What are
/r/quotes'
favorite Products & Services?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
The most popular Products mentioned in /r/quotes:
The most popular Services mentioned in /r/quotes:
Wikiquote
Goodreads
Project Gutenberg
Open Culture
Google Groups
Google Images
calibre
Google Docs
Medium
Genius
Encyclopædia Britannica
Quora
Tumblr
The most popular reviews in /r/quotes:
You are correct. Here is the actual quote:
>"Except for the field organizers of strikes, who were pretty tough monkeys and devoted, most of the so-called Communists I met were middle-class, middle-aged people playing a game of dreams. I remember a woman in easy circumstances saying to another even more affluent: 'After the revolution even we will have more, won't we, dear?' Then there was another lover of proletarians who used to raise hell with Sunday picknickers on her property.
>"I guess the trouble was that we didn't have any self-admitted proletarians. Everyone was a temporarily embarrassed capitalist. Maybe the Communists so closely questioned by the investigation committees were a danger to America, but the ones I knew—at least they claimed to be Communists—couldn't have disrupted a Sunday-school picnic. Besides they were too busy fighting among themselves."
Original source: "A Primer on the '30s." Esquire, June 1960: 85-93 (Pics: http://imgur.com/a/Audc6) Wikipedia: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Steinbeck#Disputed
In the quote's complete context "temporarily embarrassed capitalist" means something entirely different (and nearly the exact opposite of) reddit's typically intended meaning of "temporarily embarrassed millionaire".
Though the attribution is pretty dubious, that's usually said to be a Hemingway/Faulkner exchange.
Faulkner: [Hemingway] has never been known to use a word which might send the reader to the dictionary.
To which Hemingway supposedly responded:
"Poor Faulkner, doesn't he know big emotions don't come from big words."
Edit: "feelings" was supposed to be "emotions" according to the Source.
Source(ish): http://www.openculture.com/2014/07/faulkners-review-of-ernest-hemingways-the-old-man-and-the-sea.html
Lao Tzu was leaving his city in late 4th century BC China to die in the wilderness because "𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒂𝒔 𝒔𝒊𝒄𝒌 𝒂𝒕 𝒉𝒆𝒂𝒓𝒕 𝒂𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒂𝒚𝒔 𝒐𝒇 𝒎𝒆𝒏" when he was stopped by a gate guard and convinced to write down his wisdom... which became the Tao Te Ching.
Or so the story goes.
Huxley was a genius. Interesting fact: On his death bed he scrawled a note to his wife requesting she give him a specific dose of LSD. He died tripping. -- "Huxley’s experimentation continued right through his death in November 1963. When cancer brought him to his death bed, he asked his wife to inject him with “LSD, 100 µg, intramuscular.” He died later that day, just hours after Kennedy’s assassination. Three years later, LSD was officially banned in California."Aldous Huxley death trip.
I should prefer an army of stags led by a lion, to an army of lions led by a stag.
Attributed to Chabrias, who died around the time Alexander was born, thus his is the earliest life to whom such assertions have been attributed; as quoted in A Treatise on the Defence of Fortified Places (1814) by Lazare Carnot, p. 50.
The attribution to Napoleon is implausible in the extreme. I've traced it back to a Usenet post from July 1999. Reddit Gold for the first person who can antedate this:
> From: "theo" <> > > Subject: Religious wars are > > Date: 1999/07/26 > > Newsgroups: soc.penpals > > > People killing each other over their views on who has the better imaginary friend! > > Makes lotsa sense? > > The Piano Has Been Drinking,Not Me.... > Tom Waits
"Chinese Proverb" my ass. As far as I can tell, it was paraphrased from Elbert Hubbard in 1913.
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Respect
Albert Einstein, in a letter to Jost Winteler, c.1901. Highfield, Roger; Carter, Paul (1994), "The Delicate Subject", The Private Lives of Albert Einstein (1st United States ed.), St. Martin's Press (Macmillan), pp. 78–79, ISBN 9780312302276.
This is actually a poorly paraphrased bastardization of a block of text taken from Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics:
"We must be content, then, in speaking of such subjects and with such premisses to indicate the truth roughly and in outline, and in speaking about things which are only for the most part true and with premisses of the same kind to reach conclusions that are not better. In the same spirit, therefore, should each type of statement be received; for it is the mark of an educated man to look for precision in each class of things just so far as the nature of the subject admits; it is evidently equally foolish to accept probable reasoning from a mathematician and to demand from a rhetorician scientific proofs ... For a well-schooled man is one who searches for that degree of precision in each kind of study which the nature of the subject at hand admits: it is obviously just as foolish to accept arguments of probability form a mathematician as to demand strict demonstrations from an orator."
