The Little Book of Humanity 2009

8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009

1/124

Table of ContentsThe Little Book of Humanity.............................................................................................................................1

Epicurus on death...............................................................................................................................................2

Marcus Aurelius on misfortune.........................................................................................................................5

Marcus Aurelius on future.................................................................................................................................7

Epicurus on the roads end..................................................................................................................................9

Marcus Aurelius on feelings of injury.............................................................................................................11

Epicurus on pleasure........................................................................................................................................13

Epicurus on overindulgence.............................................................................................................................16

Bertrand Russell on goals in life......................................................................................................................19

Epicurus on anger.............................................................................................................................................21

Marcus Aurelius on universe...........................................................................................................................23

Epicurus on misfortune....................................................................................................................................25

Marcus Aurelius on the privilege of being alive.............................................................................................27

Marcus Aurelius on being human...................................................................................................................29

Marcus Aurelius on fountain of good..............................................................................................................31

Bertrand Russell on dogma and evidence.......................................................................................................33

Oscar Wilde on truth........................................................................................................................................35

Feedback for Post "Oscar Wilde on truth".............................................................................................37

Robert G. Ingersoll on intellectual honesty....................................................................................................38

Feedback for Post "Robert G. Ingersoll on intellectual honesty ".........................................................40

Bertrand Russell on values and science..........................................................................................................41

Hippocrates on opinions and facts...................................................................................................................43

Bertrand Russell on Aristotle..........................................................................................................................45

Marcus Aurelius on living among lying men..................................................................................................47

Feedback for Post "Marcus Aurelius on living among lying men "......................................................49

i


2/124

Table of ContentsBertrand Russell on interdependency of humankind....................................................................................50

Bertrand Russell on possessions......................................................................................................................52

Bertrand Russell on free intellect....................................................................................................................54

Marcus Aurelius on living................................................................................................................................56

Marcus Aurelius on on humans and nature...................................................................................................58

George Orwell on patriotism...........................................................................................................................60

George Orwell on money..................................................................................................................................62

Thomas Paine on ownership of earth..............................................................................................................64

Howard Winters on "we" and "them"...........................................................................................................66

Epicurus on possessions....................................................................................................................................68

Marcus Aurelius on happy life.........................................................................................................................70

Epicurus on fame and status............................................................................................................................72

Epicurus on God...............................................................................................................................................74

Feedback for Post "Epicurus on God "..................................................................................................76

Bertrand Russell on teapots in orbit...............................................................................................................77

Feedback for Post "Bertrand Russell on teapots in orbit"......................................................................79

Epicurus on folly of prayer..............................................................................................................................80

Thomas Paine on the Bible...............................................................................................................................82

Robert G. Ingersoll on prisons of mind..........................................................................................................84

Marcus Aurelius on gods..................................................................................................................................86

Feedback for Post "Marcus Aurelius on gods"......................................................................................88

Bertrand Russell on philosophy and theology................................................................................................89

Bertrand Russell on vastness and fearful passionless force of non-human things.....................................91

Marcus Aurelius on causes of controversies...................................................................................................93

Bertrand Russell on fear..................................................................................................................................95

ii


3/124

Table of ContentsEpicurus on pain of body or mind...................................................................................................................97

Epicurus on living justly...................................................................................................................................99

Marcus Aurelius on good and evil.................................................................................................................101

John Ruskin on beliefs and action.................................................................................................................103

Marcus Aurelius on loving your enemies......................................................................................................105

Bertrand Russell on the authority of the sacred books...............................................................................107

Thomas Paine on religious approval of slavery...........................................................................................109

Jeremy Nathanson on appreciation of people's differences........................................................................111

Walter Lippmann on thinking alike..............................................................................................................113

Anaxagoras on ownership..............................................................................................................................115

Diax on beliefs and truth................................................................................................................................117

Author's friends..............................................................................................................................................119

About the author.............................................................................................................................................120

Pageviews.........................................................................................................................................................121

iii


4/124

The Little Book of Humanity
http://fix.blog.de/


5/124

Epicurus on death

"Death is nothing to us; for that which has been dissolved into its elements experiences

no sensations, and that which has no sensation is nothing to us." - Epicurus (Principal

Doctrine number 2)

Epicurus is in practice saying here that fear of death is quite unnecessary, as in death personjust returns to the state he or she was before he or she was born and there is no pain after that.

The fear of death in itself is the enemy, not the inevitable death, that is a similar necessary

and vital part of life as birth is.

I know it is so easy to say, but so difficult to really do, but the easiest way to diminish fear is

to stop unnecessarily thinking about things you fear, especially if your thinking does not

really change anything, but only makes you fear a thing you need not fear. Epicureans do

think that living a full and good life is the best antidote for fear of death.

Of course the religions are feeding on this fear of death and they do their utmost to keep it up.

So it comes as no surprise that death is the main decorative motive in all Christian churches

and a instrument of killing is its main symbol.

This Epicurean doctrine is not at all about those left behind after our death, but it is all about

how we personally deal with the idea of our own death. The loss felt by others can also of

course be lessened if they can accept death as a natural and necessary part of life and not for

example as a divine sanction for our sins.

After your death you do really exist, but only as a memory of you and your actions in other

people's minds. A person leaving good memories with his good actions will live for a long

time in those memories after he or she is gone and more importantly will also be remembered

fondly.

by jaskaw @ 29.11.2009 - 19:48:53
http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-death-7480720/


6/124

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-death-7480720/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-death-7480720/


7/124


8/124

Marcus Aurelius on misfortune

"Here is the rule to remember in the future, When anything tempts you to be bitter: not,

"This is a misfortune" but "To bear this worthily is good fortune." - Marcus Aurelius

Marcus Aurelius was a Stoic and the Stoic way of thinking was all about changing ones mind

to make the best of bad situations where one is helpless to change things. This however does

not mean that Stoics would have thought that people should accept all things as they come.

There however is many situations in life where one can not change anything with his or her

actions and in these situations the Stoic way of thinking can still be a great tool in retaining

ones sanity.

by jaskaw @ 29.11.2009 - 19:50:21

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-misfortune-7480732/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-misfortune-7480732/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-misfortune-7480732/


9/124


10/124

Marcus Aurelius on future

"Never let the future disturb you. You will meet it, if you have to, with the same

weapons of reason which today arm you against the present." - Marcus Aurelius

The Stoic way was about removing all unnecessary ballast from ones mind. Carrying fear of

unknown future things is often the purest and most destructive form of self-mutilation, but

Marcus Aurelius really thinks that one can avoid it if he or she just puts her mind into it.

by jaskaw @ 29.11.2009 - 19:51:44

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-future-7480741/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-future-7480741/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-future-7480741/


11/124


12/124

Epicurus on the roads end

"While we are on the road, we must try to make what is before us better than what is

past; when we come to the road's end, we feel a smooth contentment." - Epicurus

(Vatican sayings, 48)

Epicurus gives us a way of seeing the future in a way that can make a person happier and

more content. It's about not worrying unnecessarily about the future, but giving it a try at leastbefore succumbing to pessimism and cynicism.

by jaskaw @ 29.11.2009 - 19:58:03

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-the-roads-end-7480793/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-the-roads-end-7480793/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-the-roads-end-7480793/


13/124


14/124

Marcus Aurelius on feelings of injury

"Reject your sense of injury and the injury itself disappears." - Marcus Aurelius

There are of course mental injuries that are so deep that you just cannot make them disappear,but I still claim that the less you dwell in them, the better you will feel in the long run. The

problem with philosophy is always the absolutes, as often ideas are presented as absolute

ideas, even if in the real world they are just goals that one can strive for. One can vastly

improve one's life without really getting there, but just by trying to go in the general direction

of a goal. This quote just makes no sense if interpreted erroneously to iclude physical injuries.

