The Moral and Intellectual Diversity of Races: With Particular Reference to Their Respective Influence in the Civil and Political History of Mankind — John Shaqi
The Moral and Intellectual Diversity of Races: With Particular Reference to Their Respective Influence in the Civil and Political History of MankindGobineau, Arthur, comte de
Philosophy
The Moral and Intellectual Diversity of Races: With Particular Reference to Their Respective Influence in the Civil and Political History of Mankind
It must be borne in mind that the races comprised under these divisions,
are by no means to be considered equal among themselves. We should lay
it down as a general truth, that while the entire groups differ
principally in _degree_ of intellectual capacity, the races comprised in
each differ among themselves rather in kind. Thus, we assert upon the
testimony of history, that the white races are superior to the yellow;
and these, in turn, to the black. But the Lithuanian and the Anglo-Saxon
both belong to the same group of races, and yet, history shows that
they differ; so do the Samoyede and the Chinese, the negro of Lower
Guinea, and the Fellah. These differences, observable among nations
classed under the same head, as, for instance, the difference between
the Russians and Italians (both white), we express in every day's
language by the word "genius." Thus, we constantly hear persons speak of
the artistic, administrative, nautical genius of the Greeks, Romans, and
Phenicians, respectively; or, such phrases as these, which I borrow from
Mr. Gobineau: "Napoleon rightly understood the _genius_ of his nation
when he reinstated the Church, and placed the supreme authority on a
secure basis; Charles I. and his adviser did not, when they attempted to
bend the neck of Englishmen under the yoke of absolutism." But, as the
word _genius_ applied to the capacities or tendencies of a nation, in
general implies either too much or too little, it has been found
convenient, in this work, to substitute for it another term--_instinct_.
By the use of this word, it was not intended to assimilate man to the
brute, to express aught differing from intellect or the reasoning
capacity; but only to designate the peculiar manner in which that
intellect or reasoning capacity manifests itself; in other words, the
special adaptation of a nation for the part assigned to it in the
world's history; and, as this part is performed involuntarily and, for
the most part, unconsciously, the term was deemed neither improper nor
inappropriate. I do not, however, contend for its correctness, though I
could cite the authority of high names for its use in this sense; I
contend merely for its convenience, for we thereby gain an easy method
of making distinctions of _kind_ in the mental endowments of races, in
cases where we would hesitate to make distinctions of _degree_. In fact,
it is saying of multitudes only what we say of an individual by speaking
of his _talent_; with this difference, however, that by talent we
understand excellency of a certain order, while instinct applies to
every grade. Two persons of equal intellectual calibre may have, one a
talent for mathematics, the other for literature; that is, one can
exhibit his intellect to advantage only in calculation, the other only
in writing. Thus, of two nations standing equally high in the
intellectual scale, one shall be distinguished for the high perfection
attained in the fine arts, the other for the same perfection in the
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