rethink

The Idol of the Marketplace [Rethink 4]

The "Idol of the Marketplace" (idola fori) refers to the idol formed when knowledge relies on the imperfections inherent in human language. Here, I want to examine the third of the four idols proposed by Bacon, the 16th–17th century English philosopher and scientist: the "Idol of the Marketplace."

Philosophy consists of contemplation and questions aimed at understanding humanity and the world. Let us move toward becoming a human being who thinks again.

Bacon, who sought to grasp the world scientifically and form correct knowledge, saw "humanity's flawed perception" as the greatest obstacle to this goal. He called this an idol (idola), and the word "idol" was no mere metaphor. Bacon believed that errors of perception were no different from religious blindness. Just as people blindly worship a god, humans follow the false beliefs they themselves have created without question. An "idol" refers to "an object or person that becomes an object of worship like a god," and also means "something blindly worshipped."

The Problem with Everyday Language

Following the Idol of the Cave among the four idols proposed by Bacon, the 16th–17th century English philosopher and scientist, let's consider the third idol he described: the "Idol of the Marketplace." The "Idol of the Marketplace" (idola fori) refers to the idol formed when knowledge relies on the imperfections inherent in human language.

The words we use in everyday life are not created with precision and care, but rather at a level that most people can understand without difficulty. Even without being scholarly or literary, they serve perfectly well for communicating with one another. But that very convenience becomes the seed of a problem. Everyday language is superficial, making it difficult to convey deep meaning, and it is easily misused differently by different people.

Bacon divided the ways language becomes an obstacle to understanding into two broad categories. One is assuming things exist simply because they have a name, when in fact they do not. Giving a name like "the element of fire" to something that is merely imaginary, then treating it as if it were real, is an example of this. Such a thing might be perfectly fine in a cartoon or a movie, but for Bacon, who sought scientific knowledge, it would have been an utterly unacceptable attitude.

The other category involves things that do exist but are abstracted incorrectly or defined inadequately. For instance, inferring that "the moist" has a property of diffusing into other objects, or that it has no fixed form. This may sound plausible on the surface, but if a discussion proceeds without rigorously defining the concept, the very foundation of knowledge begins to shake. In this way, human language harbors layers of distortion and error, both large and small.

On reflection, errors in language directly translate into errors in cognition. People generally view the world through the language they are accustomed to, and continue their thinking within the boundaries that language allows. Just as thoughts follow one another in succession, so does language, and the language used to link one thought to the next determines the depth and direction of thinking.

If people rely only on commonly used words, their thinking naturally settles at the level of common sense. Of course, common sense itself is not a bad thing. The problem arises when that common sense levels downward. This is also to say that the level of common sense must rise together with language.

Why Rumors Spread in the Marketplace

If you picture the space of a "marketplace," it isn't hard to understand. A marketplace is a place where countless people gather. Anyone can come and go, and people can say almost anything without any particular preparation. Treating subjective belief as objective fact, or trumpeting falsehood as though it were truth, doesn't cause much of a problem there. Wherever bargaining takes place, a certain amount of exaggeration and deception tends to creep in, and rather than condemning it, people often accept and even enjoy that atmosphere.

In such an environment, rumors spread easily. Because language is ambiguous, a single story gets distorted into countless different forms, and even fabricated claims come to be believed as truth. People make others believe something in order to exploit them, or deceive themselves by believing whatever they wish to believe. In this way, "it seems to be so" quietly becomes "it is so," and "I heard that it's so" slips into becoming simply "it is."

Those who make the best use of this are politicians and swindlers. The errors of language that Bacon discussed sometimes arise from simple ignorance, but their structural vulnerability is also frequently exploited on purpose. Manipulating language for one's own benefit, or putting forward certain words to conceal one's wrongdoing, are prime examples of this. Giving a name to something that does not exist so that people believe it does, and circulating unverified inferences as if they were established fact — these are the tactics used.

But scholarship is different. It requires a process of careful analysis, patient inquiry, and dispassionate critique, and the same holds true for the use of language. Only by carefully examining one's own thoughts and language can one advance toward more systematic and profound thinking. Perhaps the reason so many nod in agreement at the words of a seasoned scholar is, in the end, because that person has refined their thoughts and language thousands upon thousands of times.

Overcoming the Idol of the Marketplace begins with handling language rigorously and continually reflecting on the thinking built upon it.