin paper Zhibao. This article focused on thepressing issue of developing people’s knowledge. Yan Fu held, “Human talentand scholarship should seek to be useful, and the measure of being useful is
to make the nation rich and powerful. Making the nation rich and powerful isthe foundation of the sciences 格致. If the sciences have no foundation, they
have no direction and are barren. It is just as the saying says: ‘Boiling sandforever and ever never produces cooked rice.’”12 Here Yan Fu emphasizes theimportance of science for making the nation rich and powerful, and this was
also one of Bacon’s main points. But at the time, the thinking in China wasthis: China from ancient times already had the notion of science 格致,
namely, as the fundamental beginning 始基 in the Great Learning 大學. Hence,
11 Lun shibian zhi ji, Yuan qiang, and Jiuwang jue lun, in vol. 1 of Yan Fu, Yan Fu ji,edited by Wang Shi, pp. 1 5, 5 15, 40 54. Quotations below are from this edition.
In some cases, I give just the volume and page number.
12 Yan Fu ji, vol. 1, pp. 40 54.

54

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

why is it necessary to look to the West to study science 格致?13 Moreover,after Zhu Xi 朱熹, in Daxue zhangju 大學章句 (The Great Learning, Fully
Annotated), explained the phrase 格物致知, here translated as “science,” later
scholars have disputed its meaning, with the Lu brothers (Lu Jiushao 陸九韶,
Lu Jiuling 陸九齡, and Lu Jiuyuan 陸九淵) and Wang Yangming 王陽明
asserting that merit in the conduct of affairs does not depend on science 格致.
In the same essay Yan Fu responded,
The theory of the Lu brothers and Wang says that science 格致 helps notin the least in the virtuous conduct of affairs, and that restraint in thevirtuous conduct of affairs does not impede science. But that is totallynot possible.
The teaching of the Lu brothers and Wang, in essence, says that one
should only directly follow one’s heart and act independently. They feelthat without going outdoors they can know the world. But do the affairsof the world match what the so-called cognoscenti know, or are they far
apart? This they do not ask. They feel that they can close the door andmake a carriage, and when they emerge from the workshop, the axle
width will match the ruts in the roads. But will the ruts in the roads
match the axle width of the carriage, or will they be misaligned? This
they do not investigate. They create without models, follow error andpolish, yet their principles seem to have reasons, and their words seem
rational.
They do not ask or investigate whether their own knowledge matches objective truth, whether their conclusions match external reality. This way of doing
scholarly research leads to disaster first in their scholarship and finally in thenation at large.14
13 Translator’s note: The phrase 格物致知, abbreviated 格致, is frequently translated as“science,” and even in The Great Learning, it can be translated as “to investigate
things to extend knowledge.” But there the focus is on cultivating the self andordering the state. In The Great Learning, Fully Annotated, Zhu Xi explains that 格
物 means to make affairs rational. The idea is that the virtuous ruler wants to makethe affairs of the nation rational and extend his knowledge to the far corners of theempire. So that Yan Fu’s argument logically follows, I have translated 格致 as“science” throughout.
14 In “Yangming xiansheng jiyao sanzhong, xu” 陽明先生集要三種序 (Preface to Three
Important Works from the Works of Wang Yangming, winter of 1906), Yan Fu
wrote, “Scholarship in our country, from late Zhou, Qin, and Han times, has generally amounted to nothing more than textual criticism. One seldom encounterslearning from observation and investigation, examining near and far, as Westerners
learn from Nature. For textual criticism relies on the words of the ancients. Thus if
we take this as our model of study, we will amplify the harm of such study,

