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
result which you bring about by acting with what you call "practical
common sense," instead of Divine wisdom.
25. Perhaps you think I am losing Aristotle's notion of common sense, by
confusing it with our vulgar English one; and that selling ships or
ammunition to people whom we have not courage to fight either for or
against, would not by Aristotle have been held a phronetic, or prudent
proceeding. Be it so; let us be certain then, if we can, what Aristotle
does mean. Take the instance I gave you in the last lecture, of the
various modes of feeling in which a master of literature, of science,
and of art, would severally regard the storm round the temples of
Pæstum.
The man of science, we said, thought of the origin of the electricity;
the artist of its light in the clouds, and the scholar, of its relation
to the power of Zeus and Poseidon. There you have Episteme; Techne; and
Nous; well, now what does Phronesis do?
Phronesis puts up his umbrella, and goes home as fast as he can.
Aristotle's Phronesis at least does; having no regard for marvellous
things. But are you sure that Aristotle's Phronesis is indeed the right
sort of Phronesis? May there not be a commonsense, as well as an art,
and a science, under the command of sophia? Let us take an instance of a
more subtle kind.
26. Suppose that two young ladies, (I assume in my present lectures,
that none are present, and that we may say among ourselves what we like;
and we do like, do we not, to suppose that young ladies excel us only in
prudence, and not in wisdom?) let us suppose that two young ladies go to
the observatory on a winter night, and that one is so anxious to look at
the stars that she does not care whether she gives herself cold, or not;
but the other is prudent, and takes care, and looks at the stars only as
long as she can without catching cold. In Aristotle's mind the first
young lady would properly deserve the name of Sophia, and the other that
of Prudence. But in order to judge them fairly, we must assume that they
are acting under exactly the same conditions. Assume that they both
equally desire to look at the stars; then, the fact that one of them
stops when it would be dangerous to look longer, does not show that she
is less wise,--less interested, that is to say, in surpassing and
marvellous things;--but it shows that she has more self-command, and is
able therefore to remember what the other does not think of. She is
equally wise, and more sensible. But suppose that the two girls are
originally different in disposition; and that the one, having much more
imagination than the other, is more interested in these surpassing and
marvellous things; so that the self-command, which is enough to stop the
other, who cares little for the stars, is not enough to stop her who
cares much for them;--you would say, then, that, both the girls being
equally sensible, the one that caught cold was the wisest.
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