 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
page 1
page2
page3
page4
page5
page6
page7
page8
page9
page10
page11
page12
page13
page14
page15
page16
page17
page18
page19
page20
page21
page22
page23
page24
page25
page26
page27
page28
page29
page30
page31
page32
page33
page34
page35
page36
page37
page38
page39
page40
page41
page42
page43
page44
page45
page46
page 47
page48
page49
page50
page51
page52
page53
page54
page55
page56
page57
page58
page 59
page59
page 60
page61
page62
page 63
page 64
page 65
page66
page67
page 68
page 69
page 70
Page 71
page 72
pare 73
page 74
page 75
page76
page 77
page 78
page 79
page 80
page 81
page 82
page 83
page 84
page 85
page 86
page 87
page 88
page 89
page 90
page 91
page92
page93
page 94
page 95
page 96
page 97
page98
|
|
| QUOTATIONS 460-497 |
| ||||||
| 460. One of the unexpected consequences of the relatively recent expansion of the university education is the drastic diminution in the numbers of intellectuals espousing unorthodox , let alone revolutionary ideas ( the lack of the new ideas has been ostensibly lamented lately without developing yet, unfortunately, any consensus as to the causes of such a regrettable state of affairs). The reason behind this seemingly paradoxical phenomenon - the inverse proportion between the quantity of education and quality of ideas - lies in the relationships in which an individual intellectual, the main producer of ideas, and the educational institution, his main employer, with the absolute power to accept or reject him, stand to each other at any particular point in history. The post-Second World War period has been characterized by the ever increasing demand for the higher education . This has led, especially in the sixties and seventies, to the creation of many new universities and to the expansion of the old ones, which, naturally, has brought about an ever increasing demand for the teaching personnel. As a result, a large number of intellectuals, who would have been marginalised, were employed by these institutions, causing, in the process, the inevitable "domestication" of the potential "subversives". Simply stated, one who has, finally, obtained the highly coveted secure position in the educational hierarchy, the position that guarantees its occupant a rather comfortable "middle class" standard of living, in addition to the power and prestige of the "professor", is much less inclined "to rock the boat" of any establishment, particularly, the educational one he is part of, than the marginal outsider. For the universities, despite professing, in idea, the academic ,i.e. intellectual freedom, in reality, are not much different structurally from any other societal institution, viz. they encourage and reward conformity and look rather severely down upon those who resist it. And so, if not behind the solemn facades of universities, where else should we look for the new, unorthodox ideas? On the margins, as usual, of course. And who would be their producer? The same "marginal outsider", rejected and despised, often suppressed, or, what is even worse for an intellectual, intentionally ignored. For in order to have the new unorthodox or even revolutionary ideas, it is absolutely imperative (from the psychological point of view) to have people who have nothing to lose by producing them, who are, also, moved in doing that by the "enlightened self-interests", so to speak (without, necessarily, being fully or even partially conscious of their motivation), and who, finally, are sufficiently angry with the present status quo, which has no place for them, save on the margins. Them who have nothing more to lose, beware of, for they tell the truth. That is why, for example, Jews and homosexuals, the two most visible and thus traditional categories of the outsiders, contains such a disproportionate, to their absolute numbers, amount of "producers" of the new unorthodox ideas, especially in the fields of political science, psychology, arts, etc. - the areas of the most intimate reflections upon the relationship between an individual and society. On the other hand, as history shows, almost any revolutionary, especially of an intellectual kind, could be and had been bought by providing him with what he is really longing for the most - the acceptance. And we should never forget that accepting Hitler as a student into the Art Academy would have been the infinitesimally small price to pay to save the lives of tens of millions who had perished amidst the agony and horrors of the Second World War. And what are these new ideas any way if not the new ways of allowing the Outsider to get " in". Consequently, one of the regrettable outcomes of the perfect world, in which, allegedly, everyone would be "in", will be not only the absence of the new ideas, but no need for them at all. For wouldn't everybody be finally happy then? Or would they? 461. Man is the only animal who can utilize his pain and suffering as the raw material to create something useful out of it. And nobody has been as skilful in doing this as the Jews who, as a people, had practiced this uniquely human craft longer than anybody else, creating in the process two religions, politico-economical ideology and psychological theory, to name the most famous ones, all with the sole objective, yet to be realized, to free man from pain and suffering. A vicious circle? Perhaps. But is there a way out of it? 462. Yet another difference between the "successful" and "unsuccessful" people: the successful ones never bother to talk, let alone to think about somebody else's problems. 