Free bilingual books

Похвала глупости
Лев Шестов
(1907)

Downloading books is available only for authorized users


Downloading books is available only for authorized users

In Praise of Folly In Praise of Folly
1.1.
Lev Shestov

In Praise of Folly
On the Occasion of Nikolai Berdyaev's Book Sub specie aeternitatis.

Den Leib möcht ich noch haben,

Den Leib so zart und jung;

Die Seele könnt ihr begraben,

Hab' selber Seele genug.

Your body I'd still like to possess,

A body so tender and young;

As for your soul you can bury it,

I myself have enough soul.

H. HEINE

I begin my eulogy to folly not in jest as did the illustrious Erasmus of Rotterdam in the old days, but in all sincerity and from all my heart. In this task Berdyaev's new book will be of great assistance to me. Had he wished to do so, he could have titled it, following his long-deceased colleague's example, In Praise of Folly, because its purpose is to challenge common sense. True, the book is a collection of articles written in the last six years, hence, properly speaking, it does not and cannot serve some one purpose. Six years is a long time: not only a writer like Berdyaev, but any writer will change to some extent during so long a period. The book opens with an article written long ago, "The Struggle for Idealism" (Bor'ba za idealizm), in which the author still maintains a strictly Kantian viewpoint that admits, as we know, common sense and all its accompanying virtues. Then the author gradually evolves and, by the end of the book, he openly declares war on common sense, but what he opposes to common sense is not Folly, as is usually done, but Great Reason. Of course, one can express oneself in this way, calling Folly Great Reason, and, if you like, this has a deep meaning or, more precisely, a deep sting, for what can be more insulting and humiliating to common sense than to confer the honorific title of Great Reason on Folly? Until now common sense has been accepted as the father and closest friend of all minds, great and small. Now, Berdyaev, scorning genealogy and historically shaped heraldry, elevates "opposition to common sense," that is, Folly to the order of Great Reason. No doubt, this is very audacious, but Berdyaev is a writer who above all is daring and, in my opinion, this is his greatest strength. I would say that his gift, his philosophical and literary talent, lies in his audacity. As soon as it abandons him, the source of his inspiration evaporates, he has nothing to say, and he ceases to be himself. But I have run too far ahead. Let us return to his evolution or, rather, to the evolution of his idea.

As I have said, like any thinking person, Berdyaev has changed his convictions or ideas many times in the course of six years. Of course, I mean his philosophical ideas. In his political views he is incomparably more stable and consistent. He was and remains a democrat and even, it seems, a socialist. This is curious. Why do people change their philosophical beliefs much more easily than their political beliefs? The same comparative stability of political convictions can be observed also in other writers who along with Berdyaev have evolved from Marxism through idealism to mysticism and even to positive religion. Take, for example, Bulgakov. Had he displayed the same rate in changing his political beliefs, he would have been by now either among the Black Hundreds or the maximalists, that is, somewhere at the very fringe of the political field. But he has remained along with Berdyaev a democrat and socialist. True enough, he no longer worships Marx, only in the realm of theory. On practical issues he remains faithful to himself so that the unbreakable nexus idearum between Orthodoxy and reaction that exists in the public mind should be considered from now on to be finally severed. Now there are many students of Bulgakov, even among the young people, who with their teacher care for the Orthodox church and yet do not sing the praises of secular bosses with birch rods, nor field court-marshals, nor the unlimited power of ministers. How can one explain the inconstancy of philosophical beliefs in people who are politically stable and unwavering? Obviously, not by their character. One cannot be at the same time of a firm and a changing character.

