Talk:Aphorism

message: Though I agree that the new aphorism is better known, it isn't presented by Nietzsche as an aphorism, it being a phrase from his book, Also sprach zarathustra. The previous came from his "Wanderer und sein Schatten", which is a large collection of aphorisms, and perhaps more suitable for selection. - HomoUniversalis
: I removed it because of the key word  tersely in the introductory paragraph, which it doesn't have.  (32 words, two colons, a dash and internal quote marks!  I've read pithier newspaper articles.)  It's not not an aphorism - it's a philosophical statement. 
: The test of an aphorism is that a stranger can remember it almost word-perfect after one reading ("one man's meat is another man's poison") ... I defy anybody to quote this Nietzsche ramble without a chunk of practice. In fact, I had to read it a couple of times just to figure out what it meant.
: If we want Nietzsche, "That which does not kill us makes us stronger" fits the bill in terms of conciseness and popularity. But I won't remove it again without agreement. It's obviously a judgement call. - DavidWBrooks 14:56, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I agree with the first definition, there can be debate on what is and what is not superfluous. I challenge anyone to pour the principle in that aphorism into a more concise sentence. Additionally, the description, here on wikipedia, of "Human, all too human", where the aphorism originates from rightly states that it is a collection of aphorisms. Regardless, if someone wants to change it into a "That which does not kill us makes us stronger", or another short aphorism, that's okay with me. HomoUniversalis 12:48, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Nietzsche is known, among other things, as something of a "definitive" Aphorist. I think this quote should be kept, if for no other reason, for the sake of including him in this article. Danis1911 15:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nietzsche's Aphorism 

message: As usual with Wikipedia, I am impressed with this article and with the scholarly discussion emerging from it. 
I propose a link to my website www.benandverse.com.  It is a website with perhaps a difference, though hardly a distinction. 
All my aphorisms are emphatically secondhand.
Google’s Directory describes them with extraordinary politeness:
John McCall's distillation of sayings from Benjamin Franklin's "Poor Richard's Almanac."
The website provides tables with a side-by-side comparison of Franklin’s magnificent prose with my latter day jingles. In fairness, my rhyming sound bites are mainly designed to persuade people to consider Franklin’s wisdom. (In any event, my “translation” was considered accurate enough to warrant a link from the Franklin Institute.)
There is also a new section (www.benandverse.com/writings/index.htm) on my website, “Phony Pearls of Fictitious Wisdom,” which offers more secondhand aphorisms. These are based on the I Ching. However, in this case, I don’t provide the rather lengthy originals for comparison on the website. For that reason, I doubt that they are distinctive enough to warrant a link. Most aphorisms are, after all, in some sense, derived. 
It is a side-by-side comparison that is rare.
I’d consider it an honor to receive a link from the Wikipedia.
Wikipedia rightly desires to confirm the permanence of any link. The original website has persisted for years; I have instructed my executors that both the original website and this new addition shall remain unchanged until long after my death. 
Sincerely,
John McCall
[e-mail removed]
152.163.100.13 20:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Secondhand Aphorisms 

message: In the section above, I recommended my website because I thought that the craft of creating aphorisms might be made more apparent by comparing one set of sayings with another. However, since one aphorist has no reputation, the comparison would seem to be of very limitted interest. 
However, there is one remaining reason to propose a link. The website contains a very large number of sayings from Franklin (an aphorist of world-historical stature) arranged by subject with copious cross-references.
Please forgive me for my presumption in the article above.
John McCall
152.163.100.13 22:21, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No offense, but my opinion would be that Web sites containing aphorisms are so prevalent on the Web that we shouldn't link to any - they're easy to find. This isn't an aphorism collection, but an explanation. - DavidWBrooks 22:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Franklin's Sayings Arranged by Subject 

message: John "Hannibal" Smith is a fictional character... its not as if he's a collector of fictitious aphorisms (there /is/ a difference)
so he should be labelled fictional.
&c. "An aphorism is...tasty...very, very tasty..." Aaron Aardvark.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.164.8.152 (talk) 11:50, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  factitious/fictional 

message: I don't recognise this Oleg Vishnepolsky fellow...who is this guy? Is he famous yet?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.100.122 (talk) 12:46, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: "Oleg Vishnepolsky was one of the early technologists and researchers at IBM’s T.J. Watson Research Center in the 1980s, and was thus present at the creation of some of the critical advances that made the Internet possible. Some of his sayings come out of his corporate experience: “Good project management is building a novel out of a bunch of short stories.”"  —Dah31 (talk) 02:24, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who is this guy? 