It however makes a sea of sense when understood in the right way, as mental wounds happen

only in the wounded mind itself. The less one does allow words to bite, the less they really

will wound you.

by jaskaw @ 29.11.2009 - 19:59:14

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-feelings-of-injury-7480805/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-feelings-of-injury-7480805/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/marcus-aurelius-on-feelings-of-injury-7480805/


15/124


16/124

Epicurus on pleasure

"The magnitude of pleasure reaches its limit in the removal of all pain. When such

pleasure is present, so long as it is uninterrupted, there is no pain either of body or of

mind or of both together." - Epicurus (Principal Doctrine number 3)

This is the very Epicurean doctrine that is misunderstood the most and mostly on purpose by

Christians to make Epicureanism look bad. The Epicurean goal is not at all about hedonism orhaving uninterrupted pleasure, as pleasure is defined as removal of pain and not a sensation.

So the ultimate state of bliss is achieved when one is not in pain in any way mentally or

physically. One needs no pleasures as such to achieve that state. The mental pain if course the

most difficult to avoid.

Again it is not even stated that such a state is in fact achievable in practice, but it is about the

theoretical maximum state of pleasure or in other words lack of all pain. A couple of quotes

from

http://science.jrank.org/pages/9167/Epicureanism-Epicurus-on-Pleasure.html#ixzz0LAM1KHUv&C

is very useful here: "Epicurus conceived of pleasure in two ways.

"Kinetic" pleasure is that pleasure felt while performing an activity, such as eating or

drinking. "Katastematic" pleasure is that pleasure felt while being in a state. This is the

pleasure of not being disturbed, of being free from pain. Both types of pleasure occur in the

body and the soul. The absence of pain (katastematic pleasure) in the soul (ataraxia), though,

is the highest good for Epicurus. Epicurus has often been misunderstood as a "sensualist."

But this does not seem to be correct. While kinetic pleasures are desirable for Epicurus, they

are not always to be pursued. In fact, it seems that they should be pursued only when they

contribute to ataraxia (untroubledness). "

by jaskaw @ 29.11.2009 - 20:25:34

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-pleasure-7480956/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-pleasure-7480956/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-pleasure-7480956/


17/124


18/124


19/124

Epicurus on overindulgence

"No pleasure is a bad thing in itself, but the things which produce certain pleasures

entail disturbances many times greater than the pleasures themselves." Epicurus

(Principal Doctrines, 8)

This doctrine is one of those that is very commonly forgotten when people are trying toportray Epicureanists as hedonistic and reaching only for the unlimited pleasures. The big

difference to Christianity is that nothing is seen as forbidden or sinful just because of some

divine revelation, but things are valued on the benefits and disturbances they bring with them

only to a person or the society. One of course needs a rational mind that can do such a

valuation.

In Epicurean world a person must him or herself decide when the negative aspects of an

activity bringing pleasure are greater that the good. Epicurean way of thought is based on

such a expectation of self-discipline, that is unheard of in Christianity, where a person is not

supposed the make this kind of valuations him- or herself at all. One must remember also that

Epicureans are not talking about the physical pleasures, but mental pleasures are even more

important.

I understand that disturbance mentioned here is anything that puts things off-balance in ones

relationships with other people or one's own mind or body. Disturbances are all the things that

disturb "ataraxia" which is a state that is characterized by freedom from worry or any other

preoccupation.

Many Christian writers have described ataraxia as apathy and that apathy thing is as old as

Christianity, as they dug up things just like this to make Epicureanism look bad. It is however

a complete forgery, as ataraxia has nothing to do with apathy, but it is the ultimate goal as a

state of mind where a person is at peace with him or herself and the outside world.

A person can be tremendously active and productive while striving for this kind of greater

inner strength and peace. It is not even however said that it is possible to attain a perfect

peace of mind, but in my mind it is about the process where a person should avoid such things

that disturb his relationships with other people and such actions that make attaining peace in
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-overindulgence-7481220/


20/124

one

by jaskaw @ 29.11.2009 - 21:10:40

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-overindulgence-7481220/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-overindulgence-7481220/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/


21/124


22/124

Bertrand Russell on goals in life

"I have lived in the pursuit of a vision, both personal and social. Personal: to care for

what is noble, for what is beautiful, for what is gentle; to allow moments of insight to

give wisdom at more mundane times. Social: to see in imagination the society that is to

be created, where individuals grow freely, and where hate and greed and envy diebecause there is nothing to nourish them. These things I believe, and the world, for all

its horrors, has left me unshaken. - Bertrand Russell in "The Autobiography of

Bertrand Russell" (1967)

Bertrand Russell shows with his very example that a person can lead a full and fulfilling life

while being fully aware of all of the evil and unjust things there are going in the world. When

one does what one can realistically do to make an personal impact on things, one can rest

assured that one's life has not gone to waste.

by jaskaw @ 30.11.2009 - 00:50:43

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/bertrand-russell-on-goals-in-life-7482354/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/bertrand-russell-on-goals-in-life-7482354/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/bertrand-russell-on-goals-in-life-7482354/


23/124


24/124

Epicurus on anger

"A blessed and indestructible being has no trouble himself and brings no trouble upon

any other being; so he is free from anger and partiality, for all such things imply

weakness." - Epicurus (Principal Doctrines,1)

I believe Epicurus means that a person can achieve a state of "indestructibility" when he orshe he or she is free from anger and partiality and so causes no trouble to him/herself or

others with his negative thoughts and actions.

Only then he/she is freed from the things that hurt us the most. It does not even say if this

level is attainable in the real world or that it would be easy to attain.

In fact this quite Buddhist thought can be read just as a goal to be sought after, even if it is not

in real life possible to get there. The rewards come from the process itself and it might just be

that the goal is never reached, but it does not matter, if the reaching for that goal changes

something in a person.

by jaskaw @ 30.11.2009 - 12:36:01

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/epicurus-on-anger-7484059/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/epicurus-on-anger-7484059/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/epicurus-on-anger-7484059/


25/124


26/124

Marcus Aurelius on universe

"He who lives in harmony with himself lives in harmony with the universe." - Marcus

Aurelius

Its a very simple thing; accepting what and who you really are will get you a long way at

accepting also other people as who and what they really are. In the end the most of our real

life universe is made of people we already know and how we relate to them will change our

whole universe. Our "universe" can be contained in a single room at times.

by jaskaw @ 30.11.2009 - 19:08:42

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/marcus-aurelius-on-universe-7486124/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/marcus-aurelius-on-universe-7486124/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/marcus-aurelius-on-universe-7486124/


27/124


28/124

Epicurus on misfortune

"We should find solace for misfortune in the happy memory of the things that are gone

and in the knowledge that what has come to be cannot be undone." - Epicurus (Vatican

sayings, 55)

Why worry about something that is inevitable and you cannot change? Why not worry aboutthings that you can do something about and change? A abstract idea like death disturbs us just

as long as we will allow it to do so.

