why, what else do they see?
Cassandra (1860)
Trial and Interrogation (1637)
Source: Sex, Art and American Culture : New Essays (1992), Junk Bonds and Corporate Raiders : Academe in the Hour of the Wolf, p. 213
Director Jean-Pierre Melville made it up for the epigraph of Le Cercle Rouge (The Red Circle).
Misattributed
The Kasîdah of Hâjî Abdû El-Yezdî (1870)
Source: A Journey to the Western Islands of Scotland and The Journal of a Tour to the Hebrides
Lecture XX, "Conclusions"
1900s, The Varieties of Religious Experience (1902)
Context: Religion must be considered vindicated in a certain way from the attacks of her critics. It would seem that she cannot be a mere anachronism and survival, but must exert a permanent function, whether she be with or without intellectual content, and whether, if she have any, it be true or false.
We must next pass beyond the point of view of merely subjective utility, and make inquiry into the intellectual content itself.
First, is there, under all the discrepancies of the creeds, a common nucleus to which they bear their testimony unanimously?
And second, ought we to consider the testimony true?
I will take up the first question first, and answer it immediately in the affirmative. The warring gods and formulas of the various religions do indeed cancel each other, but there is a certain uniform deliverance in which religions all appear to meet. It consists of two parts: —
1. An uneasiness; and
2. Its solution.
1. The uneasiness, reduced to its simplest terms, is a sense that there is something wrong about us as we naturally stand.
2. The solution is a sense that we are saved from the wrongness by making proper connection with the higher powers.
