wealbk05-第24章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



rendered　them　reasonable　are　no　more。　Though　Latin；　therefore；

was　no　longer　understood　anywhere　by　the　great　body　of　the

people；　the　whole　service　of　the　church　still　continued　to　be

performed　in　that　language。　Two　different　languages　were　thus

established　in　Europe；　in　the　same　manner　as　in　ancient　Egypt；　a

language　of　the　priests；　and　a　language　of　the　people；　a　sacred

and　a　profane；　a　learned　and　an　unlearned　language。　But　it　was

necessary　that　the　priests　should　understand　something　of　that

sacred　and　learned　language　in　which　they　were　to　officiate；　and

the　study　of　the　Latin　language　therefore　made；　from　the

beginning；　an　essential　part　of　university　education。

　　　　　It　was　not　so　with　that　either　of　the　Greek　or　of　the　Hebrew

language。　The　infallible　decrees　of　the　church　had　pronounced　the

Latin　translation　of　the　Bible；　commonly　called　the　Latin

Vulgate；　to　have　been　equally　dictated　by　divine　inspiration；　and

therefore　of　equal　authority　with　the　Greek　and　Hebrew　originals。

The　knowledge　of　those　two　languages；　therefore；　not　being

indispensably　requisite　to　a　churchman；　the　study　of　them　did　not

for　a　long　time　make　a　necessary　part　of　the　common　course　of

university　education。　There　are　some　Spanish　universities；　I　am

assured；　in　which　the　study　of　the　Greek　language　has　never　yet

made　any　part　of　that　course。　The　first　reformers　found　the　Greek

text　of　the　New　Testament；　and　even　the　Hebrew　text　of　the　Old；

more　favorable　to　their　opinions　than　the　Vulgate　translation；

which；　as　might　naturally　be　supposed；　had　been　gradually

accommodated　to　support　the　doctrines　of　the　Catholic　Church。

They　set　themselves；　therefore；　to　expose　the　many　errors　of　that

translation；　which　the　Roman　Catholic　clergy　were　thus　put　under

the　necessity　of　defending　or　explaining。　But　this　could　not　well

be　done　without　some　knowledge　of　the　original　languages；　of

which　the　study　was　therefore　gradually　introduced　into　the

greater　part　of　universities；　both　of　those　which　embraced；　and

of　those　which　rejected；　the　doctrines　of　the　Reformation。　The

Greek　language　was　connected　with　every　part　of　that　classical

learning　which；　though　at　first　principally　cultivated　by

Catholics　and　Italians；　happened　to　come　into　fashion　much　about

the　same　time　that　the　doctrines　of　the　Reformation　were　set　on

foot。　In　the　greater　part　of　universities；　therefore；　that

language　was　taught　previous　to　the　study　of　philosophy；　and　as

soon　as　the　student　had　made　some　progress　in　the　Latin。　The

Hebrew　language　having　no　connection　with　classical　learning；

and；　except　the　Holy　Scriptures；　being　the　language　of　not　a

single　book　in　any　esteem；　the　study　of　it　did　not　commonly

commence　till　after　that　of　philosophy；　and　when　the　student　had

entered　upon　the　study　of　theology。

　　　　　Originally　the　first　rudiments　both　of　the　Greek　and　Latin

languages　were　taught　in　universities；　and　in　some　universities

they　still　continue　to　be　so。　In　others　it　is　expected　that　the

student　should　have　previously　acquired　at　least　the　rudiments　of

one　or　both　of　those　languages；　of　which　the　study　continues　to

make　everywhere　a　very　considerable　part　of　university　education。

　　　　　The　ancient　Greek　philosophy　was　divided　into　three　great

branches；　physics；　or　natural　philosophy；　ethics；　or　moral

philosophy；　and　logic。　This　general　division　seems　perfectly

agreeable　to　the　nature　of　things。

　　　　　The　great　phenomena　of　nature…　the　revolutions　of　the

heavenly　bodies；　eclipses；　comets；　thunder；　lightning；　and　other

extraordinary　meteors；　the　generation；　the　life；　growth；　and

dissolution　of　plants　and　animals…　are　objects　which；　as　they

necessarily　excite　the　wonder；　so　they　naturally　call　forth　the

curiosity；　of　mankind　to　inquire　into　their　causes。　Superstition

first　attempted　to　satisfy　this　curiosity；　by　referring　all　those

wonderful　appearances　to　the　immediate　agency　of　the　gods。