For the time being, let me leave this question unanswered and turn the reader's attention to another peculiarity of Berdyaev's intellectual development (and the same applies to Bulgakov). As soon as he abandons a set of ideas for a new one, he no longer finds in his previous intellectual wealth anything worthy of attention. All the old ideas are rags and good for nothing. Take, economic materialism, for example. At one time (in his first book) Berdyaev was excited with it—true, not in its pure version, but combined with Kantianism—and thought it contained the whole truth. Now he no longer sees any truth in it. So, let me raise the question: is a philosopher allowed to be so wildly extravagant? Surely, the materialists had at least some grains of truth. Why should they be scorned? And later on, when the time came to get up and to leave old man Kant, Berdyaev left everything, took not a thing with him, as if the slightest luggage would weigh him down, and sprinted freely to metaphysics confident in advance that he would find there both fatted herds and wide fields, in a word, everything a man needs to make a living. Then he dropped metaphysics and flung himself into the depth of religious revelation. The saga of Berdyaev's transformation from a metaphysician into a believing Christian was spread out for the reader on the pages of Problems of Life (Voprosy zhizni). What was particularly impressive about the transformation was its impetuosity. It was too fast even for Berdyaev. He became a Christian before he even learned to pronounce clearly all the words of the confession of faith. The metamorphosis, obviously, took place beyond the threshold of consciousness. In his article "On the New Religious Consciousness" (O novom religioznom soznanii), in which he first begins to talk about Christ, the god-man, the man-god, and so on, he breaks off and stutters, in a word, he displays all the signs that he finds himself in a foreign and unfamiliar realm where he can only move around by guessing and groping. Incidentally, I should point out an interesting fact that all our writers who arrived at Christianity through evolution absolutely cannot learn to pronounce the sacred words properly. Even Merezhkovsky, who has been practicing how to write on theological themes for so many years, has not yet reached anything like virtuosity in spite of his undeniable literary gifts. The right tone is lacking. This is like a person learning a foreign language at a mature age. One can always tell that he is a foreigner. The same is true of Bulgakov. He solved a difficult problem in an original way and, beginning with his first articles, he started to pronounce the word Christ in the same tone in which he previously pronounced the word Marx. And yet Bulgakov, in spite of his advantage of simplicity and natural manner (for he did not have to change it), does not convince a sensitive ear. In this respect they are all far outdone by Rozanov, although, as we know, he does not believe in Christ and does not accept the Gospel. But since childhood he has been raised according to the rules of piety, was never fascinated with Darwinism and Marxism, and has preserved his innocence. I do not think that either Merezhkovsky, Bulgakov, or Berdyaev will ever be Rozanov's equal. Bulgakov, it seems, senses this and switches from religious searchings to questions of the church, to church politics. Here, perhaps, he will be in the right place. Politics and the problems of social constitution are close and dear to him.

From what I have said, one can draw many conclusions. First of all, it follows that intellectual evolution, which in the old days was so difficult and so extraordinarily slow and now takes place so easily and quickly, does not involve any deep internal changes. Bulgakov, when he was a Marxist, was just as fine a man as he is now. Berdyaev, whether he is a Kantian or a metaphysician, and Merezhkovsky, whether he is a Nietzschean or Christian—from the inside, there is no difference. Cuculeus non facit monachum (a cowl does not a monk make). Generally speaking, it is evident that the old thinkers were mistaken when they thought that philosophical ideas had to be carefully protected in a dry place from rust and moths, otherwise they would be damaged. Political beliefs are another matter. In politics if you change your beliefs then you have to change friends and enemies, you have to shoot people you defended with your own body and vice versa. Here you have to think things over. But to switch from Kantianism to Hegelianism and even, horribile dictu, to materialism, how will that affect anyone? I do not even see any reason for a person who knows a number of philosophical systems well to evolve inevitably from one system to another. It is permitted, depending on circumstances, to believe in one and then another. In the course of a day even, one can switch systems two or three times. In the morning one can be a convinced Hegelian, during the day hold firmly onto Plato, and in the evening..., there are evenings when one will believe Spinoza even: our natura naturata will seem so immutable. It is only difficult to consent freely that virtue brings no reward. It should, to be quite frank, it most certainly should bring a reward. But if Deus sive natura, sive substantia has arranged things so that it cannot change its own nature even, then there is nothing to be done, you have to accept things and try to find comfort in contemplating the world sub specie aeternitatis.




