A Quote by Alice Hoffman

You can't dispute the ridiculous. You can't argue reasonably with evil. — © Alice Hoffman
You can't dispute the ridiculous. You can't argue reasonably with evil.
You cannot dispute the ridiculous. You cannot argue reasonably with evil.
It's a simple question of supply and demand. But all of us are grossly overpaid. I think it's a ridiculous dispute.
We might as well reasonably dispute whether it is the upper or the under blade of a pair of scissors that cuts a piece of paper, as whether value is governed by demand or supply.
What is evil? Killing is evil, lying is evil, slandering is evil, abuse is evil, gossip is evil, envy is evil, hatred is evil, to cling to false doctrine is evil; all these things are evil. And what is the root of evil? Desire is the root of evil, illusion is the root of evil.
Selfishness, if but reasonably tempered with wisdom, is not such an evil trait.
Do I make you nervous, Madame Lambert?” “No. I just prefer to keep my distance.” “Evil isn’t contagious.” “I thought you said you weren’t the most evil man in the world?” “I’m not. But that doesn’t mean I’m a good man.” “I don’t think anyone would argue with that.
To argue over who is the more noble is nothing more than to dispute whether dirt is better for making bricks or for making mortar.
Do not dispute with anyone in any matter as far as possible. For in argumentation lies much harm and its evil is greater than its benefit.
One could reasonably argue that the Turkish pogrom against the Armenians during World War I qualifies as a crime against humanity, as does the United States' ethnic cleansing of Native Americans.
Sacred Scripture, since it has no science above itself, can dispute with one who denies its principles only if the opponent admits some at least of the truths obtained through divine revelation; thus we can argue with heretics from texts in Holy Writ, and against those who deny one article of faith we can argue from another. If our opponent believes nothing of divine revelation, there is no longer any means of proving the articles of faith by reasoning, but only of answering his objections - if he has any - against faith.
I think the most important thing is to, without belligerence, stand up for what want. Argue compellingly if someone tries to change your script. Yeah, legally they can if they want to. But rather than give up, as some of the writers do, and just wail about how your script got rewritten, it's much more difficult - but well within the realm of possibility - to argue very sincerely, calmly, and reasonably from your point of view, such that the director or the producer might decide, "All right, let's do it that way."
In all my years of being with Pittsburgh, I never encountered a player taking a contract dispute into the season and letting that dispute affect the way he played.
If I think the universe is triangular, and you think it is square, there cannot be room for two universes. We may argue politely, we may argue humanely, we may argue with great mutual benefit: but, obviously, we must argue.
You're English," he said. "And I will therefore make certain allowances for you. I realize you don't understand you shouldn't argue with me, and so I'll explain it to you. Don't argue with me." Incredulous, she said, "That's it? 'Don't argue with me' is your explanation as to why I shouldn't argue with you?
When one has once accepted and absorbed Evil, it no longer demands the unfitness of the means. The ulterior motives with which youabsorb and assimilate Evil are not your own but those of Evil.... Evil is whatever distracts. Evil knows of the Good, but Good does not know of Evil. Knowledge of oneself is something only Evil has. One means that Evil has is the dialogue.... One cannot pay Evil in installments--and one always keeps on trying to.
There is no dispute that Albany needs to be changed. There is no dispute that the current situation in Albany is untenable. Nobody knows that better than I do.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!