In subjects of general interest, the task of defining terms should
consist in choosing amongst the various interpretations which have
gradually become attached to certain words, not always that one which
is most intimately or etymologically connected with the primary root,
but that which would indicate an important practical difference. Yet by
an unforeseen misfortune, the daily necessity comes before us of using
words whose meaning has never been clearly defined, so that at no time
has one meaning prevailed more than another; this is especially the
case with words connected with religion, faith, and objects of belief,
which each one understands after his own manner.
In our days the possibility of an agreement between religion and
science is often debated; how can we enter on the discussion without
being quite clear as to what religion is? According to some it is
simply the feeling of love for God; according to others it is the
expression of our faith under the form of acts of worship, acts of
charity, or perhaps the holding of certain dogmas.
The same holds good with that which we call faith, and which is often a
feeling of confidence--not always the result of thought--in the faith
of those surrounding us. Some give the name of faith to that enthusiasm
which has sufficed to cause men joyfully to meet martyrdom; others
apply it to the confidence with which the wise men followed the guiding
of the star, when it indicated the road they should follow. Faith is
only worthy of the name when it can be said to be a reasonable faith,
and thus accounting for its existence. If we are not amongst the number
of those who can give a reason for the faith that is in them, we must
take care that credulity does not glide in before we are aware of its
approach; it arises from a weakness of the mind and is compatible with
a tranquillity that differs very widely from peace; and when once
mistress of the situation, it increases, and occupies it. A wise Arab
well said, “He who builds his house on human credulity builds on a
rock.”
“Abstract,” this word which we can trace back to Aristotle, has an
interesting history. Aristotle used it at first to characterise the
creation of a work of art; the sculptor carves out of a block of marble
the statue of a man or of a woman, rejecting the chips and dust which
serve no purpose. Afterwards Aristotle applied this same word to an
idea which an accurate thinker forms, giving it a suitable shape, and
separating it from all accidental thoughts that may have surrounded
it; that done, what remains is an abstract idea. Aristotle has so well
explained the meaning of abstract, that if our logicians had simply
spoken of _concrete_ as that which is non-abstract, all the world would
more readily have understood the meaning of the word--concrete.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account