Edited for typos.
“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.”
― Sun Tzu, The Art of War
I'm re-reading Thinking, Fast and Slow at the moment. More and more I see many people's problems with science as being rooted in them trusting their intuition far more than they should. If a theory or argument in science doesn't "make sense" to their intuition or gut feeling, they dismiss it rather than let System 2 take over and think statistically or analytically.
>I used to say to our audiences: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"
>I, Candidate for Governor: And How I Got Licked (1935), ISBN 0-520-08198-6; repr. University of California Press, 1994, p. 109.
de Vigny was a French poet/philosopher/etc. after the Revolution (his family was aristocratic and he was a loyalist, so you can image his view on social order). Stello (1832) is written as a conversation between the title character and a Dr. Noir. It's kind of a pscychoanalytic session, wherein the poet talks with the doctor about his concerns in his creative and political life.
The quote is from Chapter XX: A History of The Terror:
"C'est une doctrine qui m'est particulière, monsieur, qu'il n'y a ni héros ni monstre. — Les enfants seuls doivent se servir de ces mots-la."
The chapter is a long discussion of political horrors and their perpetrators.
Hey thanks. This is one of the more pernicious misattributions around. Not that I don't like the message, or reasonably expect the average person to have an idea of what was on message for The Stout Chested philosopher. But I wish people would at least hit up Wikiquote for a full source before they posted here.
I almost feel like /r/quotes could use a bot to respond to or take down some of the most frequently mis-cited quotations.
Who said it first?
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/227780-sow-a-thought-reap-an-action-sow-an-action-reap
Sow a thought, reap an action; sow an action, reap a habit; sow a habit, reap a character; sow a character, reap a destiny. Stephen R. Covey, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People
Many have been attributed to saying it:
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2013/01/10/watch-your-thoughts/
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Terry_Pratchett
> > In ancient times cats were worshiped as gods; they have not forgotten this. > > Pratchett is credited as author of this, as quoted in in Ghost Cats : Human Encounters with Feline Spirits (2007) by Dusty Rainbolt, p. 7, and in Chicken Soup for the Soul : What I Learned from the Cat (2009) by Jack Canfield, Mark Victor Hansen, and Amy Newmark > > Variant: In ancient times, cats were worshiped as gods. They have never forgotten this. > > Quote attributed to unknown author, in Chicken Soup for the Soul Celebrates Cats : And the People Who Love Them (2004) by Jack Canfield, Mark Victor Hansen, and Sharon J. Wohlmuth, p. 1
I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery. But I’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you fuck with me, I’ll kill you all. - USMC General James N. Mattis to Iraqi leaders
>There is no documented evidence that Camus ever wrote or said this, aside from Barry Schwartz's uncited mention in The Paradox of Choice. It is likely falsely attributed.
It is from Tales of Ordinary Madness by Charles Bukowski. (I have not read this one, so I am not sure if the book is broken up into smaller parts or stories.)
Emptiness Dancing by Adyashanti
or
Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind by Suzuki
or really anything by Adyashanti, Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Thich Nhat Hanh, or Byron Katie (if you're looking for a more modern, practical, self-help-geared book).
Nisargadatta Maharaj's "I am that" is available free online - it may be a good place to start if you don't feel like buying/getting a physical book right now. http://www.scribd.com/doc/6403815/Nisargadatta-I-Am-That
Good luck! I hope this will open your eyes as much as it has mine!
I confused the meaning of your comment, due to the wording. To clarify, the quote does seem to be accurately attributed to Einstein.
To respond to your actual intention, I think many people would agree that ideas often matter more than their sources. I also think it is not uncommon for people to appreciate seeing attribution, for a variety of reasons (to award recognition, analysis & research, finding other quotes by the same person, etc.). The reason that seems (to me) to grind your gears is the additional weight/credibility given to statements attributed to well-known sources. I think many can relate to that sentiment, though it's a double-edged sword. Do we leave out or de-emphasize attributions in order to prevent attribution bias, or retain attributions (and their benefits) and risk the bias? /shrug
Upvoted your comment anyway, there's something to it.
