Tell me what you think about this?? | INFJ Forum

Tell me what you think about this??

BrentonKasselder

BrentonKasselder

Newbie
Feb 16, 2009
25
0
0
MBTI
INFJ
This is an excerpt from my absolute favorite book "Pensees" By Blaise Pascal.............


"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed. The entire universe need not arm itself to crush him. A vapor, a drop of water suffices to kill him. But, if the universe were to crush him, man would still be more noble than that which killed him, because he knows that he dies and the advantage which the universe has over him, the universe knows nothing of this.
--All our dignity then, consists in thought. By it we must elevate ourselves, and not by space and time which we cannot fill. Let us endavour then, to think well; this is the principle of morality."

----Pascal “Pensees” 347

What thoughts cross your'e mind when you read this???
 
I got a nice feeling of relief as I read it knowing the truth of what is being said.
 
I don't understand it.
 
Sure we're noble, we're also quite helpless in the big scheme of things, I'd rather not be crushed by something out of my own power, but I guess no one chooses to.

The second part gave me an eerie, think happy thoughts vibe.
 
I like the excerpt overall.

BrentonKasselder said:
This is an excerpt from my absolute favorite book "Pensees" By Blaise Pascal.............

"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed. The entire universe need not arm itself to crush him. A vapor, a drop of water suffices to kill him. But, if the universe were to crush him, man would still be more noble than that which killed him, because he knows that he dies and the advantage which the universe has over him, the universe knows nothing of this.
--All our dignity then, consists in thought. By it we must elevate ourselves, and not by space and time which we cannot fill. Let us endavour then, to think well; this is the principle of morality."

----Pascal “Pensees” 347

What thoughts cross your'e mind when you read this???
Click to expand...

Although I agree in general, I actually feel quite bothered by writings that refer to people or humankind as 'man', 'mankind', etc. :rant: It's a primary reason why I am turned off certain writings. I known that's 'the way things were' back then, and still are in some parts of the world - but it pisses me off. I am not invisible. I expect and deserve to be treated with more respect and validation as a human being.

If it wasn't for that, I would probably enjoy it more. But it's still insightful otherwise.
 
Last edited:
You're a woman are you not?
 
Soulful said:
I like the excerpt overall.



Although I agree in general, I actually feel quite bothered by writings that refer to people or humankind as 'man', 'mankind', etc. :rant: It's a primary reason why I am turned off certain writings. I known that's 'the way things were' back then, and still are in some parts of the world - but it pisses me off. I am not invisible. I expect and deserve to be treated with more respect and validation as a human being.

If it wasn't for that, I would probably enjoy it more. But it's still insightful otherwise.
Click to expand...

He was making reference to mankind as a whole not just Men.... Although he was writing in the late 1600's I donot feel from any of his writings that he excludes woman from the whole of an idea
 
BrentonKasselder said:
He was making reference to mankind as a whole not just Men.... Although he was writing in the late 1600's I do not feel from any of his writings that he excludes woman from the whole of an idea
Click to expand...
That's what she was saying, she's not very happy about it being the universal masculine. I agree that it is rather sexist, but so would a universal feminine (unless you would rather use Sie [neuter term].)

Also, I love the quote. I completely agree, we should spend more effort thinking, instead of other useless goals (universal domination...).
 
VindurNótt said:
That's what she was saying, she's not very happy about it being the universal masculine. I agree that it is rather sexist, but so would a universal feminine (unless you would rather use Sie [neuter term].)
Click to expand...

Yep, wouldn't it be great if we had a gender-neutral pronoun

Quinlan said:
You're a woman are you not?
Click to expand...

What are you saying Quinlan?

BrentonKasselder said:
He was making reference to mankind as a whole not just Men.... Although he was writing in the late 1600's I donot feel from any of his writings that he excludes woman from the whole of an idea
Click to expand...

I think you mean humankind. I don't think he excludes women from the whole of the idea, as you said, but there were obviously reasons for why that language was used at the time. That language is a simple reflection of the sexism that was a way of life at the time.
 
Last edited:
I think you mean humankind. I don't think he excludes women from the whole of the idea, as you said, but there were obviously reasons for why that language was used at the time. That language is a simple reflection of the sexism that was a way of life at the time.[/quote]

Yes i do mean humankind.....my bad. Yes although I donot feel he was an all out sexist I will recognize his choice of word may in fact display an all to prominent mindset of the time....however i am glad that you will not completely dismiss such a thought based souly on the inevitable, all be it small, influence that his culture may have had on such a brilliant mind. :)
 
i dunno what crosses my mind when i read it...but it was a very interesting piece of writing that's for sure...
 
BrentonKasselder said:
Yes i do mean humankind.....my bad. Yes although I donot feel he was an all out sexist I will recognize his choice of word may in fact display an all to prominent mindset of the time....however i am glad that you will not completely dismiss such a thought based souly on the inevitable, all be it small, influence that his culture may have had on such a brilliant mind. :)
Click to expand...

:yo:
 
BrentonKasselder said:
This is an excerpt from my absolute favorite book "Pensees" By Blaise Pascal.............


"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed. The entire universe need not arm itself to crush him. A vapor, a drop of water suffices to kill him. But, if the universe were to crush him, man would still be more noble than that which killed him, because he knows that he dies and the advantage which the universe has over him, the universe knows nothing of this.
--All our dignity then, consists in thought. By it we must elevate ourselves, and not by space and time which we cannot fill. Let us endavour then, to think well; this is the principle of morality."

----Pascal “Pensees” 347

What thoughts cross your'e mind when you read this???
Click to expand...

Basically, though humans are frail beings (compared to say planets or stars) we're alive; we can think. Not only that, but it's our responsibility to utilize our mental capacities to their utmost in pursuit of morality and knowledge. That's what I get out of it. (Duty would be proud of me! :D)
 
BrentonKasselder said:
This is an excerpt from my absolute favorite book "Pensees" By Blaise Pascal.............


"Man is but a reed, the most feeble thing in nature, but he is a thinking reed. The entire universe need not arm itself to crush him. A vapor, a drop of water suffices to kill him. But, if the universe were to crush him, man would still be more noble than that which killed him, because he knows that he dies and the advantage which the universe has over him, the universe knows nothing of this.
--All our dignity then, consists in thought. By it we must elevate ourselves, and not by space and time which we cannot fill. Let us endavour then, to think well; this is the principle of morality."

----Pascal “Pensees” 347

What thoughts cross your'e mind when you read this???
Click to expand...

That the writer picked the one thing something else hasnt got and decided that he was noble because of it. Seems arbitrary to me.
 
What's wrong with using mankind as short for humankind? Humankind sounds clumsy.
 
Quinlan said:
What's wrong with using mankind as short for humankind? Humankind sounds clumsy.
Click to expand...

I do think that it shouldn't bother people because now, most people don't use it in the direct meaning of it. However, I still won't use terms like that because it does make me unconfortable, despite me telling myself that it shouldn't.
 
BrentonKasselder said:
No....I didn't even consider that point of view, thats why its interesting to me, thats all.
Click to expand...


I thought so :) . I was just trying to instigate more responses to my comments because I tend to kill a thread. I notice that I am the last comment on many threads, although not on this forum.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back