Therefore do thou, O Father, who gavest the visible light as the

first fruits of creation, and didst breathe into the face of man the

intellectual light as the crown and consummation thereof, guard and

protect this work, which coming from thy goodness returneth to thy

glory. Thou when thou turnedst to look upon the works which thy hands

had made, sawest that all was very good, and didst rest from thy

labours. But man, when he turned to look upon the work which his hands

had made, saw that all was vanity and vexation of spirit, and could

find no rest therein. Wherefore if we labour in thy works with the

sweat of our brows thou wilt make us partakers of thy vision and thy

sabbath. Humbly we pray that this mind may be steadfast in us, and

that through these our hands, and the hands of others to whom thou

shalt give the same spirit, thou wilt vouchsafe to endow the human

family with new mercies.

PREFACE

TO THE NOVUM ORGANUM

Those who have taken upon them to lay down the law of nature as a

thing already searched out and understood, whether they have spoken

in simple assurance or professional affectation, have therein done

philosophy and the sciences great injury. For as they have been

successful in inducing belief, so they have been effective in

quenching and stopping inquiry; and have done more harm by spoiling

and putting an end to other men's efforts than good by their own.

Those on the other hand who have taken a contrary course, and asserted

that absolutely nothing can be known,--whether it were from hatred of

the ancient sophists, or from uncertainty and fluctuation of mind,

or even from a kind of fulness of learning, that they fell upon this

opinion,--have certainly advanced reasons for it that are not to be

despised; but yet they have neither started from true principles nor

rested in the just conclusion, zeal and affectation having carried

them much too far. The more ancient of the Greeks (whose writings

are lost) took up with better judgment a position between these two

extremes,--between the presumption of pronouncing on everything,

and the despair of comprehending anything; and though frequently and

bitterly complaining of the difficulty of inquiry and the obscurity of

things, and like impatient horses champing the bit, they did not

the less follow up their object and engage with Nature; thinking (it

seems) that this very question,--viz. whether or no anything can be

known,--was to be settled not by arguing, but by trying. And yet they

too, trusting entirely to the force of their understanding, applied

no rule, but made everything turn upon hard thinking and perpetual

working and exercise of the mind.

Now my method, though hard to practise, is easy to explain; and it

is this. I propose to establish progressive stages of certainty. The

evidence of the sense, helped and guarded by a certain process of

correction, I retain. But the mental operation which follows the act

of sense I for the most part reject; and instead of it I open and

lay out a new and certain path for the mind to proceed in, starting

directly from the simple sensuous perception. The necessity of this

was felt no doubt by those who attributed so much importance to

Logic; showing thereby that they were in search of helps for the

understanding, and had no confidence in the native and spontaneous

process of the mind. But this remedy comes too late to do any

good, when the mind is already, through the daily intercourse and

conversation of life, occupied with unsound doctrines and beset on all

sides by vain imaginations. And therefore that art of Logic, coming

(as I said) too late to the rescue, and no way able to set matters

right again, has had the effect of fixing errors rather than

disclosing truth. There remains but one course for the recovery of

a sound and healthy condition,--namely, that the entire work of the

understanding be commenced afresh, and the mind itself be from the

very outset not left to take its own course, but guided at every step;

and the business be done as if by machinery. Certainly if in things

mechanical men had set to work with their naked hands, without help or

force of instruments, just as in things intellectual they have set to

work with little else than the naked forces of the understanding, very

small would the matters have been which, even with their best efforts

applied in conjunction, they could have attempted or accomplished. Now

(to pause while upon this example and look in it as in a glass) let us

suppose that some vast obelisk were (for the decoration of a triumph

or some such magnificence) to be removed from its place, and that men

should set to work upon it with their naked hands; would not any

sober spectator think them mad? And if they should then send for more

people, thinking that in that way they might manage it, would he

not think them all the madder? And if they then proceeded to make a

selection, putting away the weaker hands, and using only the strong

and vigorous, would he not think them madder than ever? And if

lastly, not content with this, they resolved to call in aid the art

of athletics, and required all their men to come with hands, arms,

and sinews well anointed and medicated according to the rules of art,

would he not cry out that they were only taking pains to show a kind

of method and discretion in their madness? Yet just so it is that

men proceed in matters intellectual,--with just the same kind of mad

effort and useless combination of forces,--when they hope great things

either from the number and cooperation or from the excellency and

acuteness of individual wits; yea, and when they endeavour by Logic

(which may be considered as a kind of athletic art) to strengthen the

sinews of the understanding; and yet with all this study and endeavour

it is apparent to any true judgment that they are but applying the

naked intellect all the time; whereas in every great work to be done

by the hand of man it is manifestly impossible, without instruments

or machinery, either for the strength of each to be exerted or the

strength of all to be united.

