Meaning: The quote by Irving Babbitt reflects his observation about the shifting nature of humanism during the later Renaissance period. Babbitt was an influential literary critic and a leading figure in the movement known as the New Humanism, which sought to revive classical humanistic values in response to what he saw as the moral and cultural decline of modern society. In this quote, Babbitt contrasts two different approaches to humanism, one that emphasizes free expansion and another that emphasizes discipline and selectivity.

During the Renaissance, humanism was a cultural and intellectual movement that placed a strong emphasis on the study of classical texts, particularly those of ancient Greek and Roman philosophers and writers. Humanists advocated for a broad education that included the study of history, literature, philosophy, and the arts, with the goal of developing well-rounded individuals who were capable of critical thinking and moral virtue. This early humanism, often referred to as "Renaissance humanism," celebrated the potential of human beings to achieve greatness through the pursuit of knowledge and the cultivation of their intellectual and creative abilities.

However, as Babbitt suggests, the later Renaissance saw a shift in the focus of humanism. Instead of promoting a free and unrestrained expansion of knowledge and creativity, there emerged a more disciplined and selective approach to humanistic education and values. This shift can be seen in the growing influence of movements such as neoclassicism and the Enlightenment, which emphasized rationality, order, and a more structured approach to the study of classical texts.

The disciplinary and selective nature of humanism in the later Renaissance can be understood in several ways. First, there was a greater emphasis on the rigorous study of classical texts and the application of their principles to various fields of knowledge. This involved a more systematic and disciplined approach to education, with a focus on mastering the foundational works of ancient philosophy, literature, and science.

Second, the later Renaissance saw the emergence of a more selective approach to the reception of classical ideas and values. Instead of embracing a wide range of humanistic ideals, there was a growing tendency to prioritize certain aspects of classical thought while rejecting or downplaying others. This selectivity was often driven by the desire to uphold certain moral, aesthetic, or intellectual standards that were deemed essential for the cultivation of a refined and virtuous society.

Babbitt's assessment of the later Renaissance reflects his concern that the original spirit of humanism, with its emphasis on the unfettered pursuit of knowledge and the development of individual potential, was being overshadowed by a more rigid and exclusive form of humanism. For Babbitt, this shift represented a departure from the true essence of humanism, which he believed should prioritize the holistic development of the individual and the cultivation of moral and intellectual virtues.

In conclusion, Irving Babbitt's quote captures the changing nature of humanism during the later Renaissance, from a free and expansive ethos to a more disciplined and selective approach. This shift reflected broader changes in intellectual and cultural attitudes, as well as evolving interpretations of the classical tradition. Babbitt's critique serves as a reminder of the complex and dynamic nature of humanism, and the ongoing tension between the pursuit of knowledge and the need for discipline and selectivity in the cultivation of humanistic values.