Insights, Snippets, Quotes, Epiphanies & All That Sort of Things

[Florestan]

Nicolás Gómez Dávila, Escolios a un texto implícito, Atalanta, p. 90



http://www.amazon.es/Escolios-texto-impl%C3%ADcito-Brevis-atalanta/dp/8493724718/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366472643&sr=8-1&keywords=nicolas+gomez+davila

Naturally, I won't need to recall that my first encounter with Gómez Dávila was, some months ago, when he was quoted by you. Thanks again.

I'm only too happy you like him! Together with Cioran he's my favorite modern aphorist.

How about the following, also from him?

A youth's revolutionary activity is the rite of passage between adolescence and the bourgeoisie.

Revolutions do not solve any problem other than the economic problem of their leaders.

The first revolution broke out when it occurred to some fool that law could be invented.

A man is called a Communist if he fights for the state to assure him a bourgeois existence.

Three persons in our age make it their profession to detest the bourgeoisie:
the intellectual—that typical representative of the bourgeoisie;
the communist—that faithful executor of bourgeois intentions and ideals;
the progressive cleric—that final triumph of the bourgeois mind over the Christian soul.

Dialogue between Communists and Catholics has become possible ever since Communists started to falsify Marx and Catholics Christ.

We reactionaries are unfortunate: the left steals our ideas and the right our vocabulary.

To democratize Christianity they have to falsify the texts, reading "equal" where they say "brother."

Democracy is the political regime in which the citizen entrusts the public interests to those men to whom he would never entrust his private interests.

For the democrat it is not enough that we respect what he wants to do with his life; he demands, in addition, that we respect what he wants to do with our life.

The people never elects.
At most, it ratifies.

We enemies of universal suffrage never cease to be surprised by the enthusiasm aroused by the election of a handful of incapable men by a heap of incompetent men.

By the same measure that the state grows, the individual shrinks.

And my favorites of them all:

To be a reactionary is to understand that man is a problem without a human solution

It is no longer enough for the citizen to submit—the modern state demands accomplices.

Reactionary thought breaks into history as concrete liberty's shout of warning, as the spasm of anguish in the face of the unlimited despotism arrived at by the man intoxicated with abstract liberty.

Reactionary thought has been accused of irrationalism because it refuses to sacrifice the canons of reason to the prejudices of the day.

More here: http://don-colacho.blogspot.ro/

Oh, lest I don't forget: Eric, YHM!

[DavidRoss]

Thanks for calling this thoughtful observer to our attention. I'll check out the site. 1408 pages of aphorisms? Makes Nietzsche seem like a piker!

[Geo Dude]

Oh, I do I agree that "sexual perversion" is hard to define; if you ask me, the things that qualify are paedophilia, necrophilia, zoophilia and coprophilia. 

Seems a reasonable set of parameters for perversion.  I probably should have been a bit more clear though; at that time--and in certain demographics in the US at the current time--'perversion' was often used as a euphemism for homosexuality.  That's what I was referring to when I commented that his views on sexual perversion may be outdated in the West.  In Middle Eastern countries on the other hand....

OTOH, if we talk about perverting words' meaning, "liberal" is a prime example: in USA it means "more or less socialist" (actually, more than less) while elsewhere it means the opposite: free market and free trade. 

This reminds me of a story told in a geologist's memoir that also relates to the perversion of words:  The geologist was outside of a state congressman's office and overheard the congressman's aide informing him that he would be speaking to two scientists, one a Republican and the other a Socialist, and that his current meeting was with the former.  The author, clearly anticipating a national audience, made a parenthetical remark that Socialist is Texan for Democrat.

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Chekhov

Besides that, his short stories and plays are chock-full of "Insights, Snippets, Quotes, Epiphanies & All That Sort of Things" which are best appreciated in their proper context.  IM(not so)HO he was one of the geatest minds ever to tackle the human condition.

Thank you.  Assuming you read his works in translation, do you have any favorite translators for the short stories in English?

[Florestan]

This reminds me of a story told in a geologist's memoir that also relates to the perversion of words:  The geologist was outside of a state congressman's office and overheard the congressman's aide informing him that he would be speaking to two scientists, one a Republican and the other a Socialist, and that his current meeting was with the former.  The author, clearly anticipating a national audience, made a parenthetical remark that Socialist is Texan for Democrat.

Thank you.  Assuming you read his works in translation, do you have any favorite translators for the short stories in English?

You're welcome, but regarding English translations I can be of no help: I read his work in Romanian translation. 

[Superhorn]

   I love this quote which I found on facebook yesterday : " Religion is like a penis. It's fine to have one .
                                                                                      It's fine to be proud of it .
                                                                                      But please, don't whip  it out in public and
                                                                                      and  shake it around ".

