A Philosophical Dictionary, Volume 03
⚠️ Content warning
- Language:
- English
- Status:
- Complete work
- Authorship:
- Written by the author
- Condition of the text:
- No scanning noise detected (automatic measure over the whole text, not checked by hand)
- Extent:
- ~81,100 words · 385 passages
Cite this work
- APAVoltaire. (n.d.). A Philosophical Dictionary, Volume 03. Digital reproduction: SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/voltaire/a-philosophical-dictionary-volume-03
- MLAVoltaire. A Philosophical Dictionary, Volume 03. Digital reproduction, SigPhi, https://sigphiai.com/en/works/voltaire/a-philosophical-dictionary-volume-03.
- ChicagoVoltaire. A Philosophical Dictionary, Volume 03. Digital reproduction, SigPhi. https://sigphiai.com/en/works/voltaire/a-philosophical-dictionary-volume-03.
Reference to the edition that SigPhi reproduces: SigPhi is its digital reproduction, not its publisher. The edition's year is not in the metadata (hence "n.d."), and the translator appears only when recorded.
What it is about
Volume 3 of ten of the Philosophical Dictionary. Bacchus – Chinese Catechism. The Chinese catechism is a whole dialogue, not an article.
Context and history
The form is the argument: a dictionary is consulted rather than read through, which made it impossible to refute as a whole and easy to circulate underground. Voltaire published it anonymously in 1764 and it was burned in Geneva and in Paris. A note on the edition: the catalogue holds TWO editions of the Philosophical Dictionary — this one in ten volumes and a single-volume Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary. They are not a duplicate: they are different selections and translations, and the articles do not correspond one to one. The original is French.
Editorial context, not a citable source: unlike the passages of the work itself, these statements cannot be checked against the corpus.
which is worse, on pretence of piety and religion?" What a question for a philosopher like Montaigne! Then, if Anacreon and Tibullus had been Iroquois, they would have eaten men! Alas! alas! SECTION III. Well; two Englishmen have sailed round the world. They have discovered that New Holland is an island larger than Europe, and that men still eat one another there, as in New Zealand. Whence come this race? supposing that they exist. Are they descended from the ancient Egyptians, from the ancient people of Ethiopia, from the Africans, from the Indians--or from the vultures, or the wolves? What a contrast between Marcus Aurelius, or Epictetus, and the cannibals of New Zealand! Yet they have the same organs, they are alike human beings. We have already treated on this property of the human race; it may not be amiss to add another paragraph. The following are St. Jerome's own words in one of his letters: _"Quid loquar de cæteris nationibus, quum ipse adolescentulus in Gallia viderim Scotos, gentem Britannicam, humanis vesci carnibus, et quum per silvas porcorum greges pecudumque reperiant, tamen pastorum nates et fæminarum papillas solere abscindere et has solas ciborum delicias arbitrari?"_--What shall I say of other nations; when I myself, when young, have seen Scotchmen in Gaul, who, though they might have fed on swine and other animals of the forest, chose rather to cut off the posteriors of the youths and the breasts of the young women, and considered them as the most delicious food." Pelloutier, who sought for everything that might do honor to the Celts, took the pains to contradict Jerome, and to maintain that his credulity had been imposed on. But Jerome speaks very gravely, and of what he _saw_. We may, with deference, dispute with a father of the church about what he has heard; but to doubt of what he has _seen_ is going very far. After all, the safest way is to doubt of everything, even of what we have seen ourselves.…