Lev Shestov

In Praise of Folly
On the Occasion of Nikolai Berdyaev's Book Sub specie aeternitatis.

Den Leib möcht ich noch haben,

Den Leib so zart und jung;

Die Seele könnt ihr begraben,

Hab' selber Seele genug.

Your body I'd still like to possess,

A body so tender and young;

As for your soul you can bury it,

I myself have enough soul.

H. HEINE

I begin my eulogy to folly not in jest as did the illustrious Erasmus of Rotterdam in the old days, but in all sincerity and from all my heart. In this task Berdyaev's new book will be of great assistance to me. Had he wished to do so, he could have titled it, following his long-deceased colleague's example, In Praise of Folly, because its purpose is to challenge common sense. True, the book is a collection of articles written in the last six years, hence, properly speaking, it does not and cannot serve some one purpose. Six years is a long time: not only a writer like Berdyaev, but any writer will change to some extent during so long a period. The book opens with an article written long ago, "The Struggle for Idealism" (Bor'ba za idealizm), in which the author still maintains a strictly Kantian viewpoint that admits, as we know, common sense and all its accompanying virtues. Then the author gradually evolves and, by the end of the book, he openly declares war on common sense, but what he opposes to common sense is not Folly, as is usually done, but Great Reason. Of course, one can express oneself in this way, calling Folly Great Reason, and, if you like, this has a deep meaning or, more precisely, a deep sting, for what can be more insulting and humiliating to common sense than to confer the honorific title of Great Reason on Folly? Until now common sense has been accepted as the father and closest friend of all minds, great and small. Now, Berdyaev, scorning genealogy and historically shaped heraldry, elevates "opposition to common sense," that is, Folly to the order of Great Reason. No doubt, this is very audacious, but Berdyaev is a writer who above all is daring and, in my opinion, this is his greatest strength. I would say that his gift, his philosophical and literary talent, lies in his audacity. As soon as it abandons him, the source of his inspiration evaporates, he has nothing to say, and he ceases to be himself. But I have run too far ahead. Let us return to his evolution or, rather, to the evolution of his idea.

As I have said, like any thinking person, Berdyaev has changed his convictions or ideas many times in the course of six years. Of course, I mean his philosophical ideas. In his political views he is incomparably more stable and consistent. He was and remains a democrat and even, it seems, a socialist. This is curious. Why do people change their philosophical beliefs much more easily than their political beliefs? The same comparative stability of political convictions can be observed also in other writers who along with Berdyaev have evolved from Marxism through idealism to mysticism and even to positive religion. Take, for example, Bulgakov. Had he displayed the same rate in changing his political beliefs, he would have been by now either among the Black Hundreds or the maximalists, that is, somewhere at the very fringe of the political field. But he has remained along with Berdyaev a democrat and socialist. True enough, he no longer worships Marx, only in the realm of theory. On practical issues he remains faithful to himself so that the unbreakable nexus idearum between Orthodoxy and reaction that exists in the public mind should be considered from now on to be finally severed. Now there are many students of Bulgakov, even among the young people, who with their teacher care for the Orthodox church and yet do not sing the praises of secular bosses with birch rods, nor field court-marshals, nor the unlimited power of ministers. How can one explain the inconstancy of philosophical beliefs in people who are politically stable and unwavering? Obviously, not by their character. One cannot be at the same time of a firm and a changing character.

