I will confess that I attach much more importance to men's theoretical
arguments than to their practical proposals. I attach more importance to
what is said than to what is done; what is said generally lasts much
longer and has much more influence. I can imagine no change worse for
public life than that which some prigs advocate, that debate should be
curtailed. A man's arguments show what he is really up to. Until you
have heard the defence of a proposal, you do not really know even the
proposal. Thus, for instance, if a man says to me, "Taste this
temperance drink," I have merely doubt, slightly tinged with distaste.
But if he says, "Taste it, because your wife would make a charming
widow," then I decide. I would be openly moved in my choice of an
institution, not by its immediate proposals for practice, but very much
by its incidental, even its accidental, allusion to ideals. I judge many
things by their parentheses.
-January 4, 1908, The New Age
3 comments:
:) well put and a different point of view. Many times debate is dead and to the detriment of good ideals.
"Taste this temperance drink," I have merely doubt, slightly tinged with distaste. But if he says, "Taste it, because your wife would make a charming widow," then I decide. I would be openly moved in my choice of an institution, not by its immediate proposals for practice, but very much by its incidental, even its accidental, allusion to ideals. I judge many things by their parentheses." I don't know what this means. Can you explain it?
Probably not. lol. But I'll try. The way I interpreted it is as a commentary on the part that precedes it:
A man's arguments show what he is really up to. Until you have heard the defence of a proposal, you do not really know even the proposal.
Basically, whatever may be the merits of the "immediate proposals" of a movement (which may change soon enough, as circumstances may dictate), in the long run what matters is the ideals that it is aiming at, and which are by their nature more permanent. And you discover it's ideals, the permanent substance behind a movement, precisely through the types of arguments that are made by a group much more than through the "immediate proposals". The latter may be something simply forced by the necessity of the moment, and which may be discarded as soon as the circumstances necessitating them has passed.
Thanks that explains it. Those acts people do a lot of time even lose there meaning as time goes on but the thoughts are still there.
Post a Comment