Source: http://www.bartleby.com/168/503.html
Jean Jacques
Rousseau (1712–1778). Social Contract
& Discourses. 1913.
|
A
Discourse on the Moral Effects of the Arts and Sciences
The
Second Part
|
AN ancient tradition passed out of Egypt into
Greece, that some god, who was an enemy to the repose of mankind, was the
inventor of the sciences. 1 What must the Egyptians, among whom the sciences
first arose, have thought of them? And they beheld, near at hand, the sources
from which they sprang. In fact, whether we turn to the annals of the world,
or eke out with philosophical investigations the uncertain chronicles of
history, we shall not find for human knowledge an origin answering to the
idea we are pleased to entertain of it at present. Astronomy was born of
superstition, eloquence of ambition, hatred, falsehood and flattery; geometry
of avarice; physics of an idle curiosity; and even moral philosophy of human
pride. Thus the arts and sciences owe their birth to our vices; we should be
less doubtful of their advantages, if they had sprung from our virtues.
|
|
Their
evil origin is, indeed, but too plainly reproduced in their objects. What
would become of the arts, were they not cherished by luxury? If men were not
unjust, of what use were jurisprudence? What would become of history, if
there were no tyrants, wars, or conspiracies? In a word, who would pass his
life in barren speculations, if everybody, attentive only to the obligations
of humanity and the necessities of nature, spent his whole life in serving
his country, obliging his friends, and relieving the unhappy? Are we then
made to live and die on the brink of that well at the bottom of which Truth
lies hid? This reflection alone is, in my opinion, enough to discourage at
first setting out every man who seriously endeavours to instruct himself by
the study of philosophy.
|
|
What
a variety of dangers surrounds us! What a number of wrong paths present
themselves in the investigation of the sciences! Through how many errors,
more perilous than truth itself is useful, must we not pass to arrive at it?
The disadvantages we lie under are evident; for falsehood is capable of an
infinite variety of combinations; but the truth has only one manner of being.
Besides, where is the man who sincerely desires to find it? Or even admitting
his good will, by what characteristic marks is he sure of knowing it? Amid
the infinite diversity of opinions where is the criterion 2 by which we may certainly judge of it? Again, what is
still more difficult, should we even be fortunate enough to discover it, who
among us will know how to make right use of it?
|
|
If
our sciences are futile in the objects they propose, they are no less
dangerous in the effects they produce. Being the effect of idleness, they
generate idleness in their turn; and an irreparable loss of time is the first
prejudice which they must necessarily cause to society. To live without doing
some good is a great evil as well in the political as in the moral world; and
hence every useless citizen should be regarded as a pernicious person. Tell
me then, illustrious philosophers, of whom we learn the ratios in which
attraction acts in vacuo; and in the revolution of the planets, the relations
of spaces traversed in equal times; by whom we are taught what curves have
conjugate points, points of inflexion, and cusps; how the soul and body
correspond, like two clocks, without actual communication; what planets may
be inhabited; and what insects reproduce in an extraordinary manner. Answer
me, I say, you from whom we receive all this sublime information, whether we
should have been less numerous, worse governed, less formidable, less
flourishing, or more perverse, supposing you had taught us none of all these
fine things.
|
|
Reconsider
therefore the importance of your productions; and, since the labours of the
most enlightened of our learned men and the best of our citizens are of so
little utility, tell us what we ought to think of that numerous herd of
obscure writers and useless littérateurs, who devour without any return the
substance of the State.
|
|
Useless,
do I say? Would God they were! Society would be more peaceful, and morals
less corrupt. But these vain and futile declaimers go forth on all sides,
armed with their fatal paradoxes, to sap the foundations of our faith, and
nullify virtue. They smile contemptuously at such old names as patriotism and
religion, and consecrate their talents and philosophy to the destruction and
defamation of all that men hold sacred. Not that they bear any real hatred to
virtue or dogma; they are the enemies of public opinion alone; to bring them
to the foot of the altar, it would be enough to banish them to a land of
atheists. What extravagancies will not the rage of singularity induce men to
commit!
