for Aristotle the Church would have wanted some of its Articles of Faith. The Christians are not the only people who have authorized his philosophy; the Mohammedans are little less prejudiced in its favor; and we are told that, to this day, notwithstanding the ignorance which reigns among them, they have schools for this sect. It will be an everlasting subject of wonder to persons who know what philosophy is, to find that Aristotle's authority was so much respected in the schools for several ages, that when a disputant quoted a passage from this philosopher, he who maintained the Thesis, durst not say "transeat," but must either deny the passage, or explain it in his own way. It is in this manner we treat the Holy Scriptures in the divinity schools. The parliaments, which have proscribed all other philosophy but that of Aristotle, are more excusable than the doctors; for whether the members of parliament were really persuaded, as is very probable, that this philosophy was the best of any, or were not, the public good might induce them to prohibit new opinions, lest the academical divisions should extend their malignant influence to the tranquillity of the State. What is most astonishing to wise men is that the professors should be so strongly prejudiced in favor of Aristotle's philosophy. Had this profession been confined to his "Poetry" and "Rhetoric," it had been less wonderful; but they were fond of the weakest of his works- I mean his "Logic" and "Natural Philosophy." This justice, however, must be done to the blindest of his followers, that they have deserted him where he clashes with Christianity, and this he did in points of the greatest consequence, since he maintained the eternity of the world, and did not believe that Providence extended itself to sublunary beings. As to the immortality of the soul, it is not certainly known whether he acknowledged it or not. We shall take notice in another place of the long disputes which have reigned in Italy on this subject. In the year 1647 the famous Capuchin, Valerian Magni, published a work concerning the atheism of Aristotle. About one hundred and thirty years before, Marc Anthony Venerius published a system of philosophy, in which he discovered several inconsistencies between Aristotle's doctrine and the truths of religion. Campanella maintained the same in his book, "De Reductione ad Religionem," which was approved at Rome in the year 1630. It was not long since maintained in Holland, in the prefaces to some books, that the doctrine of this philosopher differed but little from Spinozism. In the meantime, if some Peripatetics may be believed, he was not ignorant of the mystery of the Trinity. He made a very good end, and enjoys eternal happiness. He composed a very great number of books, a great part of which is come down to us. It is true, some critics raise a thousand scruples about them. He was extremely honored in his own city, and there were heretics who worshiped his image jointly with that of Jesus Christ. I nowhere find that the Antinomians bore greater respect to this wise pagan than to the "Uncreated Wisdom," nor that the Aëtians were excommunicated for giving their disciples Aristotle's "Categories" for a Catechism. But I have somewhere read that before the Reformation there were churches in Germany in which Aristotle's "Ethics" were read every Sunday to the people, instead of the Gospel. There are but few instances of zeal for religion which have not been shown for the Peripatetic philosophy; Paul de Foix, famous for his embassies and his learning, would not see Francis Patricius at Terrara, because he was informed that that learned man taught a philosophy different from the Peripatetic. This was treating the enemies of Aristotle as zealots treat heretics. After all, it is no wonder that the Peripatetic philosophy, as it has been taught for several centuries, found so many protectors, or that the interests of it are believed to be inseparable from those of theology; for it accustoms the mind to acquiesce without evidence. This union of interests may be esteemed as a pledge to the Peripatetics of the immortality of their sect and an argument to abate the hopes of the new philosophers; considering, withal, that there are some doctrines of Aristotle which the Moderns have rejected, and which must, sooner or later, be adopted again. The Protestant divines have very much altered their conduct, if it be true, as we are told, that the first reformers clamored so loudly against the Peripatetic philosophy. The kind of death which, in some respects, does most honor to the memory of Aristotle is that which some have reported, viz., that his vexation at not being able to discover the cause of the flux and reflux of the Euripus occasioned the distemper of which he died. Some say that being retired into the island of Euboea, to avoid a process against him for irreligion, he poisoned himself. But why should he quit Athens to free himself from persecution this way? Heyschius affirms not only that sentence of death was pronounced against him for a hymn which he