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