Admittedly it can be a hard thing see that death is not a concrete thing for us before it really

happens. Epicurus reminds us that when it really happens it does not bother us anymore, as

we are then not around to worry about it anymore. If we just can realize that death is not a

thing worth worrying, we will be freed from a source of great anguish. And yes, it is quite

possible, there a lot of people who have done it successfully, but one needs to put some effort

into it. Of course the modern death cults (aka. religions) do their utmost to foster the fear of

death, as fostering just that fear is their main source of business.

This is one of the main reasons why early Christians so hated Epicureans, as they feared that

they would spoil their market, as maximizing the fear of death was and still is an extremely

important part of their marketing strategy. The ugly cult of fear of Death is present in every

single room dedicated to their vengeful god in a form of symbol that is an ancient tool of

torture and death.

by jaskaw @ 30.11.2009 - 19:32:35

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/epicurus-on-misfortune-from-big-book-of-humanity-jump-to-7486230/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/epicurus-on-misfortune-from-big-book-of-humanity-jump-to-7486230/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/epicurus-on-misfortune-from-big-book-of-humanity-jump-to-7486230/


29/124


30/124

Marcus Aurelius on the privilege of being alive

"When you arise in the morning, think of what a precious privilege it is to be alive - to

breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love." - Marcus Aurelius

A lazy moment spent on doing nothing else than letting aimless and free flow of thinking

arise can be the best investment you can ever make. Endless lazy hours spent mindlessly

looking on the hypnotic eye of the telly is however a different thing altogether.

by jaskaw @ 30.11.2009 - 19:56:39

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/marcus-aurelius-on-the-privilege-of-being-alive-7486419/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/marcus-aurelius-on-the-privilege-of-being-alive-7486419/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/30/marcus-aurelius-on-the-privilege-of-being-alive-7486419/


31/124


32/124

Marcus Aurelius on being human

"Not to feel exasperated or defeated or despondent because your days aren't packed

with wise and moral actions. But to get back up when you fail, to celebrate behaving like

a human -however imperfectly- and fully embrace the pursuit you've embarked on."

Marcus Aurelius

In practice Marcus Aurelius is saying that there is no reason and what's more important no

excuse to give up, even if one is inevitably unable always to reach the highest levels of moral

standards. We must remember also that these standards were originally set by similar failing

and frail people as worthy goals to strive for.

We fail and fall, but we can stand up again and keep trying again and again and become better

human beings day by day, week by week, year by year.

No human can never be and never has been perfect and anybody claiming this sort of thing is

simply lying, but every human can work to become a better person. This process of

betterment is the essence of being human.

by jaskaw @ 01.12.2009 - 14:53:50

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/marcus-aurelius-on-being-human-7491078/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/marcus-aurelius-on-being-human-7491078/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/marcus-aurelius-on-being-human-7491078/


33/124


34/124

Marcus Aurelius on fountain of good

"Look within. Within is the fountain of good, and it will ever bubble up, if thou wilt ever

dig. " - Marcus Aurelius

This is of course the essence of humanism. Marcus Aurelius thinks like so many other

humanists that deep buried in all humans is the will and ability for doing good, but sometimes

it just must be dug up, or it may go to waste.

by jaskaw @ 01.12.2009 - 21:33:18

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/marcus-aurelius-on-fountain-of-good-7493386/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/marcus-aurelius-on-fountain-of-good-7493386/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/marcus-aurelius-on-fountain-of-good-7493386/


35/124


36/124

Bertrand Russell on dogma and evidence

"I mean by intellectual integrity the habit of deciding vexed questions in accordance

with the evidence, or of leaving them undecided where the evidence is inconclusive. This

virtue, though it is underestimated by almost all adherents of any system of dogma, is to

my mind of the very greatest social importance and far more likely to benefit the worldthan Christianity or any other system of organized beliefs." - Bertrand Russell in "Can

Religion Cure Our Troubles?" (1954)

Bertrand Russell presents here the very basic point; if decisions should and would be based

on dogmatic beliefs or on evidence.

Instantly reacting basing the decision on an old and well-known dogma is often the quickest

way to reach a decision, but Bertrand Russell is saying that when people get over that old

gut-reaction, we will have achieved a real revolution in our societies, as things would be

decided more and more on their own current merits, not on what has been done in the past.

Bertrand Russell is not saying that one should keep on waiting for all possible newinformation, as that would often slow down decision making process. He is just saying that

one should use the available evidence that we already have and make decisions based on them

and not on old dogmatic beliefs.

On the other hand he is saying that we should defer nailing our final stand on those things that

we have too little information to base a real world opinion on and when the old dogma would

be our only guide.

by jaskaw @ 01.12.2009 - 21:38:20

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/bertrand-russell-on-dogma-and-evidence-7493422/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/bertrand-russell-on-dogma-and-evidence-7493422/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/bertrand-russell-on-dogma-and-evidence-7493422/


37/124


38/124

Oscar Wilde on truth

"The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple." - Oscar Wilde

Are there such things as truths at all? I for my part think that we have a lot of best possible

guesses, a truckload of extremely good approximations and lots of extremely accurate

information, but are they truths? Science is not at all about finding a final truth, but finding

the best possible explanation and it will change when a better explanation is found. I would

go as far as to say that absolute and unmovable truths are found only in religions, and even

those are in fact mostly extremely bold and extravagant lies.

by jaskaw @ 01.12.2009 - 22:08:53

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/oscar-wilde-on-truth-7493601/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/oscar-wilde-on-truth-7493601/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/oscar-wilde-on-truth-7493601/


39/124


40/124

Feedback forPost "Oscar Wilde on truth"

FedupwithR [Member]

06.12.2009 @ 19:34

As Truth is not a material object it cannot exist. The Truths spoken of by religions are all too often

unverifiable. The result of hallucinations, optical illusions rumor etc.
http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/oscar-wilde-on-truth-7493601/#c11705304http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/01/oscar-wilde-on-truth-7493601/#c11705304http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://fix.blog.de/


41/124

Robert G. Ingersoll on intellectual honesty

"But honest men do not pretend to know; they are candid and sincere; they love the

truth; they admit their ignorance, and they say, "We do not know."

- Robert G. Ingersoll in "Superstition" (1898)

Robert G. Ingersoll is speaking here about the unbelievable callousness of the religious

people to simply claim to know all the answers and of having final truth of how people should

behave and how things should be arranged in a life of a human being. It just takes a lot of a

person to say "I really do not know what the final answer is, and I do not know if we ever

will".

