A thought 26 Jun 2010 Things and actions are what they are, and consequences of them will be what they will be: why then should we desire to be deceived? [Bishop Joseph Butler, Fifteen Sermons, Sermon VII, §16.] This is widely misquoted from Isaiah Berlin’s epigram at the head of Karl Marx: His life and environment (1939) as (misquotations bolded): Things and actions are what they are, and their consequences will be what they will be: why then should we seek to be deceived? I have found it in an earlier essay, from 1937. Possibly this is where Berlin got it. Even recent historians misquote it. Ethics and Moral Philosophy Philosophy Quotes PhilosophyQuotes
Biology On borders and boundaries 30 Jun 2010 Thos who focus on differences often tend to look more closely at boundaries than at the core of the phenomenon, whether it is social, biological or conceptual. So I was pleased to read this comment by Will Thomas regarding boundaries in social and historical contexts: However, I want to finish… Read More
Creationism and Intelligent Design Does science lead to atheism? Not really 2 Jul 2009 Occasionally one’s sole impact on things is the ability to get other people to do good work by threatening to do it badly. I was set to do a review of survey’s on scientists and religious belief, but the literature got out of hand rather quickly, so I emailed Matt… Read More
Ethics and Moral Philosophy Morality and Evolution 5: biology and culture 20 May 201422 May 2014 [Morality and Evolution 1 2 3 4 5 6 7] I should note that there is no set historical sequence implied in the levels 0 to 4, apart from the fact that we were primates before we were humans, so some sort of historical transition from 0 to 1 must occur before any of the others…. Read More
Earlier in the section, he writes: “Even without determining what that is which we call guilt or innocence, there is no man but would choose, after having had the pleasure or advantage of a vicious action, to be free of the guilt of it, to be in the state of an innocent man. This shows at least the disturbance and implicit dissatisfaction in vice.” At most, it shows (instead) the disturbance and implicit dissatisfaction in what one acknowledges to be (one’s own) vice – a different thing entirely. Unacknowledged, there is no need for the “hurry of business or of pleasure” to assist in any desired deception, there being an absence of the latter.
Possibly, but I couldn’t locate another edition at the time. Google Books has the original 1726 edition here, and it has the same wording. Later note: As does the 1792 edition here.
The first variation does not seem to me to signal a difference. The second (“seek” v. “desire”) makes a common implication of “desire” explicit. And I wouldn’t even be surprised to find that one of the recorded meanings of “seek” IS “desire” (esp. in contexts such as “seek to be deceived”). Must look it up when I achieve immortality. Is there much in it?