۱۳۹۵ آذر ۱۳, شنبه

دُلَع

دلع
بضم دال و فتح لام و عین مهمله نوع کبیر قُنفُذ است که قُنفُذ جبلی و بفارسی خارپشت و بترکی کرئی و در مازندران شال تشی و در دیلم شاکره و بهندی سینوه [پنجابی سیه] نامند
ماهیت ان
حیوانی است قریب بجثۀ سک کوچک و در پشت آن بجای مو خارهای ابلق از سیاهی و سفیدی بقدر شبری و زیاده و از قلم باریکتر و دو طرف آن باریک با تندی و چون بخشم آید خود را جمع کند و حرکت دهد خارها مانند تیر از کمان جسته از ان جدا کردد با اندک آوازی
افعال و خواص آن
ذرور سوختۀ آن جهت جراحات بغایت مفید و در سائر افعال مانند قنفذ است و ان شاء اللّه تعالی در حرف القاف خواهد آمد
///////////
دلع. [ دُ ل َ ] (ع اِ) نوعی خارپشت بزرگ . (منتهی الارب ).
//////////
تشی هندی (در متون طب سنتی دُلَع)(نام علمی: Hystrix indica)، که در ایران اغلب با عنوان تشی شناخته می‌شود، گونه‌ای تشی از تیره تشی‌های بر قدیم است. ایران، جنوب آسیا و خاورمیانه از جمله مناطق زندگی این پستاندار به شمار می‌روند.

تشی دارای لایه‌ای از خار بر پشت خود است که در هنگام احساس خطر، آن‌ها را در بدن جانور مهاجم فرو می‌برد. با داشتن طول سر و تنه‌ای بیشتر از ۷۰ سانتی‌متر، این جانور بزرگ‌ترین جونده ایران به شمار می‌رود.[۲] در ایران، تشی با نام‌های چوله[۳] و سیخور[۴] نیز خوانده می‌شود.

محتویات  [نهفتن]
۱        نام‌شناسی
۲        توصیف ظاهری
۳        زیستگاه‌ها
۴        منابع
نام‌شناسی[ویرایش]
به جز نام «تشی»، در فرهنگ‌های فارسی این نام‌ها نیز برای این جانور به‌کار رفته‌است: چوله، اتشی، بیهن، پـَهمَزَک[۵]، جکاشه، چَکاسه، خارانداز، رُکاسه، رکاشه، ریکاسه، ریگاشه، زُکاسه، زکاشه، سُکاسته، سکاسه، سکاشه، سکاشته، کاسُج، کاسجوک، کوله، بوزوم قوره (خراسانی).[۶] همچنین «گربه تیغی» نیز گفته می‌شود و نام‌های محلی چوله، سیخور، کرپی، کول تیغتیغه نیز دارد که گاه به غلط آنرا جوجه تیغی یا خارپشت می‌نامند.[۷] در شعری آمده است: «گرچه دارد ز اعتراض جهول/سینه پر تیر طعنه چون چوله/لیک نزدیک من چنان باشد/که سگ از دور می‌کند دوله»

واژه‌های کاس و کاش که در زبان‌های ایرانی به معنای خوک است در ترکیب بخشی از نام‌های بالا دیده می‌شود. نام این جانور در انگلیسی یعنی Porcupine و تلفظ‌های مشابه در دیگر زبان‌های اروپایی نیز به معنی «خوک تیغی» است.[۸]

توصیف ظاهری[ویرایش]
طول سر و تنه این پستاندار ۷۰ تا ۹۰ سانتی‌متر است، طول هر یک از خارها ۱۸ تا ۳۵ سانتی‌متر، و وزن آن به ۱۱ تا ۲۵ کیلوگرم می‌رسد. دم تشی هندی نیز ۸ تا ۱۰ سانتی‌متر طول دارد.

خارهای بلند روی بدن تشی او را از سایر پستانداران متمایز می‌کند. خارهای ناحیه گردن و شانه نازک و بلند است، موقعی که آن‌ها را سیخ می‌کند به شکل بادبزن در می‌آیند و جانور بزرگ‌تر به نظر می‌رسد. خارهای قسمت پشت کوتاه‌تر و کمی کلفت‌تر با نوارهای سیاه و زرد، و خارهای ناحیه دم کوتاه و سفیدند. بر خلاف تصور، تشی نمی‌تواند خارهای خود را پرت کند؛ بلکه در موقع احساس خطر برای بزرگ جلوه دادن خود خارها را سیخ می‌کند و خود را از پشت و یا بغل به جانور مهاجم می‌کوبد.[۹]

زیستگاه‌ها[ویرایش]
تشی جانوری بسیار محتاط است و تنها پس از تاریکی کامل از سوراخ خود بیرون می‌آید. سوراخ تشی دارای ورودی‌های بسیار است و در ژرفای زمین قرار دارد. این جانور در بیشتر زیستگاه‌ها اعم از جنگلی، کوهستانی، استپی و بیابانی زندگی می‌کند. پیرامون باغ‌ها و زمین‌های کشاورزی نیز از جمله مناطق سکونت آن هستند.[۱۰]

تشی در سال یک بار زادآوری می‌کند. دوره آبستنی آن حدود ۱۱۲ روز است و ۱ تا ۴ بچه در هر بار زایمان می‌زاید. بچه‌ها در هنگام تولد دارای مو و چشم‌های باز هستند. آن‌ها تا دو ماهگی به مادر خود وابسته‌اند و در یک سالگی به بلوغ می‌رسند. طول عمر تشی‌های هندی حدود ۱۵ سال است.