A true follower of a Abrahamic religion will just never be capable of doing it, as the main

trick of their trade is selling certainties in issues where they simply do not exist.

Science is not at all about being certain and creating final and unerring laws of nature. It is

about striving to reach the best possible answer of the given moment. That answer can and

will change when new data arrives and enough scientists are convinced of its correctness.

That is the main reason why religion and science will always be inherently incompatible in

the very basic level.

by jaskaw @ 02.12.2009 - 10:31:55

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/


42/124


43/124

Feedback for Post "Robert G. Ingersoll on intellectualhonesty "

Richard Prins [Visitor]

http://richardprins.com

02.12.2009 @ 10:44

I'd add one of my favourites by Charles Darwin to this (from The Descent of Man, 1871, p. 4):

"It has often and confidently been asserted, that man's origin can never be known: Ignorance more frequently

begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so

positively assert that this or thatproblem will never be solved by science."

| Show subcomments

jaskaw pro

http://www.beinghuman.blogs.fi

02.12.2009 @ 10:47

A great quote, Richard, thanks!

FedupwithR [Member]

06.12.2009 @ 19:17

I would have said "unbelievable effrontery"of the religious.
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/#c11666663http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/?comment_ID=11666663&comment_level=1#c11666663http://www.blogs.fi/user/jaskaw/http://www.blogs.fi/user/jaskaw/http://www.blog.de/srv/account/account_upgrade.phphttp://www.blogs.fi/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/#c11666676http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/#c11705160http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/#c11666676http://www.beinghuman.blogs.fi/http://www.blog.de/srv/account/account_upgrade.phphttp://www.blogs.fi/user/jaskaw/http://www.blogs.fi/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/?comment_ID=11666663&comment_level=1#c11666663http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/robert-g-ingersoll-on-intellectual-honesty-7495958/#c11666663http://richardprins.com/http://fix.blog.de/http://fix.blog.de/


44/124

Bertrand Russell on values and science

"While it is true that science cannot decide questions of value, that is because they

cannot be intellectually decided at all, and lie outside the realm of truth and falsehood.

Whatever knowledge is attainable, must be attained by scientific methods; and what

science cannot discover, mankind cannot know." - Bertrand Russell in "Religion andScience (1935), ch. IX: Science of Ethics"

I think we can also scientifically explore what for example love and morality are, how they

have evolved, what purpose they serve and what is the groundwork laid by evolution on

which these ideas rest in general.

I however also think that what specific action is considered as loving or moral and which as

unloving and immoral in given society cannot be predicted by scientific methods alone, as it

is a result of quite unpredictable cultural processes that can change unexpectedly and rapidly,

when the situation and needs of the society change.

by jaskaw @ 02.12.2009 - 14:27:38

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/bertrand-russell-on-values-and-science-7497094/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/bertrand-russell-on-values-and-science-7497094/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/bertrand-russell-on-values-and-science-7497094/


45/124


46/124

Hippocrates on opinions and facts

"There are in fact two things, science and opinion; the former begets knowledge, the

latter ignorance." - Hippocrates (460 BC - 377 BC) in "Law"

Hippocrates is to my mind saying that also opinions should be based on facts as far as

possible. He is not however saying that people should not have opinions as some people have

interpreted this quote.

In organized human communities there will always be different opinions based on different

experiences, expectations and different views on the world as a whole.

The more these opinions are however based on facts of the physical world, the more realistic

the decisions made on them will ultimately be."

by jaskaw @ 02.12.2009 - 22:55:21

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/hippocrates-on-opinions-and-facts-7500556/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/hippocrates-on-opinions-and-facts-7500556/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/02/hippocrates-on-opinions-and-facts-7500556/


47/124


48/124

Bertrand Russell on Aristotle

"Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men; although he was twice

married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by examining his wives'

mouths." - Bertrand Russell in "The Impact of Science on Society" (1951)

The danger of following authority blindly lurks also in science. The biggest danger of course

is that the supposed authority can be dead wrong in some things even if he or she is on the

right track on many others.

Aristotle thought that women are a lower species than men and just maybe he wanted just to

find support for his opinions and maybe for that reason did not even want to check the facts.

This danger of idealogical bias lurks of course even today also in science.

by jaskaw @ 03.12.2009 - 14:19:07

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/bertrand-russell-on-aristotle-7503438/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/bertrand-russell-on-aristotle-7503438/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/bertrand-russell-on-aristotle-7503438/


49/124


50/124

Marcus Aurelius on living among lying men

"There is but one thing of real value - to cultivate truth and justice, and to live without

anger in the midst of lying and unjust men." - Marcus Aurelius

I think that the most important and valuable single phrase here is "without anger". Besides

making one's life more livable and bearable, being calm and forgiving in many kinds of

situations of social interaction will also put you in position of advantage compared to those

who act in anger.

Of course this kind of thing is much more difficult to implement than to just say, but

understanding the value of patience and forgiveness is the necessary start.

Passion is a quite different thing than anger, as passion is a positive feeling and anger a

negative one. I would dare to day that passion drives you forward, but anger stops you on

your tracks.

With anger you may concentrate your energies on foregone insults and wrongdoings of others

instead of concentrating on the good works you are about to do in future.

by jaskaw @ 03.12.2009 - 18:15:51

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/marcus-aurelius-on-living-among-lying-men-7504684/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/marcus-aurelius-on-living-among-lying-men-7504684/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/marcus-aurelius-on-living-among-lying-men-7504684/


51/124


52/124

Feedback for Post "Marcus Aurelius on living among lyingmen "

FedupwithR [Member]

06.12.2009 @ 18:41

Henry Miller once said that anger was a mental sickness. Anger seems to be accepted today as a justifiable

way to behave whereas, as you say, it is totally negative. Anger itself never solves any problems and life

would be so much more agreeable if everyone just stayed calm.
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/marcus-aurelius-on-living-among-lying-men-7504684/#c11704879http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/marcus-aurelius-on-living-among-lying-men-7504684/#c11704879http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://www.blogs.fi/user/fedupwithr/http://fix.blog.de/http://fix.blog.de/


53/124

Bertrand Russell on interdependency ofhumankind

"Humankind has become so much one family that we cannot ensure our own prosperity except by

ensuring that of everyone else. If you wish to be happy yourself, you must resign yourself to seeing

others also happy." - Bertrand Russell in "The Science to Save Us from Science" in The New York

Times Magazine (1950)

Bertrand Russell is speaking about collectivism where the collective is seen as the whole mankind with all of

its different ideas of how the relationships between humans should be organized. I think that Bertrand was

way ahead of his time, but I also think that globalization is in fact a centuries old phenomena.

