"If man made himself the first object of study, he would see how incapable he is of going further. How can a part know the whole?"
About this Quote
Pascal hits where Enlightenment confidence will later pretend it’s armored: the mind is a brilliant instrument that can’t step outside itself to verify its own reach. The line sounds like a modest warning, but it’s a strategically placed trap. If you take the self as your primary object of study, Pascal suggests, you don’t arrive at mastery; you arrive at a wall. Introspection doesn’t crown reason, it exposes reason’s ceiling.
The subtext is theological without needing to wave a cross. “How can a part know the whole?” is a metaphysical heckle aimed at any system that treats human rationality as a self-sufficient judge. A finite creature, embedded inside the universe, can map patterns and build proofs, but cannot gain the God’s-eye vantage point that total certainty would require. The rhetorical move is clever: it borrows the language of analysis and proportion (part versus whole) to argue for humility, not triumph.
Context matters. Pascal is writing in a 17th-century France electrified by new science and sharpened by religious conflict, including Jansenist debates over grace and human limitation. He’s not rejecting reason; he’s restricting its jurisdiction. In the Pensees, that restriction becomes an argument for faith as something like a second faculty, not a consolation prize. The quote works because it turns the modern impulse to “know thyself” into an unsettling discovery: the self is not a stable foundation, but evidence that foundations may be out of reach.
The subtext is theological without needing to wave a cross. “How can a part know the whole?” is a metaphysical heckle aimed at any system that treats human rationality as a self-sufficient judge. A finite creature, embedded inside the universe, can map patterns and build proofs, but cannot gain the God’s-eye vantage point that total certainty would require. The rhetorical move is clever: it borrows the language of analysis and proportion (part versus whole) to argue for humility, not triumph.
Context matters. Pascal is writing in a 17th-century France electrified by new science and sharpened by religious conflict, including Jansenist debates over grace and human limitation. He’s not rejecting reason; he’s restricting its jurisdiction. In the Pensees, that restriction becomes an argument for faith as something like a second faculty, not a consolation prize. The quote works because it turns the modern impulse to “know thyself” into an unsettling discovery: the self is not a stable foundation, but evidence that foundations may be out of reach.
Quote Details
| Topic | Reason & Logic |
|---|---|
| Source | Unverified source: Pensées (Blaise Pascal, 1670)
Evidence: Fragment/§ often numbered Brunschvicg [318] (varies by edition); appears in W. F. Trotter's English translation in the section discussing the 'two infinites'. This wording is an English translation of Pascal’s Pensées (French: “Si l'homme s'étudiait le premier… Comment se pourrait-il qu'une parti... Other candidates (2) Systems Thinking (Piero Mella, 2012) compilation96.7% ... If man made himself the first object of study, he would see how incapable he is of going further. How can a part ... Blaise Pascal (Blaise Pascal) compilation35.5% that make them submit to you were it not for these they would not even look at you but they hope by these services to... |
More Quotes by Blaise
Add to List







