Jump to content
The Corroboree
Bigred

Favorite Quotes

Recommended Posts

The permanent political class knows it is under very real threat. They are going to use every weapon in their armory to neutralise that threat. But none of those weapons is more powerful than a tight-knit, grass roots movement with its eye on shared vision of an inspiring future.

-Kerry-anne Mendoza

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. - Bertrand Russell, 'The Triumph of Stupidity' in: Mortals and Others: Bertrand Russell's American Essays, 1931-1935, v.2, p.28

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russell was beset by doubt about many things, except for his desire to alleviate the suffering of his fellow humans. He could never find an adequate argument to support his moral position that satisfied his high standards, leading him to separate his advocacy and activism from his 'pure' mathematical philosophy. So, to answer your question, it's probably more intelligent than cocksure. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Yeti I recently had a long argument with my family about Bertrand Russell because of some article my mum sent us, which he wrote about boredom (chapter 4 from the conquest of happiness 1930). She thought it was great but I thought it was terrible, which of course means most of what I am about to say is just opinion, not fact. The quote you posted is like a short version of that article and is plagued by the same problem, being opinionated poorly-thought-through rubbish (in my opinion, lol) that would have benefited from proof-reading. It's unusual a talented logician would produce such an illogical statement and the boredom article was full of them. As such, by logic, the statement wants to be cocksure (it is stated categorically), but if it is not it is by Russell's own definition intelligent and is therefore 'full of doubt'! Ironically of course it is not at all intelligent so I can only assume, by logical deduction of the statement itself, that it is cocksure and produced by someone 'stupid'. By my definition, it's just a bit trite, because Russell was clearly not stupid.

 

I'd only vaguely heard about Russell when my mum sent the article and I did some research on him. He seems important for his work on logic and mathematics and the fella he wrote an important book with (Alfred North Whitehead) I enjoy - if his works aren't a little bit of a head scratcher - but Russell's other philosophy appears to fall flat because of a (self-proclaimed) lack of understanding of aesthetics (a lack of understanding of aesthetics would make a person opinionated and separate the supposed 'stupid' from the supposed 'intelligent') and being very much a product of his British post-war (WW1) historical milieu, which gives it a dreary feel. I must admit I'm not basing my arguments on much more than a few articles and a wikipedia page, which is not a good foundation for criticism!

 

I think you've summed it up well about his doubt and this accords with what else I read ("He could never find an adequate argument to support his moral position that satisfied his high standards, leading him to separate his advocacy and activism from his 'pure' mathematical philosophy"). I appreciate Russell's social ethics and the effort he put toward that task, it is a conspicuous feature of his life. There is much to be admired about his social work but his social/cultural philosophy is poor from what I have seen (I have not read his philosophy on logic and maths, which may be excellent). For me, the distinction between 'stupid' and 'intelligent' is fundamentally untenable and not a good starting point for sorting out the "fundamental cause of trouble" of any epoch of history, including the modern one.

 

Edited by Micromegas
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You aren't the first person to make these observations about Russell. The task of writing the Principles of Mathematics, and then Principia Mathematica, are said to have taken such a toll on him that he was never quite the same. The 6 months jail time he did for speaking out as a conscientious objector to WWI probably didn't help much either.

 

The best interpretation of the quote itself hinges on the fact that 'cocksure' is not just being sure, it's being excessively and arrogantly sure without sufficient grounds to do so. On that, despite the paradoxical nature of his statement, we have to ask ourselves, is it better to be confident (and hence convincing), but wrong, or be right, but admit that it's possible you might be wrong (which the average voter finds unconvincing)? 

 

The best online version of the whole essay ( and I use the word loosely) is here: http://russell-j.com/0583TS.HTM

It's not my favourite of his work - even of his later work  - I thought Power, Marriage and Morals, or Why I am Not a Christian, were all better. But the historical context and ideas he expressed are interesting in our current climate - even if his analysis is not as precise as it could be.

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Yeti, interesting about the exhaustion. It is a shame my run in with Russell has been so poor, it is unlikely I will return to any of his writings at this point. That is an interesting question you pose, but not one I think can be reasonably extracted from the quote itself, or definitively answered. It still leaves the problematic of deciding what is 'wrong' and 'right' in society, and misinterpreting the quality of rhetoric and its function.