I don't think this is Socrates. I have seen something similar attributed to Oscar Wilde and his play Lady Windermere's Fan. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/790/790-h/790-h.htm
"Dumby. I congratulate you, my dear fellow. In this world there are only two tragedies. One is not getting what one wants, and the other is getting it."
> The day every one can wholly fulfill all of their own desires...
But what about things or places or events in limited supply? What happens when there is not enough to go around for everyone?
Commisar Danilov from the movie Enemy at the Gates (2001):
"I've been such a fool, Vassili. Man will always be a man. There is no new man. We tried so hard to create a society that was equal, where there'd be nothing to envy your neighbour. But there's always something to envy. A smile, a friendship, something you don't have and want to appropriate. In this world, even a Soviet one, there will always be rich and poor. Rich in gifts, poor in gifts. Rich in love, poor in love."
Shoe dog portrays to me a determination to succeed. It is also really funny.
Think and Grow Rich is essentially the same thing as many other books written by great minds, as well as what many leaders have said.. Focus on your internal self and your external world will mirror it.
When can humans not choose their emotional response to a situation?
Victor Frankyl explains this very well in the book Man's Search for Meaning in which he details his experiences as a Jew in in various concentration camps during the Holocaust.
Literally everything was taken from him, but the ability to choose an emotional response always remained.
"It is the mark of an educated mind to rest satisfied with the degree of precision which the nature of the subject admits and not to seek exactness where only an approximation is possible." -Nicomachean Ethics 1094b23-25
The context of this quote is Frankl's experience as a victim of the holocaust. He talks about which prisoners survived and which ones didn't, and why some people gave up while others were able to carry on. He was a psychiatrist already when he was imprisoned at Auschwitz, so he had a unique perspective on the experiences he had and the behavior he witnessed from the other inmates. The main idea of his book Man's Search for Meaning is that people really do have choices, no matter what their life circumstances, and that the choices people make determine the course of their lives. It was the prisoners who never conceded their dignity or sense of self, their power to make choices, who fared the best under those extreme conditions.
Interesting discussion here. The earliest source that could be found for this quote was source code distributed on USENET in 1987.
That's the basic principle behind Your Money or Your Life, a book that has had a transformative effect on how I view money.
I've always liked the quote, but here's what I found, and it's not Franklin or Rita Mae Brown:
http://throwgrammarfromthetrain.blogspot.com/2010/10/definition-of-insanity.html
I love this one. Here's a long list about humanity, but Lincoln ins't in it. More modern day folks.
Source. If you wanna read more, look for My Rise and Fall, a compilation of his autobiography My Rise, various diary entries after My Rise's publication, and notes from historians.
Notes from Prison is Alija Izetbegovic’s spiritual escape to freedom. Being politically imprisoned by the Communist regime in Yugoslavia for long years at Foca jail in Sarajevo, former President of Bosnia and Herzegovina - Alija Izetbegovic jotted down these immeasurably valuable philosophical notes on diverse topics. He saved the notes from the searching eyes of jailers and smuggled out all the 13 notebooks with the help of a fellow prisoner.
Alija Izetbegović, the first President of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992) and the author of several books, most notably " Islam Between East and West " and " Islamic Declaration ".
PDF > <strong>https://www.slideshare.net/FatimaKarim3/notes-from-prison-by-alija-izetbegovi-pdf</strong>
Interesting.. I'd attributed this quote to Carl Sagan in the past, but I looked it up again now and it seems you're right. Thanks!
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Carl_Sagan > ###Misattributed > * If it can be destroyed by the truth, it deserves to be destroyed by the truth. > * "That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be." — P. C. Hodgell, in her 1994 novel Seeker's Mask.
I have my doubts, too. I tried to google a source for it, but the best I could find was this claim from wikiquote.org: > Regarding "Ah, women. They make the highs higher and the lows more frequent." -- I do not believe this was actually Nietzsche. I think I wrote it during Nanowrimo 2011 and posted it in the Nanowrimo forums at the time (which have been wiped, so I could not check to make sure). The novel I was working on was a satirical sci-fi piece with a kooky QuoteBot that would spit out strange misquotes attributed to historical figures. That was one of them. (I can't swear to that being the case though. I believe a few of the quotes were accurate. That one looks pretty cut and dried to me not to have been Nietzsche, though I can't say who did actually say it, due to my inadequate notes.)
