Tag Archives: misreadings

Only the Doer Learns – A Little Context

A short while ago, I tracked down the source of a quotation that had been wrongly attributed to Kant and widely circulated online: “A man of knowledge lives by acting, not by thinking about acting.” I found the sentence a pretty long way from any work by Immanuel Kant, in Carlos Castaneda’s A Separate Reality, and after reading the passage in question I remarked offhand that Castaneda seemed to channeling not Kant, but some mix of Erasmus’ Praise of Folly and Nietzsche’s Thus Spoke Zarathustra.

Now my pursuit of another widely-circulated quotation — this one attributed correctly, it turns out, to Nietzsche — has brought me back to Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Reading my old beat up paperback edition of Zarathustra again today only strengthened my conviction that Castaneda drew freely on Nietzsche as he created Don Juan; and it’s also brought me back to some consideration of how much gets lost when we allow philosophical quotations to stand for philosophy. That, as I noted in a previous post, is a growing tendency, driven by the boom in career, motivational and leadership literature and by social media.

“Only the doer learns” is how R.J. Hollingdale neatly renders Nietzche’s nur der Thäter lernt. The translation I’ve seen most widely circulated lately has a deliberately antiquated flavor: “the doer alone learneth.” Maybe that looks better as a tattoo, or a gamer’s motto. [Update 22 Feb 2015: since writing this post I have discovered that the brutal death metal band Emeth has a 2008 song called ‘The Doer Alone Learneth.’] I cannot even begin to imagine the various uses to which Nietzsche might be put nowadays. I can imagine, based on other forays I have made into the world of popular quotations, that “only the doer learns” is being traded as advice that one ought to learn by doing, jump right in, be a self-starter, take some measured risks. That, regrettably, is what the literature of success reduces philosophy to — formulas for jumpstarting your career and getting ahead. Let’s see if in the present case we can arrive at something a little more intelligent and nuanced than that.

Context helps. The line in question is from the chapter on “The Ugliest Man” in Book 3 of Thus Spoke Zarathustra. It’s been yanked completely out of context — as most of these popular and familiar quotations are — and I wonder how and why it ended up getting yanked.

Here, Zarathustra is passing through the valley the shepherds call Serpent’s Death, where he comes upon “something sitting on the pathway, shaped like a man and yet hardly like a man, something unutterable” and he is overcome by “the great shame of having beheld such a thing.” He blushes and turns away, but just as he attempts to leave a human voice rises up and puts a riddle to him: “What is the revenge on the witness?” And a few minutes later: “who am I”? At first so overcome by pity that he sinks to the ground, Zarathustra raises himself up and, standing again, replies: you are the murderer of God.

So here we have Zarathustra, face to face with the ugliest man, who could not tolerate God’s witness: God pitied him. “His pity knew no shame: he crept into my dirtiest corners. This most curious, most over-importunate, over-compassionate god had to die….Man could not endure that such a witness should live.” Zarathustra replies:

“You unutterable creature,” he said, “you warned me against your road. As thanks for that, I recommend you mine. Behold, up yonder lies Zarathustra’s cave.”
“My cave is big and deep and possesses many corners; there the best hidden man can find his hiding place. And close by it are a hundred secret and slippery ways for creeping, fluttering, and jumping beasts.”
“You outcast who cast yourself out, do you not wish to live among men and the pity of men? Very well, do as I do. Thus you also learn from me; only the doer learns.
And first of all and above all speak with my animals! The proudest animal and the wisest animal — they may well be the proper counsellors for both of us!”
Thus spoke Zarathustra, and went on his way, even more thoughtfully and slowly than before: for he asked himself many things and did not easily know what to answer.
How poor is man! (he thought in his heart) how ugly, how croaking, how full of secret shame!
They tell me that man loves himself: ah, how great must this self-love be! How much contempt is opposed to it!
Even this man has loved himself as he has despised himself — he seems to me a great lover and a great despiser.
I have yet found no one who has despised himself more deeply: even that is height. Alas, was he perhaps the Higher Man whose cry I heard?
I love the great despisers. Man, however, is something that must be overcome.

