That many and grave objections may be advanced against the theory of descent with modification through natural selection, I do not deny. I have endeavoured to give to them their full force. Nothing at first can appear more difficult to believe than that the more complex organs and instincts should have been perfected, not by means superior to, though analogous with, human reason, but by the accumulation of innumerable slight variations, each good for the individual possessor. Nevertheless, this difficulty, though appearing to our imagination insuperably great, cannot be considered real if we admit the following propositions, namely,—that gradations in the perfection of any organ or instinct, which we may consider, either do now exist or could have existed, each good of its kind,—that all organs and instincts are, in ever so slight a degree, variable,—and, lastly, that there is a struggle for existence leading to the preservation of each profitable deviation of structure or instinct. The truth of these propositions cannot, I think, be disputed.

Apparently every growing part of every plant is continually circumnutating, though often on a small scale. Even the stems of seedlings before they have broken through the ground, as well as their buried radicles, circumnutate, as far as the pressure of the surrounding earth permits. In this universally present movement we have the basis or groundwork for the acquirement, according to the requirements of the plant, of the most diversified movements. Thus, the great sweeps made by the stems of twining plants, and by the tendrils of other climbers, result from a mere increase in the amplitude of the ordinary movement of circumnutation. The position which young leaves and other organs ultimately assume is acquired by the circumnutating movement being increased in some one direction. The leaves of various plants are said to sleep at night, and it will be seen that their blades then assume a vertical position through modified circumnutation, in order to protect their upper surfaces from being chilled through radiation. The movements of various organs to the light, which are so general throughout the vegetable kingdom, and occasionally from the light, or transversely with respect to it, are all modified forms of circumnutation; as again are the equally prevalent movements of stems, etc., towards the zenith, and of roots towards the centre of the earth. In accordance with these conclusions, a considerable difficulty in the way of evolution is in part removed, for it might have been asked, how did all these diversified movements for the most different purposes first arise? As the case stands, we know that there is always movement in progress, and its amplitude, or direction, or both, have only to be modified for the good of the plant in relation with internal or external stimuli.

Le piante sono esseri intelligenti? Partendo da questa semplice domanda Stefano Mancuso e Alessandra Viola conducono il lettore in un inconsueto e affascinante viaggio intorno al mondo vegetale. In generale, le piante potrebbero benissimo vivere senza di noi. Noi invece senza di loro ci estingueremmo in breve tempo. Eppure persino nella nostra lingua, e in quasi tutte le altre, espressioni come “vegetare” o “essere un vegetale” sono passate a indicare condizioni di vita ridotte ai minimi termini. “Vegetale a chi?”… Se le piante potessero parlare, forse sarebbe questa una delle prime domande che ci farebbero.

Pretty much anywhere in the world men tend to think that they are much smarter than women. Yet arrogance and overconfidence are inversely related to leadership talent — the ability to build and maintain high-performing teams, and to inspire followers to set aside their selfish agendas in order to work for the common interest of the group. Indeed, whether in sports, politics or business, the best leaders are usually humble — and whether through nature or nurture, humility is a much more common feature in women than men. For example, women outperform men on emotional intelligence, which is a strong driver of modest behaviors. Furthermore, a quantitative review of gender differences in personality involving more than 23,000 participants in 26 cultures indicated that women are more sensitive, considerate, and humble than men, which is arguably one of the least counter-intuitive findings in the social sciences. An even clearer picture emerges when one examines the dark side of personality: for instance, our normative data, which includes thousands of managers from across all industry sectors and 40 countries, shows that men are consistently more arrogant, manipulative and risk-prone than women.
The paradoxical implication is that the same psychological characteristics that enable male managers to rise to the top of the corporate or political ladder are actually responsible for their downfall. In other words, what it takes to get the job is not just different from, but also the reverse of, what it takes to do the job well. As a result, too many incompetent people are promoted to management jobs, and promoted over more competent people.

• Insist on doing everything through “channels.” Never permit short-cuts to be taken in order to expedite decisions.
• Make “speeches.” Talk as frequently as possible and at great length. Illustrate your “points” by long anecdotes and accounts of personal experiences.
• When possible, refer all matters to committees, for “further study and consideration.” Attempt to make the committee as large as possible — never less than five.
• Bring up irrelevant issues as frequently as possible.
• Haggle over precise wordings of communications, minutes, resolutions.
• Refer back to matters decided upon at the last meeting and attempt to re-open the question of the advisability of that decision.
• Be “reasonable” and urge your fellow-conferees to be “reasonable”and avoid haste which might result in embarrassments or difficulties later on.
• In making work assignments, always sign out the unimportant jobs first. See that important jobs are assigned to inefficient workers.
• Insist on perfect work in relatively unimportant products; send back for refinishing those which have the least flaw.
• To lower morale and with it, production, be pleasant to inefficient workers; give them undeserved promotions.
• Hold conferences when there is more critical work to be done.
• Multiply the procedures and clearances involved in issuing instructions, pay checks, and so on. See that three people have to approve everything where one would do.
• Work slowly.
• Contrive as many interruptions to your work as you can.
• Do your work poorly and blame it on bad tools, machinery, or equipment. Complain that these things are preventing you from doing your job right.
• Never pass on your skill and experience to a new or less skillful worker.

The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.

The more we learn about the world, and the deeper our learning, the more conscious, clear, and well-defined will be our knowledge of what we do not know, our knowledge of our ignorance. The main source of our ignorance lies in the fact that our knowledge can only be finite, while our ignorance must necessarily be infinite.

かつて文豪・夏目漱石のもとに地方出身の学生が訪ねてきたときのこと。学生が「私は小説家になりたいのです」と語ると、漱石はこんな質問をぶつけたという。
「君はウィンドウショッピングが好きかね？」
若者は大変真面目な学生だったので、次のように答えて、文学への情熱をアピールした。
「ウィンドウショッピングなんかしている時間があったら、私は書斎で本を読んでいます」
しかし、それを聞いた漱石は、「君は小説家に向かないからやめておきなさい」と諭したそうだ。

急激に増えた情報の中から知識の取捨選択を迫られる現状は，人間を知的活動からむしろ遠ざけているように思う。これはすなわち，従来型の学問が岐路に立つことをも意味している。これまでの学問はおしなべて，精神を1つの物事に集中させる過程が本質にあった。古典の音読に始まり，文献読解，自然観察，帰納推論など，知的と呼べるものはいずれも，忍耐とトレーニングを要する活動であった。昔の大学人が世の中と隔絶された環境に身を置いたのも，これと無関係ではない。しかし今は，さまざまな情報を切り貼りして体裁だけを整える作業，論文数や引用数など数値化・形骸化された指標を満たすだけの作業を，学問や研究の目標にする人があまりにも多い。旧来の制度や慣習のまま，ビッグデータを誤用しているのである。

ところが、歴史教育には”必殺技”があります。「入試でそう出るから覚えなさい」です。このように歴史科の教員が言えば、生徒たちの思考はそこで停止します。
私も中学生の頃、ここに引用したのと似たような教科書を読んで、様々な疑問を持ちました。しかし、受験に向けて心がアパシー状態（受験以外は無関心）になっていたため、疑問を持ったこと自体忘れてしまいました。みんなそんなものです。
すべては入試制度が問題であり、単に年号と出来事の暗記ばかり求める歴史教育の在り方に問題があるのです。