The interdependency between all nations was there even in 1950, but it was not talked about as much as now,

as it was a part of the nationalistic agenda wanted to play the thing down. Of course globalization has been

intensifying in last decades, but it is a question of rise in the quantity and quality of the new ties between

nations."

by jaskaw @ 03.12.2009 - 22:19:37

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/bertrand-russell-on-interdependency-of-humankind-7506326/
http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/bertrand-russell-on-interdependency-of-humankind-7506326/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/bertrand-russell-on-interdependency-of-humankind-7506326/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/03/bertrand-russell-on-interdependency-of-humankind-7506326/


54/124


55/124

Bertrand Russell on possessions

"It is preoccupation with possession, more than anything else, that prevents men from

living freely and nobly." - Bertrand Russell in "Principles of Social Reconstruction"

(1917)

I think that the word "preoccupation" is the key word here. It is again the lack of moderation

that is the real problem. Bertrand Russell is not saying that possession is bad thing per se, but

he simply says that preoccupation with it can burden a person unnecessarily.

This quote by good old Bertrand really touched a central and painful nerve in our society. I

don't think this discussion will die out anytime soon or on the other hand will lead to any final

conclusion.

But I do sincerely believe that this kind of discussion is sorely needed, as no single facet of

our society should not be taken as granted. Who can really say what is the right level of

consumption that is needed to keep up a a modern society that can support all its members?

by jaskaw @ 04.12.2009 - 20:32:26

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/04/bertrand-russell-on-possessions-7511555/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/04/bertrand-russell-on-possessions-7511555/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/04/bertrand-russell-on-possessions-7511555/


56/124


57/124

Bertrand Russell on free intellect

"One who believes as I do, that free intellect is the chief engine of human progress,

cannot but be fundamentally opposed to Bolshevism as much as to the Church of Rome.

The hopes which inspire communism are, in the main, as admirable as those instilled by

the Sermon on the Mount, but they are held as fanatically and are as likely to do asmuch harm." Bertrand Russell in "The Practice and Theory of Bolshevism" (1920)

I do believe that the degree of fanaticism is the crucial thing here, and the exact policies the

fanatics are furthering is really of quite secondary importance. Bertrand Russell was of course

looking at a specific point of history and opposing some specific policies, but I do believe this

quote can be used as a warning against all fanaticism be it left or right.

by jaskaw @ 05.12.2009 - 14:14:51

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/05/bertrand-russell-on-free-intellect-7514927/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/05/bertrand-russell-on-free-intellect-7514927/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/05/bertrand-russell-on-free-intellect-7514927/


58/124


59/124

Marcus Aurelius on living

"Where a man can live, he can also live well. " - Marcus Aurelius

I think striking the right balance is of gravest importance here. I do believe that one can alsostrive for change without driving oneself to pain and agony on the feelings of personally felt

injustice, even if on the other hand just theses feelings have always been a great force for

change.

As an old saying goes, it is about accepting those things one has no power to change and

using one's energies in trying to change those things that one can really change. But most of

all the big thing is acquiring the wisdom to see the difference.

by jaskaw @ 05.12.2009 - 17:03:02

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/05/where-a-man-can-live-he-can-also-live-well-7515623/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/05/where-a-man-can-live-he-can-also-live-well-7515623/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/05/where-a-man-can-live-he-can-also-live-well-7515623/


60/124


61/124

Marcus Aurelius on on humans and nature

"Nothing happens to anybody which he is not fitted by nature to bear." - Marcus

Aurelius

I think that good old Marcus means basically that the human kind has evolved to bear and

cope with all the things it encounters in real life.

If something we normally encounter in life would really be too much for all humans, there

would be no humans left at all. Ergo; we can learn to bear the things life throws at us, as they

are things other people have learned to live with before.

There is no kind of deity presupposed in this quote at all. It is all about natural evolution of

the species. Nature has its inner logic and there is no real mystery if one just cares to observe

and listen.

There is just universe and life as it has evolved and the reasons behind their behavior can be

revealed and explained more and more, the more, the more we put effort and time into it.

We just will ever know all the answers and those who claim to know them are just fools that

fool themselves.

by jaskaw @ 06.12.2009 - 13:53:44

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/06/marcus-aurelius-on-on-humans-and-nature-7520045/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/06/marcus-aurelius-on-on-humans-and-nature-7520045/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/06/marcus-aurelius-on-on-humans-and-nature-7520045/


62/124


63/124

George Orwell on patriotism

"Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so

vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a

distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved.

By patriotism I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life,which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people.

Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally.

Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding

purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself

but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality."

"Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally." - George Orwell in

"Notes on Nationalism" (1945)

I think that there really is a point where the garden variety patriotism turns into something

more nasty, as George Orwell tries to explain in his essay. In similar way a Christian or even

Islamic faith in itself need not to lead to any bad things, if taken in small and mild enough

doses.

However the bad things start to appear the moment when beliefs turn into fanaticism and this

certainly applies also to feelings people have for their home country. In small enough doses it

can be quite healthy thing, but any overdoing it will lead to trouble.

The world would undoubtedly be a better place without even mild forms of patriotism, but

lets get real here; It ain't gonna go away very soon, even if the formation of European Unionis a giant step towards erasing the ill effects of nationalism and patriotism in Europe at least.

by jaskaw @ 06.12.2009 - 19:02:06

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/06/george-orwell-on-patriotism-7521607/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/06/george-orwell-on-patriotism-7521607/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/06/george-orwell-on-patriotism-7521607/


64/124


65/124

George Orwell on money

"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not money, I am

become as a sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of

prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith,

so that I could remove mountains, and have not money, I am nothing." - George Orwellin "Keep the Aspidistra Flying" (1936)

George Orwell did have a period when he was really at the bottom. He tells about this time in

his fine book "Down and out in Paris and London" and this period of utter and desperate

poverty has surely influenced this quote.

He did originally come from a middle class family and started a normal middle class career as

a police officer in Burma, but dropped out as he realized what he was really doing in the

colonial Burma.

Later on he mostly led a typical freelance writers very fragile existence, as his real success

did come very late in life.

by jaskaw @ 07.12.2009 - 11:23:44

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/07/george-orwell-on-money-7526043/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/07/george-orwell-on-money-7526043/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/07/george-orwell-on-money-7526043/


66/124


67/124

Thomas Paine on ownership of earth

"Men did not make the earth. It is the value of the improvements only, and not the earth

itself, that is individual property." - Thomas Paine in "Agrarian Justice" (1795 - 1796)

There is also a more profound philosophical level to this statement for me at least, if one

forgets the the problems of taxation that did in fact inspire this piece by Paine.

I personally took this quotation to my heart because I think it also reminds us that we all in

fact are just borrowing something, when we claim to own land or water.

I believe that when we understand that we must in the end return that borrowed property in

good condition to its rightful owner, who are the coming generations, humanity as a whole,

earth as a ecosystem, as any lender of borrowed things must do, we have come a long way.

I mean that we can never own a piece of land as we own a television set and do whatever we

like to it.We have obligation to keep it in such a condition that also coming generations can

also use it; in that sense we are not owners, but borrowers.