|
|
The
waste of time is certainly a great evil; but still greater evils attend upon
literature and the arts. One is luxury, produced like them by indolence and
vanity. Luxury is seldom unattended by the arts and sciences; and they are
always attended by luxury. I know that our philosophy, fertile in paradoxes,
pretends, in contradiction to the experience of all ages, that luxury
contributes to the splendour of States. But, without insisting on the
necessity of sumptuary laws, can it be denied that rectitude of morals is
essential to the duration of empires, and that luxury is diametrically
opposed to such rectitude? Let it be admitted that luxury is a certain
indication of wealth; that it even serves, if you will, to increase such
wealth: what conclusion is to be drawn from this paradox, so worthy of the
times? And what will become of virtue if riches are to be acquired at any
cost? The politicians of the ancient world were always talking of morals and
virtue; ours speak of nothing but commerce and money. One of them will tell
you that in such a country a man is worth just as much as he will sell for at
Algiers: another, pursuing the same mode of calculation, finds that in some
countries a man is worth nothing, and in others still less than nothing; they
value men as they do droves of oxen. According to them, a man is worth no
more to the State, than the amount he consumes; and thus a Sybarite would be
worth at least thirty Lacedæmonians. Let these writers tell me, however, which
of the two republics, Sybaris or Sparta, was subdued by a handful of
peasants, and which became the terror of Asia.
|
|
The
monarchy of Cyrus was conquered by thirty thousand men, led by a prince
poorer than the meanest of Persian Satraps: in like manner the Scythians, the
poorest of all nations, were able to resist the most powerful monarchs of the
universe. When two famous republics contended for the empire of the world,
the one rich and the other poor, the former was subdued by the latter. The
Roman empire in its turn, after having engulfed all the riches of the
universe, fell a prey to peoples who knew not even what riches were. The
Franks conquered the Gauls, and the Saxons England, without any other
treasures than their bravery and their poverty. A band of poor mountaineers,
whose whole cupidity was confined to the possession of a few sheep-skins,
having first given a check to the arrogance of Austria, went on to crush the
opulent and formidable house of Burgundy, which at that time made the
potentates of Europe tremble. In short, all the power and wisdom of the heir
of Charles the Fifth, backed by all the treasures of the Indies, broke before
a few herring-fishers. Let our politicians condescend to lay aside their
calculations for a moment, to reflect on these examples; let them learn for
once that money, though it buys everything else, cannot buy morals and
citizens. What then is the precise point in dispute about luxury? It is to
know which is most advantageous to empires, that their existence should be
brilliant and momentary, or virtuous and lasting? I say brilliant, but with
what lustre! A taste for ostentation never prevails in the same minds as a
taste for honesty. No, it is impossible that understandings, degraded by a
multitude of futile cares, should ever rise to what is truly great and noble;
even if they had the strength, they would want the courage.
|
|
Every
artist loves applause. The praise of his contemporaries is the most valuable
part of his recompense. What then will he do to obtain it, if he have the
misfortune to be born among a people, and at a time, when learning is in
vogue, and the superficiality of youth is in a position to lead the fashion;
when men have sacrificed their taste to those who tyrannise over their
liberty, and one sex dare not approve anything but what is proportionate to
the pusillanimity of the other; 3 when the greatest masterpieces of dramatic poetry are
condemned, and the noblest of musical productions neglected? This is what he
will do. He will lower his genius to the level of the age, and will rather
submit to compose mediocre works, that will be admired during his life-time,
than labour at sublime achievements which will not be admired till long after
he is dead. Let the famous Voltaire tell us how many nervous and masculine
beauties he has sacrificed to our false delicacy, and how much that is great
and noble, that spirit of gallantry, which delights in what is frivolous and
petty, has cost him.
