Quotessence
Home / Quotes / Quote by Richard Bachman

Quote by Richard Bachman

“You're dumb, Garraty. You and me and Pearson and Barkovitch and Stebbins, we're all dumb. Scramm's dumb because he thinks he understands and he doesn't. Olson's dumb because he understood too much too late.”

Quote by Richard Bachman

Book:The Long Walk
Create image

Work

The Long Walk

This novel follows the journey of a young man in a totalitarian society where he must undertake an arduous trek across a desolate landscape to prove his worth. The story explores themes of resilience, the human spirit, and the cost of survival. more

Author

Richard Bachman

Browse famous quotes and profile details for Richard Bachman. more

You May Also Like

“Garraty thought that memories were like a line drawn in the dirt. The further back you went the scuffier and harder to see that line got. Until finally there was nothing but smooth sand and the black hole of nothingness that you came out of. The memories were in a way like the road. Here it was real and hard and tangible. But that early road, that nine in the morning road, was far back and meaningless.”

MemoriesNothingnessStephen KingBlack HoleMeaninglessnessMemories QuotesThe Long WalkRichard BachmanGarratyMcvries
Book:The Long Walk
Create image

“Through individuated pieces of [Source], Source takes on numerous physical and nonphysical experiences, including experiences where [It] may veil [Itself] from [Its] own true nature, so that [It] can have the experience of separate perspectives. [It] does this for the purpose of the expansion of the joy and love of Beingness through Creation.”

SpiritualSpiritualitySourceThe Veil
Book:A Walk in the Physical: Understanding the Human Experience Within the Larger Spiritual Context
Create image

“Moreover, if there were two natures having necessary being of themselves, neither would depend upon the other for existence and consequently no essential order would exist between them. One of them, therefore, would not belong to this universe, for there is nothing in the universe which is not related by an essential order to the other beings, for the unity of the universe stems from the order of its parts. Here it is objected that inasmuch as each is related to the parts of the universe through the order of eminence, this suffices for unity. To the contrary: One is not so ordered to the other, for a more perfect existence characterizes the more eminent nature. Nothing however is more perfect than a being having necessary existence of itself. What is more, one of two is not ordered to the parts of the universe, because if the universe is one, then it is characterized by a single order and this obtains where there is but one first. Proof: If you assume there are two first natures, since there is a dual term of reference, the nature next to the first has no unique order or dependence and the same is true of each subsequent nature. And thus through the whole universe there will be two orders, and hence two universes. Or else where will be an order only to one necessary being, but not to the other. If one proceeds reasonably, then, it seems he ought not to postulate anything for no apparent need, or whose entity is not clearly revealed by reason of some order to other things,—for, according to Physics, Bk. I, more than one thing should not be postulated where one suffices. Now we show there is a necessary being in the universe from the uncausable, and this in turn from what is first in causing, and the latter from what is caused. But from these effects there is no apparent necessity for assuming several first causing natures; furthermore, this is impossible, as will be shown later in the fifteenth conclusion of this third chapter. Therefore it is not necessary to assume that there are several things which are uncaused and necessarily exist. With reason, then, they are not postulated.”

PhilosophyReligionTheologyMetaphysicsOntologyModal Logic
Book:A Treatise on God as First Principle
Create image