On Prejudice by William Hazlitt (Questions & Answers)

 

On Prejudice

by William Hazlitt

(Questions & Answers)


 

1.               Define prejudice.

-    It means prejudging. We want to have our own point of view contrary to the evidence available.

 

2.               What leads to prejudice?

-    Ignorance, malice or perversity may lead to prejudice. Insufficient examination of the question under consideration tempts us into prejudice.

 

3.               Describe how ignorance results into prejudice.

-    We cannot have actual knowledge of many things in this world. We do not have any check of reason or enquiry. As a result, the absence of proof gives us an opportunity to decide things according to our own whims and fancies.

 

4.               Point out the simile used in Para 4 of the essay, On Prejudice.

-    In para 4 the writer has used a simile, comparing persons of native ignorance to spoiled children, who have never been away from home.

 

5.               How does a little knowledge spoil our personality?

-    If we know fewer things, we will not be able to judge impartially the things which are new and strange to us. We are prone to commit mistakes and decide unreasonably in our own favour.

 

6.               Why do certain things appear ridiculous and contemptible to us?

-    Certain things appear ridiculous and contemptible to us because we do not understand the right, impartial meaning of certain things or ideas. Human beings are fallible too.

 

7.               Why are the most ignorant people rude and insolent?

-    The most ignorant people are rude and insolent, because our knowledge has a narrow compass and we are shocked to see whatever does not suit our personality or our own veins.

 

8.               What do you mean by the two ideas about black colour?

-    The two ideas about colour refer to that of the blackness of sin and that of the dark colour of human beings; that is the Blacks.

 

9.               Why did we strive hard to remove the French republic?

-    We thought that republic and constitutional monarchy cannot go side by side though we had seen the successful examples of Holland, Switzerland and many other countries.

 

10.        Who became more offensive with the progress of civilization?

-    Those who offend good manner become more offensive with the progress of civilization.

 

11.        Why do all parties and sects insist upon their own technical distinction?

-    All parties and sects insist upon their own technical distinction, because giving up any part is considered as giving up the whole essence and vital interests of religion, morals and movement. As a result of it, they call their opponents traitors or atheists.

 

12.        Why did the Inquisition punish their victims?

-    The Inquisition punish their victims, because they considered the victims to be the followers of falsehood.

 

13.        Why is majority not necessary to decide a prejudice?

-    Majority is not necessary to decide a prejudice, because the truth or falsehood of an opinion does not depend on the numerical strength of its followers or opponents.

 

14.        Explain: Prejudice is egoism.

-    A thing may strike us casually or incompletely true but we insist that our casual impression is as good as a total and well-considered view. We want the world to be with us. Thus, prejudice leads to egoism.

 

15.        Comment on the style of the essay.

-    The prose used by the writer is lucid and precise. The nature of prejudice and factors responsible for it are examined in a scientific and systematic manner. There are least Biblical or historical allusions and the subject matter is not autobiographical or personalized.

 

16.        Comment on the universal appeal of the essay.

-    This essay, in subject matter and style, is not like other essays of Hazlitt. it has no autobiographical or verbose or rambling details. It is one of the didactic essays written in compact, lucid, aphoristic style, which is not the usual way of historical examples except a few. Thus, is has universal appeal for all times; past, present and future. It is written in the style of Bacon with some arguments to prove a proposition but is lacks in the worldly-wisdom of Bacon.

 

Post a Comment

0 Comments