463. Every morning, from today and till the end of your life, after waking up ask yourself: "Am I living the way I would have liked to live? Am I doing what I would have liked to do?" And if the answer is "No", the next question must be: "How would I have liked to live, and what would I have liked to do?" And no matter how many mornings will it take, do not give up trying until you find the answer to this most important question in your life. Then, after you did, the next no less important question should be: "What can I do to make it come true?" And when you find the answer to that one, which is not going to be any easier either, start each new day doing something about it. Otherwise, your life is not worth living, and you would have, probably, been better off not having been born at all. So, remember, from now on and till the end of your life, every morning... 464. I am as complex as the next person, no more no less. But unlike many, I am not hiding my complexity behind the two-dimensional mask to help the others "to deal" with me. Of course, it much easier to live with (or, perhaps, "to handle" is a more appropriate term) the two-dimensional people. They can be conveniently classified, pigeonholed and labelled. The may be expected, therefore, to act (most of the times) in a reasonably predictable fashion, no nasty surprises, no shocks. But unless pressured into such a shallow self-simplification, this is not what people intrinsically are, and it is most certainly not what I am. For I am not willing to limit myself to one mode of behaviour, one interest, one profession, one ideology, etc., and to deny the obvious fact that I am a complex being, a whole made up of many different parts, some of which can be perceived as contradictory, but most are clearly complimentary. In short, I am what I am, take it or leave it. Sadly, the majority (mostly out of nothing more malicious than the average intellectual laziness) would rather not take. So be it. It is their loss, if they prefer the bland to the colourful, the one-sided to the multidimensional, the boring to the exciting. 465.In the world which is "a stage, where every man must play a part", either assigned or chosen one, those "incorrigible" few who refuse to do so, i.e. to play a specific, invariably narrow defined and more or less permanently fixed part, are treated at best as fools or at worst as irritating nuisance or even a threat. Yet, the only crime of such conscientious objectors in the human tragicomedy is being authentic, i.e. incapable and therefore unwilling to be anything but what they (and everybody else) naturally are - the manifold personalities driven, often simultaneously by various interests and aspirations. But then, when acting accordingly, they try to explore what others consider to be their exclusive field, or to express an opinion when they are supposed to remain silent and yield to the pronouncements of the "specialists" and so on and so forth, they are condemned as the imposters and the intruders on somebody else's turf. Thus, by not playing consistently any exclusive part of his own, such an authentic individual is perceived as a threat by all who do, like, for example, a single person who is regarded as a potential threat in a company of "couples". And yet, those fears are hardly justified, since the last thing the person who refuses to play any definite part is looking for is to lock himself in somebody else's one. But then, who can convince a dog that no man wants his bone or his manger. 466. The best service the well-intentioned but uncompromisingly pure and honest - the so-called Good - can perform for Humanity is to withdraw as completely as possible from its affairs, instead of stubbornly insisting on saving mankind by offering, and especially by trying to implement their various recipes for its improvement. For since people cannot be changed (anyone familiar with history will accept it as a self-evident truth), the Good by meddling into the lives of the ordinary, i.e. less than perfect people, bring only the additional and unnecessary hardship, suffering and destruction to those who were supposed to be helped. The second best thing the Good can do is to admit to themselves that they are not the norm but an aberration and thus would never be able fully understand what motivates the ordinary people, as those who are indifferent to, or even repulsed by alcohol, cannot understand the cravings and dependencies of alcoholics. Moreover, the Good have to reconcile with the fact that they will always be the aberration and as such it will be better for everybody, including them, if they leave Humanity alone to do whatever "human nature" makes them do, however revolting and disgusting it is sometimes. "Lets Hercules himself do what he may The cat will mew, and dog will have his day". 