To learn from Zarathustra, the Ugliest Man will do as he has done: he will live in his cave, far from the sight of men, beyond pity and morality, and beyond human language itself. He will live among the beasts and speak with the animals. That is the where Zarathustra’s steep mountain road leads.

I suspect that we are to hear some mockery in the maxim “only the doer learns.” So lernst du auch von mir; nur der Thäter lernt might be Nietzche’s aphoristic and bitterly ironic rendering of a passage in Aristotle (Nichomachean Ethics 1103A) on the habit of virtue: “the virtues,” runs this famous passage from Book II of the Ethics, “we acquire by first having put them into action, and the same is also true of the arts. For the things which we have to learn before we can do them we learn by doing” [emphasis mine]. It wouldn’t surprise me to find Nietzsche roasting this old chestnut of moral philosophy even as Zarathustra turns morality and philosophy itself on its head.

Attack of the Philosophy Bots

After Friday’s post about the mistaking of Horace for Cicero, I started to wonder: who’s behind the philosophy tweet bots that cause me so much consternation?

You don’t have to look very far for answers. Every tweet by @philo_quotes — not the worst of the quote bots, but the one I singled out in my last two posts on the topic — is accompanied by a link, and that link leads to philosophical-quotes.com. The site lists quotations, the same stuff the bot tweets, without reference to sources, and it runs ads. On my last visit, I was offered Games to Exercise Your Brain and stave off the misery and forgetfulness of old age, the services of a Connecticut law firm looking for people who have been abused by clergy (and who, presumably, seek the consolation of philosophy), and a “Call for Research Participants” posted by The Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity — which is obviously not an organization run by grammarians, or even native speakers of English.

The philosophical-quotes site also promotes another site, dedicated to “inspirational quotes”, where along with words of inspiration you find more ads: a 401K plan, a business loan, some kind of sales-lead technology, audible.com, and yet another site of “Inspirational Life Quotes”. There is also a link to a Facebook page dedicated to “Motivational Quotes” (with 2979 likes); that page features an ad for the Facebook page of Philosophy Quotes, a “Society/Culture Website” with nearly 6000 likes.

A simple WhoIs search reveals that these sites are the creation and property of a French entrepreneur who deals in words and sayings that inspire and instruct. In an interview I found on the French site brocooli.com, he sums up his online activity with a single word: moné­ti­sa­tion. Hence all those ads. He also has a number of ebooks for sale, including a collection of motivational sayings which concentrates, in a single volume, “the best advice to motivate you to attain your own success”; the others are dedicated to the same theme: La Reussite, or Success.

We are pretty far removed from the quiet shade of Socrates’ plane tree. This is philosophy in the service of Success, or Leadership, or Entrepreneurship. It all amounts to the same thing. The sayings of the philosophers are regarded as guides to self-actualization; they help perpetuate a sunny entrepreneurial optimism, a bold confidence, a faith in Success, and help create the illusion that that faith is informed and justified by philosophical inquiry. The greatest minds the world has known are there to inspire you to succeed, achieve your potential; they all seem to concur: stick to it, buck up, take risks, be humble but go for the gusto, don’t be afraid to fail, trust yourself and you will succeed.

And I suspect it gets worse than that: the medium of philosophy is itself the message. The philosophy bots publish anything and everything (Descartes, Marx, Hume, James, Wittgenstein, Nietzsche, Plato, Heidegger), outrageous stuff, and people will quote it in speeches, tweet it, put it in PowerPoint, wear it on their sleeve, pin it on Pinterest or hang it above the desk, simply because quoting “philosophy” or even seeing philosophy quoted makes people feel smart and connected to smart.

Ultimately, the trouble isn’t that people use or abuse fragments of philosophy to feel smart or to elevate and ennoble base pursuits. That happens, to be sure, but that’s been happening since the first days of philosophy. And it’s worth considering that for many followers of these philosophy bots, these fragments or sayings of the philosophers might actually make the world more coherent: somebody thought that thought, not just somebody, but a philosopher, and — wow — it makes sense to me. It’s just important to remember that many of these quotations are taken out of context, often misquoted, misattributed, almost always badly translated, and until you have read and understood something of a philosopher’s work, you haven’t grasped the sense it makes.