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！
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 philosophy； whatever was taught concerning
the nature either of the human mind or of the Deity； made a part
of the system of physics。 Those beings； in whatever their essence
might be supposed to consist； were parts of the great system of
the universe； and parts； too； productive of the most important
effects。 Whatever human reason could either conclude or
conjecture concerning them； made； as it were； two chapters；
though no doubt two very important ones； of the science which
pretended to give an account of the origin and revolutions of the
great system of the universe。 But in the universities of Europe；
where philosophy was taught only as subservient to theology； it
was natural to dwell longer upon these two chapters than upon any
other of the science。 They were gradually more and more extended；
and were divided into many inferior chapters； till at last the
doctrine of spirits； of which so little can be known； came to
take up as much room in the system of philosophy as the doctrine
of bodies； of which so much can be known。 The doctrines
concerning those two subjects were considered as making two
distinct sciences。 What are called Metaphysics or Pneumatics were
set in opposition to Physics； and were cultivated not only as the
more sublime； but； for the purposes of a particular profession；
as the more useful science of the two。 The proper subject of
experiment and observation； a subject in which a careful
attention is capable of making so many useful discoveries； was
almost entirely neglected。 The subject in which； after a few very
simple and almost obvious truths； the most careful attention can
discover nothing but obscurity and uncertainty； and can
consequently produce nothing but subtleties and sophisms； was
greatly cultivated。
When those two sciences had thus been set in opposition to
one another； the comparison between them naturally gave birth to
a third； to what was called Ontology； or the science which
treated of the qualities and attributes which were common to both
the subjects of the other two sciences。 But if subtleties and
sophisms composed the greater part of the Metaphysics or
Pneumatics of the schools； they composed the whole of this cobweb
science of Ontology； which was likewise sometimes called
Metaphysics。
Wherein consisted the happiness and perfection of a man；
considered not only as an individual； but as the member of a
family； of a state； and of the great society of mankind； was the
object which the ancient moral philosophy proposed to
investigate。 In that philosophy the duties of human life were
treated as subservient to the happiness and perfection of human
life。 But when moral； as well as natural philosophy； came to be
taught only as subservient to theology； the duties of human life
were treated of as chiefly subservient to the happiness of a life
to come。 In the ancient philosophy the perfection of virtue was
represented as necessarily productive； to the person who
possessed it； of the most perfect happiness in this life。 In the
modern philosophy it was frequently represented as generally； or
rather as almost always； inconsistent with any degree of
happiness in this life； and heaven was to be earned only by
penance and mortification； by the austerities and abasement of a
monk； not by the liberal； generous； and spirited conduct of a
man。 Casuistry and an ascetic morality made up； in most cases；
the greater part of the moral philosophy of the schools。 By far
the most important of all the different branches of philosophy
became in this manner by far the most corrupted。
Such； therefore； was the common course of philosophical
education in the greater part of the universities in Europe。
Logic was taught first： Ontology came in the second place：
Pneumatology； comprehending the doctrine concerning the nature of
the human soul and of the Deity； in the third： in the fourth
followed a debased system of moral philosophy which was
considered as immediately connected with the doctrines of
Pneumatology； with the immortality of the human soul； and with
the rewards and punishments which； from the justice of the Deity；
were to be expected in a life to come： a short and superficial
system of Physics usually concluded the course。
The alterations which the universities of Europe thus
introduced into the ancient course of philosophy were all meant
for the education of ecclesiastics； and to render it a more
proper introduction to the study of theology。 But the additional
quantity of subtlety and sophistry； the casuistry and the ascetic
morality which those alterations introduced into it； certainly
did not render it more proper for the education of gentlemen or
men of the world； or more likely either to improve the
understanding； or to mend the heart。
This course of philosophy is what still continues to be
taught in the greater part of the universities of Europe； with
more or less diligence； according as the constitution of each
particular university happens to render diligence more or less
necessary to the teachers。 In some of the richest and best
endowed universities； the tutors content themselves with teaching
a few unconnected shreds and parcels of this corrupted course；
and even these they commonly teach very negligently and
superficially。
The improvements which； in modern times； have been made in
several different branches of philosophy have not； the greater
part of them； been made in universities； though some no doubt
have。 The greater part of universities have not even been very
forward to adopt those improvements after they were made； and
several of those learned societies have chosen to remain； for a
long time； the sanctuaries in which exploded systems and obsolete
prejudices found shelter and protection after they had been
hunted out of every other corner of the world。 In general； the
richest and best