some sort as the representative of learning in the arch
bishop’s household, he was constrained to take up the
defence of those principles of knowledge which he had
acquired at Chartres, against the vain substitutes for it
which were everywhere forcing themselves into notice-
His Metalogicus supposes a state of things somewhat
different from, somewhat more degenerate than, that to
which we have just now alluded. His opponents were
not solely the logical fanatics whose acquaintance he had
made at Paris, although b they were as fond of splitting
hairs. On the contrary they were animated by an im
partial contempt for all the educational tradition of the
schools : logic they scorned as heartily as they did gram
mar, and were confident of becoming philosophers by rule
of thumb. John had no difficulty in combating this supercilious attitude, but the interest of his treatise is that it
gives him occasion to discuss at large his favourite theme
of the interdependence of the several arts that relate
to the laws and functions of language, in other words, of
the Trivium : for he maintains it is only by a thorough
study of grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic, considered as
mutually connected and auxiliary, that we can lay the
foundations of genuine knowledge, Dialectic itself,
valuable and necessary as it is, is like the sword of
Hercules in a Pigmy s hand unless there be added to it
the accoutrement of the other sciences.
The Metalogicus has in one respect a peculiar value : dpranti.Gesch. d it is the first work in the middle ages in which the whole of Aristotle s (Jrganon is turned to account. Having thus a surer basis to build upon than any of his pre- inpoii cr.i. decessors, John relies entirely upon Aristotle for his logical theory. In reference to the crucial question of the universals he is the loyal disciple of Abailard, whose principles he elaborates from the newly discovered source. But even on a point to which supreme importance was attached by his contemporaries John declines to be positive : he chooses the conclusion of Aristotle not because of its absolute scientific truth but e because it is the best