Francis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

55

Reflecting on Western science, Yan Fu, again in “Jiuwang jue lun,”approvingly wrote,
The methods they follow are the opposite of those of Chinese scholars.
To clarify a principle or to establish a method, they examine all mannerof things or phenomena to see whether they all conform. They thenestablish a principle or method as a constant. What they examine ismore valuable, since it is broader and more significant. Their effects
must be lasting, and hence long standing. Their investigations must leadto the same result and same source, and hence are lofty and clear. As for
how Westerners manage science, they cannot harbor prejudices, embellish their language, entertain the slightest opinion, or make arbitrary
decisions. Moreover, they must be diligent, patient, impartial, andhumble. Only thus can they reach a level of excellence and lay a solid
path. To apply their science to people’s lives, they create technology
according to principles, make use of necessary laws, and call forth neweffects, all according to Nature’s design, as naturally as dirt accumulates
to form the earth.
Western science has benefits for national prosperity and people’s livelihood. Indeed, it forms the basis for a rich and powerful nation. Hence,
Today in the West—in such sectors as the military, agriculture, industry,
and commerce, and in such organizations as the household, nation, andempire—if they neglect anything, it is never study. This is what Herbert
Spencer was quoted as saying in Quanxue pian 勸學篇 ( An
Encouragement of Learning). Now and in the past, the West views
clarity in the physical sciences as aiding human affairs.
Yan Fu also points out that Western science, in addition to having thepractical effects mentioned above, also promotes self-cultivation. This accords
with The Great Learning, where it says, “With knowledge attained, intentions
will be sincere.” As Yan Fu writes (again in “Jiuwang jue lun”),
A gentleman of the West writes, “Learning is seeking not only to know
pursuing the fragmented and the tangential, limiting ourselves a barren enterprise,
and restraining our learning. If we then examine what we have gained, some willseek it in the mind (and feel a sense of unease), and others will place it in theexternal world (and find it out of place). This being the case, one might think betterto close one’s eyes and block up one’s ears and seek the truth in a little square inch,
for there one may find it. This is why Bodhidharma said, ‘Nirvana has no saints,’
and this is why Zhu Xi, late in life, said that he regretted not losing his sight earlier.
Thus, Wang Yangming, after he went to live among the barbarians, taught thebroad-minded first” (Yan Fu ji, vol. 2, pp. 237 238).

56

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

the unknown, but also to do the undoable. Those who study measurement and calculation do not spend all their time viewing the progress ofthe heavens. Those who study chemistry do not test materials everywhere. Those who pursue botany need not cultivate. Those who pursue
zoology need not herd livestock. The greatest value of these sciences isthat they provide the means to marshal wisdom and exercise the mind,
so that those trained in the profound do not become superficial and thosetrained in the truth do not slip into the absurd. Hence, when a principle
is presented to us, we must immediately examine to see what is rightand wrong so that no one is confused.
Thus, Western science, which Chinese scholars viewed as nothing morethan evidence of the physical, is at the same level as “investigating things toextend knowledge” (science) 格物致知, in The Great Learning. In “Jiuwang
jue lun,” Yan Fu, in a critical tone, even quotes Zhuangzi’s view on the
distinction between the metaphysical and the physical:
Moreover, as far as science is concerned, when we look at things fromthe perspective of the truth, we find that all things are equal. There are
no differences of great and small, enduring and transient, valuable andworthless, good and bad. Zhuangzi knew this, for he said, “Truth 道 isfound even in feces and urine” and “We approach the truth the closer we
get to particulars 每下而愈況.”15
This passage and the first paragraph of discourse 1, “Neng shi,” of book2 of Tianyan lun, quoted above, echo one another. So even though Yan Fu
never mentions Bacon by name here, we can clearly sense Bacon’s presence.
Throughout “Jiuwang jue lun,” Bacon’s ideas and assertions seems to peer
through between the lines even though he is never explicitly mentioned. At
the end of “Jiuwang jue lun,” Yan Fu stated that his essay “strongly advocates Western science and does not touch on anything else,” as if he had
more to say. On October 19, 1896, a year and seven months after the publication of “Yuan qiang” and a year and five months after the publication of“Jiuwang jue lun,” Liang Qichao 梁啟超 send Yan Fu a letter praising his
essay “Yuan qiang” and asked if he could reprint it in the newspaper
Shiwubao 時務報. Yan Fu replied,
In mid-spring 1894, during the instability in the east of the country, I felt
a blockage in my chest and wanted to throw up. Then my essays “Yuanqiang” and “Jiuwang jue lun” were published in Zhibao, and thedepressing situation ceased to bother me so much. But the “Yuan qiang”
15 The quote from Zhuangzi appears in Zhuangzi 莊子, “Zhi bei you” 知北遊.