For the time being, let me leave this question unanswered and turn the reader's attention to another peculiarity of Berdyaev's intellectual development (and the same applies to Bulgakov). As soon as he abandons a set of ideas for a new one, he no longer finds in his previous intellectual wealth anything worthy of attention. All the old ideas are rags and good for nothing. Take, economic materialism, for example. At one time (in his first book) Berdyaev was excited with it—true, not in its pure version, but combined with Kantianism—and thought it contained the whole truth. Now he no longer sees any truth in it. So, let me raise the question: is a philosopher allowed to be so wildly extravagant? Surely, the materialists had at least some grains of truth. Why should they be scorned? And later on, when the time came to get up and to leave old man Kant, Berdyaev left everything, took not a thing with him, as if the slightest luggage would weigh him down, and sprinted freely to metaphysics confident in advance that he would find there both fatted herds and wide fields, in a word, everything a man needs to make a living. Then he dropped metaphysics and flung himself into the depth of religious revelation. The saga of Berdyaev's transformation from a metaphysician into a believing Christian was spread out for the reader on the pages of Problems of Life (Voprosy zhizni). What was particularly impressive about the transformation was its impetuosity. It was too fast even for Berdyaev. He became a Christian before he even learned to pronounce clearly all the words of the confession of faith. The metamorphosis, obviously, took place beyond the threshold of consciousness. In his article "On the New Religious Consciousness" (O novom religioznom soznanii), in which he first begins to talk about Christ, the god-man, the man-god, and so on, he breaks off and stutters, in a word, he displays all the signs that he finds himself in a foreign and unfamiliar realm where he can only move around by guessing and groping. Incidentally, I should point out an interesting fact that all our writers who arrived at Christianity through evolution absolutely cannot learn to pronounce the sacred words properly. Even Merezhkovsky, who has been practicing how to write on theological themes for so many years, has not yet reached anything like virtuosity in spite of his undeniable literary gifts. The right tone is lacking. This is like a person learning a foreign language at a mature age. One can always tell that he is a foreigner. The same is true of Bulgakov. He solved a difficult problem in an original way and, beginning with his first articles, he started to pronounce the word Christ in the same tone in which he previously pronounced the word Marx. And yet Bulgakov, in spite of his advantage of simplicity and natural manner (for he did not have to change it), does not convince a sensitive ear. In this respect they are all far outdone by Rozanov, although, as we know, he does not believe in Christ and does not accept the Gospel. But since childhood he has been raised according to the rules of piety, was never fascinated with Darwinism and Marxism, and has preserved his innocence. I do not think that either Merezhkovsky, Bulgakov, or Berdyaev will ever be Rozanov's equal. Bulgakov, it seems, senses this and switches from religious searchings to questions of the church, to church politics. Here, perhaps, he will be in the right place. Politics and the problems of social constitution are close and dear to him.

From what I have said, one can draw many conclusions. First of all, it follows that intellectual evolution, which in the old days was so difficult and so extraordinarily slow and now takes place so easily and quickly, does not involve any deep internal changes. Bulgakov, when he was a Marxist, was just as fine a man as he is now. Berdyaev, whether he is a Kantian or a metaphysician, and Merezhkovsky, whether he is a Nietzschean or Christian—from the inside, there is no difference. Cuculeus non facit monachum (a cowl does not a monk make). Generally speaking, it is evident that the old thinkers were mistaken when they thought that philosophical ideas had to be carefully protected in a dry place from rust and moths, otherwise they would be damaged. Political beliefs are another matter. In politics if you change your beliefs then you have to change friends and enemies, you have to shoot people you defended with your own body and vice versa. Here you have to think things over. But to switch from Kantianism to Hegelianism and even, horribile dictu, to materialism, how will that affect anyone? I do not even see any reason for a person who knows a number of philosophical systems well to evolve inevitably from one system to another. It is permitted, depending on circumstances, to believe in one and then another. In the course of a day even, one can switch systems two or three times. In the morning one can be a convinced Hegelian, during the day hold firmly onto Plato, and in the evening..., there are evenings when one will believe Spinoza even: our natura naturata will seem so immutable. It is only difficult to consent freely that virtue brings no reward. It should, to be quite frank, it most certainly should bring a reward. But if Deus sive natura, sive substantia has arranged things so that it cannot change its own nature even, then there is nothing to be done, you have to accept things and try to find comfort in contemplating the world sub specie aeternitatis.