منابع[ویرایش]
پرش به بالا ↑ Amori, G. , Hutterer, R. , Kryštufek, B. , Yigit, N. , Mitsain, G. & Palomo, L.J. Hystrix indica. IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2013.2, 2008. Retrieved 17 December 2013.
پرش به بالا ↑ ضیایی، راهنمای صحرایی پستانداران ایران، ۱۸۳.
پرش به بالا ↑ دهخدا
پرش به بالا ↑ [۱]
پرش به بالا ↑ پهمزک در گویش لاری به معنای بزمجه است. په در زبان‌های ایرانی به معنی بز است و پهمزک و بزمجه هر دو یعنی مکنده بز. نگا: چند واژه: صادق کیا، در: گاهنامه هنرهای زیبای کشور، شماره ۲، ۱۳۴۱ خورشیدی. ص۱۵۳.
پرش به بالا ↑ چند واژه: صادق کیا، در: گاهنامه هنرهای زیبای کشور، شماره ۲، ۱۳۴۱ خورشیدی. ص۱۵۳.
پرش به بالا ↑ عکس/شکار دلخراش یک حیوان بوشهرنیوز
پرش به بالا ↑ چند واژه: صادق کیا، در: گاهنامه هنرهای زیبای کشور، شماره ۲، ۱۳۴۱ خورشیدی. ص۱۵۵.
پرش به بالا ↑ «تشی». وب‌گاه کویرها و بیابان‌های ایران. بازبینی‌شده در ۲۷ آذر ۱۳۹۲.
پرش به بالا ↑ عبدلی، اصغر، بهرام کیابی، حسین مصطفوی، بابک موسوی، فراهم احمدزاده، پونه رسولی، حسین دلشب و دیگران. اطلس حیات وحش (مهره‌داران) استان بوشهر. انتشارات معارف، ۱۳۸۸. ۱۹۶. شابک ‎۹۷۸-۹۶۴-۲۶۷۶-۲۴-۸.
ضیایی، هوشنگ. راهنمای صحرایی پستانداران ایران. چاپ اول. تهران: سازمان حفاظت محیط زیست، ۱۳۷۵. ۳۰۰. شابک ‎978-964-04-1996-0.
[نمایش] ن ب و
گونه‌های زنده خانواده تشی‌های بر قدیم Hystricidae
رده‌ها: سیاهه قرمز IUCN از گونه‌های با کمترین نگرانی پستانداران آسیای جنوب غربی پستانداران آسیای جنوبی پستانداران اسرائیل پستانداران ایران پستانداران جمهوری آذربایجان پستانداران خاورمیانه پستانداران هند تشی‌های بر قدیم
ویکی
///////////
لشيهم المتوج الهندي أو الشيهم الهندي (الاسم العلمي: Hystrix indica) عضو من شياهم العالم القديم وهو قارض ضخم قابل للتكيف تماماً، وجد في جميع أنحاء جنوب آسيا وفي الشرق الأوسط، فهو يتكيف بسهولة مع البيئات المختلفة: الجبال والمراعي الاستوائية وشبه الاستوائية وأراضي الآجام والغابات. طول الشيهم المتوج الهندي 70 - 90 سنتيمتر، وزنه 11 - 18 كيلوغرام. تغطي جسده الأشواك، تكون الأشواك جوفاء يهزها فتحدث قعقعة لترويع الحيوانات المفترسة[2].
مراجع[عدل]
^ مذكور في : القائمة الحمراء للأنواع المهددة بالانقراض 2016.2 — معرف القائمة الحمراء للأنواع المهددة بالانقراض: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/10751/0 — تاريخ الاطلاع: 18 سبتمبر 2016 — عنوان : The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016.2 — تاريخ النشر: 4 سبتمبر 2016
^ الشيهم المتوج الهندي
شاهد أيضاً[عدل]
قائمة ثدييات منطقة الجوف.
//////////
به آذری هیندِستان تیراندازی:
Hindistan tirəndazı (lat. Hystrix indica) – (Rodentia) dəstəsindan bir məməli heyvan növü.
////////////
به عبری ماتسوئی، دوبان:
דָּרְבָּן מצוי (שם מדעי: Hystrix indica) הוא המכרסם הגדול ביותר ביבשת אסיה והיחיד מבין משפחתו (דרבניים) המצוי באופן טבעי בישראל. הוא נקרא כך בשל הדָּרְבָּנוֹת (קוצים ארוכים) המכסים את גופו. מין זה ידוע גם בשם 'דרבן הודי'.
////////////////
به پنجابی سیه:
سیہ مگر تے وڈے کنڈیاں والا اک جنور اے۔ اے دنداں نال کتر کے کھان والا اے۔ اے پاکستان، ہندستان تے کئی ہور دیساں وچ ریندا اے۔
//////////
به ترکی استانبولی هینت اوکلو کیرپیسی:
Hint oklu kirpisi (Hystrix indica), oklu kirpigiller (Hystricidae) familyasından bir kemirici türü.
"Kirpi" olarak adlandırılsa da kirpiler ile akrabalığı yoktur.
/////////////
Indian crested porcupine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Indian crested porcupine
Hystrix indica (Indian Crested Porcupine) at IG Zoological park, Visakhapatnam 03.JPG
Conservation status
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Status_iucn3.1_LC.svg/220px-Status_iucn3.1_LC.svg.png
Least Concern (IUCN 3.1)[1]
Scientific classification
Kingdom:
Animalia
Phylum:
Chordata
Class:
Mammalia
Order:
Rodentia
Family:
Hystricidae
Genus:
Hystrix
Subgenus:
Hystrix
Species:
H. indica
Binomial name
Hystrix indica
Kerr, 1792
The Indian crested porcupine (Hystrix indica), or Indian porcupine, is a large species of Hystricomorph rodent (order Rodentia) belonging to the Old World porcupine family, Hystricidae.[1] It is native to southern Asia and the Middle East.[1]
Contents
  [show] 
Description[edit]
The Indian crested porcupine is a large rodent, weighing 11–18 kg.[2] Their body (from the nose to the base of the tail) measures between 70–90 cm, with the tail adding an additional 8–10 cm.[3] The lifespan of wild Indian crested porcupines is unknown, but the oldest known captive individual was a female that lived to be 27.1 years old.[2]
It is covered in multiple layers of modified hair called quills, with longer, thinner quills covering a layer of shorter, thicker ones.[2] The quills are brown or black with alternating white and black bands.[4] They are made of keratin and are relatively flexible.[4] Each quill is connected to a muscle at its base, allowing the porcupine to raise its quills when it feels threatened.[4] The longest quills are located on the neck and shoulder, where the quills form a "skirt" around the animal.[4] These quills can grow up to 51 cm (20 in) long,[4] with most measuring between 15–30 cm.[5] Smaller (20 cm) and more rigid quills are packed densely on the back and rump.[4] These smaller quills are used to stab at potential threats.[4] The base of the tail contains shorter quills that appear white in color, with longer, hollow quills that the porcupine can rattle to produce a warning sound when threatened.[6] Contrary to popular belief, Indian crested porcupines (like all porcupines) cannot shoot their quills.[4]