Francis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

57

series of essays is not yet finished. For at the time, having nothing to do,
I offered my opinions, based on the Novum Organum, so that we may getto the bottom of things, discover how to enrich and strengthen the
country, and get people started along this path. . . . But my abilities did
not measure up to my aspirations, and I was distracted by personalmatters, with the result that I did not complete the project. When I lookat this old essay now, I really feel that it does not amount to much, butthen you find it incisive, think it colorfully written, and praise it excessively, much to my embarrassment. . . . “Yuan qiang” is as I havedescribed it above, but if I revised it, something better might come of it.
Would it be okay for me to submit it for your approval some ten days
hence?16
Yan Fu acknowledged that the “Yuan qiang” series was incomplete, that
he wanted to base it “on the Novum Organum 格致新理, so that we may getto the bottom of things and discover how to enrich and strengthen the
country,” but because of personal matters and other duties, he could not
realize this plan. Yan Fu agreed that he would quickly revise the series andgive the manuscript to Liang Qichao to publish in Shiwubao. Harking back to
Bacon’s Novum Organum (1620), he charts the development of Westernscience from its sources and expresses hope for a connection between scienceand the development of a rich and powerful nation.17 It is here, in an
16 “Letter to Liang Qichao,” in Yan Fu ji, vol. 3, pp. 513 515.
17 The Bacon scholar Yu Lichang has written, “From what Yan Fu wrote above, we caneven infer that he personally read Bacon’s Advancement of Learning and Novum
Organum” (Peigen ji qi zhexue, p. 446). According to this letter, Yan Fu definitely
read Novum Organum around 1895. In fact, he read many of Bacon’s works. For
example, in the prologue 巵言 to Yingwen Hangu 英文漢詁 (English Grammar
Explained in Chinese, 1904), Yan Fu writes, “Neither Spinoza, in On the
Improvement of the Understanding, nor Hugo Grotius, in On the Law of War andPeace, nor Newton, in Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, nor Bacon,in Novum Organum 穷理新机, forsook the traditions of the past” (Yan Fu ji, vol. 1,
p. 155). In Yan Fu’s translation of John Stuart Mill, A System of Logic 穆勒名學, we
see that Bacon, in his Novum Organum 致知新器, divided human illusions into four
idols of the mind that dupe people into belief (Yan Fu ji, vol. 1, p. 241). From Guo
Songtao’s diary, we can infer that Yan Fu already encountered and read Bacon
during his studies in Britain. On May 30, 1878, when Guo Songtao visited theGreenwich Royal Naval College where Yan Fu and other Chinese foreign students
were studying, Yan Fu guided him around, telling him the history and circumstancesof the naval college. In his description for that day, Guo Songtao recorded in detailthe physics and chemistry that Yan Fu explained to him, and also wrote, “The ordinary and practical sciences are most rational. They deeply seek for causes and know
their unlimited usefulness. Their subtlety cannot be fathomed, and their ordering of
the facts is known to all” (Guo Songtao riji 郭嵩焘日记 [Diary of Guo Songtao], p.
589). [Reference OK? See http://www.fep.com.cn/index.php?m=content&c=index&