We can improve and use land, but we should always remember that we are never the final

owners of it.

by jaskaw @ 07.12.2009 - 21:01:16

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/07/thomas-paine-on-ownership-of-earth-7529596/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/07/thomas-paine-on-ownership-of-earth-7529596/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/07/thomas-paine-on-ownership-of-earth-7529596/


68/124


69/124

Howard Winters on "we" and "them"

"Civilization is the process in which one gradually increases the number of people included in the term

'we' or 'us' and at the same time decreases those labeled 'you' or 'them' until that category has no one

left in it." - Howard Winters

I do think that broadening of the sphere of group inclusion is a clear evolutionary trend, brought about by

many simultaneous developments and it is a clear but is still a less observed trend in the human history.

There is a ongoing creation of global digital marketplace of ideas and computerized goods and the

simultaneous creation of global tribes that can be identified in every corner in the world.

This formation of transnational global tribes has been gaining momentum for decades, but Internet has

intensified this process tremendously, as now you can really hang out with your tribe in the Net and not with

your real world neighbors.

This global tribalization is not without its own grave dangers, but it is slowly eating away the lifeblood of the

extremist nationalism, which forms a real axis of evil together with the fundamentalist interpretations of the

religion. Extreme nationalism and fundamentalist religions are the last bastion on the dangerous "us" and

"them" -thinking.

American archaeologist Howard Dalton Winters [1923-1994] was probably most influential in the fleshing

out of G.R. Willey's settlement patterns study. Winters argued that the proper way to study a settlement

pattern (that is to say, a group of related sites, each with their own role) was as a system, as each part of a

working whole. He was also interested in identifying the reasons for the selection of which goods were

funneled through trade networks in the past, what the value of these goods were to the people who traded

them. Winters was educated at the College of William and Mary and the University of Chicago. He conducted

work in the American midwest and Mexico, and was associated with the Illinois State Museum, SouthernIllinois University, and New York University.

by jaskaw @ 08.12.2009 - 12:47:49

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/08/howard-winters-on-we-and-them-7533105/
http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/08/howard-winters-on-we-and-them-7533105/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/08/howard-winters-on-we-and-them-7533105/


70/124


71/124

Epicurus on possessions

"A free life cannot acquire many possessions, because this is not easy to do without servility to mobs or

monarchs." - Epicurus

Of course not all men or women want to lead a free life, but are happily serving the mobs in for example in

Hollywood at their typewriters or directors chairs. They are serving the mobs by trying desperately to second

guess what the mobs would like to see tomorrow, what horribly exaggerated catastrophes or morbid tales of

rampant irrationality they would like dwell in next.

Servility to monarchs is easiest to observe in the middle management in every business corporation of theworld, where the least servile people are of course often those who do the real work in the field.

Few people understand how a necktie or cravat is a sign of servitude that says: "Here is the rope already in my

neck, my life is yours if you so wish,". Only the real owner and on the other hand the men at the ultimate

bottom can discard this outward sign of servitude.

by jaskaw @ 08.12.2009 - 23:25:56

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/08/epicurus-on-possessions-7536915/
http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/08/epicurus-on-possessions-7536915/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/08/epicurus-on-possessions-7536915/


72/124


73/124

Marcus Aurelius on happy life

"Very little is needed to make a happy life." - Marcus Aurelius

Even though Marcus Aurelius was a Stoic he had a clear fondness for many of the Epicureanideals. This saying is of course pure Epicureanism.

Happiness is a state of mind and is does not depend on the for example economical

circumstances, given that one does not let them interfere in ones mind.

Of course certain basic necessities must always be fulfilled before a human can even

contemplate and value his or her state of happiness.

Reaching even a momentary state of happiness in Auschwitz was certainly unbelievably more

difficult than just a few meters away outside the barbed fence. On the other hand a

unexpected friendly smile or extra loaf of bread could bring even there a moment of great

happiness, who knows?

by jaskaw @ 09.12.2009 - 13:51:01

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/09/marcus-aurelius-on-happy-life-7539691/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/09/marcus-aurelius-on-happy-life-7539691/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/09/marcus-aurelius-on-happy-life-7539691/


74/124


75/124


76/124


77/124

Epicurus on God

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but

not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh

evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus

The famous riddle of Epicurus is still quite valid, as all the question he asks have been left

quite unanswered during the two and half millennium that has passed since these words werefirst written down in ancient Greece, where men could utter like words like this and live to

tell about it. A sorry fact of life is that the rise of dogmatic Christianity made it impossible for

over a millennium to even think like this

by jaskaw @ 10.12.2009 - 14:32:54

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/epicurus-on-god-7548491/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/epicurus-on-god-7548491/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/epicurus-on-god-7548491/


78/124


79/124

Feedback for Post "Epicurus on God "

Winston Brown [Visitor]

http://weightlossgodsway.weebly.com/

14.12.2009 @ 07:02

God has been helping me lose weight - lately http://weightlossgodsway.weebly.com/

| Show subcomments

Jervis Dacia [Visitor]

15.12.2009 @ 02:26

"Is God willing to prevent fat, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is

malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh obesity? Is he neither able nor willing? Then

why call him God?

The words of Epicurus may aid you in losing weight, if you can limit the natural but unnecessary desires.
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/epicurus-on-god-7548491/#c11771280http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/epicurus-on-god-7548491/#c11779902http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/epicurus-on-god-7548491/?comment_ID=11771280&comment_level=1#c11771280http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/epicurus-on-god-7548491/#c11771280http://weightlossgodsway.weebly.com/http://weightlossgodsway.weebly.com/http://fix.blog.de/


80/124


81/124


82/124

Feedback for Post "Bertrand Russell on teapots in orbit"

Karen [Visitor]

11.12.2009 @ 02:18

Classic Russell. I adore him. Where is the Bertrand Russell of our age? Maybe Dennett. I really think he was

underappreciated, even when he was alive. At least now some of us godless beings have brought him out ofsemi-obscurity.

Ib Balicanta [Visitor]

11.12.2009 @ 08:50

He is, undoubtedly the most influential figure in my life.

Ashley Moltzan [Visitor]

11.12.2009 @ 22:16I love this! This man is an inspiration.
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/bertrand-russell-on-teapots-in-orbit-7551421/#c11747066http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/bertrand-russell-on-teapots-in-orbit-7551421/#c11747672http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/bertrand-russell-on-teapots-in-orbit-7551421/#c11754445http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/bertrand-russell-on-teapots-in-orbit-7551421/#c11754445http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/bertrand-russell-on-teapots-in-orbit-7551421/#c11747672http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/10/bertrand-russell-on-teapots-in-orbit-7551421/#c11747066http://fix.blog.de/


83/124

Epicurus on folly of prayer

"It is folly for a man to pray to the gods for that which he can attain by his own power."