Philosophy　afterwards　endeavoured　to　account　for　them　from　more

familiar　causes；　or　from　such　as　mankind　were　better　acquainted

with；　than　the　agency　of　the　gods。　As　those　great　phenomena　are

the　first　objects　of　human　curiosity；　so　the　science　which

pretends　to　explain　them　must　naturally　have　been　the　first

branch　of　philosophy　that　was　cultivated。　The　first　philosophers；

accordingly；　of　whom　history　has　preserved　any　account；　appear　to

have　been　natural　philosophers。

　　　　　In　every　age　and　country　of　the　world　men　must　have　attended

to　the　characters；　designs；　and　actions　of　one　another；　and　many

reputable　rules　and　maxims　for　the　conduct　of　human　life　must

have　been　laid　down　and　approved　of　by　common　consent。　As　soon　as

writing　came　into　fashion；　wise　men；　or　those　who　fancied

themselves　such；　would　naturally　endeavour　to　increase　the　number

of　those　established　and　respected　maxims；　and　to　express　their

own　sense　of　what　was　either　proper　or　improper　conduct；

sometimes　in　the　more　artificial　form　of　apologues；　like　what　are

called　the　fables　of　Aesop；　and　sometimes　in　the　more　simple　one

of　apophthegms；　or　wise　sayings；　like　the　Proverbs　of　Solomon；

the　verses　of　Theognis　and　Phocyllides；　and　some　part　of　the

works　of　Hesiod。　They　might　continue　in　this　manner　for　a　long

time　merely　to　multiply　the　number　of　those　maxims　of　prudence

and　morality；　without　even　attempting　to　arrange　them　in　any　very

distinct　or　methodical　order；　much　less　to　connect　them　together

by　one　or　more　general　principles　from　which　they　were　all

deducible；　like　effects　from　their　natural　causes。　The　beauty　of

a　systematical　arrangement　of　different　observations　connected　by

a　few　common　principles　was　first　seen　in　the　rude　essays　of

those　ancient　times　towards　a　system　of　natural　philosophy。

Something　of　the　same　kind　was　afterwards　attempted　in　morals。

The　maxims　of　common　life　were　arranged　in　some　methodical　order；

and　connected　together　by　a　few　common　principles；　in　the　same

manner　as　they　had　attempted　to　arrange　and　connect　the　phenomena

of　nature。　The　science　which　pretends　to　investigate　and　explain

those　connecting　principles　is　what　is　properly　called　moral

philosophy。

　　　　　Different　authors　gave　different　systems　both　of　natural　and

moral　philosophy。　But　the　arguments　by　which　they　supported　those

different　systems；　for　from　being　always　demonstrations；　were

frequently　at　best　but　very　slender　probabilities；　and　sometimes

mere　sophisms；　which　had　no　other　foundation　but　the　inaccuracy

and　ambiguity　of　common　language。　Speculative　systems　have　in　all

ages　of　the　world　been　adopted　for　reasons　too　frivolous　to　have

determined　the　judgment　of　any　man　of　common　sense　in　a　matter　of

the　smallest　pecuniary　interest。　Gross　sophistry　has　scarce　ever

had　any　influence　upon　the　opinions　of　mankind；　except　in　matters

of　philosophy　and　speculation；　and　in　these　it　has　frequently　had

the　greatest。　The　patrons　of　each　system　of　natural　and　moral

philosophy　naturally　endeavoured　to　expose　the　weakness　of　the

arguments　adduced　to　support　the　systems　which　were　opposite　to

their　own。　In　examining　those　arguments；　they　were　necessarily

led　to　consider　the　difference　between　a　probable　and　a

demonstrative　argument；　between　a　fallacious　and　a　conclusive

one：　and　Logic；　or　the　science　of　the　general　principles　of　good

and　bad　reasoning；　necessarily　arose　out　of　the　observations

which　a　scrutiny　of　this　kind　gave　occasion　to。　Though　in　its

origin　posterior　both　to　physics　and　to　ethics；　it　was　commonly

taught；　not　indeed　in　all；　but　in　the　greater　part　of　the　ancient

schools　of　philosophy；　previously　to　either　of　those　sciences。

The　student；　it　seems　to　have　been　thought；　to　understand　well

the　difference　between　good　and　bad　reasoning　before　he　was　led

to　reason　upon　subjects　of　so　great　importance。

　　　　　This　ancient　division　of　philosophy　into　three　parts　was　in

the　greater　part　of　the　universities　of　Europe　changed　for

another　into　five。

　　　　　In　the　ancient　philo