“It is sufficient for a man’s justification if he has so lived that he deserves forgiveness for his faults on account of his virtues.”
.....
[“Es ist für des Menschen Rechtfertigung hinreichend, wenn er so gelebt hat, daß er seiner Tugenden wegen Vergebung für seine Fehler verdient.”]
.....
G.C. Lichtenberg, Sudelbücher, (Frankfurt am Main und Leipzig: Insel Verlag, 1984), J.1014 from Sudelbuch J:1789-1793, p. 422.
3 comments:
That seems to be about his character, not his actions. How does one know his faults and virtues without knowledge of his actions? But if one does know his actions, why not assess them directly, rather than through some inferred "virtue" or fault"? Or is that a distinction without a difference?
Good question. I suppose it does require knowledge of his actions, which one then takes as a reflection of his character, by which one then surmises his virtues and faults.
Usually we judge the private man by his actions rather than his words. It occurred to me lately that we should probably reverse the test for politicians. Consider FDR. He promoted Jews to senior positions in Federal government on an unprecedented scale. He told anti-semitic jokes in private. I'd guess that his actions were the result of political calculation and lobby-group pressure, and that the real man can be inferred from his nasty jokes. No doubt Socrates got there before me.
Post a Comment