- Epicurus (VS, 65)

We should remember the basic fact that Epicurus did not believe in any kind of divine forces

that can affect humn life at all. He is basically saying in more modern language that man got

to do what man got to do and stop expecting help from quarters where none is to be expected.

by jaskaw @ 11.12.2009 - 14:51:58

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/11/epicurus-on-folly-of-prayer-7554789/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/11/epicurus-on-folly-of-prayer-7554789/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/11/epicurus-on-folly-of-prayer-7554789/


84/124


85/124

Thomas Paine on the Bible

"What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed

debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is

called faith." - Thomas Paine in "The Age of Reason" (1794)

Thomas Paine was a deist and he did not approve of any of the formal organized religions, but

had a personal notion of a god-spirit that did not however interfere in the matters of humans

at all.

It was quite logical for him to denounce the Bible, but believe in a quite different concept of

god. His idea of god had however nothing in common with the vengeful and angry

Father-God of the Christians.

During the latter part of his life Thomas Paine hated and opposed all organized forms of

religion, but this fact was suppressed from sight for nearly two centuries the and there are a

lot of people who do not know about his stance in religious matters at all.

The people in religious right often fall into this category, as they are just kept ignorant of the

true nature of this remarkable man and would be truly shocked if this would be revealed to

them.

by jaskaw @ 11.12.2009 - 20:31:47

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/11/thomas-paine-on-the-bible-7557149/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/11/thomas-paine-on-the-bible-7557149/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/11/thomas-paine-on-the-bible-7557149/


86/124


87/124

Robert G. Ingersoll on prisons of mind

"When I became convinced that the universe is natural, that all the ghosts and gods are

myths, there entered into my brain, into my soul, into every drop of my blood the sense,

the feeling, the joy of freedom. The walls of my prison crumbled and fell. The dungeon

was flooded with light and all the bolts and bars and manacles became dust. I was nolonger a servant, a serf, or a slave. There was for me no master in all the wide world, not

even in infinite space. I was free. - Robert G. Ingersoll in "Why I Am An Agnostic"

This quote has been admired for over a century. Robert G. Ingersoll was a orator on a level

where there is very few competitors. He also had to courage to say what he thought is the

society of 19th century where publishing this kind of thinking could end up one in deep

trouble.

by jaskaw @ 13.12.2009 - 02:17:11

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/robert-g-ingersoll-on-prisons-of-mind-7564086/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/robert-g-ingersoll-on-prisons-of-mind-7564086/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/robert-g-ingersoll-on-prisons-of-mind-7564086/


88/124


89/124

Marcus Aurelius on gods

"Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout

you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are

gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then

you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of yourloved ones." - Marcus Aurelius

Of course Marcus Aurelius is just saying that one should not bother oneself with abstract

ideas, even more if those ideas bear no connection to the real world, instead concentrate on

living a good and just life.

There is some doubt if this quote is really from Marcus Aurelius, as it is apparently not in his

book "Meditations" which is the basic source of all Marcus Aurelius -quotations. However

this quote is a fine piece of rational thinking, whoever is its writer.

The style resembles very much that of Marcus Aurelius and as a Stoic he did not believe in

any kind of personal gods or saviors, but he believed in mans own ability to work out what is

best for him or her and for the society as a whole, if enough effort is put into it.

by jaskaw @ 13.12.2009 - 12:46:55

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/


90/124


91/124

Feedback for Post "Marcus Aurelius on gods"

sandor [Visitor]

13.12.2009 @ 16:49

That's a great quote. I haven't read it before.

My favourite is: "Love thy neighbour."

There's no need to believe in "gods" or "religions" or in an Invisible Superbeing, yet those who do believe in

such nonsense seem to be unable to remember those 3 simple words.

"Love thy neighbour." End of story.

Chris [Visitor]

13.12.2009 @ 19:11

That is exactly how I have always felt.

gimmeabreak [Visitor]

13.12.2009 @ 19:31

abstract ideas like science?

| Show subcomments

Kirk [Visitor]

13.12.2009 @ 23:12Sure science is abstract - it's a process for discovering and explaining nature. The subject of science -see

figure 1 - is natural phenomena. These are real and not abstract. Some of the representations or models may

begin as abstract but the goods ones get flesh put on the bones pretty quickly.

The supernatural is completely, irrevocably abstract. That's for sure.

hiptrigger [Visitor]

13.12.2009 @ 20:05

@ gimmeabreak - 'science' allowed you to leave your idiotic comment (using hardware, software, electronics,

networking, metallurgy, chemical engineering, human factors, etc.)

As opposed to the abstract idea of god(s) which was been *created* by fearful control freaks a long time ago

and is culturally maintained by well, fearful control freaks today.
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/#c11767661http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/#c11767836http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/#c11768113http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/#c11768113http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/#c11769827http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/?comment_ID=11767836&comment_level=1#c11767836http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/#c11767836http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/#c11767661http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/13/marcus-aurelius-on-gods-7565403/#c11766522http://fix.blog.de/


92/124

Bertrand Russell on philosophy and theology

"In science men change their opinions when new knowledge becomes available; but

philosophy in the minds of many is assimilated rather to theology than to science." -

Bertrand Russell in Preface to "The Bertrand Russell Dictionary of Mind, Matter and

Morality

Bertrand Russell is on something very important here. There are no final or even temporary

truths in philosophy, but philosophers can carry a even opposite views of the same things and

both be right at the same time. There are no universally accepted current paradigms in

philosophy, as are in many other fields of science. That of course is the way it should be, as

philosophy is endlessly querying the contents of the human mind in its never ending quest for

better answer on why we are as we are.

by jaskaw @ 14.12.2009 - 13:02:06

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/14/bertrand-russell-on-the-difference-between-philosophy-and-theology-7572
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/14/bertrand-russell-on-the-difference-between-philosophy-and-theology-7572023/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/14/bertrand-russell-on-the-difference-between-philosophy-and-theology-7572023/


93/124


94/124

Bertrand Russell on vastness and fearfulpassionless force of non-human things

"I must before I die, find some way to say the essential thing that is in me, that I have

never said yet - a thing that is not love or hate or pity or scorn, but the very breath oflife, fierce and coming from far away, bringing into human life the vastness and fearful

passionless force of non-human things." - Bertrand Russell in "My Philosophical

Development" (1959)

I have a hunch that this quote is about the feeling of the unfathomable vastness of the

universe, the incredible and endless variety of the physical world and also of the unbelievable

force of human imagination, but really I don't know in the end any more about it than you, my

dear reader do know when you read it.

by jaskaw @ 14.12.2009 - 22:37:32

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/14/bertrand-russell-on-vastness-and-fearful-passionless-force-of-non-human-t
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/14/bertrand-russell-on-vastness-and-fearful-passionless-force-of-non-human-things-7575270/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/14/bertrand-russell-on-vastness-and-fearful-passionless-force-of-non-human-things-7575270/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/14/bertrand-russell-on-vastness-and-fearful-passionless-force-of-non-human-things-7575270/


95/124


96/124

Marcus Aurelius on causes of controversies

"We are too much accustomed to attribute to a single cause that which is the product of

several, and the majority of our controversies come from that." - Marcus Aurelius

Marcus Aurelius in the very heart of the matter in this quote. Even history of philosophy is

full of single-minded and one-tracked attempts of trying to explain it all the with one

all-explaining attribute. Of course even the most single-minded explanations can bring very

valueble contributions, just if one keeps in mind that the final truth simply does not exist.