  • arrive: To arrive is to get to or reach some place.
  • finally: If something happens finally, it happens after a longtime or at the end.
  • well: You use well to say that something was done in a good way.
  • carefully: Carefully means with great attention, especially to detail or safety.
  • among: If you are among certain things, they are all around you.
  • ever: Ever means at any time.
  • solve: To solve something is to find an answer to it.
  • view: To view is to look at something.
  • issue: An issue is an important topic.
  • positive: If something is positive, it is good.
  • spread: To spread is to move quickly to more places.
  • field: A field is a big area of land.
  • since: Since is used to talk about a past event still happening now.
  • wild: If something is wild, it is found in nature.
  • advantage: An advantage is something that helps you.
  • cause: To cause is to make something happen.
  • follow: To follow means to go behind someone and go where they go.
  • pet: A pet is an animal that lives with people.
  • reach: To reach means to arrive at a place.
  • return: To return is to go back to a place.
  • wise: To be wise is to use experience and intelligence to make good choices.
  • allow: To allow something to happen means to let it happen.
  • challenge: A challenge is something difficult to complete.
  • difference: A difference is a way that something is not like other things.
  • lay: To lay means to put or place in a horizontal or flat position.
  • protect: To protect someone is to stop them from getting hurt.
  • sense: To sense something is to know about it without being told.
  • accept: To accept something that is offered is to take it.
  • arrange: To arrange things is to put them in the right place.
  • familiar: If someone or something is familiar to you, you know them well.
  • grab: To grab is to take a hold of someone or something suddenly.
  • hang: To hang something is to keep it above the ground.
  • purpose: A purpose is the reason that you do something.
  • theory: A theory is an idea about how something works.
  • damage: To damage something is to break it.
  • frank: If you are frank, you are being very honest.
  • perhaps: Perhaps is used when you say that something could happen.
  • still: Still is used when you say that a situation keeps going on.
  • wave: A wave is a line of water that moves higher than the rest of the water.
  • certain: If you are certain about something, you know it is true.
  • far: If something is far, it is not close.
  • remain: To remain somewhere is to stay there.
  • rest: To rest is to stop being active while the body gets back its strength.
  • collect: To collect things is to group them together all in one place.
  • either: Either is used with or to say there are two or more possibilities.
  • truth: The truth is a fact or something that is right.
  • article: An article is a story in a newspaper or magazine.
  • material: A material is what is used to make something.
  • shape: A shape is a simple form like a square or circle.
  • thin: If someone or something is thin, they are not fat.
  • contain: To contain something is to have it inside.
  • equal: To be equal is to be the same.
  • hole: A hole is an opening in something.
  • owe: To owe is to have to pay or give back something received from another.
  • position: A position is the way something is placed.
  • raise: To raise something is to lift it up.
  • whole: Whole means all of something.
  • exam: An exam is a test.
  • example: An example of something is a thing that is typical of it.
  • limit: A limit is the largest or smallest amount of something that you allow.
  • print: To print something is to put it onto paper.
  • excite: To excite someone means to make them happy and interested.
  • mistake: A mistake is something you do wrong.
  • observe: To observe something is to watch it.
  • yet: Yet is used to say something has not happened up to now.
  • exist: To exist is to be real.
  • original: If something is original, it is the first one of that thing.
  • wealth: Wealth is a large amount of money.
  • whether: You use whether when you must choose between two things.
  • depend: To depend on someone or something is to need them.
  • conclusion: The conclusion of something is the final part of it.
  • doubt: Doubt is a feeling of not being sure.
  • foreign: If something is foreign, it is from a different country.
  • social: If something is social, it is about many people in a community.
  • consider: To consider something means to think about it.
  • extra: If something is extra, it is more than what is needed.
  • lie: To lie is to say or write something untrue to deceive someone.
  • opinion: An opinion is a thought about a person or a thing.
  • real: If something is real, it actually exists.
  • serve: To serve someone is to give them food or drinks.
  • war: A war is a big fight between two groups of people.
  • worth: If something is worth an amount of money, it costs that amount.
  • later: Later means after the present, expected, or usual time.
  • leave: To leave means to go away from someone or something.
  • though: Though is used when the second idea makes the first seem surprising.
  • comfort: To comfort someone means to make them feel better.
  • earn: To earn means to get money for the work you do.
  • reward: A reward is something given in exchange for good behavior or work.
  • set: To set something is to put it somewhere.
  • advance: To advance is to go forward.
  • course: A course is a class in school.
  • shoot: To shoot is to fire something like a bullet at someone or something.
  • lack: If there is a lack of something, there is not enough of it.
  • public: If something is public, it is meant for everyone to use.
  • task: A task is work that someone has to do.
  • involve: To involve means to be actively taking part in something.
  • period: A period is an amount of time when something happens.
  • range: A range is a number or a set of similar things.
  • sign: A sign is a notice giving information, directions, a warning, etc.
  • wide: If something is wide, it is large from side to side.
  • along: Along means to move from one part of a road, river, etc. to another.
  • attention: Attention is the notice, thought, or consideration of someone.
  • drop: To drop is to fall or allow something to fall.
  • final: If something is final, it is the last part.
  • maintain: To maintain means to make something stay the same.
  • otherwise: Otherwise means different or in another way.
  • react: To react is to act in a certain way because of something that happened.
  • deal: A deal is an agreement that you have with another person.
  • gift: A gift is something you give someone.
  • quite: Quite is used to say that something is complete or very much.
  • rather: Rather is used when you want to do one thing but not the other.
  • band: A band is a group of people who play music.
  • list: A list is a record of information printed with an item on each line.
  • own: To own something means to have it. That thing belongs to you.
  • mean: Mean describes someone who is unkind or cruel.
  • respect: Respect is a good opinion of someone because they are good.
  • strength: Strength is the physical power that you have.
  • above: If something is above, it is at a higher level than something else.
  • ahead: If something is ahead of something else, it is in front of it.
  • belief: A belief is a strong feeling that something is correct or true.
  • common: If something is common, it happens often or there is much of it.
  • inside: Inside means the inner part, space or side of something.
  • proper: If something is proper, it is right.