58

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

untranslated portion of this “Yuan qiang” revision, that he first mentioned
Bacon’s name.18 Below, let us take a look at the revisions of the third installment, “Western Science,” in this revision of “Yuan qiang.”
The original and revised versions of “Yuan qiang” are basically the same,with the latter exhibiting a few rhetorical changes for emphasis. The revised
version focuses on how to raise people’s knowledge, resources, and morals.
Yan Fu points out, “The West, during these past two centuries, has engaged
a=show&catid=32&id=1467, which gives《郭嵩焘日记
郭嵩焘日记》第 3 卷, 湖南人民出版社1982
年, 第518页 as the source for this quote.] These statements perfectly agree with
Bacon’s assertions. About Yan Fu’s explanations, Guo Songtao states, “I greatly
appreciate his statements” and “Every day I write down the information I get fromhim.” Yan Fu, I believe, reread Bacon around the spring of 1895. Yan Fu wrote,“For at the time, having nothing to do, I offered my opinions, based on the Novum
Organum.” “At the time” refers to the time of writing of the third installment,“Western Science,” of “Yuan qiang” (from spring 1895 to May of that year). In the
manuscript revision of July 4, 1897, of Tianyan lun, “Bacon” appears twice, and in
the published version, one occurrence is deleted and another two instances areadded, for a total of four occurrences.
18 Bacon’s name appears in Tianyan lun, book 2, discourse 1, “Neng shi.” There is atemporal connection between the two essays, I believe. The first person to introduce
Bacon to Chinese readers was Wang Tao 王韜, who in Weng you yutan 甕牖餘談(Ramblings from the Window of an Old Man) stated, “In 1620 Bacon wrote Novum
Organum 格物窮理新法. Prior to this, no one discussed these matters. Bacon’s
writing sought to reach the truth, and to do so, one must investigate things inconformity to reason, and not make up reasons to conform to things.” Wang Tao’s
knowledge must have come from James Legge. At about the same time, Guo
Songtao, the first Chinese minister to Britain, mentioned Bacon in his diary: “TheBritish endeavor to study reality, a tradition that began with Bacon 畢爾庚” (Lundun
yu Bali riji 伦敦与巴黎日记 [London and Paris Diaries] [Changsha: Yuelu Shushe,
1984], vol. 10, p. 275). “The British began to take empirical studies seriously startingwith Bacon 比耕. . . . Bacon studied the Latin and Greek classics, but after a whilecame to find them barren and bereft of practical use. He then took up material theories of learning called the new science. . . . In 1645 a group of scientists met topursue Bacon’s new science, and they founded a society called the Society for the
New Science” (vol. 13, pp. 384 385). “The English have Bacon 倍根, who wrote
books on astrology” (vol. 14, p. 405). Guo Songtao’s knowledge of the history ofWestern science came from Chinese foreign students in Britain, including Yan Fu.
The first person to translate Bacon’s works into Chinese was the British Protestantmissionary William Muirhead, who concisely translated a portion of Novum
Organum under the title of Gezhi xinfa 格致新法 (The New Scientific Method).
Muirhead’s partial translation was first published in installments in Gezhi huibian 格致匯編, nos. 3 10 (1877) and later reprinted in Wanguo gongbao 萬國公報. A relatively accessible edition of this translation can be found in Wanguo gongbao
wenxuan 万国公报文选, edited by Li Tiangang 李天纲 (Shanghai: Zhong-Xi Shuju,
2012), pp. 409 420. On Bacon’s reception in late Qing China and his influence on
Yan Fu, in addition to Yu Lichang’s work, one can also refer to the Fudan
University master’s thesis “Yan Fu dui Peigen zhishixue sixiang de chanfa,” by Li
Yu. Thanks to Prof. Sun Qing of Fudan University for showing me Li Yu’s thesis.

Francis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

59

in measurement, calculation, and scientific pursuits on an unprecedented scale
and at heretofore unseen levels of precision. Machines produced with scienceappear nearly everywhere in people’s lives. Moreover, the telegraph, steamship, and railroad can unite the whole world, and yet only one or two people
are needed to operate them.” “The West’s accomplishments to date are due to
its rapid changes over the last two centuries in the long run and over the last
fifty years over the short term.” All this is because the West follows the lawsof survival of the fittest and natural selection and greatly encourages thedevelopment of people’s knowledge, resources, and morals. Yan Fu writes,
The thriving state of scientific studies over the past two centuries mustbe attributed to Bacon’s first sweeping away the cobwebs of the oldlearning. Scholars propose new theories, and technicians then thoroughly
apply these theories to create new technology. This model for progresshas been very successful. Hence we say that people’s knowledge is thesource of a rich and powerful nation. Now I will put this essay aside fora few months and not publish it.
Since both the West and China (in the Great Learning) take science as
the beginning of scholarship, Yan Fu asks, Why has there developed such ahuge difference in people’s knowledge in the two countries? Some people
think that the reason for this is that “knowledge in China is anchored on
vacuities, whereas knowledge in the West is based on reality.” But Yan Fu
points out that this is not the crux of the matter, for the West also has
vacuous scholarship.19 “The difference between China and the West lies notin the difference between the vacuous and the real,” for up to the Ming
dynasty, Chinese science was comparable with Western science.
[But] more recently, their philology prioritizes science and neglects
literature, emphasizes correct usage and depreciates embellishment.
Moreover, they teach the young to observe and take what they observe
to heart, to value what they acquire on their own and avoid relying onothers, to be given to doubt and be wary of believing tradition. In theirnumerical sciences they teach the young to apply reason, and in theirmechanical and chemical sciences they instruct the young to observe.
And yet science is nothing more than a tool.
That is, mass education in the West encourages personal observation, application, and thought. One should not be bound by the theories of the ancients.
19 For example, the abstract sciences in Yan Fu’s “Xixue menjing gongyong” 西學門徑
功用 (Means and Applications of Western Knowledge) and Qunxue yiyan 群學肄言(The Study of Sociology). Details to follow in another paper.