The Indian crested porcupine has a stocky build with a low surface area to volume ratio, which aids in heat conservation.[7] It has broad hands and feet with long claws used for burrowing.[2] Like all porcupines, the Indian crested porcupine has a good sense of smell and sharp, chisel-like incisors.[4]
Habitat and Distribution[edit]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Hystrix_indica.jpg/220px-Hystrix_indica.jpg
Indian crested porcupine on a rocky hillside
Indian crested porcupines are found throughout southwest and central Asia and in parts of the Middle East,[2] including Afghanistan, Armenia, Azerbaijan, China, Georgia, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Nepal, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Turkmenistan, and Yemen.[1] Due to their flexible environmental tolerances, Indian crested porcupines occupy a broad range of habitats.[1] They prefer rocky hillsides,[2] but are also common in tropical and temperate shrub-lands, grasslands, forests, plantations, and gardens.[1] Their range seems to be limited by seasonal densities of forage and the availability of suitable substrates for digging burrows.[8] More specifically, the northern range of the Indian crested porcupine is limited by minimum summer night duration: they do not occur above latitudes where minimum night duration is less than 7 hours, presumably because of the amount of foraging time required to meet their dietary needs.[9]
Diet[edit]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a3/Indian_Crested_Porcupine.JPG/220px-Indian_Crested_Porcupine.JPG
A captive Hystrix indica eating plant material
Indian crested porcupines have a very broad and mostly herbivorous diet.[2]They consume a variety of natural and agricultural plant material, including roots, bulbs, fruits, grains, and tubers, along with insects and small vertebrates.[2][3][10][11][12] Because they are cecal digesters, they are able to exploit low quality forage.[13] They have also been known to chew on bones to acquire minerals, such as calcium, that aid in quill growth.[3][5] Their capability to form substantial fat reserves is a useful adaptation for living in seasonally fluctuating habitats.[7]
These porcupines can act as substantial habitat modifiers when excavating for tubers.[14][15] They are also considered serious agricultural pests in many parts of their range due to their taste for agricultural crops.[9][16] For these reasons, they are often regarded as a nuisance.[1]
Behavior[edit]
Like other Old World porcupines, the Indian crested porcupine is nocturnal.[2] Both adults and weaned juveniles spend an average of 7 hours foraging every night.[9][17][18] They tend to avoid moonlight in the winter months, which could be a strategy to evade predation.[17] However, during summer months they do not avoid moonlight (likely because there are less dark hours during which to forage) but instead tend to stay closer to their dens.[17] During the day, they remain in their dens,[18][19] but throughout the winter they will occasionally emerge from their dens during daylight hours to bask in the sun.[7]
The Indian crested porcupine is semi-fossorial.[2] They live in natural caves or in excavated burrows.[18][19] Because they do not climb or jump well, they spend most of their life on or under the ground.[4] However, they are good swimmers.[4]
Predators of the Indian crested porcupine include large cats,[20][21] caracals, wolves, striped hyenas, and humans.[17]When excited or scared, a porcupine will stand its quills up to appear larger.[4] It can also rattle the hollow quills at the base of its tail, stomp its feet, growl, grunt, or charge backward into the threat.[4]
Reproduction[edit]
Indian crested porcupines mate in February and March.[22] Gestation lasts an average of 240 days.[5] A female gives birth to one brood of 2-4 offspring per year.[3] Young are born with open eyes and are covered in short, soft quills that harden within a few hours after birth.[2] Young are fully weaned 13–19 weeks after birth, but remain in the den with parents and siblings until sexual maturity at around 2 years of age.[22] The Indian crested porcupine is usually monogamous, and both parents live in the den with their offspring throughout the year.[2]
Conservation[edit]
Due to its adaptability to a wide range of habitats and food types, the Indian crested porcupine is listed by the IUCN as Least Concern as of 2008.[1][2] Populations are stable and not severely fragmented, and while population status varies across its range, in many places it is common enough to be considered a pest.[1] However, as a result of urbanization, infrastructure development, and pesticide use, suitable porcupine habitat is currently declining.[2]