message: Aphorisms are inherently neoclassical, and are representitive of its tenets. By definition, an aphorism needs balance (and a fulcrum point) and parallelism. It isn't just something that one doesn't forget.
See Benjamin Franklin's writing for a more depthy explanation.
--72.224.11.29 17:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of Aphorism missing the point 

message: The quote that is widely attributed to Twain was not, in fact, said by him. Danis1911 15:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mark Twain quote 

message:  hopiakuta  Please do  sign  your  signature  on your  message.  %7e%7e   Thank You. - 21:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[ signature ]] 

message: So that we might learn who that might be, please do write that, if you can.
Thank You,
 hopiakuta  Please do  sign  your  signature  on your  message.  %7e%7e   Thank You. - 21:40, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[  Leonid  Sukhorukov ]] 

message: Are directions/advice like "Love the sinner and hate the sin" really aphorisms? --Irrevenant [ talk ] 10:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are directions really aphorisms? 

message: I'm really going to have to use this page a lot! My college-grade sister and I had a bet that I wouldn't be able to finish one of her writing assignments, a 1,055 word essay about Nietzche (hope I'm spelling it properly), and his aphorisms. So, I hope I can do well!
--Princess Janay (talk) 02:38, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Essays, Essays 

message: I think the examples section badly needs references. --Taraborn (talk) 21:19, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Hey, what happened to my Aristotle quote?! 'Man is by nature...'. It's famous!
Or does that not count?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Citizen89 (talk • contribs) 15:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aristotle 

message: 7.1.1 Proverbs and sayings
In many East and Southeast Asian languages, proverbs, traditional sayings, and traditional verses play an incomparably more important role in effective communication than they do in English.
P. 209 [226 of 332 in PDF], The Languages of East and Southeast Asia: An Introduction, Goddard, Cliff, Oxford University Press, USA ISBN: 0199273111.  free download - 6.8 MB Pawyilee (talk) 13:18, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aphorism and society 

message: Just tossing this out there: would René Descartes' statement, "Cogito ergo sum," be considered aphoristic? --Enigmatick 03:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Descartes? 

message: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tirukkural is filled with aphorisms .. Infact the whole thing is a collection of aphorisms (only). I think it should be included in this page.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.73.238.161 (talk) 13:15, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tirukkural 

message: When reverting one's contributions, a better explanation should be provided than "I don't think these are aphorisms." The editor's discretion doesn't count for a Wikipedia policy, with all due respect. Hearfourmewesique (talk) 04:15, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: You are mistaking PEARLS from aphorisms. They may sound similar, but the latter require literary value. Musicians' one-liners are usually pearls, not aphorisms.Galassi (talk) 12:11, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverting contributions 

message: In some terms borrowed from greek, the initial alpha represents negation, such as theism-atheism.  Is this the case for aphorism?  Tkuvho (talk) 05:25, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  is alpha in aphorism a negation? 

message: There were two uncited lists in the article, both were subjective lists based on no reliable independent sources, either to support inclusion or to support the idea that these are widely considered significant examples. There is no problem including lists where there is creible evidence that all the elements included are generally considered representative examples by reliable independent sources, but these had no indication to that effect. Applicable policies include WP:NOR, WP:V, WP:RS. Guy (Help!) 16:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed content 

message: * Modern popular aphorisms - deleted.
Who needs aphorisms created only by some unknown writer?
* Aphorism Explained   - deleted.
A very anonymous website. Hence dubious reliability.
I've added an excellent website - non-anonymous, and already recognized by our Wikipedia. Use Google to check: "www.phrases.org.uk" site:https://en.wikipedia.org/85.193.240.37 (talk) 03:18, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  I've replaced some external links. 

message: The Introduction text is word for word that in the book "Random Thoughts" by SR Gladdish.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.174.46 (talk) 17:00, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plagiarism