[Florestan]

Sir Bertrand Russel

I want to say, in all seriousness, that a great deal of harm is being done in the modern world by belief in the virtuousness of work, and that the road to happiness and prosperity lies in an organized diminution of work. (In Praise of Idleness, 1932)

I am completely at a loss to understand how it came about that some people who are both humane and intelligent could find something to admire in the vast slave camp produced by Stalin (Why I Am Not A Communist, 1956).

[Geo Dude]

Both Russell quotes are nice, I particularly like the first one.  Here's a Faulkner quote that it reminds me of:

"In my opinion it's a shame that there is so much work in the world. One of the saddest things is that the only thing a man can do for eight hours a day, day after day, is work. You can't eat eight hours a day nor drink for eight hours a day nor make love for eight hours—all you can do for eight hours is work. Which is the reason why man makes himself and everybody else so miserable and unhappy."

[Wakefield]

 Russell is one of mine oldest intellectual idols. I have always been amazed by the number of powerful brains getting their acmé in Europe and America (this time, as a concession, I use America as a synonym of USA) between 1870-1930. Just to mention my own preferences, an inaccurate list would include: Russell, Chesterton, Ortega, Wilde, Shaw, Santayana, William James, Wittgenstein, Whitehead and so.

BTW, I guess this could be a nice resource for Russell's fans:

http://archive.org/details/westernphilosoph035502mbp

My personal favorite history of the philosophy. 

[Florestan]

Both Russell quotes are nice, I particularly like the first one.  Here's a Faulkner quote that it reminds me of:

"In my opinion it's a shame that there is so much work in the world. One of the saddest things is that the only thing a man can do for eight hours a day, day after day, is work. You can't eat eight hours a day nor drink for eight hours a day nor make love for eight hours—all you can do for eight hours is work. Which is the reason why man makes himself and everybody else so miserable and unhappy."

Yes, I am familiar with that: a great one, too.

Here are some more on work:

By working faithfully eight hours a day you may eventually get to be boss and work twelve hours a day.~ Robert Frost

The brain is a wonderful organ; it starts working the moment you get up in the morning and does not stop until you get into the office.~ Robert Frost

The taxpayer - that's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination.~ Ronald Reagan

If work were so pleasant, the rich would keep it for themselves.~ Mark Twain

Nobody talks more of free enterprise and competition and of the best man winning than the man who inherited his father's store or farm.~ C. Wright Mills

Increased means and increased leisure are the two civilisers of man.~  Benjamin Disraeli

All intellectual improvement arises from leisure.~ Samuel Johnson

Education...now seems to me perhaps the most authoritarian and dangerous of all the social inventions of mankind. It is the deepest foundation of the modern slave state, in which most people feel themselves to be nothing but producers, consumers, spectators, and 'fans,' driven more and more, in all parts of their lives, by greed, envy, and fear. My concern is not to improve 'education' but to do away with it, to end the ugly and antihuman business of people-shaping and to allow and help people to shape themselves.~ John Holt

I believe that liberation from wage slavery starts with liberation from school slavery.~ John O. Andersen

If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?~ George Carlin

If one looks at the world without prejudice but with an eye to maximizing freedom, the major coercive institution is not the state, it's work.~ Bob Black

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.~ Krishnamurti

Some people giving orders and others obeying them: this is the essence of servitude. Of course, as Hospers smugly observes, "one can at least change jobs," but you can't avoid having a job....[...] But freedom means more than the right to change masters.~ Bob Black

[Florestan]

Russell is one of mine oldest intellectual idols. I have always been amazed by the number of powerful brains getting their acmé in Europe and America (this time, as a concession, I use America as a synonym of USA) between 1870-1930. Just to mention my own preferences, an inaccurate list would include: Russell, Chesterton, Ortega, Wilde, Shaw, Santayana, William James, Wittgenstein, Whitehead and so.

Brilliant minds indeed. Not to be forgotten in the same generation: Unamuno, Guglielmo Ferrero, Luigi Sturzo, Nikolai Berdyaev...

[Florestan]

And then there is, of course, the one and only Oscar Wilde.

[...]that monstrous and ignorant thing that is called Public Opinion, which, bad and well-meaning as it is when it tries to control action, is infamous and of evil meaning when it tries to control Thought or Art.

