SONG OF SOLOMON. 



SOPHISTS. 



centuries, often entitle their productions for more than one voice, 

 ' Part-Songs." 



Concerning the songs, or 2K<(Aio, of the Greeks, see Music and 

 SCOLLA. Of the Roman song, musically considered, we are without 

 information. Having more of war than of taste in their nature, the 

 Romans bestowed little thought on music, and coldly adopted what 

 was transmitted by the elegant Greeks. But music, as the term is at 

 present understood, is an art exclusively modern, and cannot be said to 

 have existed till the invention, or at least the use, of counterpoint. 



The poetry of modern songs has, in too many instances, degene- 

 rated, while the music of them has gradually improved. England, 

 from about the middle of the last century till a recent period, 

 furnished its full share of beautiful songs (this term excluding all airs 

 of greater pretensions) to the general stock. France rather later 

 began to contribute its fair quota ; and however opinions may differ 

 respecting the merit of earlier French melodies, it seems to be agreed 

 that they may now compete with those of most other nations. But it 

 must be admitted that Germany of late years has taken the lead in 

 this, as in higher departments of music. 



SONG OF SOLOMON. [SOLOMON'S SONG.] 



SONNET (Italian, Sunata, Svnetto), a form of poetry much used by 

 the Italian and Spanish poets, but which our deficiency of rhymes has 

 caused to be more sparingly used in English. The sonnet properly 

 consists of two quatrains, having properly but two rhymes, and two 

 terceta. The last six lines are susceptible of various arrangements ; 

 the one usually adopted in English is the rhyming of the fifth and 

 sixth lines together, frequently after a full pause, so that the sonnet 

 ends with a point, as in an epigram. The Italians consider the best 

 form to be the rhyming together of the three uneven and the three 

 even lines ; but our poverty of rhymes causes us to prefer the rhyming 

 of the first and fourth, second and fifth, third and sixth lines : this, 

 with a break in the sense at the third line, constitutes also a legitimate 

 sonnet, of which the Italians have given abundant precedents. We 

 need scarcely observe that all our poeta have held themselves at 

 ]ilTty to vary the form of the sonnet. The lightness and richness of 

 tin' Italian and Spanish languages .enable their poets to express every 

 feeling or fancy in the sonnet ; but with us it has been found most 

 suitable to grave, dignified, and contemplative subjects. Hence MHton 

 and Wordsworth are our best writers of sonnets. 



SONOROUS VIBRATIONS. When the air or other elastic body 

 is made to vibrate with sufficient rapidity, i/ntnd is produced. 

 [ACOUSTICS.] During such vibrations the molecular arrangement of 

 the sounding body becomes changed, but returns to its normal state 

 when the vibrations cease. [NODAL POINTS AND LINES.] It is stated 

 (Bird's ' Natural Philosophy,') that if a copper ribbon 9 feet long, 

 4 inch wide, and '(M inch thick, be vibrated, its length will appear to 

 be unaffected. If it be stretched by a weight of 90 Ibs., its length will 

 remain the same until it be made to vibrate, when it will become per- 

 manently lengthened by 6 or 7 inches. When sonorous vibrations are 

 isochronous a perfect pound or tune is produced; when irregular, a 

 l'r the phenomena produced by the reflection of sonorous 

 vibrations, see ECHO, and for their interference ACOUSTICS and INTER- 

 FERENCE. For the production of sonorous vibrations daring the 

 railing of heated metals, see TiiEitMOi-iiosE. For the different kinds 

 of vibrations, see VIBRATIONS. 



SOOT is that portion of fuel which escapes combustion, and which 

 is mechanically carried up and deposited partly in chimneys and partly 

 in the air. The soot of coal and that of wood differ very materially 

 in their composition ; the former indeed does not appear to have been 

 accurately analysed, but it evidently contains more carbonaceous 

 matter than the latter. Coal-soot contains substances usually derived 

 from the distillation of organic matters ; it contains sulphate and 

 hydrochlorate of ammonia, and has been used for the preparation .,f 

 the carbonate ; to hot water it yields a brown bitter extract, and it 

 iiis an empyreumatic oil ; but its great basis is charcoal in a state 

 in which it is capable of absorbing ammonia from the air, and hence 

 with the ammoniacal salts it already contains, it is used as a manure, 

 and acts very powerfully as such. Sir H. Davy observes that for this 

 purpose it is well fitted to be used in the dry state, thrown into the 

 ground with the seed, and requires no preparation. 



The soot of wood has been minutely analysed by Braconnot, who 

 found it to consist of the following substances : 



I'lniin (about) 30-50 



Azotised matter ........ 20-00 



Carbonate of lime atil trace* of carbonate of magnesia 14-66 



Water U-50 



Acclatc of lime ........ 5-C5 



Mi'.phate oflime 5'00 



Acetate of potash 4-10 



onaceoua matter insoluble in alkalies . . . S-85 

 Ferruginous phosphate of lime . . . . . 1-50 



,i 0-95 



Acetate of magnesia ....... 0-53 



Aibolin (a peculiar acrid and hitler principle) about . 50 



chloride of potassium 0-36 



Acetate of ammonia (about) 0-20 



Acetate of Iron (a trace) 



[00- 



Braconnot considers the ulmin as absolutely similar to that obtained 

 artificially by the action of potash on wood-sawdust, but Berzelius is 

 of a different opinion, and calls it yc.in. The azotised matter is very 

 soluble in water, and insoluble in alcohol. As coal-soot contains much 

 more carbonaceous matter than wood-soot, and also a much larger 

 portion of ammoniacal salts, it must be more active as a manure, and 

 altogether a more useful substance. 



