Quotessence
Home / Topics / Discourse Quotes

Discourse Quotes

Browse 575 quotes about Discourse.

Related topics

Discourse Quotes

“But, then, what is philosophy today—philosophical activity, I mean—if it is not the critical work that thought brings to bear on itself? In what does it consist, if not in the endeavor to know how and to what extent it might be possible to think differently, instead of legitimating what is already known? There is always something ludicrous in philosophical discourse when it tries, from the outside, to dictate to others, to tell them where their truth is and how to find it, or when it works up a case against them in the language of naive positivity.”

“I assign a type of extended schooling called “homework,” so that the effect of surveillance, if not the surveillance itself, travels into private households, where students might otherwise use free time to learn something unauthorized from a father or mother, by exploration or by apprenticing to some wise person in the neighborhood.”

“I want to see how people can operationalize kindness online. It would be good for people to take that as a value from which to work, before launching into things that are about destruction and about vilification.”

“When it comes to moral dilemmas and matters of discerning right justice, my natural sympathy so often happens to land on the opposite end of that of most of my peers. I sometimes wonder if this is nothing more than the misguidedness and the wickedness of my own heart. I wonder other times if God wires some of us in such a way so that fair discourse might then be provided, so that honest and unbiased, due process is ultimately more likely to be carried out. Perhaps it is all necessary for variance of perception, for mindful debate: that the heart is meant to create a bit of bias on certain issues; as between one another, they weigh and balance. For not all hearts are the same.”

“The real purpose of the opposition is to minimize the amount of money the ruling party will have stolen from the people at the end of its term.”

“The paradox of wokeism is that, in its quest for inclusivity, it often becomes exclusionary, shutting down conversations deemed uncomfortable or offensive. This narrowing of acceptable discourse harms the essence of free speech, as it places arbitrary boundaries on what can be said or joked about. Comedy, in particular, serves as a barometer for societal norms and challenges our preconceptions. Suppressing comedic expression not only hampers artistic freedom but also stifles the very laughter that can bridge divides and foster understanding.”

“In this my affliction the pleasant discourse of a certain friend of mine and his admirable consolations afforded me such refreshment that I firmly believe of these it came that I died not. But, as it pleased Him who, being Himself infinite, hath for immutable law appointed unto all things mundane that they shall have an end, my love,—beyond every other fervent and which nor stress of reasoning nor counsel, no, nor yet manifest shame nor peril that might ensue thereof, had availed either to break or to bend,—of its own motion, in process of time, on such wise abated that of itself at this present it hath left me only that pleasance which it is used to afford unto whoso adventureth himself not too far in the navigation of its profounder oceans; by reason whereof, all chagrin being done away, I feel it grown delightsome, whereas it used to be grievous.”

“A combination of television and the stresses peculiar to two-income or single-parent families has swallowed up most of what used to be family time as well. Our kids have no time left to grow up fully human and only thin-soil wastelands to do it in.”

“[…] marginile unei cărţi nu sunt niciodată clar şi riguros trasate: dincolo de titlu, de primele rânduri şi de punctul final, mai presus de configuraţia sa internă şi de forma care îi conferă autonomie, ea se află prinsă într-un sistem de trimiteri la alte cărţi, la alte texte, la alte fraze: este un nod într-o reţea.”

“...You, my friend, are society. So welcome to the club of community, and even though some may try to drown out other styles of discourse with shouts about personal rights, the community may have a thing or two to say, and it may say it a lot louder. After all, community can only progress when its individuals exercise higher moral choices, and community is sacrificed when individuals choose with only themselves in mind.”

“The focus on lived experience by identity groups valorizes inner selves experienced emotionally rather than examined rationally. Notes one observer, “Our political culture is marked, at the micro level, by the fusion of a given person’s opinion and what they perceive to be their singular, permanent, and authentic self.” This privileges opinions sincerely held over reasoned deliberation that may force one to abandon those opinions. That an argument is offensive to someone’s sense of self-worth is often seen as sufficient to delegitimize it, a trend encouraged by the kind of short-form discourse propagated by social media.”