 

Parable of the Unmissable Missed Encounters

In three lines Schopenhauer relates a story that is supposed to illustrate the solitude of an insightful person surrounded by bewitched people: his watch keeps the correct time in a city whose clock towers all have the wrong time; he alone knows "the true time." The point of the story is expressed in the succinct question: "But what good does it do him?"

The fate of this solitary person is to be pitied. Not only due to the fault of those who follow the public clocks; and not even due to the fault of those who can and do know that this one person has a watch that keeps the true time. They are no more malicious than those who only look to the towers, since in such cases even a little common sense counsels not concerning oneself about a truth held by a solitary person.

Schopenhauer didn't want the story to be read entirely in this manner. The citizens following the double meaning - orienting themselves according to the clocks that don't keep time while also knowing the possessor of the correct time - are suspected of not perceiving an obligation: making sure that the tower clocks are set to the correct time. On the other hand, Schopenhauer doesn't consider the person consciously proud of his watch's correct time. What reason could there be for him to adjust his watch to the time of the majority of clocks? Why should he do this when he has the right time?

The only reason for adjusting his watch would be to not destroy the possibilities for interacting with all the other citizens of the city by coming too early or too late to all appointments and occasions. Ultimately, he wouldn't need to go to any events, because the peculiarity of his watch would prevent him from taking advantage of their profits and pleasures. Or he could come to the quiet decision to stick to the correct time on his watch but take into account the difference from the public clocks so that he always arrived on time. Here he runs the risk of becoming comical in his own eyes by insisting on a truth that he would have to constantly falsify for the purpose of its utility.

The core of the absurdity does not lie with those in the story. It lies with the storyteller. In favor of its illustrative effect, the storyteller assumes that one person could know the true time, while everyone else doesn't. He forgets that the public is one of the determining elements of the concept of time. There is no secret time, there are no secret timekeepers, no individual times, no private clocks. The earth's rotation or the apparent rotation of the heavens predetermines the length of the day, but neither its beginning and end nor its divisions along the way. These are publicly regulated conventions. Only the radius of life realms and life interactions matters in establishing the range that such a convention must have for it to be "definitive" and render all deviations from it nonsensical.

The solitary possessor of the true time in a city with nothing but clock towers with the wrong time is not a wise man but a fool. By disregarding this, the storyteller betrays more about himself than about what he seeks to illustrate: that for those following the wrong time, an appropriate deadline must be set for finally grasping what one person with a clear head saw immediately. The story is supposed to dissuade one from thinking impatiently that all can and must follow the possessor of truth without delay. In fact, it shows the opposite: why they would never follow him.

Hans Blumenberg, Care Crosses the River (1987 [Eng trans 2010]), pp.117-8

 

 

 

 

Edited by Micromegas
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything is one, there is only now.

Everything is now, there is only one.

- Me

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is mind? No matter.

What is matter? Never mind.

 

-Homer J. Simpson 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of us have become so psychologically perverted that we would choose money over real wealth...

- Alan Watts

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before enlightenment, carry water and chop wood.

After enlightenment    ,carry water and chop wood.

 

The Buddha  

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"he has a forehead?" "yes", "well I have a fivehead,"

he continued.. "he goes on holiday to tenerife?" . "well I go on holiday to elevenerife" 

 

Edited by ☽Ţ ҉ĥϋηϠ₡яღ☯ॐ€ðяئॐ♡Pϟiℓℴϟℴ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If I am not sovereign over my own consciousness, then I am sovereign over nothing. "

 

Graham Hancock

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cry “Havoc!” and let slip the dogs of war

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"don't fuck with the springy nips"    ~TISM~

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Belief is but the language of the fool who does not think.

 

myself

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together

    -Dwight D Eisenhower.1961.

 

 

"You don't need to afford the things you're buying, Bryan.

You need to afford the interest on the money you need to borrow in order to buy them."

    -NZ comedian John Clarke (playing an investment banker) in a sketch interview with Bryan Dawe (playing interviewing journo) following the fallout of the GFC...
 
 
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“I have to make sure I don't engage in conversations with people who don't abide by the rules of evidence.” ― CarlHart

 

http://drcarlhart.com/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had I the heavens' embroidered cloths,

Enwrought with golden and silver light,

The blue and the dim and the dark cloths

Of night and light and the half-light,

I would spread the cloths under your feet:

But I, being poor, have only my dreams;

I have spread my dreams under your feet;

Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.   - William Butler Yeats

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×