SOPHISM (2<J<io>m), that superficial and incomplete aspect of the 

 truth, which at first sight looks like the truth, but on closer inspection 

 turns out to contain some radical error. This seems the most correct 

 definition, but the word is used loosely. Its general signification, 

 namely, a specious proposition, is perhaps nearest the mark. Truly 

 considered, most errors are sophisms, for errors are not direct contra- 

 dictions to the truth, but simply the leaving out of view one or more 

 elements of the truth, and seizing on only one or two elements, and 

 declaring them to constitute the whole truth. Victor Cousin defines 

 error to be " One element of thought considered exclusively, and taken 

 for the complete thought itself. Error is nothing but an incomplete 

 truth converted into an absolute truth." (' Introduction a 1'Hist. de 

 Philosophic,' Lecon 7.) Spinoza had before defined " falsity to be that 

 privation of truth which arises from inadequate ideas." (' Ethica,' 

 b. ii. prop, xxxv.) It is sometimes a mei e confusion of terms ; as in 

 the common example of Bread being better than paradise ; because 

 bread is better than nothing, and nothing is better than paradise the 

 confusion arises from both the " nothings " being used substantively ; 

 whereas it is only the first that is so used ; the second is affirmative, 

 and expresses " there is nothing better." A sophism is therefore the 

 use of some word in a different sense in the premises from that in the 

 conclusion, and this is the definition of Aristotle (' Top.' viii. 11): 

 " When the discourse is a demonstration of anything, if it contain 

 anything which has no relation to the conclusion, there will be no 

 syllogism ; and if there appear to be one, it will be a sophism, and 

 not a demonstration." 



This confusion of words and ideas is the origin of all errors and 

 sophisms ; but though errors and sophisms are logically constituted 

 alike, yet the instinctive sense of mankind marks the difference between 

 incomplete views (error) and wilful perversion (sophism). In all cases 

 a sophism is supposed to be recognised as such by the sophist. It is 

 an endeavour on his part to " make the worse appear the better reason." 

 It is the consciousness then of the sophist which distinguishes and 

 renders odious his error as a sophism. 



SOPHISTS. The race of sophists took its rise in Athens about the 

 5th century B.C., when Athens was a real democracy. From the neces- 

 sity every man was under of pleading his own cause before the dicastery, 

 in any case before the court, whether as plaintiff or defendant ; from 

 the political power which every citizen possessed, but could scarcely 

 exercise with effect unless able to speak fluently; the teaching of 

 rhetoric, or the arts of speaking and arguing logically, came to be in 

 much request. The age was also a sceptical, and therefore an investi- 

 gating oue. But though flourishing in Athens, sophists and their 

 teachings were not confined to that city, but extended throughout all 

 the Grecian republics, and occasionally to the courts of tyrants. They 

 went about Greece discoursing and "debating, and sometimes educating 

 the youth of rich and noble lamilies. They were not, strictly speaking, 

 a sect ; indeed the name signifying only a wise or clever man, had 

 been so applied from the earliest times of Greece ; and Socrates, Plato, 

 and other eminent men were all called sophists. 



The disrepute attached to the name arose apparently from the facts 

 of the teachers accepting payment for their lessons, and thence pro- 

 ceeding to inculcate not the desire for truth, but the means of securing 

 victory by the use of specious fallacies. It was against both these 

 modes that Socrates and Plato contended ; and to which Plato and 

 Aristotle affixed the name as a term of reproach for a " man who em- 

 ploys what he knows to be fallacy, for the purpose of deceit and of 

 getting money." (Grote, ' Hist, of Greece,' vol. v.) But the sophists 

 were able to bear up against the judgment of philosophers, by having 

 become the trainers of men for the active pursuits of life, and their 

 influence over the multitude greatly exceeded that of the sages. Nor 

 did they all, though they taught for money, teach fallacies merely ; 

 and the representations of them in the Dialogues of Plato must not 

 be accepted as the truth with reference to them as a class. Socrates, 

 Protagoras, and Prodicus, were stigmatised as sophists, but what we know 

 of their doctrines and practice does not deserve any heavy condemna- 

 tion. No doubt, in numerous instances the sophists, like the school- 

 men of the middle ages, indulged in subtleties and evasions which 

 were dishonest, trivial, and often ridiculous ; but, as Ritter says (' Ge- 

 schichte der Philosophic,' vol. i.), " It is not to be denied that the 

 sophists contributed greatly to the perfection of prose ; which was in 

 itself a great benefit to philosophy. The sophists applied themselves 

 to manifold arts of persuasion, and in their attacks upon each other, 

 labouring to expose and lay bare the delusions of appearance, they 

 acquired great nicety in the distinction of terms. Prodicus was cele- 

 brated for his skill in the distinctions of synonymous terms (as we 

 learn from Plato, who ridicules him for it, (Protag. p. 337 ; Crat. 

 p. 384) ; but Prodicus is honourably mentioned by him (Euthyd. 

 p. 277-305). The sophisms turning upon the words ' to learn,' ' to 

 understand,' ' to know,' also contributed to the more accurate know- 

 ledge of these terms. The very circumstance that their rules were 



