加载中…
个人资料
John_ny
John_ny
  • 博客等级:
  • 博客积分:0
  • 博客访问:1,034,511
  • 关注人气:570
  • 获赠金笔:0支
  • 赠出金笔:0支
  • 荣誉徽章:
正文 字体大小:

After reading Literature and Science by Matthew Arnold

(2014-10-13 16:41:18)
标签:

杂谈

Why does Arnold believe it is more important for most people to know ‘the great results of the scientific investigation of nature’ than ‘the process by which those results are reached.’?

Just like what Arnold says in the essay that it is needful for those who are to discuss any matter together to have a common understanding as to the sense of the terms they employ and since the terms in the question come from this essay, I feel it necessary to first identify their meaning in context.

“The great results of scientific investigation of nature”, in this essay, refer to the great results of the modern scientific study of nature and, in Matthew Arnold’s own words, ‘the best which has been thought and said in the world.’ And in the essay, Matthew points out directly that what he refers to as the best which has been thought and said in the world is not belles lettres, mainly decorative, but all knowledge that reaches us through books. Therefore, it’s clear that Matthew Arnold agrees with Professor Huxley on this point that knowing the great results of the modern scientific study of nature is required.

However, Matthew Arnold confesses that he has to part company with the friends of physical science who propose to make the training in natural science the main part of education. And this training stands for ‘the process by which those results are reached.’ in the question. And Matthew Arnold fully opposes this opinion and thinks this training incomplete. Before he forwards his argument, he sets a fact that the power of conduct, the power of intellect and knowledge, the power of beauty, and the power of social life and manners are the building up of human life and that these powers are not isolated but related because we have fundamental desire, that good should forever be present to us, to relate our knowledge to our sense for conduct and to our sense for beauty.

Then he suggests that the results of science are merely in the sphere of intellect and knowledge, which, if not put for us into relation with our sense of conduct, our sense for beauty, will, after a certain while, become unsatisfying and wearying. We need humane letters to relate the results of science to out sense for conduct and to our sense for beauty because these humane letters have the power of engaging the emotions. They do exercise the power and exert an influence upon man’s sense for conduct and his sense for beauty. Furthermore, Arnold points out that students of humane letters only will at least know the great general conceptions brought in by modern physical science, whereas students of the natural sciences only know nothing of humane letters. The latter students will probably be unsatisfied and more incomplete than the former students. Therefore, Matthew Arnold concludes that the great majority of mankind would do well to choose to be educated in humane letters rather than in the natural sciences.

Basically, Arnold thinks giving the training of natural sciences predominance in education will make education inadequate. He thinks, for the majority of people, knowing the great results is enough. It is indeed good to have some experience of scientific habit, but it certainly should not be the main part of education, whose goal should be to satisfy the demand of relating knowledge to human beings’ sense for conduct and to sense for beauty.

0

阅读 收藏 喜欢 打印举报/Report
  

新浪BLOG意见反馈留言板 欢迎批评指正

新浪简介 | About Sina | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站律师 | SINA English | 产品答疑

新浪公司 版权所有