60

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

Moreover, the focus of learning in the various sciences is different. Logic andmathematics require thought; physics and chemistry demand observation. And
yet all of these sciences serve only as tools (for the organization of knowledge). Yan Fu continues,
Hence, Huxley writes, “Reading is a second-hand way of acquiringknowledge. I regard only the world as my book, and only the things of
the world as my text. This is true learning.” This is the crux of Westerneducation. But what about China? Zhu Xi explained “to investigate
things to extend knowledge (science)” 格物致知 as meaning learning all
the principles of things 即物窮理, which is true. But reading books toacquire knowledge is depending on externals, much as the crane depends
on the wind to soar high.
The passage beginning “Hence, Huxley writes” is not in the first draft of“Yuan qiang.” Yan Fu borrowed Huxley’s words to introduce Bacon’s ideathat only knowledge gleaned from Nature is true knowledge. In the Chinese
tradition, it is unproblematic for Zhu Xi to explain “to investigate things toextend knowledge (science)” as meaning learning all the principles of things,
but to say that learning the principles of things is acquiring knowledge frombooks (including those written by Zhu Xi) is not what is meant. Knowledge
acquired from books neither requires nor allows testing. Hence, Yan Fu
writes, such knowledge “is depending on externals, much as the cranedepends on the wind to soar high.” It is just not the same as principles
gleaned from things.20
20 Thanks to Prof. Azuma Jūji of Kansai University, a specialist on Zhu Xi, for his
instruction. On another front, Li Yu thinks, “The model followed in Chinese classical studies is none other than reading books to acquire knowledge. Though
Chinese classical studies also “investigates things to extend knowledge,” investigating things in Chinese classical studies and seeking the truth in science are two
radically different approaches to scholarly research. The former takes the Confucianclassics as its point of departure, establishes norms and emends texts, and thereby
attains knowledge” (“Yan Fu dui Peigen zhishixue sixiang de chanfa”). In “Jinshi
wenming chuzu er dajia zhi xueshuo” 近世文明初祖二大家之學說 (The Theories of
Two Founders of Modern Civilization), Liang Qichao noted the following: “In his
explication of the Great Learning, Zhu Xi said that scholars must familiarize themselves with the things of the world, for one can further what one already knows ofthings and reach new heights of knowledge; that after much effort, one will
suddenly achieve a breakthrough, arrive at a grasp of the surface and interior, thefine points and rough spots, of the things of this world, and by fully exercising
one’s mind, achieve perfect clarity. Zhu Xi’s argument, in clarity and completeness,yields naught to Bacon. But though Zhu Xi can expound roughly on his notion ofprinciple 理, Bacon can elaborate in detail on his method. Bacon not only elaborated on his method; he put it into practice. While Zhu Xi made a serious effort at
expounding his theory, it nonetheless was vacuous mental talk based on nothing andFrancis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

61

For unknown reasons, the essay “Yuan qiang,” after revision, was neverrepublished in Shiwubao. Yan Fu agreed “to submit it for your approval someten days hence.” That means that the revision should have been completed
within 1896. In the revised version of “Yuan qiang,” “Bacon” is rendered 柏
庚, as in Tianyan lun, whereas it appears as 培根 in “Xixue menjing gongyong”(September 1898) and later publications. Hence, it would seem that Yan Fu
revised “Yuan qiang” when he was translating Tianyan lun, no later than thelatter half of 1896.21 At about the same time, Yan Fu first defined the terms
內導 (induction) and 外導 (deduction) in his preface to Hexuli zhigong tianyan
lun 赫胥黎治功天演論 (Huxley’s Evolution and Ethics, 1896):22
In Western logic 名學, the means for discovering the reasons for thingsand deriving knowledge are the methods of induction 內導 and deduction
外導. Induction consists of investigating a portion and inferring thewhole, discovering a bit and generalizing over all. Deduction consists ofusing principles to reach a conclusion about many things, or hypothesizing a parameter and reasoning backwards via modus tollens.23

