The Wisdom Letter #116

5 quotes from J. D. Salinger (1919–2010)

✹ For today's Wisdom Letter, we have carefully curated five bite-sized quotes from the American author, J. D. Salinger (1919–2010).

Quote № 01:

“What really knocks me out is a book that, when you're all done reading it, you wish the author that wrote it was a terrific friend of yours and you could call him up on the phone whenever you felt like it.”

— J. D. Salinger, “The Catcher in the Rye”

Quote № 02:

“All you have to do is say something nobody understands and they'll do practically anything you want them to.”

— J. D. Salinger, “The Catcher in the Rye”

Quote № 03:

“I'm just sick of ego, ego, ego. My own and everybody else's. I'm sick of everybody that wants to get somewhere, do something distinguished and all, be somebody interesting. It's disgusting.”

— J. D. Salinger, “Franny and Zooey”

Quote № 04:

“The mark of the immature man is that he wants to die nobly for a cause, while the mark of the mature man is that he wants to live humbly for one.”

— J. D. Salinger, “The Catcher in the Rye”

Quote № 05:

“I'm sick of just liking people. I wish to God I could meet somebody I could respect...”

— J. D. Salinger, “Franny and Zooey”

✱✱✱
Support Philosophors:
buymeacoffee.com/philosophors

✺ Today’s Questions

Three philosophical questions to foster your curiosity:

Question № 01:

Is respect a fundamental human right or a social privilege? To what extent should respect be granted universally, regardless of individual behavior or status?

Question № 02:

In what ways does the ego act as a filter through which we interpret external events, and can we ever perceive the world without egoic distortion?

Question № 03:

What are the implications of immersing oneself in fictional worlds for our understanding of truth, and can fiction have a deeper truth than factual accounts?

---

✺ Bite-sized Concept

For today’s concept, let’s take a quick look at Definist Fallacy:

Definist fallacy is a logical fallacy where a term is redefined in a biased or circular way to support a particular argument or conclusion. This redefinition typically skews the meaning of the term, making it easier to defend a specific stance. It manipulates the language of the debate rather than addressing the actual argument itself.

For example, someone might say, “True patriotism means supporting every decision the government makes without question.” In this example, the speaker commits the Definist fallacy by redefining "patriotism" to mean unconditional support for the government. This biased redefinition shifts the debate in their favor by implying that anyone who questions government actions is unpatriotic, rather than engaging with the actual complexities of what patriotism might involve.

To deepen your understanding, here’s a question to think about:

In what ways can the Definist fallacy create an illusion of agreement or disagreement in a discussion, and how might this affect the ability of participants to reach a deeper understanding of the issue at hand?

That wraps up today’s concept; we’ll dive into another one next time.

---

✺ Support Philosophors!

Philosophors is a one-person labor of love, born out of my deep passion for wisdom. I’ve been fortunate enough to sustain this project through the generous donations of my audience, for which I’m incredibly grateful. If you would also like to support and help Philosophors thrive while remaining completely ad-free, please consider making a small donation and joining me on a mission to make wisdom more accessible.

✦ Donate Here → buymeacoffee.com/philosophors