467. The actions motivated not by desire and for their own sake but by necessity and for the sake of something else will never produce happiness. 468. Anyone curious to know what would have happened if Hamlet had married Ophelia can get a pretty good idea by considering the marriage of Prince Charles and Diana. 469. Humanity is helplessly short of the new plots, but, as if to compensate for such a depressing scarcity, is tireless perpetually recycling the old ones, being apparently oblivious to the fact that the endless elaboration of the same few themes, despite producing the seemingly infinite variety of forms, adds nothing new to the substance. 470. I am going to fight Life even if it kills me, which it will, inevitably, do anyway. 471. Beware of the ambitious mediocrities, for they are the main perpetrators of evil in the world, either by trying to do what they aren't capable of, or by envying, hating and persecuting those who are. 472. For a poet to be admired by his fellow poets, or for a writer - by writers, or for a painter - by painters, etc. each has to be sufficiently removed from his colleagues either in time or in space, or, preferably, in both. 473. It is not the sensual love of man by another man, or homosexual acts (anal intercourse, etc.) in themselves that are responsible for the indisputable fact that homosexual men, on average, are more artistically creative than the heterosexual ones. And also homosexuality definitely liberates man from some limitation of the single gender and allows him to display and to experience wider range of emotions and expressions (which undoubtedly enriches his artistic possibilities) it is rather the alienation caused by homosexuality that, evidently, triggers the creative impulse. For the all-pervasive feeling of being an alien, whether it originates in racial, sexual, or any other kind of rejection, forces a man, in order to survive, to find new ways to fit into the society that expels him. This, of course, calls for inventiveness which is the mother of creativity. And when creativity becomes the essential attribute of man, it begins to manifest itself in all his thoughts and deeds, including, for those who are artists, in the artistic creative originality. Needless to say, not all homosexuals are artistically creative and, as everybody knows, not all creative people are homosexuals. There is yet another character trait that homosexual man and creative man have in common - both are existentially self-centred. The egotism of homosexual man is the natural outcome of the choice the heterosexual majority forces him to make - either give up your inclinations and desires and forsake your very nature or face the rejection by the society at large, including, very often, your family and others close to you. Thus, by choosing to remain true to himself at the expense of losing what the majority considers to be the most valuable thing in life - the acceptance by the others - the homosexual essentially proclaims that the most important thing in his life is the self-fulfilment and for its sake he is willing to sacrifice anything else. Being rejected by the society at large he, in turn, rejects it himself and becomes totally preoccupied with his own life and, especially, with his own pleasures, disregarding what the rest think and feel about him, which is the typical attitude and behaviour of a consistent egocentric. And also of the creative man who is confronted by the necessity to make a similar choice. For the numerous obligations the society imposes on a man -"zoon politicon", a party to the "social contract" - if he dutifully attends to all of them, would constantly interfere with the creative process by effectively draining all his energy. Consequently, the creative man has to make a choice - either to serve his art=himself or to serve others. And when he chooses himself he is, again, acting like a typical egotist. Although, he may, at least, claim that he is giving society something in return as a compensation for abdicating his social responsibilities, a claim which the ordinary egotist certainly cannot make. 474. Show me a successful man or a woman, and I'll show you the one who has excelled above everything else in the most important of them all art - the art of using others. 475. You can't teach an old dog the new tricks, but you can give them the new and different names. 476. Some individuals are capable of rising above the crowd, the others seem to be determined to sink below it, but the crowd as a whole is like a liquid in the communicating vessels, always settles at the level of its common denominator, usually the lowest and therefore the easiest one to reach in the quest for the security of uniformity. 477. The good "work ethics" is just a convenient euphemism, making the virtue out of necessity for the poor and powerless to work very hard while earning very little. 