What is the origin of the phrase "and nothing of value was lost"?
Is this from a movie, book, or show, or did it get its start on Slashdot or some other online forum?
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
I'm still checking for the origin of the phrase but here's something from Urban Dictionary:
Self explanitory [sic]. Used as a response to when something of naught value has happened
"News reporter: After the assassin finished off his rampage of brutally murdering The Jonas Brothers, he proceeded to then hijack Mel Gibson's private jet, where they were forced to crash land in the pacific ocean. And nothing of value was lost."
and here's an explanation from Yahoo Answers:
I don't know, but there is an episode of the Critic, in which Jay Sherman says something similar after watching a float of a horse's *** on fire roll into a theatre where the musical Cats is playing.
Okay, found something more scholarly - in page 120 of David Archard's Philosophy and Pluralism by Lord Bhikhu Parekh we find this:
It actually references Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics (1984), X.7! We're a bit closer now and I found this quote from that same reference:
Nichomachean Ethics X.7
There may be something similar in Metaphysics, but I don't recall that text as well.
"But we must not follow those who advise us, being men, to think of human things, and, being mortal, of mortal things, but must, so far as we can, make ourselves immortal, and strain every nerve to live in accordance with the best thing in us; for even if it be small in bulk, much more does it in power and worth surpass everything."
Almost but not quite. If you read along though - you'll find the closest phrase to "and nothing of value was lost":
So if among virtuous actions political and military actions are distinguished by nobility and greatness, and these are unleisurely and aim at an end and are not desirable for their own sake, but the activity of reason, which is contemplative, seems both to be superior in serious worth and to aim at no end beyond itself, and to have its pleasure proper to itself (and this augments the activity), and the self-sufficiency, leisureliness, unweariedness (so far as this is possible for man), and all the other attributes ascribed to the supremely happy man are evidently those connected with this activity, it follows that this will be the complete happiness of man, if it be allowed a complete term of life (for none of the attributes of happiness is incomplete).
Here it is in the original Greek:
εἰ δὴ τῶν μὲν κατὰ τὰς ἀρετὰς πράξεων αἱ πολιτικαὶ καὶ πολεμικαὶ κάλλει καὶ μεγέθει προέχουσιν, αὗται δ' ἄσχολοι καὶ τέλους τινὸς ἐφίενται καὶ οὐ δι' αὑτὰς αἱρεταί εἰσιν, ἡ δὲ τοῦ νοῦ ἐνέργεια σπουδῇ τε διαφέρειν δοκεῖ θεωρητικὴ οὖσα, καὶ παρ' αὑτὴν οὐδενὸς ἐφίεσθαι τέλους, καὶ ἔχειν τὴν ἡδονὴν οἰκείαν αὕτη δὲ συναύξει τὴν ἐνέργειαν, καὶ τὸ αὔταρκες δὴ καὶ σχολαστικὸν καὶ ἄτρυτον ὡς ἀνθρώπῳ, καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα τῷ μακαρίῳ ἀπονέμεται, τὰ κατὰ ταύτην τὴν ἐνέργειαν φαίνεται ὄντα· ἡ τελεία δὴ εὐδαιμονία αὕτη ἂν εἴη ἀνθρώπου, λαβοῦσα μῆκος βίου τέλειον· οὐδὲν γὰρ ἀτελές ἐστι τῶν τῆς εὐδαιμονίας
Si donc, entre les actions qui sont conformes à la vertu, celles d'un homme livré aux travaux de l'administration et de la guerre, l'emportent par leur éclat et par leur importance, mais ne laissent aucun moment de loisir, tendent toujours à quelque but, et ne sont nullement préférables par elles-mêmes, tandis que l'activité de l'esprit, qui semble être d'une nature plus noble, étant purement contemplative, n'ayant d'autre fin qu'elle-même, et portant avec soi une volupté qui lui est propre, donne plus d'énergie (a nos facultés); si la condition de se suffire à soi-même, un loisir exempt de toute fatigue corporelle (autant que le comporte la nature de l'homme), et tous les autres avantages qui caractérisent la félicité parfaite, sont le partage de ce genre d'activité : il s'ensuit que c'est elle qui est réellement le bonheur de l'homme, quand elle a rempli toute la durée de sa vie; car rien d'imparfait ne peut être compté parmi les éléments ou conditions du bonheur.
Google Translate gives this back-translation:
If, therefore, between actions that are consistent with virtue, that of a man given to the work of the administration and the war outweighed by their brilliance and their importance, but leave no leisure time, tend always to some purpose, and are not preferred by themselves, while the activity of the mind, which seems to be of a more noble, as purely contemplative, with no other end than Similarly, and bearing with it a pleasure of its own, gives more energy (to our schools), if the condition is sufficient for himself, a hobby free of physical fatigue (as far as the nature of the behavior man), and all other benefits that characterize the perfect bliss, are sharing this type of activity: it follows that it is really the happiness of man, when it has fulfilled all the period of his life, for nothing imperfect can be counted among the elements or conditions of happiness.
UPDATE: I was able to contact David Archard and I asked him which particular part of X.7 is the statement "and nothing of value was lost" referring to. He said it was used by one of his contributors - Bhikhu Parekh.
It was used by one of the contributors to a collection I edited – Bhikhu Parekh
okay, contacting Lord Bhikhu Parekh now ... :)
I vaguely recall long ago reading a story about a Greek Philosopher (one I had never heard of) returning from a journey and finding that his house was burnt down and his entire family perished in the fire. His response, that fortunately, nothing of value was lost, was supposed to reflect his detachment from earthly possessions (apparently including his family) and his dedication to Higher Truth. I remember it, primarily because I thought at the time that it was admirable to think that about his home and furnishings, but a denial of his humanity to think that of his wife and children.
Know your meme gives the following:
refers to a scene from a 1995 episode of The Critic where a fire causes a theatre hosting a production of Cats to burn down, resulting in the protagonist Jay Sherman saying, "and nothing of value was lost," implying Cats is a valueless production.
A more historical source might be found in ancient philosophical texts (particularly Stoic writings).
In Letter IX of Seneca's Epistulae Morales ad Lucilium titled "On Philosophy & Friendship":
For Stilbo, after his country was captured and his children and his wife lost, as he emerged from the general desolation alone and yet happy, spoke as follows to Demetrius, called Sacker of Cities because of the destruction he brought upon them, in answer to the question whether he had lost anything: "I have all my goods with me!" There is a brave and stout-hearted man for you! The enemy conquered, but Stilbo conquered his conqueror. "I have lost nothing!" Aye, he forced Demetrius to wonder whether he himself had conquered after all. "My goods are all with me!" In other words, he deemed nothing that might be taken from him to be a good.