idea. There is a different air and complexion in characters as well as
in faces, though perhaps each equally beautiful; and the excellences of
one cannot be transferred to the other. Thus if one man possesses a
stoical apathy of soul, acts independent of the opinion of the world,
and fulfills every duty with mathematical exactness, you must not expect
that man to be greatly influenced by the weakness of pity, or the
partialities of friendship; you must not be offended that he does not
fly to meet you after a short absence, or require from him the convivial
spirit and honest effusions of a warm, open, susceptible heart. If
another is remarkable for a lively, active zeal, inflexible integrity, a
strong indignation against vice, and freedom in reproving it, he will
probably have some little bluntness in his address not altogether
suitable to polished life; he will want the winning arts of
conversation; he will disgust by a kind of haughtiness and negligence in
his manner, and often hurt the delicacy of his acquaintance with harsh
and disagreeable truths.

We usually say--That man is a genius, but he has some whims and
oddities--Such a one has a very general knowledge, but he is
superficial, etc. Now in all such cases we should speak more rationally,
did we substitute "therefore" for "but": "He is a genius, therefore he
is whimsical" and the like.

It is the fault of the present age, owing to the freer commerce that
different ranks and professions now enjoy with each other, that
characters are not marked with sufficient strength; the several classes
run too much into one another. We have fewer pedants, it is true, but we
have fewer striking originals. Every one is expected to have such a
tincture of general knowledge as is incompatible with going deep into
any science; and such a conformity to fashionable manners as checks the