Disputed origin:
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mark_Twain#Disputed
> This appears on the opening placard of the film The Equalizer, attributing it to Twain, but no published attributions have as yet been located prior to two in 2014, the year in which this movie was released: Reset Your Life Path: Find Your Purpose, Change the World (2014) by Mark Gelhaus, p. 39; and "Step Four : Find Your Purpose, and Forty Days to Breakthrough (2014) by Skye McKenzie, Ch. 38 Day Thirty-eight: Anointed and Sent…, p. 87
nevermind. it came back to me in a dream:
> > I have yet to see any problem, however complicated, which, when you looked at it in the right way, did not become still more complicated.
> Poul Anderson
^Attributed. ^Often ^referred ^to ^as ^<em>Anderson's ^Law</em>.
- Tyler the Creator, lyrical genius
People like Chomsky and all sorts of academic (read "not conservative/business indebted") economists routinely make this point. Not many people actually read The Wealth of Nations: Adam Smith is basically what we'd call a liberal today. Only right-wing propagandists quote him out of context in this manner.
I'm assuming you've read The Power Of Now then. I'm currently reading it and loving every part. I've never read a book more slowly and meticulously as to soak up all the knowledge.
How would you say A New Earth compares to Power of Now? Would you consider it as essential?
I believe this quote may be misattributed to Feynman. I have never been a*ble to find a source for it. Does anyone have a source for it? Other than that, it is an excellent quote. I think everyone should read Feynman's *Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman.
Now that's some good shit. There is a time to dance.
I'm unable to find a source for this in Hemingway's writings. The earliest example appears to be from a Usenet post at alt.support.depression from 2000.
Attributed to Rogers in "The Manly Wisdom of Will Rogers", in The Friars Club Bible of Jokes, Pokes, Roasts, and Toasts (2001), by Nina Colman, p. 316
> [Christopher Soames, Churchill's future son-in-law, remembered] Churchill showing him around Chartwell Farm [around 1946]. When they came to the piggery Churchill scratched one of the pigs and said: I am fond of pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals.
More goodies:
The most important service rendered by the press and the magazines is that of educating people to approach printed matter with distrust.
Man is the only animal that laughs and has a state legislature. - As quoted in 1,911 Best Things Anybody Ever Said (1988) by Robert Byrne
The devil tempted Christ; yes, but it was Christ who tempted the devil to tempt him. - Further Extracts from the Note-Books of Samuel Butler, compiled and edited by A.T. Bartholomew (1934), p. 76
“What are the facts? Again and again and again – what are the facts? Shun wishful thinking, ignore divine revelation, forget what “the stars foretell,” avoid opinion, care not what the neighbors think, never mind the unguessable “verdict of history” – what are the facts, and to how many decimal places? You pilot always into an unknown future; facts are your single clue. Get the facts!” - Robert A. Heinlein
Source: Pascal's Pensées, page 139
I use Calibre to read ebooks, the above link has it for free of charge. If you decide to use Calibre you can download the Kindle file (.mobi) from the above link.
The above link is the English version of the Pensées.
Source: Pascal's Pensées, page 139
I use Calibre to read ebooks, the above link has it for free of charge. If you decide to use Calibre you can download the Kindle file (.mobi) from the above link.
The above link is the English version of the Pensées.
Those are all paraphrased, see this. The quotes on the page you provide that don't have "Benjamin Franklin" immediately afterwards are 3rd party hack jobs on the original phrase.
Here's a few other ones that I really like.
"You wouldn't worry so much about what others think of you if you realized how seldom they do." -Eleanor Roosevelt
"I am only one, but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will not refuse to do the something that I can do." -Helen Keller
"People seldom do what they believe in. They do what is convenient, then repent." -Bob Dylan
The Prince, by Machiavelli.
"The fact is that a man who wants to act virtuously in every way necessarily comes to grief among so many who are not virtuous."
"Men shrink less from offending one who inspires love than one who inspires fear."
From wiki quote: (edit: attributed to Otto von Bismarck)
>When asked what was the greatest political fact of modern times, Bismarck is reported to have responded, that it was "the inherited and permanent fact that North America speaks English." Whether the saying be authentic or not, the remark is certainly worthy of its reputed author's keen insight into political fundamentals.
