Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Reflections On The Unequal Distribution Of Talents To Mankind.
On this footing therefore we are apt to admire in others the qualities We have not , and we are even tempted to envy them those qualities : hut the dose of self-love , which nature has abundantly provided us with , supplies all deficiencies , and makes ample compensation for them by putting us in our own eyes upon a level with- those happy men , whose merit might excite our envy . We cannot now think of the distribution the Creator has made of
his gifts , without being persuaded that he had in view , by this distribution , to establish a social intercourse among men ; and we must be blind if we cannot perceive that this distribution is likewise the source and origin of commerce . Not finding every thing in our own fund , and different productions arising from different countries , our mutual wants of course should give us attractions to one another , and
form bonds for uniting together the different people of the earth . If there existed a man perfect enough to be sufficient to himself , in what a lig ht should we consider him ! Julius Ceesar mi ght have been the most acomplished man in the world ; so was Cicero in a multip licity of respects ; Demosthenes excelled in eloquence ; and for genius none among the first ages of Christianity appeared greater
than Origen : yet was there a something exceptionable in all these illustrious men ; a something ' which they could not help being indebted for to others , and which they had not ; and a something that sullied their character . . '¦ - The foibles in such great men as these being a triumph to envy , what should be our despair , nay vexatious rage , if we found ourselves forced to admire in one of our kind all the talents that could well be
desired ? Even excess , in the qualities of a man deemed perfect , would not be exempt from the imputation of being faulty . Great foibles go commonly hand in hand with great talents ; rare merit has almost always an equipoize in humiliating faults , and felicity is never found with that which should seem to procure and make it permanent .
How many illustrious wretches have exhibited instances that happiness and riches are hardly compatible ! Genius and taste are seldom , companions . Has not Homer sometimes his slumbers ? - I see Shakespeare , after soaring like an eagle to the sun , fall shamefully , and grovel with the vile insect . ' Sir Isaac Newton seemed to have in his genius resources sufficient
to create a world ; I mean by the help of that science- of calculation which regulates all the celestial motions . Consulted by William III , on a point of political disquisition , he was quite bewildered in thought , and could shew no sagacity . The King passed the same Judgment on him as Apelles on the Shoe-maker . Perhaps the Philosopher is as much regardless of catching flies as the eagle ; and this perhaps was
the reason why Socrates became a butt to the railleries of the Athenians , because he could not reckon up the votes of his tribe . But the bent of the genius does all . Things out of its sphere are either held up as minutiae , or it cannot pierce them by any intuitive !
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software.
Reflections On The Unequal Distribution Of Talents To Mankind.
On this footing therefore we are apt to admire in others the qualities We have not , and we are even tempted to envy them those qualities : hut the dose of self-love , which nature has abundantly provided us with , supplies all deficiencies , and makes ample compensation for them by putting us in our own eyes upon a level with- those happy men , whose merit might excite our envy . We cannot now think of the distribution the Creator has made of
his gifts , without being persuaded that he had in view , by this distribution , to establish a social intercourse among men ; and we must be blind if we cannot perceive that this distribution is likewise the source and origin of commerce . Not finding every thing in our own fund , and different productions arising from different countries , our mutual wants of course should give us attractions to one another , and
form bonds for uniting together the different people of the earth . If there existed a man perfect enough to be sufficient to himself , in what a lig ht should we consider him ! Julius Ceesar mi ght have been the most acomplished man in the world ; so was Cicero in a multip licity of respects ; Demosthenes excelled in eloquence ; and for genius none among the first ages of Christianity appeared greater
than Origen : yet was there a something exceptionable in all these illustrious men ; a something ' which they could not help being indebted for to others , and which they had not ; and a something that sullied their character . . '¦ - The foibles in such great men as these being a triumph to envy , what should be our despair , nay vexatious rage , if we found ourselves forced to admire in one of our kind all the talents that could well be
desired ? Even excess , in the qualities of a man deemed perfect , would not be exempt from the imputation of being faulty . Great foibles go commonly hand in hand with great talents ; rare merit has almost always an equipoize in humiliating faults , and felicity is never found with that which should seem to procure and make it permanent .
How many illustrious wretches have exhibited instances that happiness and riches are hardly compatible ! Genius and taste are seldom , companions . Has not Homer sometimes his slumbers ? - I see Shakespeare , after soaring like an eagle to the sun , fall shamefully , and grovel with the vile insect . ' Sir Isaac Newton seemed to have in his genius resources sufficient
to create a world ; I mean by the help of that science- of calculation which regulates all the celestial motions . Consulted by William III , on a point of political disquisition , he was quite bewildered in thought , and could shew no sagacity . The King passed the same Judgment on him as Apelles on the Shoe-maker . Perhaps the Philosopher is as much regardless of catching flies as the eagle ; and this perhaps was
the reason why Socrates became a butt to the railleries of the Athenians , because he could not reckon up the votes of his tribe . But the bent of the genius does all . Things out of its sphere are either held up as minutiae , or it cannot pierce them by any intuitive !