Upon these premises two things occur to me of which, that they may

not be overlooked, I would have men reminded. First it falls out

fortunately as I think for the allaying of contradictions and

heart-burnings, that the honour and reverence due to the ancients

remains untouched and undiminished; while I may carry out my designs

and at the same time reap the fruit of my modesty. For if I should

profess that I, going the same road as the ancients, have something

better to produce, there must needs have been some comparison or

rivalry between us (not to be avoided by any art of words) in respect

of excellency or ability of wit; and though in this there would be

nothing unlawful or new (for if there be anything misapprehended by

them, or falsely laid down, why may not I, using a liberty common

to all, take exception to it?) yet the contest, however just and

allowable, would have been an unequal one perhaps, in respect of the

measure of my own powers. As it is however,--my object being to open a

new way for the understanding, a way by them untried and unknown,--the

case is altered; party zeal and emulation are at an end; and I appear

merely as a guide to point out the road; an office of small authority,

and depending more upon a kind of luck than upon any ability or

excellency. And thus much relates to the persons only. The other point

of which I would have men reminded relates to the matter itself.

Be it remembered then that I am far from wishing to interfere with

the philosophy which now flourishes, or with any other philosophy

more correct and complete than this which has been or may hereafter

be propounded. For I do not object to the use of this received

philosophy, or others like it, for supplying matter for disputations

or ornaments for discourse,--for the professor's lecture and for the

business of life. Nay more, I declare openly that for these uses the

philosophy which I bring forward will not be much available. It does

not lie in the way. It cannot be caught up in passage. It does not

flatter the understanding by conformity with preconceived notions.

Nor will it come down to the apprehension of the vulgar except by its

utility and effects.

Let there be therefore (and may it be for the benefit of both) two

streams and two dispensations of knowledge; and in like manner two

tribes or kindreds of students in philosophy--tribes not hostile or

alien to each other, but bound together by mutual services;--let there

in short be one method for the cultivation, another for the invention,

of knowledge.

And for those who prefer the former, either from hurry or from

considerations of business or for want of mental power to take in and

embrace the other (which must needs be most men's case), I wish that

they may succeed to their desire in what they are about, and obtain

what they are pursuing. But if any man there be who, not content

to rest in and use the knowledge which has already been discovered,

aspires to penetrate further; to overcome, not an adversary in

argument, but nature in action; to seek, not pretty and probable

conjectures, but certain and demonstrable knowledge;--I invite all

such to join themselves, as true sons of knowledge, with me, that

passing by the outer courts of nature, which numbers have trodden,

we may find a way at length into her inner chambers. And to make my

meaning clearer and to familiarise the thing by giving it a name, I

have chosen to call one of these methods or ways _Anticipation of the

Mind_, the other _Interpretation of Nature_.

Moreover I have one request to make. I have on my own part made it my

care and study that the things which I shall propound should not only

be true, but should also be presented to men's minds, how strangely

soever preoccupied and obstructed, in a manner not harsh or

unpleasant. It is but reasonable however (especially in so great a

restoration of learning and knowledge) that I should claim of men one

favour in return; which is this; If any one would form an opinion or

judgment either out of his own observation, or out of the crowd of

authorities, or out of the forms of demonstration (which have now

acquired a sanction like that of judicial laws), concerning these

speculations of mine, let him not hope that he can do it in passage or

by the by; but let him examine the thing thoroughly; let him make some

little trial for himself of the way which I describe and lay out; let

him familiarise his thoughts with that subtlety of nature to which

experience bears witness; let him correct by seasonable patience and

due delay the depraved and deep-rooted habits of his mind; and when

all this is done and he has begun to be his own master, let him (if he

will) use his own judgment.

PREFACE TO THE FIRST FOLIO EDITION OF SHAKESPEARE'S PLAYS (1623)[A]

TO THE GREAT VARIETY OF READERS

From the most able, to him that can but spell: There you are number'd.