  • arrive: To arrive is to get to or reach some place.
  • finally: If something happens finally, it happens after a longtime or at the end.
  • well: You use well to say that something was done in a good way.
  • carefully: Carefully means with great attention, especially to detail or safety.
  • among: If you are among certain things, they are all around you.
  • ever: Ever means at any time.
  • solve: To solve something is to find an answer to it.
  • view: To view is to look at something.
  • issue: An issue is an important topic.
  • positive: If something is positive, it is good.
  • spread: To spread is to move quickly to more places.
  • field: A field is a big area of land.
  • since: Since is used to talk about a past event still happening now.
  • wild: If something is wild, it is found in nature.
  • advantage: An advantage is something that helps you.
  • cause: To cause is to make something happen.
  • follow: To follow means to go behind someone and go where they go.
  • pet: A pet is an animal that lives with people.
  • reach: To reach means to arrive at a place.
  • return: To return is to go back to a place.
  • wise: To be wise is to use experience and intelligence to make good choices.
  • allow: To allow something to happen means to let it happen.
  • challenge: A challenge is something difficult to complete.
  • difference: A difference is a way that something is not like other things.
  • lay: To lay means to put or place in a horizontal or flat position.
  • protect: To protect someone is to stop them from getting hurt.
  • sense: To sense something is to know about it without being told.
  • accept: To accept something that is offered is to take it.
  • arrange: To arrange things is to put them in the right place.
  • familiar: If someone or something is familiar to you, you know them well.
  • grab: To grab is to take a hold of someone or something suddenly.
  • hang: To hang something is to keep it above the ground.
  • purpose: A purpose is the reason that you do something.
  • theory: A theory is an idea about how something works.
  • damage: To damage something is to break it.
  • frank: If you are frank, you are being very honest.
  • perhaps: Perhaps is used when you say that something could happen.
  • still: Still is used when you say that a situation keeps going on.
  • wave: A wave is a line of water that moves higher than the rest of the water.
  • certain: If you are certain about something, you know it is true.
  • far: If something is far, it is not close.
  • remain: To remain somewhere is to stay there.
  • rest: To rest is to stop being active while the body gets back its strength.
  • collect: To collect things is to group them together all in one place.
  • either: Either is used with or to say there are two or more possibilities.
  • truth: The truth is a fact or something that is right.
  • article: An article is a story in a newspaper or magazine.
  • material: A material is what is used to make something.
  • shape: A shape is a simple form like a square or circle.
  • thin: If someone or something is thin, they are not fat.
  • contain: To contain something is to have it inside.
  • equal: To be equal is to be the same.
  • hole: A hole is an opening in something.
  • owe: To owe is to have to pay or give back something received from another.
  • position: A position is the way something is placed.
  • raise: To raise something is to lift it up.
  • whole: Whole means all of something.
  • exam: An exam is a test.
  • example: An example of something is a thing that is typical of it.
  • limit: A limit is the largest or smallest amount of something that you allow.
  • print: To print something is to put it onto paper.
  • excite: To excite someone means to make them happy and interested.
  • mistake: A mistake is something you do wrong.
  • observe: To observe something is to watch it.