totally unverified. This is why the new science arose in Europe and not in China”(Yinbingshi wenji zhi shisan, p. 4). At the beginning of this essay, Liang Qichao
wrote, “My friend Yan Fu of Houguan District often said, ‘Martin Luther, Bacon,and Descartes are the sages of the modern age. But people of later ages are weak intheir thinking and regard sages as those whose names have been passed down by
the ancients. Hence, I dare not revere them by name.’ I really admire this statement.
For the one who opened up new territory in the centuries-old field of religion is infact Martin Luther, and the ones who opened up new territory in the centuries-old
field of science are in fact Bacon and Descartes. In view of the fact that religion has
already entered its period of decline and that science has just entered its period ofascendency, like the morning sun rising in the sky, we can see that the influence of
Bacon and Descartes on the world has yet fully to bear fruit” (Yinbingshi wenji zhi
shisan, p. 1). This passage appears to refer to Liang Qichao’s interactions with Yan
Fu prior to fleeing to Japan in October 1898.
21 The revised version of “Yuan qiang” was published only in 1901 in Houguan Yuan-shi
zongkan 侯官嚴氏叢刊 (The Works of Yan Fu of Houguan), edited by Xiong Yuan’e
熊元鍔.
22 In the Shenshijizhai 慎始基齋 edition of Tianyan lun dated October 15, 1896, 內籀 isused for “induction” and 外籀 is used for “deduction.”
23 Yan Fu ji, vol. 5, p. 1411. In the edition of Tianyan lun published by Shenshijizhai in
June 1898 and later editions, this passage reads, “When we look at Western logic,
we find the methods of induction 內籀 and deduction 外籀 used in science. Induction
consists of investigating a portion and inferring the whole, grasping a bit and gathering all together. Deduction consists of using principles to reach a conclusion about
many things, or hypothesizing a parameter and reasoning backwards by modus
tollens” (Yan Fu quanji, vol. 1, p. 76).

62

3

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

Brief Conclusion

In the previous section, I sorted out Yan Fu’s views of science as reflectedin “Lun shibian zhi ji” (On the Urgency of Change in the World), “Yuanqiang” (The Sources of Strength), “Jiuwang jue lun” (On the National
Salvation Decision), and the revised version of “Yuan qiang.” In 1895 Yan Fu
began translating Huxley’s Evolution and Ethics (Tianyan lun in Chinese). In
spring of the same year, he broke his silence to publish newspaper articles
commending Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and Herbert Spencer’ssociology, arguing that the source of a rich and powerful nation is people’sknowledge, resources, and morals, and advocating that the most importanttask was developing people’s knowledge. In the course of translating
Huxley’s Evolution and Ethics, Yan Fu seems to have realized the need to
trace the development of Western religion and science, and at this time
Bacon’s works reentered his purview. Liang Qichao’s request in the fall of1896 to reprint “Yuan qiang” gave Yan Fu an opportunity to introduce Bacon
to Chinese readers. All of this first made an appearance in his revision of“Yuan qiang.” Yan Fu translated Huxley’s Evolution and Ethics, Adam Smith’s
Wealth of Nations (Yuan fu 原富), and Herbert Spencer’s Study of Sociology(Qunxue yiyan 群學肄言) while simultaneously writing his political essays ofthis period. These translations and writings no doubt mutually influenced andmutually supplemented one another. In reading and understanding Yan Fu’s
Tianyan lun, it is quite necessary to keep this perspective in mind.
Tianyan lun was published in the lunar fourth month of 1898 and soonstirred up a tremendous reaction throughout China. The Hundred Days’
Reform movement began soon thereafter, and the reformists seeking tostrengthen China took up the banner of evolution. In the lunar ninth month
Yan Fu lectured at the Tongyi College, a lecture that appeared in all thenewspapers under the title “Xixue menjing gongyong” (Means andApplications of Western Knowledge).24 In this lecture of a little over two
thousand characters, “Bacon” appeared twice:
The English scholar Francis Bacon says, “In the world, material objects
are not great; only man is great. In man, it is not his body that is great;
it is his mind that is great.” Hence, in the affairs of the living, training
the mind and accumulating knowledge is most important. Those withtrained minds and accumulated knowledge are scholars; those lacking
such are commoners and barbarians. (P. 93)
In Bacon’s Advancement of Learning and Novum Organum there is nothing
resembling this quote. However, in book 1, section 115, of the Novum
24 Yan Fu ji, vol. 1, pp. 92 95.

