Daily Inspiration Quote by James Anthony Froude

Froude is drawing a hard line between the temperament of science and the temperament of faith, and he does it with the cool confidence of a Victorian intellectual who’s watched too many public debates turn into moral theater. Science, in his telling, has armor: method. If you can test a claim, you can afford to stay calm, because disagreement isn’t a personal threat; it’s raw material. An “opponent” can be met like a hypothesis: with procedures, not wounded pride.

“Belief,” by contrast, is “sensitive” because it often functions less as a proposition than as an identity badge. The subtext is psychological and political: when convictions can’t be stress-tested, they’re protected by social norms, indignation, and appeals to loyalty. Sensitivity becomes a defense mechanism. Froude’s wording quietly suggests that what looks like principled outrage may be fragility disguised as virtue.

The context matters. Froude wrote in an era when Darwin, biblical criticism, and the rising prestige of empirical inquiry were destabilizing inherited certainties. As a historian, he’d also seen how national and religious narratives harden into “belief” precisely because they organize meaning and status. Challenge them and you don’t just dispute facts; you threaten the story people live inside.

The rhetorical trick is the asymmetry: science “rests” (steady, structural), belief is “sensitive” (reactive, bodily). It’s not an even-handed plea for civility; it’s a critique of how unexamined convictions demand deference while claiming moral seriousness.