We'll Never Conquer Space (1960)
Context: Space can be mapped and crossed and occupied without definable limit; but it can never be conquered. When our race has reached its ultimate achievements, and the stars themselves are scattered no more widely than the seed of Adam, even then we shall still be like ants crawling on the face of the Earth. The ants have covered the world, but have they conquered it — for what do their countless colonies know of it, or of each other?
So it will be with us as we spread out from Earth, loosening the bonds of kinship and understanding, hearing faint and belated rumors at second — or third — or thousandth hand of an ever dwindling fraction of the entire human race. Though the Earth will try to keep in touch with her children, in the end all the efforts of her archivists and historians will be defeated by time and distance, and the sheer bulk of material. For the numbers of distinct human societies or nations, when our race is twice its present age, may be far greater than the total number of all the men who have ever lived up to the present time.
We have left the realm of comprehension in our vain effort to grasp the scale of the universe; so it must ever be, sooner rather than later.
Source: The Diary of Anaïs Nin, Vol. 1: 1931-1934
The Impact of Space Activities Upon Society (ESA Br) European Space Agency (2005)
Source: 1975, The Philosophy of Andy Warhol (1975), Ch. 10: Atmosphere
“The point, being indivisible, occupies no space. That which occupies no space is nothing.”
The Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci (1883), II Linear Perspective
Context: The point, being indivisible, occupies no space. That which occupies no space is nothing. The limiting surface of one thing is the beginning of another.
https://www.irishtimes.com/advertising-feature/inside-marketing/mastering-strategy-crucial-for-business-success-1.4394295
Source: A Confederacy of Dunces (1980, posthumous), Ch. 9, p. 226
The System of the World (1800)
“Well, you never knew exactly how much space you occupied in people's lives.”
Source: Tender Is the Night
What I Saw in America (1922)
Context: The truth is that prohibitions might have done far less harm as prohibitions, if a vague association had not arisen, on some dark day of human unreason, between prohibition and progress. And it was the progress that did the harm, not the prohibition. Men can enjoy life under considerable limitations, if they can be sure of their limited enjoyments; but under Progressive Puritanism we can never be sure of anything. The curse of it is not limitation; it is unlimited limitation. The evil is not in the restriction; but in the fact that nothing can ever restrict the restriction. The prohibitions are bound to progress point by point; more and more human rights and pleasures must of necessity be taken away; for it is of the nature of this futurism that the latest fad is the faith of the future, and the most fantastic fad inevitably makes the pace. Thus the worst thing in the seventeenth-century aberration was not so much Puritanism as sectarianism. It searched for truth not by synthesis but by subdivision. It not only broke religion into small pieces, but it was bound to choose the smallest piece.
"Fads and Public Opinion"
Rampart Institute, p. 409.
The Fundamental of Liberty (1988)
