Posted by: Cheope
in Quotes & Aphorisms (Wisdom)
Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know.
Send
Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don't know because we don't want to know.
There are different types of freedom, and there are many misunderstandings in the matter? The most important type of freedom is being what you really are. You exchange your freedom for a role. You exchange your senses for an act. You sell your capability of hearing, and in exchange you wear a mask. You can deprive a man from his political freedom and you won't hurt him? That's until you don't deprive him of his freedom of feeling. That could destroy him.
In the moments when we have to make a very important decision, it's best to confide in impulse, in passion, because reason generally tries to farther us from dreams, producing the justification that it's not yet time.
Reason has fear of defeat.
But intuition loves life and the challeges of life.
Human reason has this peculiar fate that in one species of its knowledge it is burdened by questions which, as prescribed by the very nature of reason itself, it is not able to ignore, but which, as transcending all its powers, it is also not able to answer.
The irrationality of a thing is no argument against its existence, rather a condition of it.
It's not what you did in your past life that influences your present, but it's what you do in your present life that remedies the past and will logically change the future.
Reasonable beings are called people because their nature indicates them as an end in themselves, meaning like someting that cannot be used simply as a means.
It doesn't matter how you feel today, get up, get dressed and show yourself.
The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter—'tis the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning.
As long as we follow the development of the case backwards, starting from the final result, the chain of events appears to us to be continuous and we think that we've reached a very satisfying vision of things and maybe even complete. But if we go the opposite way, if we start from the preamble which we traced through analisys, and we try to follow it to the result, the impression of a necessary concatenation of events and not otherwise determinable is completely non-existant. We find out immediately that the result could've been different and we could've understood it and explained it equally well. Synthesis isn't then as satisfying as analysis; in other words, the knowledge of the preambles wouldn't permit us to foresee the nature of the result.