Francis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

63

Organum, Bacon does have this to say about the purpose of book 1:“Whereas in this first book of aphorisms I proposed to prepare men’s minds
as well for understanding as for receiving what is to follow, now that I havepurged and swept and leveled the floor of the mind, it remains that I place themind in a good position and as it were in a favorable aspect toward what I
have to lay before it.” Also in book 1, Bacon specifically analyzed four idolsthat hinder a scientific perspective, in order to prepare for his discussion inbook 2 of the method of scientific research, and in particular, the method of
induction.25 One might equate Yan Fu’s phrase “training the mind and accumulating knowledge” here with the notion of cultivating moral character 修身
in the Great Learning, but in the context of the evolution from barbariansociety to civilized society, it is obvious that he means developing people’sknowledge as part of the program of making the nation rich and powerful.26
Bacon as well, in the Novum Organum, emphasized that understanding andusing knowledge demarcates barbarians from civilized people.
In the second section of his lecture “Xixue menjing gongyong,” Yan Futakes up his main topic of interest, the means and applications of Westernknowledge. He says that there are three levels of obtaining knowledge ortruth. The first is textual research 考訂, which is also called observation 觀察or following 演驗. The reason for the latter two appellations is that “learning
all the principles of things sometimes involves superhuman processes (such as
the procession of the sun and stars and the change of customs over the ages)
or human-driven processes (such as Daoist alchemy and planting andhusbandry).” The former can only be observed, and following the latter isquite apt. The next level is linking up disparate bits of knowledge 貫通 or
25 In his translation of John Stuart Mill’s System of Logic (Mulei mingxue 穆勒名學),
Yan Fu pointed out, “This is why Bacon developed his theory of the four idols andplaced idols of the tribe first. (In book 1 of his Novum Organum, Bacon divided
human illusions into four idols that people revere: idols of the tribe, idols of the
cave, idols of the marketplace, and idols of the theater)” (p. 241).
26 Yan Fu continues, “The mind operates in two modes, one emotional, the other rational.
The expression of emotion is exemplified by poetry and song, a paradigmatic
instance being the Chinese poem “Li Sao” 離騷 (The Sadness of Separation). The
rational is found in texts covering philosophy and discussing principles. The rationalcan be further divided into texts that record events and texts that discuss principles.” Yu Lichang writes that this distinction between “texts that record events andtexts that discuss principles” is “Yan Fu’s new analysis of Bacon’s system ofknowledge and division of the sciences” (Peigen ji qi zhexue, p. 450). I myself thinkthat in the division of the sciences, Yan Fu prefers to follow Spencer rather than
Bacon. Moreover, I see this statement of Yan Fu’s rather as an expression of exasperation at the difference in style that he encountered as he transitioned from translating Tianyan lun to translating Yuan Fu. (See Shen Guowei, “Cong Tianyan lun dao
Yuan fu.”)64

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

forming a unified body of knowledge 會通. This involves “viewing similarities and differences as part of the same system” and “seeking the reason why
things are thus.” Efforts at this level produce “basic methods and common
cases.” Yan Fu notes that in the past, in both China and the West, knowledgecame from these two levels, and only these two levels. Hence, “the basic
methods and common cases often contained many errors.” “Then recently
scientists in the West began improving their knowledge at a third level:
experimentation.” And “the more thorough the experimentation, the more
knowledge approached reality.” For Yan Fu, “experimentation” 試驗 meant
trying something out to see if it proved effective, which is somewhat
different from its present meaning. Since both China and the West had theformer two levels of producing knowledge, how could the West pull ahead
and produce so much more knowledge? Here is Yan Fu’s answer:
When we do science as best as possible, the most important thing toknow is how to read Nature’s text, a text without words. Bacon writes,“All events and all things are appropriate for scholars to study. Hence,nothing is too great or small, too valuable or worthless, too clean or
dirty. If scholars know how to discover their principles, all those principles can form the truth.” Here what seems like a pile of rubble is thebest path to the truth. Huxley writes, “Those who understand the natureof things and the mind read from the book of Nature. Those who seek
knowledge from accounts in books acquire second-hand book knowledge.” Those who read books and acquire second-hand knowledge not
only depend on others’ conceptions, but also place themselves in theposition of later generations. People understand things differently andoften err. If I believe their errors, I too err. This is what scientists fear
most. Because political ethicists do not exercise their own minds andblindly accept what the ancients say, they often create havoc and realize
it only later. This has happened countless times in the past.27“The difference between Chinese and Western scholarship lies here,” Yan
Fu writes. Bacon held that natural developments are the source of humanknowledge. All natural phenomena—be it something low and base or something noble and sumptuous—have the same claim to our attention, observation, and study. It is this point that Yan Fu wished to make by translating
Huxley, in both Tianyan lun and the revised version of Yuan qiang.
Yan Fu wrote, in two separate works, “Bacon said, ‘Knowledge itself is
power.’”28 Yan Fu was the earliest scholar to realize, at such a profound27 Yan Fu ji, vol. 1, p. 93.
28 Yan Fu, Yuan fu, p. 220, and Mingxue qianshuo 名學淺說 (William Jevons, Primer ofFrancis Bacon in Yan Fu’s Tianyan lun