  • yet: Yet is used to say something has not happened up to now.
  • exist: To exist is to be real.
  • original: If something is original, it is the first one of that thing.
  • wealth: Wealth is a large amount of money.
  • whether: You use whether when you must choose between two things.
  • depend: To depend on someone or something is to need them.
  • conclusion: The conclusion of something is the final part of it.
  • doubt: Doubt is a feeling of not being sure.
  • foreign: If something is foreign, it is from a different country.
  • social: If something is social, it is about many people in a community.
  • consider: To consider something means to think about it.
  • extra: If something is extra, it is more than what is needed.
  • lie: To lie is to say or write something untrue to deceive someone.
  • opinion: An opinion is a thought about a person or a thing.
  • real: If something is real, it actually exists.
  • serve: To serve someone is to give them food or drinks.
  • war: A war is a big fight between two groups of people.
  • worth: If something is worth an amount of money, it costs that amount.
  • later: Later means after the present, expected, or usual time.
  • leave: To leave means to go away from someone or something.
  • though: Though is used when the second idea makes the first seem surprising.
  • comfort: To comfort someone means to make them feel better.
  • earn: To earn means to get money for the work you do.
  • reward: A reward is something given in exchange for good behavior or work.
  • set: To set something is to put it somewhere.
  • advance: To advance is to go forward.
  • course: A course is a class in school.
  • shoot: To shoot is to fire something like a bullet at someone or something.
  • lack: If there is a lack of something, there is not enough of it.
  • public: If something is public, it is meant for everyone to use.
  • task: A task is work that someone has to do.
  • involve: To involve means to be actively taking part in something.
  • period: A period is an amount of time when something happens.
  • range: A range is a number or a set of similar things.
  • sign: A sign is a notice giving information, directions, a warning, etc.
  • wide: If something is wide, it is large from side to side.
  • along: Along means to move from one part of a road, river, etc. to another.
  • attention: Attention is the notice, thought, or consideration of someone.
  • drop: To drop is to fall or allow something to fall.
  • final: If something is final, it is the last part.
  • maintain: To maintain means to make something stay the same.
  • otherwise: Otherwise means different or in another way.
  • react: To react is to act in a certain way because of something that happened.
  • deal: A deal is an agreement that you have with another person.
  • gift: A gift is something you give someone.
  • quite: Quite is used to say that something is complete or very much.
  • rather: Rather is used when you want to do one thing but not the other.
  • band: A band is a group of people who play music.
  • list: A list is a record of information printed with an item on each line.
  • own: To own something means to have it. That thing belongs to you.
  • mean: Mean describes someone who is unkind or cruel.
  • respect: Respect is a good opinion of someone because they are good.
  • strength: Strength is the physical power that you have.
  • above: If something is above, it is at a higher level than something else.
  • ahead: If something is ahead of something else, it is in front of it.
  • belief: A belief is a strong feeling that something is correct or true.
  • common: If something is common, it happens often or there is much of it.
  • inside: Inside means the inner part, space or side of something.
  • proper: If something is proper, it is right.

  •  
    Next chapter