We had rather you were weighd. Especially, when the fate of all Bookes

depends vpon your capacities: and not of your heads alone, but of your

purses. Well! it is now publique, & you wil stand for your priuiledges

wee know: to read, and censure. Do so, but buy it first. That doth

best commend a Booke, the Stationer saies. Then, how odde soeuer your

braines be, or your wisedomes, make your licence the same, and

spare not. Iudge your sixe-pen'orth, your shillings worth, your fiue

shillings worth at a time, or higher, so you rise to the iust rates,

and welcome. But, what euer you do, Buy. Censure will not driue a

Trade, or make the Iacke go. And though you be a Magistrate of wit,

and sit on the Stage at _Black-Friers_, or the _Cock-pit_, to arraigne

Playes dailie, know, these Playes haue had their triall alreadie,

and stood out all Appeals; and do now come forth quitted rather by a

Decree of Court, then any purchas'd Letters of commendation.

It had bene a thing, we confesse, worthie to haue bene wished, that

the Author himselfe had liu'd to haue set forth, and ouerseen his owne

writings. But since it hath bin ordain'd otherwise, and he by death

departed from that right, we pray you do not envie his Friends, the

office of their care, and paine to haue collected & publish'd them,

and so to haue publish'd them, as where (before) you were abus'd with

diuerse stolne, and surreptitious copies, maimed, and deformed by the

frauds and stealthes of iniurious imposters, that expos'd them euen

those, are now offer'd to your view cur'd, and perfect of their

limbes, and all the rest, absolute in their numbers, as he conceiued

them. Who, as he was a happie imitator of Nature, was a most gentle

expresser of it. His mind and hand went together. And what he thought,

he vttered with that easinesse, that wee haue scarse receiued from him

a blot in his papers. But it is not our prouince, who onely gather his

works, and giue them you, to praise him. It is yours that reade him.

And there we hope, to your diuers capacities, you will finde enough,

both to draw, and hold you for his wit can no more lie hid then it

could be lost. Reade him, therefore and againe and againe. And if then

you doe not like him surely you are in some manifest danger, not to

vnderstand him. And so we leaue you to other of his Friends, whom if

you need can bee your guides: if you neede them not, you can leade

your selues, and others. And such Readers we wish him.

JOHN HEMINGE HENRIE CONDELL.

[Footnote A: Little more than half of Shakespeare's plays were

published during his lifetime; and in the publication of these there

is no evidence that the author had any hand. Seven years after his

death, John Heminge and Henry Condell, two of his fellow-actors,

collected the unpublished plays, and, in 1623, issued them along with

the others in a single volume, usually known as the First Folio.

When one considers what would have been lost had it not been for the

enterprise of these men, it seems safe to say that the volume they

introduced by this quaint and not too accurate preface, is the most

important single book in the imaginative literature of the world.]

PREFACE TO THE PHILOSOPHIAE NATURALIS PRINCIPIA MATHEMATICA

BY SIR ISAAC NEWTON. (1686)[A]

Since the ancients (as we are told by Pappus) made great account of

the science of mechanics in the investigation of natural things; and

the moderns, laying aside substantial forms and occult qualities,

have endeavored to subject the phenomena of nature to the laws of

mathematics, I have in this treatise cultivated mathematics so far as

it regards philosophy. The ancients considered mechanics in a twofold

respect; as rational, which proceeds accurately by demonstration, and

practical. To practical mechanics all the manual arts belong, from

which mechanics took its name. But as artificers do not work with

perfect accuracy, it comes to pass that mechanics is so distinguished

from geometry, that what is perfectly accurate is called geometrical;

what is less so is called mechanical. But the errors are not in the

art, but in the artificers. He that works with less accuracy is an

imperfect mechanic: and if any could work with perfect accuracy, he

would be the most perfect mechanic of all; for the description of

right lines and circles, upon which geometry is founded, belongs

to mechanics. Geometry does not teach us to draw these lines, but

requires them to be drawn; for it requires that the learner should

first be taught to describe these accurately, before he enters upon

geometry; then it shows how by these operations problems may be

solved. To describe right lines and circles are problems, but not

geometrical problems. The solution of these problems is required from

mechanics; and by geometry the use of them, when so solved, is shown;

