Fool, Philosopher, Sage

The fool is never satisfied with what he has, but is quite satisfied with what he is. The philosopher is never satisfied with what he is, but is satisfied with what he has. The sage is satisfied with both. Unfortunately, there are no sages, few philosophers, and a world full of fools.

On Repetition

Anyone can see the need for repetition in physical training. One push-up is as good as none. But one hundred per day, every day, will do your upper body a world of good. People are less likely to appreciate the necessity of repetition in mental and spiritual training. Thus liberals often foolishly rail against 'rote memorization.'

So complaints about the repetitiveness of my more protreptic aphorisms and observations are out of place. The latter are spiritual exercises for the writer's and the reader's sake. Multiple 'reps' are as necessary for mental and spiritual development as they are for physical development.

Of Books and Men

IMG_0240 A book is a man at his best. Who knows what Plato was like in the flesh? Maybe he suffered from halitosis. Perhaps he was unbearably domineering. But in his books I have him at my beck and call, for instruction, uplift, or just to keep the pre-Socratics from improperly fraternizing with Aristotle.

Each book on my shelves is a window, a window opening out upon a world. From Aristotle to Zubiri, window after window, world upon world . . .

On Forming Societies at Faint Provocation

Paul Brunton, Notebooks II, 154, #56:

I am not enamoured overmuch of this modern habit, which forms a society at faint provocation. A man's own problem stares him alone in the face, and it is not to be solved by any association of men. Every new society we join is a fresh temptation to waste time.

Well said. Would Thoreau have joined the Thoreau Society? Merton the Merton Society? Would Groucho Marx have joined a club that would have him as a member, let alone make him the cynosure of its interest?

On Replying in Kind

Suppose A launches a vicious verbal attack on B. B will be tempted to respond in kind, but ought to give some thought to the point of so doing. For even if B does not escalate the attack, but merely throws back what was thrown at him, the attacker may well feel justified in having made his initial assault. He will be tempted to rationalize his behavior as follows:

You see what a worthless fellow B is? How dare he call me names! I'm glad I attacked him; he deserved it. In fact, I attacked him just to expose him, just to show what nastiness he is capable of.