Page:Of the conduct of the understanding (IA ofconductofunder00lock).pdf/19

Rh of a recluse student, who had made an object of the art of composition. It everywhere abounds with colloquial expressions, which he had probably caught by the ear from those whom he considered as models of good conversation; and hence, though it now seems somewhat antiquated and not altogether suited to the dignity of the subject, it may be presumed to have contributed its share towards the great object of turning the thoughts of his contemporaries to logical and metaphysical inquiries.

Although John Locke is so very imposing a figure in the history of intelligence, he holds but little place in that of pure literature. He has been called “perhaps the greatest, but certainly the most characteristic of English philosophers”; it might be added, the most. innocent of style. . . His style is prolix, dull, and without elevation; he expresses himself with perfect clearness indeed, but without variety or charm of any kind. He seems to have a contempt for all the arts of literature, and passes on from sentence to sentence, like a man talking aloud in his study, and intent only on making the matter in hand perfectly clear to himself. It is only proper to say that this is not the universal view, and that it is usual to speak of the homespun style of Locke as “forcible,” “incisive,” and even “ingenious.”