Indeed, there is much more to be said in favour of the physical force of the public than there is in favour of the public's opinion. The former may be fine. The latter must be foolish. It is often said that force is no argument. That, however, entirely depends on what one wants to prove. Many of the most important problems of the last few centuries, such as the continuance of personal government in England, or feudalism in France, have been solved entirely by means of physical force. The very violence of a revolution may make the public grand and splendid for a moment. It was a fatal day when the public discovered that the pen is mightier than the paving-stone, and can be made as offensive as the brick-bat. They at once sought for the journalist, found him, developed him, and made him their industrious and well-paid servant. It is greatly to be regretted, for both their sakes. Behind the barricade there may be much that is noble and heroic. But what is there behind the leading article but prejudice, stupidity, cant, and twaddle? And when these four are joined together they make a terrible force, and constitute the new authority.

In old days men had the rack. Now they have the press. That is an improvement certainly. But still it is very bad, and wrong, and demoralising. Somebody - was it Burke? - called journalism the fourth estate. That was true at the time, no doubt. But at the present moment it really is the only estate. It has eaten up the other three. The Lords Temporal say nothing, the Lords Spiritual have nothing to say, and the House of Commons has nothing to say and says it. We are dominated by Journalism. In America the President reigns for four years, and Journalism governs for ever and ever.

[...]

People sometimes inquire what form of government is most suitable for an artist to live under. To this question there is only one answer. The form of government that is most suitable to the artist is no government at all. Authority over him and his art is ridiculous. It has been stated that under despotisms artists have produced lovely work. This is not quite so. Artists have visited despots, not as subjects to be tyrannised over, but as wandering wonder-makers, as fascinating vagrant personalities, to be entertained and charmed and suffered to be at peace, and allowed to create. There is this to be said in favour of the despot, that he, being an individual, may have culture, while the mob, being a monster, has none. One who is an Emperor and King may stoop down to pick up a brush for a painter, but when the democracy stoops down it is merely to throw mud. And yet the democracy have not so far to stoop as the Emperor. In fact, when they want to throw mud they have not to stoop at all. But there is no necessity to separate the monarch from the mob; all authority is equally bad.

There are three kinds of despots. There is the despot who tyrannises over the body. There is the despot who tyrannises over the soul. There is the despot who tyrannises over soul and body alike. The first is called the Prince. The second is called the Pope. The third is called the People. The Prince may be cultivated. Many Princes have been. Yet in the Prince there is danger. One thinks of Dante at the bitter feast in Verona, of Tasso in Ferrara's madman's cell. It is better for the artist not to live with Princes. The Pope may be cultivated. Many Popes have been; the bad Popes have been. The bad Popes loved Beauty, almost as passionately, nay, with as much passion as the good Popes hated Thought. To the wickedness of the Papacy humanity owes much. The goodness of the Papacy owes a terrible debt to humanity. Yet, though the Vatican has kept the rhetoric of its thunders and lost the rod of its lightning, it is better for the artist not to live with Popes. It was a Pope who said of Cellini to a conclave of Cardinals that common laws and common authority were not made for men such as he; but it was a Pope who thrust Cellini into prison, and kept him there till he sickened with rage, and created unreal visions for himself, and saw the gilded sun enter his room, and grew so enamoured of it that he sought to escape, and crept out from tower to tower, and falling through dizzy air at dawn, maimed himself, and was by a vine-dresser covered with vine leaves, and carried in a cart to one who, loving beautiful things, had care of him. There is danger in Popes. And as for the People, what of them and their authority? Perhaps of them and their authority one has spoken enough. Their authority is a thing blind, deaf, hideous, grotesque, tragic, amusing, serious, and obscene. It is impossible for the artist to live with the People. All despots bribe. The people bribe and brutalise. Who told them to exercise authority? They were made to live, to listen, and to love. Some one has done them a great wrong. They have marred themselves by imitation of their inferiors. They have taken the sceptre of the Prince. How should they use it? They have taken the triple tiara of the Pope. How should they carry its burden? They are as a clown whose heart is broken. They are as a priest whose soul is not yet born. Let all who love Beauty pity them. Though they themselves love not Beauty, yet let them pity themselves. Who taught them the trick of tyranny ?

RTWT here: http://libcom.org/library/soul-of-man-under-socialism-oscar-wilde

[Parsifal]

Yes, I am familiar with that: a great one, too.

Here are some more on work:

By working faithfully eight hours a day you may eventually get to be boss and work twelve hours a day.~ Robert Frost

The brain is a wonderful organ; it starts working the moment you get up in the morning and does not stop until you get into the office.~ Robert Frost

The taxpayer - that's someone who works for the federal government but doesn't have to take the civil service examination.~ Ronald Reagan

If work were so pleasant, the rich would keep it for themselves.~ Mark Twain

Nobody talks more of free enterprise and competition and of the best man winning than the man who inherited his father's store or farm.~ C. Wright Mills

Increased means and increased leisure are the two civilisers of man.~  Benjamin Disraeli

