“Not content with discoursing on supermen, the author presents them in the flesh - or whatever it is they are made of.”

Review of Karel Capek's play R.U.R. - Rossum's Universal Robots; Daily Express, 17 January 1923

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Not content with discoursing on supermen, the author presents them in the flesh - or whatever it is they are made of." by Herbert Farjeon?

Herbert Farjeon5

American playwright, theater manager, critic, and researche… 1879–1972

Related quotes

“Happiness is closer to the experience of acceptance and contentment than it is to pleasure. True happiness exists as the spacious and compassionate heart's willingness to feel whatever is present.”

Noah Levine (1971) American Buddhist teacher

Against the Stream (2007)

“I think we made love three times that final summer. Made love! Preposterous euphemism for fucking, almost as bad as the most grotesque of all, slept together. Whatever Sundara and I made, in those three pressings of flesh to flesh, love couldn’t have been the commodity; we made sweat, we made rumpled sheets, we made heavy breathing, we even made orgasms, but love? Love?”

Robert Silverberg book The Stochastic Man

Source: The Stochastic Man (1975), Chapter 29 (p. 162)

“I would be content if "German" and its derivatives were banished from all but linguistic discourse on this subject.”

Walter Goffart (1934) American historian

Source: Quotaes, Barbarian Tides (2010), p. 4

“The streets made me, and the streets stink, but I love them, for I was born in them out of flesh and I was born in them out of spirit.”

William Saroyan (1908–1981) American writer

The Bicycle Rider In Beverly Hills (1952)

“My reason, it’s true, controls my feelings,
But whatever its authority,
It doesn’t rule them so much as tyrannize them.”

Pierre Corneille Polyeucte

Ma raison, il est vrai, dompte mes sentiments,
Mais, quelque autorité que sur eux elle ait prise,
Elle n'y règne pas, elle les tyrannise.
Pauline, act II, scene ii.
Polyeucte (1642)

“Philosophy establishes itself as a discourse by opposition to the authority of received opinion, especially the opinions sedimented as cult and as law. Philosophy puts into question the authority of what has been handed down. It is not just that there is a critique of philosophic authorities; rather, philosophy appears to be characterized by rejection of intellectual authority as such. How is philosophy to distinguish, then, a permissible authority from those many impermissible authorities which it must reject if it is to survive?
Perhaps it would be better to avoid the quandary altogether by dismissing authority in order to consider only the "content" of the claims under consideration, regardless of their pretensions. The dismissal fails for at least two reasons. The first is that there are no claims in philosophic texts that are wholly free at least from the implicit constructions of authority. If criticism takes only the content, then it ends up with something other than the texts that have constituted the discourse of philosophy. There is no Platonic "theory of Forms" dissociable from the Platonic pedagogy, that is, from the teaching authority of the Platonic Socrates. The second reason for not being able to dismiss authority altogether is that the very criticism that wants to look only at contents will impose itself as an authority in its choice of procedure. One will still have authority, but an authority that refuses to raise any question about authority.
Perhaps the question about legitimate authority could be avoided, again, by replying that the obvious criterion for claims in philosophy is the truth. The assumption here is that access to the truth is had entirely apart from the authority of philosophical traditions. Yet it is a biographical fact that one is brought into philosophy by education. First principles are learned most often not by simple observation or by the natural light of reason, but under the tutelage of some authoritative tradition.”

Mark D. Jordan (1953)

Authority and persuasion in philosophy (1985)