rove that life provides time for both scholarly and the military pursuits: "...the strength of the body cometh somewhat the more early, so in states, arms and learning, whereof the one corresponeth to the body, the other to the soul of man, have a concurrence or near sequence in times" (Advancement of Learning, p. 181). To counter the argument that knowledge makes man seek leisure, Bacon states that "none love business for itself but those that are learned" for only the learned "love business as an action according to nature, as a agreeable to health of mind as exercise is to health of body." Those without learning love business because of their "untrue valours"- needs that are personal and not related to the 'naturalness' of business (Advancement of Learning, p. 184-185). Finally, Bacon says that, rather than leading man from virtue, knowledge brings man to it. For Bacon, the discipline of learning teaches man to recognize what is real, what is good, and what is evil (Advancement of Learning, p. 184). Although Rousseau draws the opposite conclusion from Bacon in each argument, his supporting evidence is almost identical to Bacon's. What to Bacon is made more clear by knowledge, is made more obscure to Rousseau. For Rousseau, virtue is lost and judgement corrupted by the same knowledge Bacon saw as securing virtue (Discourse, p. 21). While Bacon believed that knowledge naturally turned man towards business, Rousseau held that it turned man towards vanity and away from true work (Discourse, p. 17). In his argument that knowledge makes man unfit militarily, Rousseau uses the same examples of Greece and Rome. To Rousseau, the fall of Greece and Rome was caused by the rise of knowledge. Though it would appear that time had given Rousseau the last word on these arguments, such is not the case. In both M. Gautier's and M. Bordes' refutations of the Discourse, Bacon's arguments are re-stated (Letter to Grimm, and Last Reply). Rousseau ans...
