Nothing is more common than good things: the point in question is only to discriminate them; and it is certain that they are all natural and within o… - Blaise Pascal

All of our reasoning ends in surrender to feeling.

Why should I choose to divide my ethics into four rather than six? Why should I define virtue as four, or two, or one? Why as desist and resist rather than 'follow nature' or 'discharge your private business without injustice', like Plato, or anything else?
'But,' you will say, 'there everything is summed up in a word. - 'Yes, but that is no good unless you explain it.' And when you come to explain it, as soon as you open up this precept which contains all the others, out they all come in the original confusion that you wanted to avoid. Thus when they are all enclosed in one they are concealed and useless, as if they were in a box, and they only come to light in their natural confusion. Nature has laid them down, without enclosing one inside another.

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