It would be better for me … that multitudes of men should disagree with me rather than that I, being one, should be out of harmony with myself.

It would be better for me... that multitudes of men should disagree with me rather than that I, being one, should be out of harmony with myself.

No doubt you are right... there would be far less suffering amongst mankind if men... did not employ their imaginations so assiduously in recalling the memory of past sorrow, instead of bearing their present lot with equanimity.

A hundred years ago—or even a couple of generations ago—you do not encounter the sort of waving of the bloody shirt of prejudice that greets you on all sides now. Men did not profess such indignation that other men had differing convictions and viewpoints. They rather expected to encounter these, and to argue with them as best they could.

If men gave birth, they'd be less inconsiderate.

When men differ in any matter of belief, let them meet each other manfully.

If men knew what they can have for a tear, they would be better loved and we should be less ruinous to them.

If men could only know each other, they would neither idolize nor hate.

The sum of evil, Pascal remarked, would be much diminished if men could only learn to sit quietly in their rooms.

If laying aside all worldly Greatness and Vain-Glory, I should be ask'd where I thought it was most probable that Men might enjoy true Happiness, I would prefer a small peaceable Society, in which Men, neither envy'd nor esteem'd by Neighbours, should be contented to live upon the Natural Product of the Spot they inhabit, to a vast Multitude abounding in Wealth and Power, that should always be conquering others by their Arms Abroad, and debauching themselves by Foreign Luxury at Home.

Whenever men meet together in large groups they adopt a different view of themselves and look at each other in a new way. They are emboldened, strengthened in their desire and gravitate to those who support their viewpoint. This may seem natural but why should it be so? Essentially, all men inwardly seek unity and find its reflection in conformity of thought and ideas. This instinct is behind the formation of political parties and other groups. The ideological consensus acts as a magnet and strengthens the potency of the whole.

Keep this thought handy when you feel a fit of rage coming on — it isn’t manly to be enraged. Rather, gentleness and civility are more human, and therefore manlier. A real man doesn’t give way to anger and discontent, and such a person has strength, courage, and endurance — unlike the angry and complaining. The nearer a man comes to a calm mind, the closer he is to strength.” — MARCUS AURELIUS, MEDITATIONS, 11.18.5b

Wars would be a lot better, I think, if guys would say to themselves sometimes "Jesus — I'm not going to do that to the enemy. That's too much."

Being unable to overcome death, misery, and uncertainty, men have agreed, in order to be happy, not to think about them.