|
|
It
is thus that the dissolution of morals, the necessary consequence of luxury,
brings with it in its turn the corruption of taste. Further, if by chance
there be found among men of average ability, an individual with enough
strength of mind to refuse to comply with the spirit of the age, and to
debase himself by puerile productions, his lot will be hard. He will die in
indigence and oblivion. This is not so much a prediction, as a fact already
confirmed by experience! Yes, Carle and Pierre Vanloo, the time is already
come when your pencils, destined to increase the majesty of our temples by
sublime and holy images, must fall from your hands, or else be prostituted to
adorn the panels of a coach with lascivious paintings. And you, inimitable
Pigal, rival of Phidias and Praxiteles, whose chisel the ancients would have
employed to carve them gods, whose images almost excuse their idolatry in our
eyes; even your hand must condescend to fashion the belly of an ape, or else
remain idle.
|
|
We
cannot reflect on the morality of mankind without contemplating with pleasure
the picture of the simplicity which prevailed in the earliest times. This
image may be justly compared to a beautiful coast, adorned only by the hands
of nature; towards which our eyes are constantly turned, and which we see
receding with regret. While men were innocent and virtuous and loved to have
the gods for witnesses of their actions, they dwelt together in the same
huts; but when they became vicious, they grew tired of such inconvenient
onlookers, and banished them to magnificent temples. Finally, they expelled
their deities even from these, in order to dwell there themselves; or at
least the temples of the gods were no longer more magnificent than the
palaces of the citizens. This was the height of degeneracy; nor could vice
ever be carried to greater lengths than when it was seen, supported, as it
were, at the doors of the great, on columns of marble, and graven on
Corinthian capitals.
|
|
As
the conveniences of life increase, as the arts are brought to perfection, and
luxury spreads, true courage flags, the virtues disappear; and all this is
the effect of the sciences and of those arts which are exercised in the
privacy of men’s dwellings. When the Goths ravaged Greece, the libraries only
escaped the flames owing to an opinion that was set on foot among them, that
it was best to leave the enemy with a possession so calculated to divert
their attention from military exercises, and keep them engaged in indolent and
sedentary occupations.
|
|
Charles
the Eighth found himself master of Tuscany and the kingdom of Naples, almost
without drawing sword; and all his court attributed this unexpected success
to the fact that the princes and nobles of Italy applied themselves with
greater earnestness to the cultivation of their understandings than to active
and martial pursuits. In fact, says the sensible person who records these
characteristics, experience plainly tells us, that in military matters and
all that resemble them application to the sciences tends rather to make men
effeminate and cowardly than resolute and vigorous.
|
|
The
Romans confessed that military virtue was extinguished among them, in
proportion as they became connoisseurs in the arts of the painter, the
engraver and the goldsmith, and began to cultivate the fine arts. Indeed, as
if this famous country was to be for ever an example to other nations, the
rise of the Medici and the revival of letters has once more destroyed, this
time perhaps for ever, the martial reputation which Italy seemed a few
centuries ago to have recovered.
|
|
The
ancient republics of Greece, with that wisdom which was so conspicuous in
most of their institutions, forbade their citizens to pursue all those
inactive and sedentary occupations, which by enervating and corrupting the
body diminish also the vigour of the mind. With what courage, in fact, can it
be thought that hunger and thirst, fatigues, dangers and death, can be faced
by men whom the smallest want overwhelms and the slightest difficulty repels?
With what resolution can soldiers support the excessive toils of war, when
they are entirely unaccustomed to them? With what spirits can they make
forced marches under officers who have not even the strength to travel on
horseback? It is no answer to cite the reputed valour of all the modern
warriors who are so scientifically trained. I hear much of their bravery in a
day’s battle; but I am told nothing of how they support excessive fatigue,
how they stand the severity of the seasons and the inclemency of the weather.
