Public Opinion Simplified

²³ In all cases, the agreement or disagreement of the feelings and judgments of other people with our own is important to us, proportionally as we ourselves are uncertain author:

• the propriety of our own feelings
• the accuracy of our own judgments

²⁴ A sensible man may sometimes feel great uneasiness lest he should have yielded too much even to an honourable feeling.

He is anxiously afraid lest, meaning only to act with spirit, and to do justice, he may, from the too great vehemence of his emotion, have done a real injury to some other person; who, though not innocent, may not have been so guilty as he at first apprehended. Other people’s opinion becomes of the utmost importance to him. Their approbation is the most healing balsam; their disapprobation, the bitterest and most tormenting poison that can be poured into his uneasy mind. When he is perfectly satisfied with every part of his own conduct, the judgment of other people is often of less importance to him.

²⁵ There are some very noble and beautiful arts, in which the degree of excellence can be determined only by a certain nicety of taste.

However, the decisions arising from this taste appear always uncertain. There are others, in which the success admits, of clear demonstration, or very satisfactory proof. Among the candidates for excellence in those different arts, the anxiety about the public opinion is always much greater in the former than in the latter.

Poets, Mathematicians, Natural Philosophers are affected differently by public opinion

²⁶ The beauty of poetry is of such nicety.

A young beginner can never be certain that he has attained it. Therefore, favourable judgments of others delights him the most. This establishes the good opinion which he is anxious to have in his own performances. Their unfavourable judgements mortifies him most severely. This shakes that good opinion.

In time, experience and success may give him a little more confidence in his own judgment. However, he is always liable to be most severely mortified by the unfavourable judgments of the public.

Jean Racine The Phaedra was perhaps the finest tragedy in any language.

It was written by Jean Racine, who was so disgusted with the Phaedra’s unremarkable success. He resolved to stop writing for the stage even though he was at the height of his abilities. He frequently used to tell his son that the most impertinent criticism had always given him more pain than the highest and justest eulogy had ever given him pleasure. Voltaire’s extreme sensibility to the slightest censure of the same kind is well known.

Mr. Pope is the most correct, elegant and harmonious of all the English poets.

His Dunciad is an everlasting monument of how he was so much hurt by the criticisms of the lowest and most contemptible authors. Thomas Gray joins Milton’s sublimity with Pope’s elegance and harmony. He is perhaps the best English poet He was so much hurt by a foolish and impertinent parody of two of his finest odes. He afterwards never attempted any considerable work. Those men of letters who value themselves on fine writing in prose, approach somewhat to the sensibility of poets.

²⁷ On the contrary, mathematicians may have perfect assurance of the truth and importance of their discoveries.

They are frequently very indifferent about the public’s reception. Dr. Robert Simpson of Glasgow and Dr. Matthew Stewart of Edinburgh are two of the greatest mathematicians that I have had the honour to be known to.

I believe they are the two greatest living in my time. They never seemed to feel the slightest uneasiness from the public’s neglect and ignorance of their most valuable works. Sir Isaac Newton was a great man.

His Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy was neglected by the public for several years. His tranquility probably never suffered 15 minutes of interruption. Natural philosophers are independent of the public opinion.

They approach nearly to mathematicians. They enjoy the similar security and tranquility in their judgments on the merit of their own discoveries and observations.

²⁸ The morals of those classes of men of letters are perhaps sometimes affected by this very great difference in their public situation.

²⁹ Mathematicians and natural philosophers are independent of the public opinion.

They have little temptation to form themselves into factions and cabals to: support their own reputation or depress their rivals’ reputation They are almost always men of the most amiable simplicity of manners. They live in harmony with one another. They are the friends of one another’s reputation. They enter into no intrigue to secure the public applause. They are pleased when their works are approved of, without being much vexed or angry when they are neglected.

³⁰ It is not always the same with poets or fine writers.

They are very apt to divide themselves into literary factions.

Each cabal is, often avowedly and almost always secretly:

• the mortal enemy of the reputation of other cabals, and
• employing all the intrigue and solicitation to preoccupy the public opinion in favour of their own works and against those of its rivals.

In France, Despreaux and Racine did not think it below them to head a literary cabal to depress the reputation:

• first of Quinault and Perreault
• afterwards of Fontenelle and La Motte

They even treated the good La Fontaine with a most disrespectful kindness.

In England, the amiable Mr. Addison had a gentle and modest character.

Despite this, he headed the same little cabal to keep down Mr. Pope’s rising reputation. The academy of sciences is a society of mathematicians and natural philosophers Mr. Fontenelle wrote about its members. He frequently celebrated the amiable simplicity of their manners. He observes their manners as a universal quality among them as to be the characteristic of their group

The French academy is a society of poets and fine writers. Mr. D’Alembert wrote about its members. He frequently did not have this same remark. He nowhere pretends that that society had this amiable quality.

³¹ We naturally want to know other people’s opinion about our own merit because of:

• our uncertainty about our own merit, and
• our anxiety to think favourably of it:

We want to be:

• more than ordinarily elevated when that opinion is favourable, and
• more than ordinarily mortified when it is unfavourable.

But they should not make us desirous of obtaining the favourable or of avoiding the unfavourable opinion by intrigue and cabal. When a man has bribed the judges, the most unanimous court decision may gain him his lawsuit. However, it cannot give him any assurance that he was in the right. He never would have bribed the judges if he merely wanted to satisfy himself that he was in the right.

He bribed the judges because he wished to:

• find himself in the right and
• gain his lawsuit.

If praise were only a proof of our own praiseworthiness and of no consequence to us, we would never try to obtain it unfairly. Praise has some importance to wise men. Therefore, men very much above the common level sometimes have attempted to obtain praise and avoid blame by very unfair means.