The Indian crested porcupine is protected under the India Schedule IV of the Indian Wildlife Protection Act of 1972, amended up to 2002.[2] Nonetheless, because they are destructive to gardens and agricultural crops, porcupines are widely hunted.[5][23] There exists a large trade of these porcupines for consumption and medicinal use.[2] Despite being considered a pest, Indian crested porcupines play an important role in spreading seeds and pollen.[2]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b4/Hystrix_indica.JPG/220px-Hystrix_indica.JPG
Hystrix indica in a trap
References[edit]
1.     ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i Amori, G.; Hutterer, R.; Kryštufek, B.; Yigit, N.; Mitsain, G. & Muñoz, L. J. P. (2008). "Hystrix indica". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2008. International Union for Conservation of Nature. Retrieved 19 November 2015.
2.     ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q "Indian Crested Porcupine (Hystrix indica) - Information on Indian Crested Porcupine - Encyclopedia of Life". Encyclopedia of Life. Retrieved 2015-11-19.
3.     ^ Jump up to:a b c d Prater, Stanley Henry (1965). The Book of Indian Animals. Bombay: Diocesan Press.
4.     ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m "Indian Crested Porcupine". San Diego Zoo. Retrieved 2015-11-19.
5.     ^ Jump up to:a b c d Gurung, K.K.; Singh, R. (1996). Field Guide to the Mammals of the Indian Subcontinent. San Diego: Academic Press.
6.     Jump up^ Ellerman, J.R. (1961). The Fauna of India. New Delhi: Manager of Publications.
7.     ^ Jump up to:a b c Alkon, Philip U.; Degen, A. Allan; Cohen, Anat; Pollak, Haya (1986-05-01). "Seasonal Energy Requirements and Water Intakes of Indian Crested Porcupines (Hystrix indica) in Captivity". Journal of Mammalogy. 67 (2): 333–342. doi:10.2307/1380887. JSTOR 1380887.
8.     Jump up^ Gorbunov, A.V. (1985). "Features of the ecology of porcupines in the deserts of eastern Prikaspia". Soviet Journal of Ecology. 16: 248–253.
9.     ^ Jump up to:a b c Alkon, Philip U.; Saltz, David (1988-05-01). "Foraging Time and the Northern Range Limits of Indian Crested Porcupines (Hystrix indica Kerr)". Journal of Biogeography. 15 (3): 403–408. doi:10.2307/2845271. JSTOR 2845271.
10.  Jump up^ Arslan, Atilla (2008). "On the Indian crested porcupine, Hystrix indica (Kerr, 1792) in Turkey". Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences. 11: 315–317.
11.  Jump up^ Gutterman, Yitzchak; Herr, Nir (1981-01-01). "Influences of porcupine (Hystrix indica) activity on the slopes on the northern Negev mountains — Germination and vegetation renewal in different geomorphological types and slope directions". Oecologia. 51 (3): 332–334. doi:10.1007/BF00540902. ISSN 0029-8549.
12.  Jump up^ Kadhim, Abdul-Hassain H. (1997-01-01). "Distribution and reproduction of the Indian Crested Porcupine Hystrix indica (Hystricidae: Rodentia) in Iraq". Zoology in the Middle East. 15 (1): 9–12. doi:10.1080/09397140.1997.10637731. ISSN 0939-7140.
13.  Jump up^ Hanley, Thomas A. (1982-03-01). "The Nutritional Basis for Food Selection by Ungulates". Journal of Range Management. 35(2): 146–151. doi:10.2307/3898379. JSTOR 3898379.
14.  Jump up^ Olsvig-Whittaker, L.; Shachak, M.; Yair, A. (1983-11-01). "Vegetation patterns related to environmental factors in a Negev Desert watershed". Vegetatio. 54 (3): 153–165. doi:10.1007/BF00047104. ISSN 0042-3106.
15.  Jump up^ Yair, A.; Shachak, M. (1982-09-01). "A case study of energy, water and soil flow chains in an arid ecosystem". Oecologia. 54 (3): 389–397. doi:10.1007/BF00380008. ISSN 0029-8549.
16.  Jump up^ Hafeez, Shahid; S., Khan, G.; Ashfaq, Muhammad; H., Khan, Z. "Food habits of the Indian crested porcupine (Hystrix indica) in Faisalabad, Pakistan.". www.cabdirect.org. Retrieved 2015-11-20.
17.  ^ Jump up to:a b c d Alkon, Philip U.; Mitrani, David Saltz (1988-02-25). "Influence of Season and Moonlight on Temporal-Activity Patterns of Indian Crested Porcupines (Hystrix indica)". Journal of Mammalogy. 69 (1): 71–80. doi:10.2307/1381749. ISSN 0022-2372.
18.  ^ Jump up to:a b c Alkon, P. U.; Saltz, D. (1985-12-01). "Potatoes and the Nutritional Ecology of Crested Porcupines in a Desert Biome". Journal of Applied Ecology. 22 (3): 727–737. doi:10.2307/2403225. JSTOR 2403225.
19.  ^ Jump up to:a b Harrison, D.L. (1972). The Mammals of Arabia. 3. London: Ernest Benn.
20.  Jump up^ Kingdon, J.S. (1974). East African Mammals. 2. London: Academic Press.
21.  Jump up^ Owens, Mark; Owens, Delia (1984-01-01). Cry of the Kalahari. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. ISBN 0395647800.
22.  ^ Jump up to:a b van Aarde, R.J. (1985). "Reproduction in captive female Cape porcupines (Hystrix africaeaustralis)". Journal of Reproduction and Fertility. 75: 577–582.
23.  Jump up^ Qumsiyeh, Mazin B. (1996-01-01). Mammals of the Holy Land. Texas Tech University Press. ISBN 9780896723641.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/df/Wikispecies-logo.svg/34px-Wikispecies-logo.svg.png
Wikispecies has information related to: Hystrix indica