A little sunshine or snow, or the want of a few superfluities, is enough to
cripple and destroy one of our finest armies in a few days. Intrepid
warriors! permit me for once to tell you the truth, which you seldom hear. Of
your bravery I am fully satisfied. I have no doubt that you would have triumphed
with Hannibal at Cannæ, and at Trasimene: that you would have passed the
Rubicon with Cæsar, and enabled him to enslave his country; but you never
would have been able to cross the Alps with the former, or with the latter to
subdue your own ancestors, the Gauls.
|
|
A
war does not always depend on the events of battle: there is in generalship
an art superior to that of gaining victories. A man may behave with great
intrepidity under fire, and yet be a very bad officer. Even in the common
soldier, a little more strength and vigour would perhaps be more useful than
so much courage, which after all is no protection from death. And what does
it matter to the State whether its troops perish by cold and fever, or by the
sword of the enemy?
|
|
If
the cultivation of the sciences is prejudicial to military qualities, it is
still more so to moral qualities. Even from our infancy an absurd system of
education serves to adorn our wit and corrupt our judgment. We see, on every
side, huge institutions, where our youth are educated at great expense, and
instructed in everything but their duty. Your children will be ignorant of
their own language, when they can talk others which are not spoken anywhere.
They will be able to compose verses which they can hardly understand; and,
without being capable of distinguishing truth from error, they will possess
the art of making them unrecognisable by specious arguments. But magnanimity,
equity, temperance, humanity and courage will be words of which they know not
the meaning. The dear name of country will never strike on their ears; and if
they ever hear speak of God, 4 it will be less to fear, than to be frightened of,
Him. I would as soon, said a wise man, that my pupil had spent his time in
the tennis court as in this manner; for there his body at least would have
got exercise.
|
|
I
well know that children ought to be kept employed, and that idleness is for
them the danger most to be feared. But what should they be taught? This is
undoubtedly an important question. Let them be taught what they are to
practise when they come to be men; 5 not what they ought to forget.
|
|
Our
gardens are adorned with statues and our galleries with pictures. What would
you imagine these masterpieces of art, thus exhibited to public admiration,
represent? The great men, who have defended their country, or the still
greater men who have enriched it by their virtues? Far from it. They are the
images of every perversion of heart and mind, carefully selected from ancient
mythology, and presented to the early curiosity of our children, doubtless
that they may have before their eyes the representations of vicious actions,
even before they are able to read.
|
|
Whence
arise all those abuses, unless it be from that fatal inequality introduced
among men by the difference of talents and the cheapening of virtue? This is
the most evident effect of all our studies, and the most dangerous of all
their consequences. The question is no longer whether a man is honest, but
whether he is clever. We do not ask whether a book is useful, but whether it
is well-written. Rewards are lavished on with and ingenuity, while virtue is
left unhonoured. There are a thousand prizes for fine discourses, and none
for good actions. I should be glad, however, to know whether the honour
attaching to the best discourse that ever wins the prize in this Academy is
comparable with the merit of having founded the prize.
|
|
A
wise man does not go in chase of fortune; but he is by no means insensible to
glory, and when he sees it so ill distributed, his virtue, which might have
been animated by a little emulation, and turned to the advantage of society,
droops and dies away in obscurity and indigence. It is for this reason that
the agreeable arts must in time everywhere be preferred to the useful; and
this truth has been but too much confirmed since the revival of the arts and
sciences. We have physicists, geometricians, chemists, astronomers, poets,
musicians, and painters in plenty; but we have no longer a citizen among us;
or if there be found a few scattered over our abandoned countryside, they are
left to perish there unnoticed and neglected. Such is the condition to which
we are reduced, and such are our feelings towards those who give us our daily
bread, and our children milk.
