9Septemberсентября · 9-е сентября
Те знания, которые в наше время считаются наукой, более препятствуют, чем содействуют благу человеческой жизни.
The knowledge that in our time is considered science hinders the good of human life more than it furthers it.
1. Астрономия, механика, физика, химия и все другие науки, вместе и каждая порознь, разрабатывают каждая подлежащую ей сторону жизни, не приходя ни к каким результатам о жизни вообще. Только во времена своей дикости, т. е. неясности, неопределенности, некоторые науки эти пытались с своей точки зрения охватить все явления жизни и путались, сами выдумывая новые понятия и слова. Так это было с астрономией, когда она была астрологией, с химией, когда она была алхимией. То же происходит и теперь с той опытной эволюционной наукой, которая, рассматривая одну сторону или некоторые стороны жизни, заявляет притязания на изучение всей жизни.
1. Astronomy, mechanics, physics, chemistry, and all the other sciences, together and each separately, each work out the side of life that is its province, without arriving at any results about life in general. Only in the times of their savagery, that is, of their unclearness and indefiniteness, did some of these sciences try to take in all the phenomena of life from their own point of view, and they got tangled up, inventing new concepts and words of their own. So it was with astronomy when it was astrology, and with chemistry when it was alchemy. The same is happening now with that experimental evolutionary science which, examining one side or a few sides of life, lays claim to the study of the whole of life.
2. Наука выполняет свою задачу не тем, что объясняет причины появления пятен на солнце, а тем, что выясняет законы нашей собственной жизни и последствия их нарушения.
2. Science fulfills its task not by explaining the causes of the appearance of spots on the sun, but by making clear the laws of our own life and the consequences of breaking them.
From The Eagle's Nest · close to the original .
John Ruskin’s own wordsScience does its duty, not in telling us the causes of spots in the sun; but in explaining to us the laws of our own life, and the consequences of their violation.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. The Eagle's Nest (1872), Lecture IX 'The Story of the Halcyon' (10 March 1872), § 206, the end of the lecture, on the home 'we would quit no more'.
Close. Tolstoy takes the first of Ruskin's three sentences on the duty of science, art, and literature, almost word for word; 'telling us the causes' becomes «объясняет причины» (explains the causes). Not in Thoughts of Wise Men (1903). Faithful to the English: printable offered.
3. По отношению к природе опыт дает нам в руки правила и является источником истины; но по отношению нравственных законов опыт оказывается, к сожалению, матерью заблуждения. Поэтому было бы в высшей степени недостойно желать законы о том, чтò я должен делать, вывести из того или ограничить тем, чтò совершается в природе или совершалось в истории.
3. With regard to nature, experience puts rules into our hands and is the source of truth; but with regard to moral laws, experience proves, unfortunately, to be the mother of error. Therefore it would be in the highest degree unworthy to wish to derive the laws of what I ought to do from what takes place in nature or has taken place in history, or to limit them by it.
Kant.
From Kritik der reinen Vernunft · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changed“From what is done,” Kant’s “was getan wird,” what people do, becomes “from what takes place in nature or has taken place in history,” so the ought is set against nature and history; “the parent of illusion” becomes “the mother of error.”
Original · GermanIn Betracht der Natur gibt uns Erfahrung die Regel an die Hand und ist der Quell der Wahrheit; in Ansehung der sittlichen Gesetze aber ist Erfahrung (leider!) die Mutter des Scheins, und es ist höchst verwerflich, die Gesetze über das, was ich tun soll, von demjenigen herzunehmen oder dadurch einschränken zu wollen, was getan wird.
Source text: archive.orgIn English · J. M. D. Meiklejohn, 1855For as regards nature, experience presents us with rules and is the source of truth, but in relation to ethical laws experience is the parent of illusion, and it is in the highest degree reprehensible to limit or to deduce the laws which dictate what I ought to do, from what is done.
