Among intellectuals who consider themselves 'scientific,' the phrase 'the nature of man' is apt to have the effect of a red flag on a bull.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Scientific men can hardly escape the charge of ignorance with regard to the precise effect of the impact of modern science upon the mode of living of the people and upon their civilisation.
By exploring the political and moral colorings of discoveries about what makes us tick, we can have a more honest science and a less fearful intellectual milieu.
Man is a creative retrospection of nature upon itself.
If we want to make a statement about a man's nature on the basis of his physiognomy, we must take everything into account; it is in his distress that a man is tested, for then his nature is revealed.
It stands to the everlasting credit of science that by acting on the human mind it has overcome man's insecurity before himself and before nature.
And we owe science to the combined energies of individual men of genius, rather than to any tendency to progress inherent in civilization.
The proper study of Mankind is Man.
Man, in the collective sense, is the hero of science. Man, in the collective sense, is the hero of Earth.
The method of nature: who could ever analyze it?
The man of science, like the man of letters, is too apt to view mankind only in the abstract, selecting in his consideration only a single side of our complex and many-sided being.