|
|
I
confess, however, that the evil is not so great as it might have become. The
eternal providence, in placing salutary simples beside noxious plants, and
making poisonous animals contain their own antidote, has taught the
sovereigns of the earth, who are its ministers, to imitate its wisdom. It is
by following this example that the truly great monarch, to whose glory every
age will add new lustre, drew from the very bosom of the arts and sciences,
the very fountains of a thousand lapses from rectitude, those famous
societies, which, while they are depositaries of the dangerous trust of human
knowledge, are yet the sacred guardians of morals, by the attention they pay
to their maintenance among themselves in all their purity, and by the demands
which they make on every member whom they admit.
|
|
These
wise institutions, confirmed by his august successor and imitated by all the
kings of Europe, will serve at least to restrain men of letters, who, all
aspiring to the honour of being admitted into these Academies, will keep
watch over themselves, and endeavour to make themselves worthy of such honour
by useful performances and irreproachable morals. Those Academies also,
which, in proposing prizes for literary merit, make choice of such subjects
as are calculated to arouse the love of virtue in the hearts of citizens,
prove that it prevails in themselves, and must give men the rare and real
pleasure of finding learned societies devoting themselves to the
enlightenment of mankind, not only by agreeable exercises of the intellect,
but also by useful instructions.
|
|
An
objection which may be made is, in fact, only an additional proof of my
argument. So much precaution proves but too evidently the need for it. We
never seek remedies for evils that do not exist. Why, indeed, must these bear
all the marks of ordinary remedies, on account of their inefficacy? The
numerous establishments in favour of the learned are only adapted to make men
mistake the objects of the sciences, and turn men’s attention to the
cultivation of them. One would be inclined to think, from the precautions
everywhere taken, that we are overstocked with husbandmen, and are afraid of
a shortage of philosophers. I will not venture here to enter into a
comparison between agriculture and philosophy, as they would not bear it. I
shall only ask What is philosophy? What is contained in the writings of the
most celebrated philosophers? What are the lessons of these friends of
wisdom. To hear them, should we not take them for so many mountebanks,
exhibiting themselves in public, and crying out, Here, Here, come to
me, I am the only true doctor? One of them teaches that there is no
such thing as matter, but that everything exists only in representation.
Another declares that there is no other substance than matter, and no other
God than the world itself. A third tells you that there are no such things as
virtue and vice, and that moral good and evil are chimeras; while a fourth
informs you that men are only beasts of prey, and may conscientiously devour
one another. Why, my great philosophers, do you not reserve these wise and
profitable lessons for your friends and children? You would soon reap the
benefit of them, nor should we be under any apprehension of our own becoming
your disciples.
|
|
Such
are the wonderful men, whom their contemporaries held in the highest esteem
during their lives, and to whom immortality has been attributed since their
decease. Such are the wise maxims we have received from them, and which are
transmitted, from age to age, to our descendants. Paganism, though given over
to all the extravagances of human reason, has left nothing to compare with
the shameful monuments which have been prepared by the art of printing,
during the reign of the gospel. The impious writings of Leucippus and
Diagoras perished with their authors. The world, in their days, was ignorant
of the art of immortalising the errors and extravagancies of the human mind.
But thanks to the art of printing 6 and the use we make of it, the pernicious reflections
of Hobbes and Spinoza will last for ever. Go, famous writings, of which the
ignorance and rusticity of our forefathers would have been incapable. Go to
our descendants, along with those still more pernicious works which reek of
the corrupted manners of the present age! Let them together convey to
posterity a faithful history of the progress and advantages of our arts and
sciences. If they are read, they will leave not a doubt about the question we
are now discussing, and unless mankind should then be still more foolish than
we, they will lift up their hands to Heaven and exclaim in bitterness of
heart: “Almighty God! thou who holdest in Thy hand the minds of men, deliver
us from the fatal arts and sciences of our forefathers; give us back
ignorance, innocence and poverty, which alone can make us happy and are
precious in Thy sight.”