Source text: gutenberg.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Kritik der reinen Vernunft (1781; 2nd ed. 1787), Transcendental Dialectic, Book I, section 1 (Von den Ideen überhaupt), as excerpted in Raoul Richter, Kant-Aussprüche (1901), Kant-Aussprüche no. 123, under «Sittenlehre: Wesen und Würde des Sittlichen» (Richter's register: Kr. d. r. V., Hartenstein III, 260); 2nd ed. (1787), p. 375; Meiklejohn's English (1855), Transcendental Dialectic, Book I, section I.
Kant's sentence, closely in its first half, with its last clause widened. Kant: in regard to nature experience gives us the rule and is the source of truth, but in regard to moral laws experience is (alas!) the mother of illusion, and it is most reprehensible to take the laws of what I ought to do from, or to limit them by, “was getan wird” (what is done). Tolstoy: «чтò совершается в природе или совершалось в истории» (what happens in nature or has happened in history). Kant contrasts what ought to be done with what people actually do; Tolstoy's version sets the ought against nature and history. He also writes «матерью заблуждения» (the mother of error) for “die Mutter des Scheins” (the mother of illusion), «в высшей степени недостойно» (in the highest degree unworthy) for “höchst verwerflich” (most reprehensible), and opens the second sentence with «Поэтому» (therefore). Richter prints the sentence alone, out of Kant's passage on Plato's ideas.
4. Знание смиряет великого, удивляет обыкновенного и раздувает маленького человека.
4. Knowledge humbles the great, astonishes the ordinary, and puffs up the small.
5. Науки — это пища для ума. И эта пища может быть так же вредна для ума, как и пища телесная для тела, если принимать ее не в меру. Так что и умственной пищи можно переесть и заболеть от нее. Для того, чтобы этого не было, надо так же, как и в телесной пище, принимать ее только тогда, когда это необходимо нужно.
5. The sciences are food for the mind. And this food can be just as harmful to the mind as bodily food is to the body, if it is taken immoderately. So one can overeat on mental food, too, and fall ill from it. To keep this from happening, one must, just as with bodily food, take it only when it is truly necessary.
From The Stones of Venice, vol. III · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changedRuskin’s “Knowledge is mental food” becomes “The sciences are food for the mind,” and of his three misuses only the last, being “eaten to surfeiting,” is kept, as food “taken immoderately”; his question, “how much of it will enable us best for our work,” becomes a rule: take it “only when it is truly necessary.”
After Ruskin’s own wordsKnowledge is mental food, and is exactly to the spirit what food is to the body (except that the spirit needs several sorts of food, of which knowledge is only one), and it is liable to the same kind of misuses.
It may be mixed and disguised by art, till it becomes unwholesome; it may be refined, sweetened, and made palatable, until it has lost all its power of nourishment; and, even of its best kind, it may be eaten to surfeiting, and minister to disease and death.
Therefore, with respect to knowledge, we are to reason and act exactly as with respect to food.
We are to ask, therefore, first, is the knowledge we would have fit food for us, good and simple, not artificial and decorated? and secondly, how much of it will enable us best for our work; and will leave our hearts light, and our eyes clear?
Source text: gutenberg.orgTolstoy’s own version · Путь жизниНаука — это пища для ума. И эта пища для ума может быть так же вредна, как и пища телесная, если она не чиста, подслащена и если принимаешь ее не в меру.
Для того, чтобы этого не было, надо так же, как в телесной пище, принимать ее только тогда, когда голоден, когда чувствуешь необходимость узнать, — только тогда, когда знание нужно для души.
Source text: tolstoy.ruDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. The Stones of Venice, vol. III (1853), ch. II 'Roman Renaissance', §§ XXV–XXVI, 'Knowledge is mental food'.