and it is the glory of geometry that from those few principles,

fetched from without, it is able to produce so many things. Therefore

geometry is founded in mechanical practice, and is nothing but that

part of universal mechanics which accurately proposes and demonstrates

the art of measuring. But since the manual arts are chiefly conversant

in the moving of bodies, it comes to pass that geometry is commonly

referred to their magnitudes, and mechanics to their motion. In this

sense rational mechanics will be the science of motions resulting

from any forces whatsoever, and of the forces required to produce any

motions, accurately proposed and demonstrated. This part of mechanics

was cultivated by the ancients in the five powers which relate to

manual arts, who considered gravity (it not being a manual power) no

otherwise than as it moved weights by those powers. Our design, not

respecting arts, but philosophy, and our subject, not manual, but

natural powers, we consider chiefly those things which relate to

gravity, levity, elastic force, the resistance of fluids, and the like

forces, whether attractive or impulsive; and therefore we offer this

work as mathematical principles of philosophy; for all the difficulty

of philosophy seems to consist in this--from the phenomena of motions

to investigate the forces of nature, and then from these forces

to demonstrate the other phenomena; and to this end the general

propositions in the first and second book are directed. In the third

book we give an example of this in the explication of the system of

the World; for by the propositions mathematically demonstrated in the

first book, we there derive from the celestial phenomena the forces

of gravity with which bodies tend to the sun and the several planets.

Then, from these forces, by other propositions which are also

mathematical, we deduce the motions of the planets, the comets, the

moon, and the sea. I wish we could derive the rest of the phenomena of

nature by the same kind of reasoning from mechanical principles; for

I am induced by many reasons to suspect that they may all depend

upon certain forces by which the particles of bodies, by some causes

hitherto unknown, are either mutually impelled towards each other, and

cohere in regular figures, or are repelled and recede from each other;

which forces being unknown, philosophers have hitherto attempted the

search of nature in vain; but I hope the principles here laid

down will afford some light either to that or some truer method of

philosophy.

In the publication of this work, the most acute and universally

learned Mr. Edmund Halley not only assisted me with his pains in

correcting the press and taking care of the schemes, but it was to

his solicitations that its becoming public is owing; for when he

had obtained of me my demonstrations of the figure of the celestial

orbits, he continually pressed me to communicate the same to the Royal

Society, who afterwards, by their kind encouragement and entreaties,

engaged me to think of publishing them. But after I had begun to

consider the inequalities of the lunar motions, and had entered upon

some other things relating to the laws and measures of gravity,

and other forces; and the figures that would be described by bodies

attracted according to given laws; and the motion of several bodies

moving among themselves; the motion of bodies in resisting mediums;

the forces, densities, and motions of mediums; the orbits of the

comets, and such like; I put off that publication till I had made a

search into those matters, and could put out the whole together. What

relates to the lunar motions (being imperfect) I have put all together

in the corollaries of proposition 66, to avoid being obliged to

propose and distinctly demonstrate the several things there contained

in a method more prolix than the subject deserved, and interrupt the

series of the several propositions. Some things, found out after the

rest, I chose to insert in places less suitable, rather than change

the number of the propositions and the citations. I heartily beg that

what I have here done may be read with candor; and that the defects

I have been guilty of upon this difficult subject may be not so much

reprehended as kindly supplied, and investigated by new endeavors of

my readers.

Cambridge, Trinity College, ISAAC NEWTON.

May 8, 1686

[Footnote A: Sir Isaac Newton, the great English mathematician and

physicist, was born at Woolsthorpe in 1642, and died at Kensington in

1727. He held a professorship at Cambridge, represented the University

in Parliament, as master of the mint reformed the English coinage, and

for twenty five years was president of the Royal Society. His theory

of the law of universal gravitation, the most important of his many

discoveries, is expounded in his "Philosophiae Naturalis Principia

Mathematical," usually known merely as the "Principia," from which,

this Preface is translated.]

PREFACE TO FABLES,

ANCIENT AND MODERN

BY JOHN DRYDEN. (1700)[A]

'Tis with a poet as with a man who designs to build, and is very

exact, as he supposes, in casting up the cost beforehand, but,

generally speaking, he is mistaken in his account, and reckons short

of the expense he first intended. He alters his mind as the work

proceeds, and will have this or that convenience more, of which he had

not thought when he began. So has it happened to me; I have built a

house, where I intended but a lodge; yet with better success than a

certain nobleman,[1] who, beginning with a dog kennel, never liv'd to

finish the palace he had contriv'd.

Prefaces and prologues to famous books · 第 13 / 41 段