ON POPULAR KNOWLEDGE.

BY GEORGE S. HILLARD.


Against all institutions for the diffusion of knowledge among the
community, an objection is often urged that they can teach nothing
thoroughly, but only superficially, and that modest ignorance is better
than presumptuous half-knowledge. How frequently is it said that "a little
learning is a dangerous thing." This celebrated line is a striking
instance of the vitality which may be given to what is at least a very
doubtful proposition by throwing it into a pointed form. If anything be a
good at all, it is a good precisely in proportion to the extent in which
it is possessed or enjoyed. A great deal of it is better than a little,
but a little is better than none. No one says or thinks that a little
conscience, or a little wisdom, or a little faith, or a little charity is
a dangerous thing. Why then is a little learning dangerous? Alas, it is
not the little learning, but the much ignorance which it supposes, that is
dangerous!

We also frequently hear it said, that the general diffusion of popular
knowledge is unfavorable to great acquisitions in any one individual. This
is a favorite dogma with those persons whose views are all retrospective,
who are ever magnifying past ages at the expense of the present, and who
will insist upon riding through life with their faces turned toward the
horse's tail instead of his head. "We have smatterers and sciolists in
abundance," say they, "but where are the giant scholars of other days?"
Dr. Johnson once said, in reply to a remark upon the general intelligence
of the people of Scotland, that learning in Scotland was like bread in a
besieged city, where every man gets a mouthful, but none a full meal. He