Do what you can with what you have where you are. - Theodore Roosevelt
I can't publish a list of quotes here so I've put all the life-changing ones I've collected over the years into https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TrqROPDJMvJPrhmYhJ2e1VZ1jTdJ9Q7KGyOHLrX54PQ/edit?hl=en&authkey=CMTf9tYM
It's unlikely this is by Shaw. The earliest citation in Google Books is from Burke Hedges, <em>You, Inc: Discover the C.E.O. Within!</em> of 1996, where it is attributed not to Shaw but to novelist Mary McCarthy. It's subsequently attributed to Shaw in Espeland and Verdick, <em>Making Every Day Count: Daily Readings for Teens</em> (1998) (visible with Amazon search inside).
The book of his letters is amazing. Amazon link so you can read the synopsis etc.
The quote is from the book Goodbye, Mr. Nothing (written by yours truly). It can be found here on Amazon Kindle if you're interested. Hope that helps!
This quote reminded me to look up if she had any memoirs available...and I found 'Last Flight'.
I had a quick look and came across this:
>"I worked in a hospital during the war. From that experience I decided that medicine interested me most. Whether or not medicine needed me, I did not question."
The beauty of a quote is it can be interpreted in so many ways (particularly if the context is not readily known or available).
For me...I would interpret this as a father reminding his son that doing something right (even if it takes longer than expected ---- or that the whole world is rushing him) is what's important. And that if Philip (assuming that it is from this collection) is not willing to tune out his detractors...and is going to give in because of societal pressure...then he is not the right person for the job.
PS: I was actually hoping for OP to confirm if this was taken from the correspondences between Philip and his father. There would be likely a bit of context on what his father meant (was Philip wanting to get to a certain place? Be a certain kind of person?)
Edits: Mistakenly put Chesterfield as Philip's last name. Will leave it blank until confirmation (Apparently it is Stanhope ---- but then Philip was the name of his father --- who was the third Earl of Chesterfield).
The quote comes from Nicomachean Ethics and is more accurately interpreted somewhere along the lines of "All things are done in the pursuit of happiness".
I think Aristotle was right for saying it too. Every action we take, right or wrong, we believe will bring us happiness either now or in the future (key word believe). No one actively tries to bring about unhappiness in their lives, even if some manage to do so through misguided beliefs/notions.
The ultimate goal for each individual is to lead a happy life and whether we are conscious of it or not; every action we take is to attempt to further attaining it. What happiness is however, is unique to each individual. Otherwise, we'd all act in an identical fashion to obtain it.
would mindfulness be the most effective way of observing patterns, strengths and weaknesses? i believe the ACT modality would be best for clarifying values.
there is a whole study area on decision making under cognitive psychology. Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman would be a good source
what are your recs for nonviolent communication and empathy?
i've listened to Daniel Goleman's book on EI, there anything else out there?
><strong>The Art of War [6:13]</strong>
>>sun tzu needs to lay off the weed smh
> <em>^Aztrosist</em> ^in ^Entertainment
>^56,680 ^views ^since ^Feb ^2017
[^bot ^info](/r/youtubefactsbot/wiki/index)
>All value may not come from labor, but you can't write off Marx entirely.
The labor theory of value isn't just Marxist actually. Adam Smith explained it in The Wealth of Nations which was published in 1776 (before Marx was born) but Smith was largely dismissive. But after Smith, it was picked up by all strands of political thought. The main strains being: Liberalism through David Ricardo (1772-1823), individualist anarchism through Josiah Warren (1798-1874), Marxism/communism through Karl Marx (1818-1883), and mutualism through Proudhon (1809-1865).
Thoreau and Emerson are generally put in the category of "classical liberalism", however they advocated self-reliance and essentially wanted a minarchist government so are sometimes put in the "individualist anarchist" category as well.
>Laborers still exchange their lives for money which is then exchanged for commodities.
Sure, but the price isn't based upon the amount of life that you exchange for it. A mathematician has a job that is just as difficult if not more difficult than an engineer yet he is paid less. He exchanges the same amount of life for less money. This is because the immediate societal worth of a new mathematical theory is generally less than that of a new, more fuel-efficient engine, for example. The idea that the "amount of life" expended dictates the "price" really only holds up on an individual level, not on an economic or societal level.
Indeed a healthy mindset alone cannot overcome abuse or toxic environments but I believe it's an excellent starting point for any task. Only if we are aware and in control of our own mind can we helpfully influence others.
Since you seem quite interested in the stoics I recommend Irvine's A Guide to the Good Life which does a great job introducing the main thrusts of stoic philosophy but in a very understandable way for us in the modern world.