All intellectual improvement arises from leisure.~ Samuel Johnson

Education...now seems to me perhaps the most authoritarian and dangerous of all the social inventions of mankind. It is the deepest foundation of the modern slave state, in which most people feel themselves to be nothing but producers, consumers, spectators, and 'fans,' driven more and more, in all parts of their lives, by greed, envy, and fear. My concern is not to improve 'education' but to do away with it, to end the ugly and antihuman business of people-shaping and to allow and help people to shape themselves.~ John Holt

I believe that liberation from wage slavery starts with liberation from school slavery.~ John O. Andersen

If work is so terrific, how come they have to pay you to do it?~ George Carlin

If one looks at the world without prejudice but with an eye to maximizing freedom, the major coercive institution is not the state, it's work.~ Bob Black

It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society.~ Krishnamurti

Some people giving orders and others obeying them: this is the essence of servitude. Of course, as Hospers smugly observes, "one can at least change jobs," but you can't avoid having a job....[...] But freedom means more than the right to change masters.~ Bob Black

The aphorism, it would appear, is the primordial twitter. 

[Wakefield]

And then there is, of course, the one and only Oscar Wilde.

Let me recommend some of the best pages ever written about Wilde:

http://books.google.cl/books?id=xvycg3RMAW4C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

I have always thought the essay "About Oscar Wilde" like inseparable of the essay "On Chesterton".

I can't recommend these readings highly enough. 

[Brian]

The aphorism, it would appear, is the primordial twitter.

One can only imagine the glorious possibilities had Wilde or Nietzsche been on Twitter.

[Geo Dude]

One can only imagine the glorious possibilities had Wilde or Nietzsche been on Twitter.

Hehehe, a fascinating thought.  Personally, I'd give all the money in the world to revive H.L. Mencken and give him a Twitter feed around election time.  (Any given election.)

[Wakefield]

Hehehe, a fascinating thought.  Personally, I'd give all the money in the world to revive H.L. Mencken and give him a Twitter feed around election time.  (Any given election.)

Yes, but we face an intrinsic problem here: Aphorisms and related short forms are manifestations of extremely intensive/concentrated thought. Internet and Twitter, for the case, are promoting -by their own nature- exactly the opposite form of reading and thought: superficial and careless. At their best, they allow some funny boutades, but almost never deep thought. 

[Brian]

Yes, but we face an intrinsic problem here: Aphorisms and related short forms are manifestations of extremely intensive/concentrated thought. Internet and Twitter, for the case, are promoting -by their own nature- exactly the opposite form of reading and thought: superficial and careless. At their best, they allow some funny boutades, but almost never deep thought. 

But this is not inherent to Twitter; it is altogether a function of what Twitter users do. There is no preventing a philosopher from joining (and indeed I believe the Dalai Lama was once a regular user). There is no reason that Twitter promotes by its own nature superficiality, any more than the idea that, say, you would promote superficiality by demanding Nietzsche or Cioran use only 140 characters per aphorism.

[Wakefield]

But this is not inherent to Twitter; it is altogether a function of what Twitter users do. There is no preventing a philosopher from joining (and indeed I believe the Dalai Lama was once a regular user). There is no reason that Twitter promotes by its own nature superficiality, any more than the idea that, say, you would promote superficiality by demanding Nietzsche or Cioran use only 140 characters per aphorism.

I don't believe this as a sort of dogma, but I think there are quite proofs to demonstrate an evident decline of intensive thought/reading, as a consequence of new technologies, and many people are thinking seriously about this. Means aren't inocuous and have a direct impact on the content (message). Nicholas Carr aptly summarizes this issue in his book The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains.

Of course, mere "transcriptions" of thoughts produced through different "technologies" aren't a product of Twitter. I think it's quite clear, isn't it? 

[Parsifal]

But this is not inherent to Twitter; it is altogether a function of what Twitter users do. There is no preventing a philosopher from joining (and indeed I believe the Dalai Lama was once a regular user). There is no reason that Twitter promotes by its own nature superficiality, any more than the idea that, say, you would promote superficiality by demanding Nietzsche or Cioran use only 140 characters per aphorism.

Nietzsche was a twit who wrote book after book about the nature of women despite the fact that he had apparently never spoken to a girl.  I think Nietzsche would have to have raised his game to be able to compete on twitter. 

[Florestan]

Let me recommend some of the best pages ever written about Wilde:

http://books.google.cl/books?id=xvycg3RMAW4C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

I have always thought the essay "About Oscar Wilde" like inseparable of the essay "On Chesterton".

I can't recommend these readings highly enough. 

Gracias, caballero!

I don't believe this as a sort of dogma, but I think there are quite proofs to demonstrate an evident decline of intensive thought/reading, as a consequence of new technologies

I second that.