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg/30px-Commons-logo.svg.png
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Hystrix indica.

[show]
·         v
·         t
·         e
Extant species of family Hystricidae (Old World porcupines)
Categories: 
·         IUCN Red List least concern species

·         Hystricidae
·         Mammals of South Asia
·         Mammals of Southwest Asia
·         Mammals of India
·         Mammals of Azerbaijan
·         Mammals of the Middle East
ارسال شده توسط در

۱۳۹۵ آذر ۱۲, جمعه

جان لاک در سوء استفاده از واژگان Of the Abuse of Words,John Locke

Find EnlightenmentContentsPrevious Chapter
Chapter X
Of the Abuse of Words
I. Some words introduced without clear ideas annexed to them, even in their first original. One may observe, in all languages, certain words that, if they be examined, will be found in their first original, and their appropriated use, not to stand for any clear and distinct ideas. These, for the most part, the several sects of philosophy and religion have introduced. For their authors or promoters, either affecting something singular, and out of the way of common apprehensions, or to support some strange opinions, or cover some weakness of their hypothesis, seldom fail to coin new words, and such as, when they come to be examined, may justly be called insignificant terms. For, having either had no determinate collection of ideas annexed to them when they were first invented; or at least such as, if well examined, will be found inconsistent, it is no wonder, if, afterwards, in the vulgar use of the same party, they remain empty sounds, with little or no signification, amongst those who think it enough to have them often in their mouths, as the distinguishing characters of their Church or School, without much troubling their heads to examine what are the precise ideas they stand for. I shall not need here to heap up instances; every man's reading and conversation will sufficiently furnish him. Or if he wants to be better stored, the great mintmasters of this kind of terms, I mean the Schoolmen and Metaphysicians (under which I think the disputing natural and moral philosophers of these latter ages may be comprehended) have wherewithal abundantly to content him.
3. II. Other words, to which ideas were annexed at first, used afterwards without distinct meanings. Others there be who extend this abuse yet further, who take so little care to lay by words, which, in their primary notation have scarce any clear and distinct ideas which they are annexed to, that, by an unpardonable negligence, they familiarly use words which the propriety of language has affixed to very important ideas, without any distinct meaning at all. Wisdom, glory, grace, &c., are words frequent enough in every man's mouth; but if a great many of those who use them should be asked what they mean by them, they would be at a stand, and not know what to answer: a plain proof, that, though they have learned those sounds, and have them ready at their tongues ends, yet there are no determined ideas laid up in their minds, which are to be expressed to others by them.
4. This occasioned by men learning names before they have the ideas the names belong to. Men having been accustomed from their cradles to learn words which are easily got and retained, before they knew or had framed the complex ideas to which they were annexed, or which were to be found in the things they were thought to stand for, they usually continue to do so all their lives; and without taking the pains necessary to settle in their minds determined ideas, they use their words for such unsteady and confused notions as they have, contenting themselves with the same words other people use; as if their very sound necessarily carried with it constantly the same meaning. This, though men make a shift with in the ordinary occurrences of life, where they find it necessary to be understood, and therefore they make signs till they are so; yet this insignificancy in their words, when they come to reason concerning either their tenets or interest, manifestly fills their discourse with abundance of empty unintelligible noise and jargon, especially in moral matters, where the words for the most part standing for arbitrary and numerous collections of ideas, not regularly and permanently united in nature, their bare sounds are often only thought on, or at least very obscure and uncertain notions annexed to them. Men take the words they find in use amongst their neighbors; and that they may not seem ignorant what they stand for, use them confidently, without much troubling their heads about a certain fixed meaning; whereby, besides the ease of it, they obtain this advantage, That, as in such discourses they seldom are in the right, so they are as seldom to be convinced that they are in the wrong; it being all one to go about to draw those men out of their mistakes who have no settled notions, as to dispossess a vagrant of his habitation who has no settled abode. This I guess to be so; and every one may observe in himself and others whether it be so or not.
5. Unsteady application of them. Secondly, Another great abuse of words is inconstancy in the use of them. It is hard to find a discourse written on any subject, especially of controversy, wherein one shall not observe, if he read with attention, the same words (and those commonly the most material in the discourse, and upon which the argument turns) used sometimes for one collection of simple ideas, and sometimes for another; which is a perfect abuse of language. Words being intended for signs of my ideas, to make them known to others, not by any natural signification, but by a voluntary imposition, it is plain cheat and abuse, when I make them stand sometimes for one thing and sometimes for another; the wilful doing whereof can be imputed to nothing but great folly, or greater dishonesty. And a man, in his accounts with another may, with as much fairness make the characters of numbers stand sometimes for one and sometimes for another collection of units: v.g. this character 3, stand sometimes for three, sometimes for four, and sometimes for eight, as in his discourse or reasoning make the same words stand for different collections of simple ideas. If men should do so in their reckonings, I wonder who would have to do with them? One who would speak thus in the affairs and business of the world, and call 8 sometimes seven, and sometimes nine, as best served his advantage, would presently have clapped upon him, one of the two names men are commonly disgusted with. And yet in arguings and learned contests, the same sort of proceedings passes commonly for wit and learning; but to me it appears a greater dishonesty than the misplacing of counters in the casting up a debt; and the cheat the greater, by how much truth is of greater concernment and value than money.
6. III. Affected obscurity, as in the Peripatetick and other sects of philosophy. Thirdly, Another abuse of language is an affected obscurity; by either applying old words to new and unusual significations; or introducing new and ambiguous terms, without defining either; or else putting them so together, as may confound their ordinary meaning. Though the Peripatetick philosophy has been most eminent in this way, yet other sects have not been wholly clear of it. There are scarce any of them that are not cumbered with some difficulties (such is the imperfection of human knowledge,) which they have been fain to cover with obscurity of terms, and to confound the signification of words, which, like a mist before people's eyes, might hinder their weak parts from being discovered. That body and extension in common use, stand for two distinct ideas, is plain to any one that will but reflect a little. For were their signification precisely the same, it would be as proper, and as intelligible to say, "the body of an extension," as the "extension of a body"; and yet there are those who find it necessary to confound their signification. To this abuse, and the mischiefs of confounding the signification of words, logic, and the liberal sciences as they have been handled in the schools, have given reputation; and the admired Art of Disputing hath added much to the natural imperfection of languages, whilst it has been made use of and fitted to perplex the signification of words, more than to discover the knowledge and truth of things: and he that will look into that sort of learned writings, will find the words there much more obscure, uncertain, and undetermined in their meaning, than they are in ordinary conversation.