by jaskaw @ 15.12.2009 - 15:38:13

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/15/marcus-aurelius-on-causes-of-controversies-7579075/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/15/marcus-aurelius-on-causes-of-controversies-7579075/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/15/marcus-aurelius-on-causes-of-controversies-7579075/


97/124


98/124

Bertrand Russell on fear

"Fear is the main source of superstition, and one of the main sources of cruelty. To

conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom." - Bertrand Russell in "An Outline of

Intellectual Rubbish" (1943)

Fear is the main source of hate. Hate is of course a very natural response to fear, as with it a

person makes him/herself ready to meet the thing that is causing the fear. The problem is of

course groundless and ideology-based fear that uses the natural responses of a person for its

own ends.

by jaskaw @ 15.12.2009 - 20:21:36

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/15/bertrand-russell-on-fear-7580651/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/15/bertrand-russell-on-fear-7580651/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/15/bertrand-russell-on-fear-7580651/


99/124


100/124

Epicurus on pain of body or mind

"If the things that produce the pleasures of profligate men really freed them from fears

of the mind concerning celestial and atmospheric phenomena, the fear of death, and the

fear of pain; if, further, they taught them to limit their desires, we should never have

any fault to find with such persons, for they would then be filled with pleasures fromevery source and would never have pain of body or mind, which is what is bad."

Epicurus (Principal Doctrines, 10)

The tenth Epicurean doctrine collects the ideas presented in earlier doctrines to show the

Epicurean way for achieving mental peace. In fact Epicureans are saying that forgetting the

religious explanations for earthly things can greatly pacify the mind, when one understands

that natural phenomena are not caused by human action, but can be explained rationally.

Most of all important is to overcome the irrational fear of death that is cultivated by many

religions to a maximum effect, as soothing this fear they themselves are doing their best to

foster is their age-old marketing ploy.

The other side of the kind is developing a sufficient level of self-restraint that one does not

hurt oneself or others by filling his or her desires. Limiting ones desires is the key here. The

doctrine simply says that getting rid of fear and over-indulgence are the basis for a good life.

by jaskaw @ 16.12.2009 - 16:15:56

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/16/epicurus-on-pain-of-body-or-mind-7585183/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/16/epicurus-on-pain-of-body-or-mind-7585183/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/16/epicurus-on-pain-of-body-or-mind-7585183/


101/124


102/124

Epicurus on living justly

"It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and honorably and justly, and it is

impossible to live wisely and honorably and justly without living pleasantly. Whenever any one of these

is lacking, when, for instance, the man is not able to live wisely, though he lives honorably and justly, it

is impossible for him to live a pleasant life." - Epicurus (Principal Doctrines, 5)

There are striking similarities is Epicurean thinking to original Buddhist school of thought and there is a slight

possibility of for the moment unknown Buddhist influences reaching Epicurus in his time.On the other when one starts thinking life in a human social environment from a fresh start with analyzing just

what one sees around oneself, one can end up thinking very similarly.

Humans are after all at the base very similar products of the same evolutionary processes everywhere, even if

cultural artefacts can hide this very basic fact from clear view. So thinking through the essentials for a good

human life can bring about very similar conclusions.

The Buddhist approach is in many ways also very different form Epicurean world-view, but on the other hand

the Buddhist influences that could have reached Epicurus in time must have been very original and early ones,

without the layers upon layers of cultural sediment that cover the original ideas in modern Buddhism.

by jaskaw @ 16.12.2009 - 23:35:25

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/16/epicurus-on-living-justly-7587276/
http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/16/epicurus-on-living-justly-7587276/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/16/epicurus-on-living-justly-7587276/


103/124


104/124

Marcus Aurelius on good and evil

"Life is neither good or evil, but only a place for good and evil. " - Marcus Aurelius

I think he is saying that our life if what we make of it; but on the other hand we do not have a completecontrol of our lives and we are forced into doing things by our current environment. The same person can be a

vehicle for good and evil in different circumstances and different environments in his life.

by jaskaw @ 17.12.2009 - 20:19:13

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/17/marcus-aurelius-on-good-and-evil-7591754/
http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/17/marcus-aurelius-on-good-and-evil-7591754/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/17/marcus-aurelius-on-good-and-evil-7591754/


105/124


106/124

John Ruskin on beliefs and action

"What we think, or what we know, or what we believe is, in the end, of little

consequence. The only consequence is what we do." - John Ruskin

I do not think that John Ruskin directed this sentence to anybody in particular. I think that he

was just referring to the fact that things going on in our minds do not at the end really matter

if they are not translated into real world action. A good intention is just a good intention if it

is not followed by action, be the person at question a good socialist or a fervent Christian.

by jaskaw @ 18.12.2009 - 11:33:16

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/18/john-ruskin-on-beliefs-and-action-7597250/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/18/john-ruskin-on-beliefs-and-action-7597250/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/18/john-ruskin-on-beliefs-and-action-7597250/


107/124


108/124

Marcus Aurelius on loving your enemies

"It is man's peculiar duty to love even those who wrong him." - Marcus Aurelius

There are ideas that are present in all societies at all times. At times there however arises ideologies that claim

to have invented these ideas, as Christian claimed to have invented kindness towards ones adversaries. Theability to continuing living and acting with people that you see have wronged you at some point of your life is

however a very important thing in a complex modern society, where multitude of social interactions creates

friction and conflicts all the time. Marcus Aurelius is in fact just giving a very basic recipe for succesful social

interaction.

by jaskaw @ 19.12.2009 - 21:10:55

http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/19/marcus-aurelius-on-loving-your-enemies-7607681/
http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/19/marcus-aurelius-on-loving-your-enemies-7607681/http://blog.de/user/jaskaw/http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/12/19/marcus-aurelius-on-loving-your-enemies-7607681/


109/124


110/124

Bertrand Russell on the authority of the sacredbooks

"Deduction from inspired books is the method of arriving at truth employed by jurists,

Christians, Mohammedans and Communists. Since deduction as a means of obtainingknowledge collapses when doubt is thrown upon its premises, those who believe in

deduction must necassarily be bitter against men who question the authority of the

sacred books." - Bertrand Russell in "The Scientific Outlook" (1931)

I know it seems odd to add jurists to this company, but the difference between deduction and

induction is the thing that is important here and not the validity of the texts in which people

base their deductions.

Laws are of course a different thing than ideological texts like the Bible or Das Kapital, but

the basic idea is deriving the right answers from existing texts and not from the real world.

A jurist is not concerned on if a thing is really humanly right or wrong, but just what thecurrent law says it to be, and these can be and often have been quite different things.

So the the laws making Jews second class laws in Germany in the 30's where quite valid laws

passed through due legal process, but they were humanly wrong.

A jurist however would not want to see this, as he or she would just be deducting the right

answer from current law.

There is however no value judgment in the original quote, but it i

The Little Book of Humanity 2009

Documents

Transcript of The Little Book of Humanity 2009