Is this from "Mindfulness in Plain English"?
That book literally changed my life by giving me these sort of understandings. I keep that book with only a couple others on my desk at all times. Thank you for posting this.
Good read on this topic, " Man's Search for Meaning " by Viktor Frankl. He saw and lived through the worst humanity has to offer and he came to realize this. He found that no one, no matter what they say or do, can control your will or how you react.
"Between stimulus and response there is a space. In that space is our power to choose our response. In our response lies our growth and our freedom." Viktor E. Frankl
Unfortunately this text does not appear anywhere in Pepys' diaries. It's a fake.
(Search the diaries for yourself to check: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/4200/4200-h/4200-h.htm )
This mindless Marxist sloganeering done more to damage brains on the Left than most other things I can think of. A few excerpts from a book written in last century that predicted Trumpism: > > It is impossible to discuss leftist politics in the twentieth century, in any country, without saying something about Marxism. For Marxism was not only a catastrophe for all the countries in which Marxists took power, but a disaster for the reformist Left in all the countries in which they did not. > > ...The ideals of social democracy and economic justice...long antedated Marxism, and would have made much more headway had "Marxism-Leninism" never been invented. > > ...I think we should abandon the leftist-versus-liberal distinction, along with the other residues of Marxism that clutter up our vocabulary--overworked words like "commodification" and "ideology," for example. Had Kerensky managed to ship Lenin back to Zurich, Marx would still have been honored as a brilliant political economist who foresaw how the rich would use industrialization to immiserate the poor. But his philosophy of history would have seemed, like Herbert Spencer's, a nineteenth-century curiosity. People on the Left would not have wasted their time on Marxist scholasticism, nor would they have been so ready to assume that the nationalization of the means of production was the only way to achieve social justice. They would have evaluated suggestions for preventing the immiseration of the proletariat country by country, in the pragmatic, experimental spirit which Dewey recommended.
In these past 6 years I've done more LSD, much more meditation, and am completing a post-doc position in a molecular neuroscience lab. I still stand by the statement.
(Though I will add that in a conversation comparing human existence to a monkey trapped in a house, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche was asked "What happens if the monkey takes LSD" and his response was "The monkey is already on LSD"(cutting through spiritual materialism). In my experience I have found that to be true and have ceased taking any pharmacologic for the sole purpose of mind-alteration)
Churches are made of people and most people prefer "the truth they've got".
Read The Fire That Consumes, it's not the truth you got, but it's exhaustively Biblical (Yes I know, the current edition is bigger than the Bible).
This is not Roald Dahl of course, but an old English proverb (listed, e.g., in this collection, first published in 1857.) This proverb was used, in particular, by Emily Dickinson in 1985 for her wonderful twist:
>A little Madness in the Spring
>
>Is wholesome even for the King.
Thank you very much for your effort, but this site is absolutely unreliable. My long and bitter experience shows that of the websites, you may trust only Libquotes, Quote Investigator, and Wikiquotes (two of them are mentioned in this sub's guidelines), and they do not list this aphorism. I could not find it in this special collection. During a few decades after his death, Hemingway was enormously popular, and many quotes were misattributed to him.
He was talking about the number of impeachments increasing. Which it hasn't. He also wasn't talking about morality.
Read for yourself: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/815/815-h/815-h.htm#link2HCH0015
Toqueville would've despised Trump.
I have this old 4"x5.5" tiny book published by Penquin Books in 1991 that I throw in my bag when travelling or know I'll be waiting in line for a while. It's titled Michel De Montaigne, Four Essays translated by M. A. Screech (!) The essay itself is called On the Art of Conversation and is a delight to read. I found this link for a huge bunch of essays, by a different translator, so not exactly the same-the one here is called: Chapter 8 On the Art of Conference. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/3600/3600-h/3600-h.htm#link2HCH0101
"The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool." - William Shakespeare
You asked the same question 15 hours ago and again 2 hours ago so this duplicate post has been removed.
Please stop reposting.
"I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints.
The sinners are much more fun.
You know that only the good die young."