8. Calling it "subtlety. " This, though a very useless skin, and that which I think the direct opposite to the ways of knowledge, hath yet passed hitherto under the laudable and esteemed names of subtlety and acuteness, and has had the applause of the schools, and encouragement of one part of the learned men of the world. And no wonder, since the philosophers of old, (the disputing and wrangling philosophers I mean, such as Lucian wittily and with reason taxes), and the Schoolmen since, aiming at glory and esteem, for their great and universal knowledge, easier a great deal to be pretended to than really acquired, found this a good expedient to cover their ignorance, with a curious and inexplicable web of perplexed words, and procure to themselves the admiration of others, by unintelligible terms, the apter to produce wonder because they could not be understood: whilst it appears in all history, that these profound doctors were no wiser nor more useful than their neighbours, and brought but small advantage to human life or the societies wherein they lived: unless the coining of new words, where they produced no new things to apply them to, or the perplexing or obscuring the signification of old ones, and so bringing all things into question and dispute, were a thing profitable to the life of man, or worthy commendation and reward.
9. This learning very little benefits society. For, notwithstanding these learned disputants, these all-knowing doctors, it was to the unscholastic statesman that the governments of the world owed their peace, defence, and liberties; and from the illiterate and contemned mechanic (a name of disgrace) that they received the improvements of useful arts. Nevertheless, this artificial ignorance, and learned gibberish, prevailed mightily in these last ages, by the interest and artifice of those who found no easier way to that pitch of authority and dominion they have attained, than by amusing the men of business, and ignorant, with hard words, or employing the ingenious and idle in intricate disputes about unintelligible terms, and holding them perpetually entangled in that endless labyrinth. Besides, there is no such way to gain admittance, or give defence to strange and absurd doctrines, as to guard them round about with legions of obscure, doubtful, and undefined words. Which yet make these retreats more like the dens of robbers, or holes of foxes, than the fortresses of fair warriors: which, if it be hard to get them out of, it is not for the strength that is in them, but the briars and thorns, and the obscurity of the thickets they are beset with. For untruth being unacceptable to the mind of man, there is no other defence left for absurdity but obscurity.
10. But destroys the instruments of knowledge and communication. Thus learned ignorance, and this art of keeping even inquisitive men from true knowledge, hath been propagated in the world, and hath much perplexed, whilst it pretended to inform the understanding. For we see that other well-meaning and wise men, whose education and parts had not acquired that acuteness, could intelligibly express themselves to one another; and in its plain use make a benefit of language. But though unlearned men well enough understood the words white and black, &c., and had constant notions of the ideas signified by those words; yet there were philosophers found who had learning and subtlety enough to prove that snow was black; i.e. to prove that white was black. Whereby they had the advantage to destroy the instruments and means of discourse, conversation, instruction, and society; whilst, with great art and subtlety, they did no more but perplex and confound the signification of words, and thereby render language less useful than the real defects of it had made it; a gift which the illiterate had not attained to.
11. As useful as to confound the sounds that the letters of the alphabet stand for. These learned men did equally instruct men's understandings, and profit their lives, as he who should alter the signification of known characters, and, by a subtle device of learning, far surpassing the capacity of the illiterate, dull, and vulgar, should in his writing show that he could put A for B, and D for E, &c., to the no small admiration and benefit of his reader. It being as senseless to put black, which is a word agreed on to stand for one sensible idea, to put it, I say, for another, or the contrary idea; i.e. to call snow black, as to put this mark A, which is a character agreed on to stand for one modification of sound, made by a certain motion of the organs of speech, for B, which is agreed on to stand for another modification of sound, made by another certain mode of the organs of speech.
12. This art has perplexed religion and justice. Nor hath this mischief stopped in logical niceties, or curious empty speculations; it hath invaded the great concernments of human life and society; obscured and perplexed the material truths of law and divinity; brought confusion, disorder, and uncertainty into the affairs of mankind; and if not destroyed, yet in a great measure rendered useless, these two great rules, religion and justice. What have the greatest part of the comments and disputes upon the laws of God and man served for, but to make the meaning more doubtful, and perplex the sense? What have been the effect of those multiplied curious distinctions, and acute niceties, but obscurity and uncertainty, leaving the words more unintelligible, and the reader more at a loss? How else comes it to pass that princes, speaking or writing to their servants, in their ordinary commands are easily understood; speaking to their people, in their laws, are not so? And, as I remarked before, doth it not often happen that a man of an ordinary capacity very well understands a text, or a law, that he reads, till he consults an expositor, or goes to counsel; who, by that time he hath done explaining them, makes the words signify either nothing at all, or what he pleases.
14. IV. By taking words for things. Fourthly, Another great abuse of words, is the taking them for things. This, though it in some degree concerns all names in general, yet more particularly affects those of substances. To this abuse those men are most subject who most confine their thoughts to anyone system, and give themselves up into a firm belief of the perfection of any received hypothesis: whereby they come to be persuaded that the terms of that sect are so suited to the nature of things, that they perfectly correspond with their real existence. Who is there that has been bred up in the Peripatetick philosophy, who does not think the Ten Names, under which are ranked the Ten Predicaments, to be exactly conformable to the nature of things? Who is there of that school that is not persuaded that substantial forms, vegetative souls, abhorrence of a vacuum, intentional species, &c., are something real? These words men have learned from their very entrance upon knowledge, and have found their masters and systems lay great stress upon them: and therefore they cannot quit the opinion, that they are conformable to nature, and are the representations of something that really exists. The Platonists have their soul of the world, and the Epicureans their endeavour towards motion in their atoms when at rest. There is scarce any sect in philosophy has not a distinct set of terms that others understand not. But yet this gibberish, which, in the weakness of human understanding, serves so well to palliate men's ignorance, and cover their errors, comes, by familiar use amongst those of the same tribe, to seem the most important part of language, and of all other the terms the most significant: and should aerial and aetherial vehicles come once, by the prevalency of that doctrine, to be generally received anywhere, no doubt those terms would make impressions on men's minds, so as to establish them in the persuasion of the reality of such things, as much as Peripatetick forms and intentional species have heretofore done.
