Share this on Facebook
download .zip with all pictures
This is actually utter garbage. Your reaction is exactly what’s wrong with what people do with art. They think it has some meaning that isn’t there, then argue that it’s all subjective anyway. The fact is they got the quote or variant of it flat-out wrong in the image. Let’s look at the original quote:
“The Optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds, the Pessimist fears it is true.”
Here we see the pessimist doesn’t ‘know’ anything he ‘fears’ it, which is to say ‘he believes’ in something still without ‘knowing’.
Now let’s look even deeper at the origin of the ‘the best of all possible worlds’:
In this article it is repeated time and again that what this phrase means is that someone ‘believes’ or ‘thinks’ that this is the best of all possible worlds, thus making him an optimist. At no point, does the issue of ‘knowing’ versus ‘believing’ come into play. In fact to claim ‘knowledge’ would to bizarrely claim some sort of divine knowledge of all things, and become a subject of theology, being God and having God-like powers.
The point is, using the word ‘pessimist’ along with ‘knows it’ doesn’t impart any greater meaning. All it says is that ‘someone who tends to believe the glass is half empty ‘knows’ (somehow) that this is the best of all possible worlds.’
– How does he know (not believes) this while an optimist can only think it?
– Does ‘knowing’ that this is the best world possible a sign that the world is evil? In fact according to the wiki article, having such knowledge should make one the ultimate optimist, because God would have chosen to create this world out of all worlds and God is good, therefore this is the best of all possible worlds, even with the existence of evil. You’re being fooled by the loaded word ‘pessimist’ and attributing a bunch of nonsense drama to it, like dancing to architecture.