478. Short of directly harming them, nothing seems can put you as effectively in a bad standing with others as trying to give them a good advice. For the inevitable and prominent feature of the good advice is a suggestion to look at any given problem or situation realistically and to discard any false expectations and wishful thinking. And who likes to do or even to hear that? 479. Knowledge without courage to act upon it is like a loaded gun without a trigger - both are utterly useless and present danger only to their owners. 480. Every man, sooner or later , has to reconcile himself to the life of the ever diminishing physical capabilities. For though the spirit may be is as willing as ever, the flesh is getting progressively weaker all the time. 481. If I had to die a violent death, I would rather, given a choice, do it as a fully aware of being doomed fighter than as a futilely hopeful and defenceless victim. 482. It is not only easier not to make enemies than to make friends, but also, in the long run, it is much more important. Here are some of the probable reasons why. People, in general, are hard to please (and continuous mutual pleasure is the best fuel of friendship) but easy to hurt (and harm is the ostensible cause of animosity). Furthermore, pain is remembered longer (our very survival depends on it) than pleasure. Finally, to close the circle, people are more eager to harm (it is instinctive and therefore easy) than to help ( it must be cultivated and ,therefore, is more difficult). Consequently, in return, they appreciate more being spared the pain than being given the pleasure. To repeat again, one should put much more energy into trying to avoid making enemies than into gaining friends. For the harm, which could be done to us by our numerous enemies (both individually and collectively) significantly outweighs the benefits derived from our rare friends. 483. Those who are too hungry cannot be relied upon to judge the quality of food. 484. Living is like walking on a narrow plank thrown over the abyss - one should never look down. 485. As unnatural as it may seem , some people grow so much accustomed to their emotional pain and mental anguish that it literally becomes their raison d'etre. And they would, against their best interests, vehemently resist any attempts by others to help them to relieve it. 486. People either understand each other right away or not at all. And no amount of " trying to understand" can change this simple fact we are all familiar with but seldom willing to acknowledge. Instead, the harder they try the more disappointment and frustration or even anger the both sides feel. For a listener does not understand a speaker unless what the speaker is saying is the direct verbal expression of what the listener is feeling and thinking, provided, in addition, the speaker is using the words the listener himself would have used, if he had to say the same thing. Needless to say, such an affinity is extremely rare. 487. A man speaking to a woman, in general, and a husband speaking to his wife, in particular, has to be fully aware of the danger inherent in such a conversation. For every statement he makes, every word he utters have the potentiality of being "self-incriminating". 488. As the world is getting smaller and smaller, the knowledge of geography is becoming more and more indispensable to tell the "good" people from the "bad" ones. For the ever growing awareness of each other, instead of diminishing the old racial prejudices, seems to be producing quite an opposite effect. 489. The more I observe animals, the more I understand people. 490. A woman uses sex to get a man, a man uses a woman to get sex. For a woman sex is the means, for a man it is the end. 491. If you are planning to have children, first of all, you must ask yourself a question: "Am I capable of resigning to whatever may happen to them in the future and of reconciling myself to it?" For before giving a life to a child one has to accept its death. And if one cannot, one better not have children at all. 492. Parents should forever ask their children forgiveness for bringing them into this world. 493. If you want your child to grow a happy person you should teach it to derive the satisfaction not from owning things but from knowing them. 494. There is, at least, one good thing about being poor - your children aren't waiting for you to die. 495. As one grows older, minimizing the efforts and conserving the energy become, of necessity, the first priority in life. 496.Security and stability are inimical to creativity. 497. If a conversation is , essentially, an exchange of opinions (and not all are), an almost instinctive impulse to disagree with the point of view of one's interlocutor manifests itself much more often than an inclination to agree. Which is quite understandable, considering that in disagreeing we, without even being fully aware of it, assert our individuality and independence of mind, while by agreeing we feel as if surrendering both. |
 Sign Guestbook |
 View Guestbook |
|
. |
| Visitors: 00825 |