15. Instance, in matter. How much names taken for things are apt to mislead the understanding, the attentive reading of philosophical writers would abundantly discover; and that perhaps in words little suspected of any such misuse. I shall instance in one only, and that a very familiar one. How many intricate disputes have there been about matter, as if there were some such thing really in nature, distinct from body; as it is evident the word matter stands for an idea distinct from the idea of body? For if the ideas these two terms stood for were precisely the same, they might indifferently in all places be put for one another. But we see that though it be proper to say, There is one matter of all bodies, one cannot say, There is one body of all matters: we familiarly say one body is bigger than another; but it sounds harsh (and I think is never used) to say one matter is bigger than another. Whence comes this, then? Viz. from hence: that, though matter and body be not really distinct, but wherever there is the one there is the other; yet matter and body stand for two different conceptions, whereof the one is incomplete, and but a part of the other. For body stands for a solid extended figured substance, whereof matter is but a partial and more confused conception; it seeming to me to be used for the substance and solidity of body, without taking in its extension and figure: and therefore it is that, speaking of matter, we speak of it always as one, because in truth it expressly contains nothing but the idea of a solid substance, which is everywhere the same, everywhere uniform. This being our idea of matter, we no more conceive or speak of different matters in the world than we do of different solidities; though we both conceive and speak of different bodies, because extension and figure are capable of variation. But, since solidity cannot exist without extension and figure, the taking matter to be the name of something really existing under that precision, has no doubt produced those obscure and unintelligible discourses and disputes, which have filled the heads and books of philosophers concerning materia prima; which imperfection or abuse, how far it may concern a great many other general terms I leave to be considered. This, I think, I may at least say, that we should have a great many fewer disputes in the world, if words were taken for what they are, the signs of our ideas only; and not for things themselves. For, when we argue about matter, or any the like term, we truly argue only about the idea we express by that sound, whether that precise idea agree to anything really existing in nature or no. And if men would tell what ideas they make their words stand for, there could not be half that obscurity or wrangling in the search or support of truth that there is.
17. V. By setting them in the place of what they cannot signify. Fifthly Another abuse of words is the setting them in the place of things which they do or can by no means signify. We may observe that in the general names of substances whereof the nominal essences are only known to us when we put them into propositions, and affirm or deny anything about them, we do most commonly tacitly suppose or intend, they should stand for the real essence of a certain sort of substances. For, when a man says gold is malleable, he means and would insinuate something more than this. That what I call gold is malleable, (though truly it amounts to no more,) but would have this understood, viz. That gold, i.e. what has the real essence of gold, is malleable; which amounts to thus much, that malleableness depends on, and is inseparable from the real essence of gold. But a man, not knowing wherein that real essence consists, the connexion in his mind of malleableness is not truly with an essence he knows not, but only with the sound gold he puts for it. Thus, when we say that animal rationale is, and animal implume bipes latis unguibus is not a good definition of a man; it is plain we suppose the name man in this case to stand for the real essence of a species, and would signify that "a rational animal" better described that real essence than "a two-legged animal with broad nails, and without feathers." For else, why might not Plato as properly make the word anthropos, or man, stand for his complex idea, made up of the idea of a body, distinguished from others by a certain shape and other outward appearances, as Aristotle make the complex idea to which he gave the name anthropos, or man, of body and the faculty of reasoning joined together; unless the name anthropos, or man, were supposed to stand for something else than what it signifies; and to be put in the place of some other thing than the idea a man professes he would express by it?
18. V. g. Putting them for the real essences of substances. It is true the names of substances would be much more useful, and propositions made in them much more certain, were the real essences of substances the ideas in our minds which those words signified. And it is for want of those real essences that our words convey so little knowledge or certainty in our discourses about them; and therefore the mind, to remove that imperfection as much as it can, makes them, by a secret supposition, to stand for a thing having that real essence, as if thereby it made some nearer approaches to it. For, though the word man or gold signify nothing truly but a complex idea of properties united together in one sort of substances; yet there is scarce anybody, in the use of these words, but often supposes each of those names to stand for a thing having the real essence on which these properties depend. Which is so far from diminishing the imperfection of our words, that by a plain abuse it adds to it, when we would make them stand for something, which, not being in our complex idea, the name we use can no ways be the sign of.
19. Hence we think change of our complex ideas of substances not to change their species. This shows us the reason why in mixed modes any of the ideas that make the composition of the complex one being left out or changed, it is allowed to be another thing, i.e. to be of another species, as is plain in chance-medley, manslaughter, murder, parricide, &c. The reason whereof is, because the complex idea signified by that name is the real as well as nominal essence; and there is no secret reference of that name to any other essence but that. But in substances, it is not so. For though in that called gold, one puts into his complex idea what another leaves out, and vice versa: yet men do not usually think that therefore the species is changed: because they secretly in their minds refer that name, and suppose it annexed to a real immutable essence of a thing existing, on which those properties depend. He that adds to his complex idea of gold that of fixedness and solubility in aqua regia, which he put not in it before, is not thought to have changed the species; but only to have a more perfect idea, by adding another simple idea, which is always in fact joined with those other, of which his former complex idea consisted. But this reference of the name to a thing, whereof we have not the idea, is so far from helping at all, that it only serves the more to involve us in difficulties. For by this tacit reference to the real essence of that species of bodies, the word gold (which, by standing for a more or less perfect collection of simple ideas, serves to design that sort of body well enough in civil discourse) comes to have no signification at all, being put for somewhat whereof we have no idea at all, and so can signify nothing at all, when the body itself is away. For however it may be thought all one, yet, if well considered, it will be found a quite different thing, to argue about gold in name, and about a parcel in the body itself, v.g. a piece of leaf-gold laid before us; though in discourse we are fain to substitute the name for the thing.
20. The cause of this abuse, a supposition of nature's working always regularly, in setting boundaries to species. That which I think very much disposes men to substitute their names for the real essences of species, is the supposition before mentioned, that nature works regularly in the production of things, and sets the boundaries to each of those species, by giving exactly the same real internal constitution to each individual which we rank under one general name. Whereas anyone who observes their different qualities can hardly doubt, that many of the individuals, called by the same name, are, in their internal constitution, as different one from another as several of those which are ranked under different specific names. This supposition, however, that the same precise and internal constitution goes always with the same specific name, makes men forward to take those names for the representatives of those real essences; though indeed they signify nothing but the complex ideas they have in their minds when they use them. So that, if I may so say, signifying one thing, and being supposed for, or put in the place of another, they cannot but, in such a kind of use, cause a great deal of uncertainty in men's discourses; especially in those who have thoroughly imbibed the doctrine of substantial forms, whereby they firmly imagine the several species of things to be determined and distinguished.
21. This abuse contains two false suppositions. But however preposterous and absurd it be to make our names stand for ideas we have not, or (which is all one) essences that we know not, it being in effect to make our words the signs of nothing; yet it is evident to any one who ever so little reflects on the use men make of their words, that there is nothing more familiar. When a man asks whether this or that thing he sees, let it be a drill, or a monstrous foetus, be a man or no; it is evident the question is not, Whether that particular thing agree to his complex idea expressed by the name man: but whether it has in it the real essence of a species of things which he supposes his name man to stand for. In which way of using the names of substances, there are these false suppositions contained:-
