Mont Saint Michel and Chartres (1904)
Context: Experience proved that man's power of choice in action was very far from absolute, and logic seemed to require that every choice should have some predetermining cause which decided the will to act. Science affirmed that choice was not free,— could not be free,— without abandoning the unity of force and the foundation of law. Society insisted that its choice must be left free, whatever became of science or unity. Saint Thomas was required to illustrate the theory of liberum arbitrium by choosing a path through these difficulies, where path there was obviously none.
“Revolution will free society of its afflictions, while science will free the individual of his.”
Source: The War of the End of the World
Help us to complete the source, original and additional information
Mario Vargas Llosa 30
Peruvian writer, politician, journalist, and essayist 1936Related quotes
Source: Sociology For The South: Or The Failure Of A Free Society (1854), p. 61
[186, Anthony, Lewis, w:Anthony Lewis, Freedom for the Thought That We Hate; A Biography of the First Amendment, Basic Books, 2007, 0465039170]
Source: Liberalism (1911), Chapter III, The Movement Of Theory, p. 34.
Source: 1960s–1970s, The Constitution of Liberty (1960), p. 6.
“True loyalty between individuals is possible only in a loose and relatively free society.”
Section 101
The True Believer (1951), Part Three: United Action and Self-Sacrifice
Context: Collective unity is not the result of the brotherly love of the faithful for each other. The loyalty of the true believer is to the whole — the church, party, nation — and not to his fellow true believer. True loyalty between individuals is possible only in a loose and relatively free society.
Source: The Evolution of Civilizations (1961) (Second Edition 1979), Chapter 3, Groups, Societies, and Civilizations, p. 67
“His Rhetoric, Our Reality,” http://www.antiwar.com/mercer/?articleid=4585 Antiwar.com, January 26, 2005.
2000s, 2005
Source: SCUM MANIFESTO (1967), p. 7 (hyphens (not en- or em-dashes) so in original; "others" so in original, probably intended as "other's"; line break across "inter-"/"acting"; "noone" so in original, probably intended as "no one").