|
|
But
if the progress of the arts and sciences has added nothing to our real
happiness; if it has corrupted our morals, and if that corruption has
vitiated our taste, what are we to think of the herd of text-book authors,
who have removed those impediments which nature purposely laid in the way to
the Temple of the Muses, in order to guard its approach and try the powers of
those who might be tempted to seek knowledge? What are we to think of those
compilers who have indiscreetly broken open the door of the sciences, and
introduced into their sanctuary a populace unworthy to approach it, when it
was greatly to be wished that all who should be found incapable of making a
considerable progress in the career of learning should have been repulsed at
the entrance, and thereby cast upon those arts which are useful to society. A
man who will be all his life a bad versifier, or a third-rate geometrician,
might have made nevertheless an excellent clothier. Those whom nature
intended for her disciples have not needed masters. Bacon, Descartes and
Newton, those teachers of mankind, had themselves no teachers. What guide
indeed could have taken them so far as their sublime genius directed them?
Ordinary masters would only have cramped their intelligence, by confining it
within the narrow limits of their own capacity. It was from the obstacles
they met with at first, that they learned to exert themselves, and bestirred
themselves to traverse the vast field which they covered. If it be proper to
allow some men to apply themselves to the study of the arts and sciences, it
is only those who feel themselves able to walk alone in their footsteps and
to outstrip them. It belongs only to these few to raise monuments to the
glory of the human understanding. But if we are desirous that nothing should
be above their genius, nothing should be beyond their hopes. This is the only
encouragement they require. The soul insensibly adapts itself to the objects
on which it is employed, and thus it is that great occasions produce great
men. The greatest orator in the world was Consul of Rome, and perhaps the
greatest of philosophers Lord Chancellor of England. Can it be conceived
that, if the former had only been a professor at some University, and the
latter a pensioner of some Academy, their works would not have suffered from
their situation. Let not princes disdain to admit into their councils those
who are most capable of giving them good advice. Let them renounce the old
prejudice, which was invented by the pride of the great, that the art of
governing mankind is more difficult than that of instructing them; as if it
was easier to induce men to do good voluntarily, than to compel them to it by
force. Let the learned of the first rank find an honourable refuge in their
courts; let them there enjoy the only recompense worthy of them, that of
promoting by their influence the happiness of the peoples they have
enlightened by their wisdom. It is by this means only that we are likely to
see what virtue, science and authority can do, when animated by the noblest
emulation, and working unanimously for the happiness of mankind.
|
|
But
so long as power alone is on one side, and knowledge and understanding alone
on the other, the learned will seldom make great objects their study, princes
will still more rarely do great actions, and the peoples will continue to be,
as they are, mean, corrupt and miserable.
|
|
As
for us, ordinary men, on whom Heaven has not been pleased to bestow such
great talents; as we are not destined to reap such glory, let us remain in
our obscurity. Let us not covet a reputation we should never attain, and
which, in the present state of things, would never make up to us for the
trouble it would have cost us, even if we were fully qualified to obtain it.
Why should we build our happiness on the opinions of others, when we can find
it in our own hearts? Let us leave to others the task of instructing mankind
in their duty, and confine ourselves to the discharge of our own. We have no
occasion for greater knowledge than this.
|
|
Virtue!
sublime science of simple minds, are such industry and preparation needed if
we are to know you? Are not your principles graven on every heart? Need we do
more, to learn your laws, than examine ourselves, and listen to the voice of
conscience, when the passions are silent?
|
|
This
is the true philosophy, with which we must learn to be content, without
envying the fame of those celebrated men, whose names are immortal in the
republic of letters. Let us, instead of envying them, endeavour to make,
between them and us, that honourable distinction which was formerly seen to
exist between two great peoples, that the one knew how to speak, and the
other how to act, aright.