made in honor of his father-in-law, but also that he swallowed aconite in execution of the sentence. If this were true, it would have been mentioned by more authors. The number of ancient and modern writers who have exercised their pens on Aristotle, either in commenting on, or translating him, is endless. A catalogue of them is to be met with in some of the editions of his works, but not a complete one. See also a treatise of Father Labbé, entitled "A Short View of the Greek Interpreters of Aristotle and Plato," hitherto published; printed at Paris in the year 1657 in four volumes. Mr. Teiffer names four authors who have composed Lives of Aristotle: Ammonius, Guarini of Verona, John James Beurerus, and Leonard Aretin. He forgot Jerome Gemusams, physician and professor of philosophy at Basil, author of a book, "De Vita Aristotelis et Ejus Operum Censura" (The Life of Aristotle, and a Critique on His Works). Complete. From "The Historical and Critical Dictionary." JAMES BEATTIE (1735-1803) AMES BEATTIE, the Scottish poet and essayist, was born at College, Aberdeen. His family was poor, and after leaving college he spent several years as a schoolmaster in the Grampian Hills. In 1760 he became Professor of Moral Philosophy in Marischal College and held the position for many years. In 1773 he began the publication of "The Minstrel," a poem which did much to make him celebrated. His essays published between 1770 and 1793 are chiefly on philosophical and metaphysical subjects. They brought him into such favor that the English government granted him a pension of £200 a year. He died August 18th, 1803. AN ESSAY ON LAUGHTER Ego vero omni de re facetius puto posse ab homine non inurbano, quam de ipsis facetiis, disputari.- Cicero. F MAN, it is observed by Homer, that he is the most wretched, and, by Addison and others, that he is the merriest animal in the whole creation: and both opinions are plausible, and both perhaps may be true. If, from the acuteness and delicacy of his perceptive powers, from his remembrance of the past, and his anticipation of what is to come, from his restless and creative fancy, and from the various sensibilities of his moral nature, man be exposed to many evils, both imaginary and real, from which the brutes are exempted, he does also from the same sources derive innumerable delights that are far beyond the reach of every other animal. That our pre-eminence in pleasure should thus in some degree be counterbalanced by our pre-eminence in pain was necessary to exercise our virtue and wean our hearts from sublu. nary enjoyment; and that beings thus beset with a multitude of sorrows should be supplied from so many quarters with the means of comfort is suitable to that benign economy which characterizes every operation of nature. When a brute has gratified those few appetites that minister to the support of the species and of the individual, he may be said to have attained the summit of happiness, above which a thousand years of prosperity could not raise him a single step. But for man, her favorite child, Nature has made a more liberal provision. He, if he have only guarded against the necessities of life, and indulged the animal part of his constitution, has experienced but little of that felicity whereof he is capable. To say nothing at present of his moral and religious gratifications, is he not furnished with faculties that fit him for receiving pleasure from almost every part of the visible universe? Even to those persons whose powers of observation are confined within a narrow circle, the exercise of the necessary arts may open inexhaustible sources of amusement, to alleviate the cares of a solitary and laborious life. Men of more enlarged understanding and more cultivated taste are still more plentifully supplied with the means of innocent delight. For such, either from acquired habit, or from innate propensity, is the soul of man, that there is hardly anything in art or nature from which we may not derive gratification. What is great, overpowers with pleasing astonishment; what is little, may charm by its nicety of propor tion or beauty of color; what is diversified, pleases by supplying a series of novelties; what is uniform, by leading us to reflect on the skill displayed in the arrangement of its parts; order and connection gratify our sense of propriety; and certain forms of irregularity and unsuitableness raise within us that agreeable emotion whereof laughter is the outward sign. Risibility, considered as one of the characters that distinguish man from the inferior animals, and as an instrument of harmless, and even of profitable, recreation to every age, condition and capacity of human creatures must be allowed to be not unworthy of the philosopher's notice. Whatever is peculiar to rational nature must be an object of some importance to a rational being; and Milton has observed that: "Smiles from reason flow, To brutes denied." Whatever may be employed as a means of discountenancing vice, folly, or falsehood is an object of importance to a moral being: and Horace has remarked: |
