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
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
4/124
The Little Book of Humanity
http://fix.blog.de/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7480720/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
6/124
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-death-7480720/
http://thelittlebook.blogs.fi/2009/11/29/epicurus-on-death-7480720/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
7/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7480732/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
9/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7480741/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
11/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7480793/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
13/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7480805/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
15/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7480956/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
17/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
18/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7481220/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
21/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7482354/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
23/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7484059/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
25/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7486124/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
27/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7486230/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
29/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7486419/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
31/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7491078/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
33/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7493386/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
35/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7493422/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
37/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7493601/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
39/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7495958/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
42/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7497094/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
45/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7500556/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
47/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7503438/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
49/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7504684/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
51/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7506326/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
54/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7511555/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
56/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7514927/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
58/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7515623/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
60/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7520045/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
62/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7521607/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
64/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7526043/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
66/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7529596/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
68/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7533105/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
70/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7536915/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
72/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7539691/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
74/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
75/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
76/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7548491/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
78/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
80/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
81/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7554789/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
84/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7557149/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
86/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7564086/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
88/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7565403/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
90/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7572023/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
93/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7575270/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
95/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7579075/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
97/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7580651/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
99/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7585183/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
101/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7587276/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
103/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7591754/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
105/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7597250/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
107/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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-7607681/8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
109/124
8/14/2019 The Little Book of Humanity 2009
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
Top Related