|
Note 1. It is easy to see the allegory
in the fable of Prometheus: and it does not appear that the Greeks, who
chained him to the Caucasus, had a better opinion of him than the Egyptians
had of their god Theutus. The Satyr, says an ancient fable, the first time he
saw a fire, was going to kiss and embrace it; but Prometheus cried out to him
to forbear, or his beard would rue it. It burns, says he, everything that
touches it.
|
Note 2. The less we know, the more we
think we know. The peripatetics doubted of nothing. Did not Descartes
construct the universe with cubes and vortices? And is there in all Europe
one single physicist who does not boldly explain the inexplicable mysteries
of electricity, which will, perhaps, be for ever the despair of real
philosophers?
|
Note 3. I am far from thinking that the
ascendancy which women have obtained over men is an evil in itself. It is a
present which nature has made them for the good of mankind. If better
directed, it might be productive of as much good, as it is now of evil. We
are not sufficiently sensible of what advantage it would be to society to
give a better education to that half of our species which governs the other.
Men will always be what women choose to make them. If you wish then that they
should be noble and virtuous, let women be taught what greatness of soul and
virtue are. The reflections which this subject arouses, and which Plato
formerly made, deserve to be more fully developed by a pen worthy of
following so great a master, and defending so great a cause.
|
Note 4. Pensées philosophiques
(Diderot).
|
Note 5. Such was the education of the
Spartans with regard to one of the greatest of their kings. It is well worthy
of notice, says Montaigne, that the excellent institutions of Lycurgus, which
were in truth miraculously perfect, paid as much attention to the bringing up
of youth as if this were their principal object, and yet, at the very seat of
the Muses, they make so little mention of learning that it seems as if their
generous-spirited youth disdained every other restraint, and required,
instead of masters of the sciences, instructors in valour, prudence and
justice alone.
Let us hear next what the same writer says of the ancient Persians. Plato, says he, relates that the heir to the throne was thus brought up. At his birth he was committed, not to the care of women, but to eunuchs in the highest authority and near the person of the king, on account of their virtue. These undertook to render his body beautiful and healthy. At seven years of age they taught him to ride and go hunting. At fourteen he was placed in the hands of four, the wisest, the most just, the most temperate and the bravest persons in the kingdom. The first instructed him in religion, the second taught him to adhere inviolably to truth, the third to conquer his passions, and the fourth to be afraid of nothing. All, I may add, taught him to be a good man; but not one taught him to be learned. Astyages, in Xenophon, desires Cyrus to give him an account of his last lesson. It was this, answered Cyrus, one of the big boys of the school having a small coat, gave it to a little boy and took away from him his coat, which was larger. Our master having appointed me arbiter in the dispute, I ordered that matters should stand as they were, as each boy seemed to be better suited than before. The master, however, remonstrated with me, saying that I considered only convenience, whereas justice ought to have been the first concern, and justice teaches that no one should suffer forcible interference with what belongs to him. He added that he was punished for his wrong decision, just as boys are punished in our country schools when they forget the first aorist of [Greek]. My tutor must make me a fine harangue, in genere demonstrativo, before he will persuade me that his school is as good as this. |
Note 6. If we consider the frightful
disorders which printing has already caused in Europe, and judge of the
future by the progress of its evils from day to day, it is easy to foresee
that sovereigns will hereafter take as much pains to banish this dreadful art
from their dominions, as they ever took to encourage it. The Sultan Achmet,
yielding to the importunities of certain pretenders to taste, consented to
have a press erected at Constantinople; but it was hardly set to work before
they were obliged to destroy it, and throw the plant into a well.
It is related that the Caliph Omar, being asked what should be done with the library at Alexandria, answered in these words. “If the books in the library contain anything contrary to the Alcoran, they are evil and ought to be burnt; if they contain only what the Alcoran teaches, they are superfluous.” This reasoning has been cited by our men of letters as the height of absurdity; but if Gregory the Great had been in the place of Omar, and the Gospel in the place of the Alcoran, the library would still have been burnt, and it would have been perhaps the finest action of his life |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.