A free version of § XXV, as «По Рёскину» (after Ruskin) says. Ruskin's 'knowledge' becomes «Науки» (the sciences), and 'the spirit' becomes «ум» (the mind). Of Ruskin's three misuses, knowledge 'mixed and disguised by art', 'refined, sweetened, and made palatable', and 'eaten to surfeiting', the Circle keeps only the last, «если принимать ее не в меру» (if it is taken beyond measure), and adds «Так что и умственной пищи можно переесть и заболеть от нее» (so one can overeat on mental food too and fall ill of it), from 'minister to disease and death'. The last sentence, «принимать ее только тогда, когда это необходимо нужно» (to take it only when it is truly needed), condenses § XXVI's question 'how much of it will enable us best for our work'. The Path of Life (1910) prints a fuller version, unsigned, that keeps 'refined, sweetened' as «не чиста, подслащена» (not pure, sweetened) and ends 'only when one is hungry ... when knowledge is needed for the soul'. The sentence before § XXV gave 9-23.4.
6. Для того, чтобы знания были важны, нужно, чтобы они служили благу — единению людей. Люди соединяются между собой признанием единой для всех истины. Выражения этой истины должны быть ясны и понятны. В теперешней же науке выражения неясны и непонятны.
6. For knowledge to be important, it must serve the good — the union of people. People are united with one another by recognizing a truth that is one for all. The expressions of this truth must be clear and comprehensible. But in present-day science the expressions are unclear and incomprehensible.
7. Сократ говорил, что для людей, которые ничего более не желают, как сделаться хорошими, легка всякая наука, потому что они в каждой науке желают знать только то, что нужно всем людям.
7. Socrates said that for people who desire nothing more than to become good, every science is easy, because in every science they want to know only what all people need.
8. Мудрость Сократа состояла в том, что он не думал, что знал то, чего не знал.
8. The wisdom of Socrates consisted in his not thinking that he knew what he did not know.
From Academica · reworded by Tolstoy .
What changedThe rule by which Cicero explains the oracle’s verdict, “this alone is the whole of wisdom” (in Ramage, whom Tolstoy follows, “all wisdom consists in this”), becomes a statement about one man, “The wisdom of Socrates consisted in his not thinking that he knew what he did not know,” and Apollo drops out.
What Tolstoy read · Beautiful Thoughts from Latin AuthorsFor this cause he imagined that Socrates was called the wisest of men by Apollo, because all wisdom consists in this, not to think that we know what we do not know.
Source text: archive.orgOriginal · Latin… ob eamque rem se arbitrari ab Apolline omnium sapientissimum esse dictum, quod haec esset una hommis sapientia, non arbitrari sese scire quod nesciat.
Source text: thelatinlibrary.comIn English · C. D. Yonge, 1853And it is on that account that he imagines he was pronounced by Apollo the wisest of all men, because this alone is the whole of wisdom, for a man not to think that he knows what he does not know.
Source text: archive.orgDetails
The words shown were found, word for word, in the saved source text. Academica, I.16 (Academica posteriora, Varro's speech; "Acad. Quaest. i. 4" in Ramage).
Cicero has Varro report Socrates' own account of the oracle: he "imagined that he was pronounced by Apollo the wisest of all men, because this alone is the whole of wisdom, for a man not to think that he knows what he does not know" (quod haec esset una omnis sapientia, non arbitrari sese scire quod nesciat). Ramage, on Tolstoy's list of sources, prints the sentence alone under the heading "Wisdom in not Thinking that One Knows that of which he is Ignorant": "For this cause he imagined that Socrates was called the wisest of men by Apollo, because all wisdom consists in this, not to think that we know what we do not know." Tolstoy turns the rule about all wisdom into a statement about Socrates: «Мудрость Сократа состояла в том, что он не думал, что знал то, чего не знал» (the wisdom of Socrates consisted in his not thinking that he knew what he did not know), and leaves out Apollo. The Latin Library text misprints "hommis" for "omnis".
Translation note. The Russian italic is broken only at the commas; it is set here as one span.
Как бы велико ни было знание, оно не может помочь исполнению главной цели жизни — нравственному совершенствованию.
However great knowledge may be, it cannot help in fulfilling the chief aim of life — moral perfection.
Tolstoy TodayТолстой сегодня · tolstoytoday.org/september/9