“La leçon qui veut donner Xénophon en montrant Simonide en train d'écouter en silence le long discourse de Hiéron, puis en lui répondant, peut être exprimée maintenant de la façon suivante: même un homme parfaitement juste qui veut donner des conseils à un tyran doit se présenter comme un homme dénué de tous scrupules. Le plus grand homme qui ait jamais imité le Hiéron fut Machiavel. Je ne serais pas surpris si une étude suffisamment attentive de l'œuvre de Machiavel conduisait à la conclusion que c'est précisément le fait que Machiavel a parfaitement compris la principale leçon pédagogique de Xénophon qui explique les phrases les plus choquantes du Prince. Mais si Machiavel a compris la leçon de Xénophon, il ne l'a certainement pas appliquée dans l'esprit de son auteur. Car, d'après Xénophon, le conseiller du tyran doit apparaître comme un homme dénué de tous scrupules, non parce qu'il déclare ne craindre ni l'enfer ni le diable ou qu'il professe des principes immoraux, mais du simple fait qu'il s'abstient de tenir compte des principes moraux. Il doit manifester son affranchissement réel ou supposé à cet égard, non par le discours, mais par le silence car, en procédant ainsi - en méprisant la morale par l'action plutôt qu'en l'attaquant par le discours, il révèle en même temps sa compréhension des choses politiques. Xénophon, ou son Simonide, est plus politique que Machiavel; il refuse de séparer la modération (ou la prudence) de la sagesse (ou perspicacité).”

“La vie n'est pas un monologue théâtral. Les grands discours ne mènent nulle part, c'est juste un act s'ils ne conduisent pas pas à pas, à commencer à agir, s'il n'y a aucune action dessus. Ne confondez pas être solidaire et solitaire.”

“Of course, in television's presentation of the "news of the day," we may see the Now...this" mode of discourse in it's boldest and most embarrassing form. For there, we are presented not only with fragmented news but news without context, without consequences, without value, and therefore without essential seriousness; that is to say, news as pure entertainment.”

“In many a case, the phrase ‘I’d like to get to know you better’ is a euphemism for ‘I want us to fuck.”

“If this constant sliding and hiding of meaning were true of conscious life, then we would of course never be able to speak coherently at all. If the whole of language were present to me when I spoke, then I would not be able to articulate anything at all. The ego, or consciousness, can therefore only work by repressing this turbulent activity, provisionally nailing down words on to meanings. Every now and then a word from the unconscious which I do not want insinuates itself into my discourse, and this is the famous Freudian slip of the tongue or parapraxis. But for Lacan all our discourse is in a sense a slip of the tongue: if the process of language is as slippery and ambiguous as he suggests, we can never mean precisely what we say and never say precisely what we mean. Meaning is always in some sense an approximation, a near-miss, a part-failure, mixing non-sense and non-communication into sense and dialogue.”

“The strange thing, dear reader, is that the materialistic modern ignorance we live in which has stripped women of comfort, happiness and dignity considers the Prophet's (ﷺ) marriage to Aisha as a shubha (allegation) to be defended because of her young age. One truly wonders how the corrupt dare to challenge the pure, and how failure dares to disparage success! What is strange is that we Muslims accept this labeling of the most successful and beautiful marriage as a shubha! We add it to the group of shubha(s) and start the case for defense. We should have asked from the beginning, "What specifically is the problem, so that we can respond to it?" Why do you –objectors– assume that we accept your standards?! It is strange that we allow Islam haters who defeat us militarily in every despicable way to also defeat us psychologically by occupying our minds and souls. So here we are: Judging our religion, our history, and our Prophet's (ﷺ) tradition according to our opponents' standards! Accepting the classification of a part of religion as a shubha means losing half the battle. If you try to defend it using the standards of your opponent you lose the other half!”

