But secondly, you say, “society must exact vengeance, and society must punish.” Wrong on both counts. Vengeance comes from the individual, and punishment from God.
Society is poised between the two. Punishment is too far above, and vengeance too far beneath it. Nothing so great or so petty can be appropriate. We must not “strike in vengeance” but improve by correction.[Mais, reprend-on, — il faut que la société se venge, que la société punisse. — Ni l’un, ni l’autre. Se venger est de l’individu, punir est de Dieu.
La société est entre deux. Le châtiment est au-dessus d’elle, la vengeance au-dessous. Rien de si grand et de si petit ne lui sied. Elle ne doit pas “punir pour se venger”; elle doit corriger pour améliorer.]Victor Hugo (1802–1885) French writer, journalist, human rights activist, politician
Last Day of a Condemned Man [Le Dernier Jour d’un Condamné], 1832 Preface (1829) [tr. Woolen (1992)]
(Source)
(Source (French)). Other translations:But it is urged by the apologists for the penalty of death, that society must avenge itself -- society must punish. This is incorrect -- vengeance only belongs to the individual -- punishment to God. Society ought not to punish to avenge -- it should correct to ameliorate.
[tr. Reynolds (1840)]They continue, “But society must avenge itself, society must punish.”
Neither one nor the other; vengeance is an individual act, and punishment belongs to God. Society is between the two; punishment is above its power, retaliation beneath it. Society should not punish, to avenge itself; it should correct, to ameliorate others!
[tr. Fleetwood (1840)]But, they say, society must avenge itself; society must punish. Neither the one nor the other. To avenge belongs to the individual; punishment, to God.
Society is between the two. Punishment is above her; vengeance beneath. She uses nothing so great or so small. She should not "punish to avenge herself;" she should "correct to make better."
[tr. Ward (1896)]But let’s continue. Society must take revenge, punish. It is neither one nor the other. Revenge is for the individual, punishment for God.
Society falls between the two. Punishment is above it, vengeance beneath. Neither something so great nor something so small befits it. It should not "punish to take revenge": it should correct in order to improve. [tr. Moncrieff (2009)]
Quotations about:
pettiness
Note not all quotations have been tagged, so Search may find additional quotes on this topic.
Grief often inspires other odd emotions, and pettiness — the jealous assertion of one’s own claims as a mourner — is one of the commonest.
People who are too much concerned with little things usually become incapable of big ones.
[Ceux qui s’appliquent trop aux petites choses deviennent ordinairement incapables des grandes.]François VI, duc de La Rochefoucauld (1613–1680) French epigrammatist, memoirist, noble
Réflexions ou sentences et maximes morales [Reflections; or Sentences and Moral Maxims], ¶41 (1665-1678) [tr. Kronenberger (1959)]
(Source)
Present from the 1665 edition. See here for more discussion (English).
(Source (French)). Other translations:They that use to employ their minds too much upon Trifles, commonly make themselves incapable of any thing that is serious or great.
[tr. Stanhope (1694), ¶42]Those who apply themselves too much to little things, commonly become incapable of great ones.
[pub. Donaldson (1783), ¶38; ed. Lepoittevin-Lacroix (1797), ¶41]]Those who apply themselves much to little things, commonly become incapable of great ones.
[ed. Carville (1835), ¶35]Those who bestow too much application on trifling things, become generally incapable of great ones.
[ed. Gowens (1851), ¶42]Those who apply themselves too closely to little things often become incapable of great things.
[tr. Bund/Friswell (1871)]Undue attention to details tends to unfit us for greater enterprises.
[tr. Heard (1917)]Too close attention to trifles generally breeds incapacity in matters of moment.
[tr. Stevens (1939)]Men too involved in details usually become unable to deal with great matters.
[tr. FitzGibbon (1957)]People too much taken up with little things usually become incapable of big ones.
[tr. Tancock (1959)]Those who apply themselves too much to little things, ordinarily become incapable of great ones.
[tr. Whichello (2016)]
Preoccupation with money is the great test of small natures, but only a small test of great ones; there may be a wide gulf between a man who despises money and a genuinely honest man.
[L’intérêt d’argent est la grande épreuve des petits caractères; mais ce n’est encore que la plus petite pour les caractères distingués; et il y a loin de l’homme qui méprise l’argent, à celui qui est véritablement honnête.]
Nicolas Chamfort (1741–1794) French writer, epigrammist (b. Nicolas-Sébastien Roch)
Products of Perfected Civilization [Produits de la Civilisation Perfectionée], Part 1 “Maxims and Thoughts [Maximes et Pensées],” ch. 2, ¶ 164 (1795) [tr. Mathers (1926)]
(Source)
(Source (French)). Other translations:Concern for money is the great test of small natures; but is scarcely a test at all for those who rise above the ordinary; and there is a long way between the man who scorns money and the one who is genuinely honest.
[tr. Merwin (1969)]Pecuniary gain is the great test for those of weak character, but for those wit out-of-the-ordinary characters it is of the slightest importance; and a wide gulf separates the man who despises money from one who is truly honest.
[tr. Pearson (1973)]Weak characters think money all-important; for any well-bred person, it's a very minor concern.
[tr. Parmée (2003), ¶ 129]The desire for money can go very far in proving that a person has a petty character, but it has little to say about a persons sincerity; and there is a great distance between a man who scorns money and someone who is truly honest.