22. VI. By proceeding upon the supposition that the words we use have a certain and evident signification which other men cannot but understand. Sixthly, there remains yet another more general, though perhaps less observed, abuse of words; and that is, that men having by a long and familiar use annexed to them certain ideas, they are apt to imagine so near and necessary a connexion between the names and the signification they use them in, that they forwardly suppose one cannot but understand what their meaning is; and therefore one ought to acquiesce in the words delivered, as if it were past doubt that, in the use of those common received sounds, the speaker and hearer had necessarily the same precise ideas. Whence presuming, that when they have in discourse used any term, they have thereby, as it were, set before others the very thing they talked of. And so likewise taking the words of others as naturally standing for just what they themselves have been accustomed to apply them to, they never trouble themselves to explain their own, or understand clearly others' meaning. From whence commonly proceeds noise, and wrangling, without improvement or information; whilst men take words to be the constant regular marks of agreed notions, which in truth are no more but the voluntary and unsteady signs of their own ideas. And yet men think it strange, if in discourse, or (where it is often absolutely necessary) in dispute, one sometimes asks the meaning of their terms: though the arguings one may every day observe in conversation make it evident, that there are few names of complex ideas which any two men use for the same just precise collection. It is hard to name a word which is hard to name a word which will not be a clear instance of this. Life is a term, none more familiar. Any one almost would take it for an affront to be asked what he meant by it. And yet if it comes in question, whether a plant that lies ready formed in the seed have life; whether the embryo in an egg before incubation, or a man in a swoon without sense or motion, be alive or no; it is easy to perceive that a clear, distinct, settled idea does not always accompany the use of so known a word as that of life is. Some gross and confused conceptions men indeed ordinarily have, to which they apply the common words of their language; and such a loose use of their words serves them well enough in their ordinary discourses or affairs. But this is not sufficient for philosophical inquiries. Knowledge and reasoning require precise determinate ideas. And though men will not be so importunately dull as not to understand what others say, without demanding an explication of their terms; nor so troublesomely critical as to correct others in the use of the words they receive from them: yet, where truth and knowledge are concerned in the case, I know not what fault it can be, to desire the explication of words whose sense seems dubious; or why a man should be ashamed to own his ignorance in what sense another man uses his words; since he has no other way of certainly knowing it but by being informed. This abuse of taking words upon trust has nowhere spread so far, nor with so ill effects, as amongst men of letters. The multiplication and obstinacy of disputes, which have so laid waste the intellectual world, is owing to nothing more than to this ill use of words. For though it be generally believed that there is great diversity of opinions in the volumes and variety of controversies the world is distracted with; yet the most I can find that the contending learned men of different parties do, in their arguings one with another, is, that they speak different languages. For I am apt to imagine, that when any of them, quitting terms, think upon things, and know what they think, they think all the same: though perhaps what they would have be different.
32. How men's words fail when they stand for substances. In our notions concerning Substances, we are liable to all the former inconveniences: v.g. he that uses the word tarantula, without having any imagination or idea of what it stands for, pronounces a good word; but so long means nothing at all by it. 2. He that, in a newly-discovered country, shall see several sorts of animals and vegetables, unknown to him before, may have as true ideas of them, as of a horse or a stag; but can speak of them only by a description, till he shall either take the names the natives call them by, or give them names himself. 3. He that uses the word body sometimes for pure extension, and sometimes for extension and solidity together, will talk very fallaciously. 4. He that gives the name horse to that idea which common usage calls mule, talks improperly, and will not be understood. 5. He that thinks the name centaur stands for some real being, imposes on himself, and mistakes words for things.
33. How when they stand for modes and relations. In Modes and Relations generally, we are liable only to the four first of these inconveniences; viz. 1. I may have in my memory the names of modes, as gratitude or charity, and yet not have any precise ideas annexed in my thoughts to those names. 2. I may have ideas, and not know the names that belong to them: v.g. I may have the idea of a man's drinking till his colour and humour be altered, till his tongue trips, and his eyes look red, and his feet fail him; and yet not know that it is to be called drunkenness. 3. I may have the ideas of virtues or vices, and names also, but apply them amiss: v.g. when I apply the name frugality to that idea which others call and signify by this sound, covetousness. 4. I may use any of those names with inconstancy. 5. But, in modes and relations, I cannot have ideas disagreeing to the existence of things: for modes being complex ideas, made by the mind at pleasure, and relation being but by way of considering or comparing two things together, and so also an idea of my own making, these ideas can scarce be found to disagree with anything existing; since they are not in the mind as the copies of things regularly made by nature, nor as properties inseparably flowing from the internal constitution or essence of any substance; but, as it were, patterns lodged in my memory, with names annexed to them, to denominate actions and relations by, as they come to exist. But the mistake is commonly in my giving a wrong name to my conceptions; and so using words in a different sense from other people: I am not understood, but am thought to have wrong ideas of them, when I give wrong names to them. Only if I put in my ideas of mixed modes or relations any inconsistent ideas together, I fill my head also with chimeras; since such ideas, if well examined, cannot so much as exist in the mind, much less any real being ever be denominated from them.
34. Seventhly, language is often abused by figurative speech. Since wit and fancy find easier entertainment in the world than dry truth and real knowledge, figurative speeches and allusion in language will hardly be admitted as an imperfection or abuse of it. I confess, in discourses where we seek rather pleasure and delight than information and improvement, such ornaments as are borrowed from them can scarce pass for faults. But yet if we would speak of things as they are, we must allow that all the art of rhetoric, besides order and clearness; all the artificial and figurative application of words eloquence hath invented, are for nothing else but to insinuate wrong ideas, move the passions, and thereby mislead the judgment; and so indeed are perfect cheats: and therefore, however laudable or allowable oratory may render them in harangues and popular addresses, they are certainly, in all discourses that pretend to inform or instruct, wholly to be avoided; and where truth and knowledge are concerned, cannot but be thought a great fault, either of the language or person that makes use of them. What and how various they are, will be superfluous here to take notice; the books of rhetoric which abound in the world, will instruct those who want to be informed: only I cannot but observe how little the preservation and improvement of truth and knowledge is the care and concern of mankind; since the arts of fallacy are endowed and preferred. It is evident how much men love to deceive and be deceived, since rhetoric, that powerful instrument of error and deceit, has its established professors, is publicly taught, and has always been had in great reputation: and I doubt not but it will be thought great boldness, if not brutality, in me to have said thus much against it. Eloquence, like the fair sex, has too prevailing beauties in it to suffer itself ever to be spoken against. And it is in vain to find fault with those arts of deceiving, wherein men find pleasure to be deceived.

http://enlightenment.supersaturated.com/johnlocke/BOOKIIIChapterX.html
ارسال شده توسط در
اشتراک در: پست‌ها (Atom)