A Quote by Francois de La Rochefoucauld

Were we perfectly acquainted with the object, we should never passionately desire it. — © Francois de La Rochefoucauld
Were we perfectly acquainted with the object, we should never passionately desire it.
We should scarcely desire things ardently if we were perfectly acquainted with what we desire.
We should desire very few things passionately if we did but perfectly know the nature of the things we desire.
We should wish for few things with eagerness, if we perfectly knew the nature of that which was the object of our desire.
Before we passionately desire a thing, we should examine the happiness of its possessor.
I think slavery is wrong, morally, and politically. I desire that it should be no further spread in these United States, and I should not object if it should gradually terminate in the whole Union.
I think that slavery is wrong, morally, socially and politically. I desire that it should be no further spread in these United States, and I should not object if it should gradually terminate in the whole Union.
I try to rediscover why that object exists at all, and why one should take the trouble to reconsider It. I don't consider the technical or commercial parameters so much as the desire for a dream that humans have attempted to project onto an object.
We treat desire as a problem to be solved, address what desire is for and focus on that something and how to acquire it rather than on the nature and the sensation of desire, though often it is the desire between us and the object of desire that fills the space in between with the blue of longing.
It has frequently been said that we never desire what we think absolutely inapprehensible: it is however true that some of our sharpest agonies are those in which the object of desire is regarded as both possible and imaginary.
One [expert] said, 'Always have a baby sitter who is acquainted with your children.' If they were acquainted with my children, they wouldn't sit!
Isn’t desire always the same, whether the object is present or absent? Isn’t the object always absent? —This isn’t the same languor: there are two words: Pothos, desire for the absent being, and Himéros, the more burning desire for the present being.
A young man before he leaves the shelter of his father's house, and the guard of a tutor, should be fortify'd with resolution, and made acquainted with men, to secure his virtues, lest he should be led into some ruinous course, or fatal precipice, before he is sufficiently acquainted with the dangers of conversation, and his steadiness enough not to yield to every temptation.
The words we read and words we write never say exactly what we mean. The people we love are never just as we desire them. The two symbola never perfectly match. Eros is in between.
Nothing is more maddening than being questioned by the object of one's interest about the object of hers, should that object not be you.
Avarice and Happiness never saw each other, how then should they become acquainted?
In antiquity, a woman might be an object of worship or desire, but never of love.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!