- Billy Joel, Only The Good Die Young, The Stranger (1977)
When Machiavelli came to the end of his life, he had a vision shortly before giving up the ghost. He saw a small company of poor scoundrels, all in rags, ill-favoured, famished, and, in short, in as bad plight as possible. He was told that these were the inhabitants of paradise, of whom it is written, Beati pauperes, quoniam ipsorum est regnum caelorum. After they withdrew, innumerable serious and majestic personages appeared, who seemed to be sitting in a senate-house and dealing with the most important affairs of state. Among them he saw Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, Plutarch, Tacitus, and others of similar character; but he was told at the same time that those venerable personages, notwithstanding their appearance, were the damned, and the souls rejected by heaven, for Sapientia huius saeculi, inimica est Dei.. After this, he was asked to which of the groups he would choose to belong; he answered that he would much rather be in Hell with those great geniuses, to converse with them about affairs of state, than be condemned to the company of the verminous scoundrels that he had first been shown.
- Niccolò Machiavelli (disputed)
I can find no evidence that Oscar Wilde wrote this. The earliest close match is a Usenet post by "Wolf333" to alt.atheism from 2001:
> Why would I go to heaven? None of my friends are there.
It is, however, strongly reminiscent of the the dream Machivelli is said to have experienced on his deathbed:
> When Machiavelli came to the end of his life, he had a vision shortly before giving up the ghost. He saw a small company of poor scoundrels, all in rags, ill-favoured, famished, and, in short, in as bad plight as possible. He was told that these were the inhabitants of paradise, of whom it is written, Beati pauperes, quoniam ipsorum est regnum caelorum. After they withdrew, innumerable serious and majestic personages appeared, who seemed to be sitting in a senate-house and dealing with the most important affairs of state. Among them he saw Plato, Aristotle, Seneca, Plutarch, Tacitus, and others of similar character; but he was told at the same time that those venerable personages, notwithstanding their appearance, were the damned, and the souls rejected by heaven, for Sapientia huius saeculi, inimica est Dei. After this, he was asked to which of the groups he would choose to belong; he answered that he would much rather be in Hell with those great geniuses, to converse with them about affairs of state, than be condemned to the company of the verminous scoundrels that he had first been shown.
I remeber reading some guys beat Charlie Chaplin in a look like Charlie Chaplin contest. http://www.openculture.com/2016/06/when-charlie-chaplin-entered-a-chaplin-look-alike-contest-and-came-in-20th-place.html
I have not read your link, but it seems you are correct in that the actual quote is as you've described. Wikiquote, if that's sufficient evidence to confirm the actual quote for whoever clicks into this thread. You may have included it in your link, but as I said I didn't read anything more than what you wrote above. Cheers.
Google images can be helpful:
You might try slightly different words for the image search but there seems to be many pictures to choose from.
It's all over the place as a stand-alone quote. But I don't know what original source is.
It's an attributed saying of Confucius, but if you need a scholarly citation we can go with François de La Rochefoucauld who put it in a book.
It's a disputed origin quote attributed to Martin Luther.
I appreciate that you have had discussions with people in the field and read some papers that left you with the impression that you've outlined above. Unfortunately, it is not an accurate representation of the overall field's views on the subject.
In addition to the general roundup on IQ listed above, Wikipedia has also done a decent job of summarizing how neuroscience approaches inquiries into the neural bases of intelligence.
Edit: in addition to the above, here is a Cambridge University introductory-level Neuroscience textbook on intelligence. From the first paragraph of the summary: "He dispels common misconceptions, such as the belief that IQ tests are biased or meaningless, and debunks simple interventions alleged to increase intelligence."
As someone who is reading Meditations by Marcus Aurelius. In my opinion he is talking about giving into impulses, bad judgement, filling your mind with opinions of others and opinions of the lot you have in life. Bogging your thoughts up with that is what he considers harmful to the soul. He writes frequently of doing good for your soul by using good judgment and abandoning your opinions and similar rejections of judgment of what the universe deals to you. So your thoughts give your soul it's character, or dye.
Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance had a good discussion on no grade education. Here is a short explanation
Obviously, grades don't mean much because there are endless processes for trying to determine if any one graduate is actually competent for the job.
Wasn't sure what kind of worse you were feeling there. For a "fuck your conscience" feeling, Sade is pretty much my go-to. I actually tried to look for something in Justine, but eventually pulled from The Thought and Themes of the Marquis de Sade. It's no feat of memory on my part, but I'm glad at least one of them worked for you.
And Daria and C.S. are never far from my thoughts.
Just spoke with him. It is indeed an original. He's a Nietzsche scholar if that makes any difference.