hat he might himself, upon a higher plane of
knowledge, be subjected to the same criticism; for limitation is
everywhere our lot.

PHILOSOPHY

With the progress of civilization, not all parts of human labor and
activity in which culture is revealed, flourish equally; rather in
accordance with the favorable character of persons and conditions, one
necessarily surpasses the other, and thus arouses a more general
interest. A certain jealous displeasure often arises in consequence,
among members of a family so varied in its branches, who often are the
less able to endure one another, the more closely they are related.

It is for the most part a baseless complaint, when this or that adept in
science and art complains that just his branch is being neglected by
contemporaries; for an able master has only to appear in order to
concentrate attention upon himself. If Raphael should reappear today, we
should bestow upon him a superabundance of honor and riches. An able
master arouses excellent pupils and their activities extend their
ramifications into the infinite.

From the earliest times philosophers especially have incurred the
hatred, not only of their fellow scientists, but of men of the world and
_bons vivants_, perhaps more by the position they assume than by their
own fault. For as philosophy in accordance with her nature must make
demands upon the universal and the highest, she must regard worldly
objects as included in and subordinated to herself.

Nor are these pretentious demands specifically denied; every man rather
believes that he has a right to take part in her discoveries, to make
use of her maxims, and to appropriate whatever else she may have to
offer. But as philosophy, in order to become universal, must make use of
her own vocabulary of unfamiliar combinations and difficult
explanations, which are in harmony neither with the life nor with the
momentary needs of men of the world, she is despised by those who cannot
find the handle by which she might easily be grasped.

Yet, if, on the other hand, one wished to accuse the philosophers
because they do not know how to translate doctrine into life, and
because they make the most mistakes exactly where all their convictions
should be converted into action, thereby diminishing their own credit in
the eyes of the world--no lack of examples might be found to verify such
accusations.

Winckelmann often complains bitterly of the philosophers of his day and
thei