“The point is that television does not reveal who the best man is. In fact, television makes impossible the determination of who is better than whom, if we mean by 'better' such things as more capable in negotiation, more imaginative in executive skill, more knowledgeable about international affairs, more understanding of the interrelations of economic systems, and so on. The reason has, almost entirely, to do with 'image.' But not because politicians are preoccupied with presenting themselves in the best possible light. After all, who isn't? It is a rare and deeply disturbed person who does not wish to project a favorable image. But television gives image a bad name. For on television the politician does not so much offer the audience an image of himself, as offer himself as an image of the audience. And therein lies one of the most powerful influences of the television commercial on political discourse.”

“ولكن من الصعب جداً التمييز بين التعليم الذي يخدم الطلبة حقاً في حياتهم الراهنة والمستقبلية، من ناحية، وتلقين أيديولوجيات الجماعات أو المنظمات القوية في المجتمع، أو منع الطلاب من تطوير قدراتهم النقدية، من ناحية أخرى. وما يزال من الصعب على المرء أن يركز اللوم على أحد المدرسين أو إحدى القطع المختارة في الكتاب الدراسي المنهجي، لأنّ شكل التأثير قد يكون أكثر انتشاراً وتعقيداً وعالمية وتفاقماً وتشعباً. وبالتأكيد يمكن أن تلتحق جميع الأطراف المعنية: بدءاً من وزارة التعليم التي تقوم بإصدار المناهج الدراسية إلى الكُتّاب، أو المؤلفين والناشرين لهذه الكتب التعليمية، وكذلك لجان المعلمين التي توافق عليها، وأخيراً المعلمين الذين يدرسونها؛ إذ قد يكونون جميعاً مقتنعين بأن هذه الكتب جيدة لتعليم الأطفال. (ص50)”

“Lost in the incessant focus on the darker sides of free speech—real, perceived, and exaggerated—are the profound benefits of free and open discourse, from the toppling of absolutist rulers to the cross-fertilization of knowledge across cultures and the defeat of institutional racism and discrimination. As thinkers like Spinoza, Cato, Madison, Constant, and Douglass have pointed out, we jeopardize those benefits if we are unwilling to accept any of the harms or costs that inevitably accompany free expression.”

“Although scholars such as Butler have debated such approaches as reinforcing problematic identity models and creating an either/or distinction, Lather is referring to the power of using the discouraged discourse as an act of transgression. Thus, embodiment and reflexivity are tools used to disrupt current language and assumptions about the value of female bodies through a voluptuous validity. The term "voluptuous" is not used as an objectification of a sexualised body, as seen through the male gaze, but rather as an ownership of the body through a somantic fullness. Characteristics associated with female, body, fluids, excess, undisciplined, and out of order aspects are purposively used as an act of rebellion against patriarchal taboos.”

“Низка людей, які працюють у цій галузі, починаючи з таких постструктуралістів, як Лакан і Дерріда, писали в такий спосіб, який, здавалося, навмисне затуманював їхні думки й захищав від відповідальності за суперечності і слабку логіку.”

“Nothing could be more admirable than the manner in which for forty years he [Joseph Black] performed this useful and dignified office. His style of lecturing was as nearly perfect as can well be conceived; for it had all the simplicity which is so entirely suited to scientific discourse, while it partook largely of the elegance which characterized all he said or did ... I have heard the greatest understandings of the age giving forth their efforts in its most eloquent tongues-have heard the commanding periods of Pitt's majestic oratory-the vehemence of Fox's burning declamation-have followed the close-compacted chain of Grant's pure reasoning-been carried away by the mingled fancy, epigram, and argumentation of Plunket; but I should without hesitation prefer, for mere intellectual gratification (though aware how much of it is derived from association), to be once more allowed the privilege which I in those days enjoyed of being present while the first philosopher of his age was the historian of his own discoveries, and be an eyewitness of those experiments by which he had formerly made them, once more performed with his own hands.”

“...if there be some points which correspondence can never settle, but which can be made clear by conversation in two minutes, at other times just the opposite is the case: an objection clearly stated in writing, a doubt well expressed, which elicits a direct and positive reply, helps things along more than ten hours of oral intercourse!”