[tr. Siniscalchi]
Chickenshit refers to behavior that makes military life worse than it need be: petty harassment of the weak by the strong; open scrimmage for power and authority and prestige; sadism thinly disguised as necessary discipline; a constant “paying off of old scores”; and insistence on the letter rather than the spirit of ordinances. Chickenshit is so called — instead of horse- or bull- or elephant-shit — because it is small-minded and ignoble and takes the trivial seriously. Chickenshit can be recognized instantly because it never has anything to do with winning the war.
Paul Fussell (1924–2012) American cultural and literary historian, author, academic
“Chickenshit: An Anatomy,” Wartime: Understanding and Behavior in the Second World War (1989)
(Source)
Sometimes misattributed to historian Stephen Ambrose, who used part of it (with attribution) in his Band of Brothers (1992).
Low people, in good circumstances, fine clothes, and equipage, will insolently show contempt for all those who cannot afford as fine clothes, as good an equipage, and who have not (as they term it) as much money in their pockets: on the other hand, they are gnawed with envy, and cannot help discovering it, of those who surpass them in any of these articles; which are far from being sure criterions of merit.
Lord Chesterfield (1694–1773) English statesman, wit [Philip Dormer Stanhope]
Letter to his son, #167 (29 Oct 1748)
(Source)
People in general will much better bear being told of their vices or crimes than of their little failings or weaknesses.
Lord Chesterfield (1694–1773) English statesman, wit [Philip Dormer Stanhope]
Letter to his son, #204 (26 Nov 1749)
(Source)
If a small thing has the power to make you angry, does that not indicate something about your size?
Sydney J. Harris (1917–1986) Anglo-American columnist, journalist, author
(Attributed)
The man of honor thinks of his character, the inferior man of his position. The man of honor desires justice, the inferior man favor.
[君子懷德、小人懷土、君子懷刑、小人懷惠。]
Confucius (c. 551- c. 479 BC) Chinese philosopher, sage, politician [孔夫子 (Kǒng Fūzǐ, K'ung Fu-tzu, K'ung Fu Tse), 孔子 (Kǒngzǐ, Chungni), 孔丘 (Kǒng Qiū, K'ung Ch'iu)]
The Analects [論語, 论语, Lúnyǔ], Book 4, verse 11 (4.11) (6th C. BC – AD 3rd C.) [tr. Soothill (1910)]
(Source)
(Source (Chinese)). Other translations:The superior man thinks of virtue; the small man thinks of comfort. The superior man thinks of the sanctions of law; the small man thinks of favours which he may receive.
[tr. Legge (1861)]The masterly man has an eye to virtue, the common man, to earthly things; the former has an eye to penalties (for error), the latter, to favour.
[tr. Jennings (1895)]A wise man regards the moral worth of a man; a fool, only his position. A wise man expects justice; a fool expects favours.
[tr. Ku Hung-Ming (1898)]The proper man is concerned with examining his consciousness and acting on it, the small man is concerned about land; the superior man about legality, the small man about favors.
[tr. Pound (1933)]Where gentlemen set their hearts upon moral force (tê), the commoners set theirs upon the soil. Where gentlemen think only of punishments, the commoners think only of exceptions.
[tr. Waley (1938)]The perfect gentleman cherishes high moral conduct; the mean man, well-being. The perfect gentleman cherishes the penal code; the mean man, ex¬ emptions therefrom.
[tr. Ware (1950)]While the gentleman cherishes benign rule, the small man cherishes his native land. While the gentleman cherishes a respect for the law, the small man cherishes generous treatment.
[tr. Lau (1979)]The gentleman cherishes virtue, but the small man cherishes the soil; the gentleman cherishes the rigors of the law, but the small man cherishes leniency.
[tr. Dawson (1993)]A gentleman seeks virtue; a small man seeks land. A gentleman seeks justice; a small man seeks favors.
[tr. Leys (1997)]The gentleman cherishes virtue; the small man cherishes land. The gentleman cherishes institutions; the small man cherishes favors.
[tr. Huang (1997)]The gentlemen are concerned about the virtuousness; the mean persons are concerned about the land. The gentlemen are concerned about the status; the mean persons are concerned about the benefit.
[tr. Cai/Yu (1998), #77]Exemplary persons (junzi) cherish their excellence; petty persons cherish their land. Exemplary persons cherish fairness; petty persons cherish the thought of gain.
[tr. Ames/Rosemont (1998)]The gentleman likes virtue; the little man likes partiality. The gentleman likes justice; the little man likes mercy.
[tr. Brooks/Brooks (1998)]while the noble-minded cherish integrity, little people cherish territory. And while the noble-minded cherish laws, little people cherish privilege.
[tr. Hinton (1998)]The gentleman cherishes virtue, whereas the petty person cherishes physical possessions. The gentleman thinks about punishments, whereas the petty person thinks about exemptions.
[tr. Slingerland (2003)]The gentleman has his mind fixed on virtue; the petty man has his mind fixed on land. The gentleman has his mind fixed on penalties; the petty man has his mind fixed on bounty.
[tr. Watson (2007)]The gentleman [junzi] worries about the condition of his moral character, while the common man [xiaoren] worries about [whether he can hold on to] his land. The gentleman is conscious of [not breaking] the law, while the common man is conscious of what benefits he might reap [from the state].
[tr. Chin (2014)]A Jun Zi cares about virtuous and righteous principles, whereas a Xiao Ren cares about worldly matters. A Jun Zi cares about rules and discipline, whereas a Xiao Ren cares about benefits.
[tr. Li (2020)]The superior man seeks what is right; the inferior one, what is profitable.
[Source]
