by mutual comparison measure together our several progress. I
found them as before, and where they were before; nor did they
appear to have reached the goal in unravelling the old questions,
nor had they added one jot of a proposition. The aims that once
inspired them, inspired them still: they had progressed in one
point only: they had unlearned moderation, they knew not modesty;
in such wise that one might despair of their recovery. And thus
experience taught me a manifest conclusion, that, whereas
dialectic furthers other studies, so if it remain by itself it
lies bloodless and barren, nor does it quicken the soul to yield
fruit of philosophy, except the same conceive from elsewhere.[14]

This was doubtless one of the experiences which led John to vigorous
argument on the futility of devotion to Logic alone, and on the
importance of a liberal education:

That eloquence is of no effect without wisdom is a saying that is
frequent and true. Whence it is evident that to be of effect it
operates within the limits of wisdom. Therefore eloquence is
effective in proportion to the measure of wisdom which each one
has acquired; for the former does harm if it is dissociated from
the latter.

From this it follows that dialectic, which is the quickest and
most prompt among the hand-maids of eloquence, is of use to each
one in proportion to the measure of his knowledge. For it is of
most use to him who knows the most and of least use to him who
knows little. For as the sword of Hercules in the hand of a pygmy
or dwarf is ineffective, while the same sword in the hand of
Achilles or Hector strikes down everything like a thunderbolt, so