the most popular of their time; and the philosophical among poets, the
least popular of theirs."

"Take care," said Vincent, smiling, "that we are not misled by the point
of your deduction; the remark is true, but with a certain reservation,
viz. that the philosophy which renders a poet less popular, must be the
philosophy of learning, not of wisdom. Wherever it consists in the
knowledge of the plainer springs of the heart, and not in abstruse
inquiry into its metaphysical and hidden subtleties, it necessarily
increases the popularity of the poem; because, instead of being limited
to the few, it comes home to every one. Thus it is the philosophy of
Shakspeare, Byron, Horace, Pope, Moliere, which has put them into every
one's hands and hearts--while that of Propertius, even of Lucretius, of
Cowley, and Shelley, makes us often throw down the book, because it
fatigues us with the scholar. Philosophy, therefore, only sins in poetry,
when, in the severe garb of learning, it becomes 'harsh and crabbed,' and
not 'musical, as is Apollo's lute.'"

"Alas!" said I, "how much more difficult than of yore, education is
become--formerly, it had only one object--to acquire learning; and now,
we have not only to acquire it, but to know what to do with it when we
have--nay, there are not a few cases where the very perfection of
learning will be to appear ignorant."

"Perhaps," said Glanville, "the very perfection of wisdom may consist in
retaining actual ignorance. Where was there ever the individual who,
after consuming years, life, health, in the pursuit of science, rested
satisfied with its success, or rewarded by its triumph? Common sense
tells us that the best method of employing life, is to enjoy it. Common
sense tells us, also, the ordinary means of this enjoyment; health,