ONE:It is an often-quoted observation of Friedrich Schlegels that every man is born either a Platonist or an Aristotelian. If we narrow the remark to the only class which, perhaps, its author recognised as human beings, namely, all thinking men, it will be found to contain a certain amount of truth, though probably not what Schlegel intended; at any rate something requiring to be supplemented by other truths before its full meaning can be understood. The common opinion seems to be that Plato was a transcendentalist, while Aristotle was an experientialist; and that this constitutes the most typical distinction between them. It would, however, be a mistake to292 suppose that the priori and posteriori methods were marked off with such definiteness in Platos time as to render possible a choice between them. The opposition was not between general propositions and particular facts, but between the most comprehensive and the most limited notions. It was as if the question were now to be raised whether we should begin to teach physiology by at once dividing the organic from the inorganic world, or by directing the learners attention to some one vital act. Now, we are expressly told that Plato hesitated between these two methods; and in his Dialogues, at least, we find the easier and more popular one employed by preference. It is true that he often appeals to wide principles which do not rest on an adequate basis of experimental evidence; but Aristotle does so also, more frequently even, and, as the event proved, with more fatal injury to the advance of knowledge. In his Rhetoric he even goes beyond Plato, constructing the entire art from the general principles of dialectics, psychology, and ethics, without any reference, except for the sake of illustration, to existing models of eloquence.That accounts for it. I didnt know he was going to make the hop or I might not have come myselfbut nowwell, the man broke off his phrase and started to clamber into the control seat, lets get going.
JETIS - Elegant Responsive HTML5 Template
ONE:V.
JETIS - Elegant Responsive HTML5 Template
ONE:The systems of Plato and Aristotle were splendid digressions from the main line of ancient speculation rather than stages in its regular development. The philosophers who came after them went back to an earlier tradition, and the influence of the two greatest Hellenic masters, when it was felt at all, was felt almost entirely as a disturbing or deflecting force. The extraordinary reach of their principles could not, in truth, be appreciated until the organised experience of mankind had accumulated to an extent requiring the application of new rules for its comprehension and utilisation; and to make such an accumulation possible, nothing less was needed than the combined efforts of the whole western world. Such religious, educational, social, and political reforms as those contemplated in Platos Republic, though originally designed for a single city-community, could not be realised, even approximately, within a narrower field than that offered by the mediaeval church and the feudal state. The ideal theory first gained practical significance in connexion with the metaphysics of Christian theology. The place given by Plato to mathematics has only been fully justified by the develop2ment of modern science. So also, Aristotles criticism became of practical importance only when the dreams against which it was directed had embodied themselves in a fabric of oppressive superstition. Only the vast extension of reasoned knowledge has enabled us to disentangle the vitally important elements of Aristotles logic from the mass of useless refinements in which they are imbedded; his fourfold division of causes could not be estimated rightly even by Bacon, Descartes, or Spinoza; while his arrangement of the sciences, his remarks on classification, and his contributions to comparative biology bring us up to the very verge of theories whose first promulgation is still fresh in the memories of men.CHAPTER XXV. CRANK-HAMMERS.
JETIS - Elegant Responsive HTML5 Template
ONE:"But that is a weapon, general!"
JETIS - Elegant Responsive HTML5 Template
ONE:Considered as means for transmitting power, the contrast as to advantages and disadvantages lies especially between belts and gearing instead of between belts and shafts. It is true in extreme cases, such as that cited at Crewe, or in conveying water-power from inaccessible places, through long distances, the comparison lies between belts and shafts; but in ordinary practice, especially for first movers, the problem as to mechanism for conveying power lies between belts and gear wheels. If experience in the use of belts was thorough, as it is in the case of gearing, and if the quality of belts did not form so important a part in the estimates, there would be but little difficulty in determining where belts should be employed and where gearing would be preferable. Belts are continually taking the place of gearing even in cases where, until quite recently, their use has been considered impracticable; one of the largest rolling mills in Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, except a single pair of spur wheels as the last movers at each train of rolls, is driven by belts throughout.
JETIS - Elegant Responsive HTML5 Template