65level, the importance of knowledge in the form of Western science, andBacon was the source of his desire to make the nation rich and powerful.
Bibliography
Bacon, Francis. Advancement of Learning. 1605. http://www.gutenberg.org/
files/5500/5500-h/5500-h.htm. Chinese translation: F. Peigen 培根, Xueshu dejinzhan 学术的进展, translated by Liu Yuntong 刘运同. Shanghai: Shanghai
Renmin Chubanshe, 2007.
Bacon, Francis. Novum Organum. 1620. English translation: The New Organon, in
Works, vol. 8, edited by James Spedding, Robert Leslie Ellis, and Douglas
Denon Heath. Boston: Taggard and Thompson, 1864. https://en.wikisource.org/
wiki/Novum_Organum. Chinese translation: F. Peigen 培根, Xin gongju 新工具,translated by Xu Baokui 许宝骙. Beijing: Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1984.
Fan Hongye 樊洪业. “Cong ‘gezhi’ dao ‘kexue’ ” 从“格致”到“科学” (From “gezhi”[the old word for “science”] to “kexue” [the present-day term for “science”]).
Ziran bianzhengfa tongxun 自然辩证法通讯 10, no. 3 (1988): 39–50.
Huxley, Thomas Henry. Evolution and Ethics. Romanes Lecture. London:
Macmillan, 1893. Reprinted in Evolution and Ethics and Other Essays (NewYork: D. Appleton and Co., 1902). https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Evolution_
and_Ethics. Modern Chinese translation: H. Hexuli 赫胥黎, Jinhualun yu
lunlixue 进化论与伦理学. Beijing: Kexue Chubanshe, 1973.
Li Yu 李玉. “Yan Fu dui Peigen zhishixue sixiang de chanfa” 严复对培根知识学思
想的阐发 (Yan Fu’s Elucidation of Bacon’s Ideas on Acquiring Knowledge).
Master’s thesis. Fudan University, 2009.
Liang Qichao 梁启超. Yinbingshi wenji zhi shisan 饮冰室文集之十三 (Collected
Essays from the Yinbing Studio, supplemental vol.). Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju,
1989.
Shen Guowei 沈国威. “Cong Tianyan lun dao Yuan fu: Yi Yan Fu, Wu Rulun deshuzha wei sucai de kaocha” 从《天演论
天演论》
到《原富
原富》
：以严复
以严复、吴汝纶的书札为素材的考察 (From Evolution and Ethics to Yuan Fu: An Exploration Based on the Lettersof Yan Fu and Wu Rulun). Fanyishi yanjiu 翻译史研究 2013: 190–207.
Sun Yingxiang 孙应祥 and Pi Houfeng 皮后锋, eds. Yan Fu ji bubian 严复集补编(Supplement to the Works of Yan Fu). Fujian: Fujian Renmin Chubanshe, 2004.
Yan Fu 严复, trans. Tianyan lun 天演论, by Thomas Henry Hexuli 赫胥黎. Yan yi
mingzhu zongkan 严译名著丛刊. Beijing: Shangwuyin Shuguan, 1981. https://zh.wikisource.org/zh/天演論. First published in 1898. A translation of Thomas
Henry Huxley, Evolution and Ethics, 1893.
Yan Fu 严复. Yan Fu ji 严复集 (The Works of Yan Fu), 5 vols., edited by Wang Shi
王栻. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1986.
Yan Fu 严复. Yan Fu quanji 严复全集 (The Complete Works of Yan Fu), 11 vols.,edited by Wang Zhenglu 汪征鲁, Fang Baochuan 方宝川, Ma Yong 马勇. Fujian:Fujian Jiaoyu Chubanshe, 2014.
Logic), p. 2. Bacon’s statement appears in “Of Heresies,” Meditationes Sacrae(1597).

66

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol. 7 2016

Yu Lichang 余丽嫦. Peigen ji qi zhexue 培根及其哲学 (Bacon and His Philosophy).
Beijing: Renmin Chubanshe, 1987.