No one can be saved — in virtue of what he can do. Everyone can be saved — in virtue of what God can do.
— Karl Barth, born on this date in 1886
No one can be saved — in virtue of what he can do. Everyone can be saved — in virtue of what God can do.
… the study gave undergraduates various stories to read and observed their reactions. In one example, students were given stories about voting, with the result that "people who strongly identified with a fictional character who overcame obstacles to vote were significantly more likely to vote in a real election several days later".
Kolakowski had an ability to produce paragraphs of startling luminosity. Witness his riposte to the arrogance of intellect. “A modern philosopher who has never once suspected himself of being a charlatan must be such a shallow mind that his work is probably not worth reading.” As an undergraduate I accidentally ended up in lectures he was giving at All Souls. I mistakenly assumed the lectures would be on Marxism. But the lectures were on medieval philosophy. The clarity and verve with which he explained obscure sounding figures like, Duns Scotus and Pascal, had even a small group of nineteen year olds hooked and I stayed on for the term.
The radical novelty of modern science lies precisely in the rejection of the belief, which is at the heart of all popular religion, that the forces which move the stars and atoms are contingent upon the preferences of the human heart.
English is a melding of the languages of the many different peoples who have lived in Britain; it has also changed through commerce and conquest. English has always been a ragbag, and that encouraged further permissiveness. In the past half century or so, however, this situation has produced a serious quarrel, political as well as linguistic, with two combatant parties: the prescriptivists, who were bent on instructing us in how to write and speak; and the descriptivists, who felt that all we could legitimately do in discussing language was to say what the current practice was. This dispute is the subject of “The Language Wars: A History of Proper English” (Farrar, Straus & Giroux), by the English journalist Henry Hitchings, a convinced descriptivist.
Murray is right to point to the incoherent and defensive moral sensibilities of the American upper class. But is it really the case that it does not preach what it practices? He notes that, at the very least, this ruling class preaches the doctrine of non-judgmentalism. He also observes that, from time to time, the new upper class feels comfortable with using derogatory labels, particularly towards fundamentalist Christians and rural working-class whites. However, the preaching of this privileged elite is not confined to the denunciation of the backwoods redneck and the gun-loving members of the National Rifle Association. In fact, when it comes to preaching, Murray’s SuperZips are in a class of their own. They may use a self-conscious rhetoric of non-judgmentalism – words like ‘inappropriate’ and ‘challenging’, or phrases such as ‘people in need of support’ and ‘people with issues’ – but they have no inhibitions about instructing others about what food they should eat, how they should bring up their children, or what forms of behaviour are healthy. Outwardly they eschew the language of morality. Instead of sermons, they use the language of ‘raising awareness’.
What Binet has really written is a book about the obstacles to writing a novel about Heydrich—a record of all the reasons why this story does not need to be told, cannot be told, and should not be told. In a series of short numbered sections, Binet alternately narrates the life of Heydrich and the plot to assassinate him and speaks in his own voice, describing his own research methods, giving glimpses of his own personal life, and pointing out all the flaws in his own narration. The only way to overcome his doubts about the whole enterprise, Binet suggests, is to place them front and center.
It's one thing, for instance, to conduct experiments, but it's another to learn from them. A company, Mr. Manzi says, "is an alliance of individuals, and there are always competing theories, power centers, and knowledge silos within any firm." Amid all the "jockeying for control," the most successful experiments are performed when the experimenters don't have a dog in any strategic fight.
Love is a mutual self-giving which ends in self-recovery.
Book reviewers who are trained to avoid all but the briefest sketch of plot summary know that talking about the storyline is a poor way to register enthusiasm about a book.
Ms. Kessler-Harris claims that American anti-communists waged campaigns "filled with hyperbole and outright lies." But it was the Stalinists, Hellman included, who made falsehood a core principle. Her penchant for fantastical tales prompted Mary McCarthy's acid comment that "every word she writes is a lie, including 'and' and 'the.' " The story of Hellman's friendship with "Julia," an Austrian working in the anti-fascist resistance whom she supposedly assisted, was put forward in Hellman's memoir "Pentimento" (1973) and made into a Hollywood film. The story, it turned out, was cribbed from an acquaintance. (The film's director would later denounce Hellman as a "phony.")
Inspiration is a guest that does not willingly visit the lazy.