The Eagle's Nest: Ten Lectures on the Relation of Natural Science to Art, Given Before the University of Oxford, in Lent Term, 1872Ruskin, John
Philosophy
The Eagle's Nest: Ten Lectures on the Relation of Natural Science to Art, Given Before the University of Oxford, in Lent Term, 1872
Ruskin, John
Art and science
23. "Know _thyself_;" but can it indeed be sophia,--can it be the noble
wisdom, which thus speaks to science? Is not this rather, you will ask,
the voice of the lower virtue of prudence, concerning itself with right
conduct, whether for the interests of this world or of the future? Does
not sophia regard all that is above and greater than man; and by so much
as we are forbidden to bury ourselves in the mole's earth-heap, by so
much also, are we not urged to raise ourselves towards the stars?
Indeed, it would at first seem so; nay, in the passage of the Ethics,
which I proposed to you to-day for question, you are distinctly told so.
There are, it is said, many different kinds of phronesis, by which every
animal recognizes what is for its own good: and man, like any other
creature, has his own separate phronesis telling him what he is to seek,
and to do, for the preservation of his life: but above all these forms
of prudence, the Greek sage tells you, is the sophia of which the
objects are unchangeable and eternal, the methods consistent, and the
conclusions universal: and this wisdom has no regard whatever to the
things in which the happiness of man consists, but acquaints itself only
with the things that are most honourable; so that "we call Anaxagoras
and Thales, and such others, wise indeed, but not prudent, in that they
know nothing of what is for their own advantage, but know surpassing
things, marvellous things, difficult things, and divine things."
24. Now here is a question which evidently touches _us_ closely. We
profess at this day to be an especially prudent nation;--to regard only
the things which are for our own advantage; to leave to other races the
knowledge of surpassing things, marvellous things, divine things, or
beautiful things; and in our exceeding prudence we are, at this moment,
refusing the purchase of, perhaps, the most interesting picture by
Raphael in the world, and, certainly, one of the most beautiful works
ever produced by the art-wisdom of man, for five-and-twenty thousand
pounds, while we are debating whether we shall not pay three hundred
millions to the Americans, as a fine for selling a small frigate to
Captain Semmes. Let me reduce these sums from thousands of pounds, to
single pounds; you will then see the facts more clearly; (there is not
one person in a million who knows what a "million" means; and that is
one reason the nation is always ready to let its ministers spend a
million or two in cannon, if they can show they have saved
twopence-halfpenny in tape). These are the facts then, stating pounds
for thousands of pounds; you are offered a Nativity, by Raphael, for
five-and-twenty pounds, and cannot afford it; but it is thought you may
be bullied into paying three hundred thousand pounds, for having sold a
ship to Captain Semmes. I do not say you will pay it. Still your present
position is one of deprecation and humility, and that is the kind of
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account