Summary
Montaigne tackles one of humanity's most puzzling traits: our complete inconsistency. He shows how the same person can be brave one day and cowardly the next, generous in one situation and selfish in another. Using examples from history - like Nero weeping over signing a death warrant despite his reputation for cruelty - Montaigne argues that trying to pin down someone's 'true' character is nearly impossible. He observes that we're all like chameleons, changing color based on our circumstances. A soldier might be fearless in battle but terrified of a barber's razor. A woman might throw herself from a window to preserve her virtue, yet be promiscuous before and after. Montaigne admits his own contradictions: he finds himself bashful and insolent, chaste and lustful, honest and lying, all depending on the moment. Rather than seeing this as a character flaw, he suggests it's simply human nature. We're driven by immediate circumstances - anger, necessity, company, wine - rather than consistent principles. This insight matters because it frees us from the impossible task of being perfectly consistent and helps us judge others more fairly. Instead of expecting people to always act the same way, we can appreciate the complex, ever-changing nature of human behavior. True wisdom lies not in achieving perfect consistency, but in understanding and accepting our contradictory nature.
Coming Up in Chapter 59
From the complexity of human nature, Montaigne turns to one of our most revealing states: drunkenness. He'll explore how wine strips away our masks and what our behavior under the influence truly reveals about who we are.
Share it with friends
An excerpt from the original text.(~500 words)
OF THE INCONSTANCY OF OUR ACTIONS Such as make it their business to oversee human actions, do not find themselves in anything so much perplexed as to reconcile them and bring them into the world’s eye with the same lustre and reputation; for they commonly so strangely contradict one another that it seems impossible they should proceed from one and the same person. We find the younger Marius one while a son of Mars and another a son of Venus. Pope Boniface VIII. entered, it is said, into his Papacy like a fox, behaved himself in it like a lion, and died like a dog; and who could believe it to be the same Nero, the perfect image of all cruelty, who, having the sentence of a condemned man brought to him to sign, as was the custom, cried out, “O that I had never been taught to write!” so much it went to his heart to condemn a man to death. All story is full of such examples, and every man is able to produce so many to himself, or out of his own practice or observation, that I sometimes wonder to see men of understanding give themselves the trouble of sorting these pieces, considering that irresolution appears to me to be the most common and manifest vice of our nature witness the famous verse of the player Publius: “Malum consilium est, quod mutari non potest.” [“‘Tis evil counsel that will admit no change.” --Pub. Mim., ex Aul. Gell., xvii. 14.] There seems some reason in forming a judgment of a man from the most usual methods of his life; but, considering the natural instability of our manners and opinions, I have often thought even the best authors a little out in so obstinately endeavouring to make of us any constant and solid contexture; they choose a general air of a man, and according to that interpret all his actions, of which, if they cannot bend some to a uniformity with the rest, they are presently imputed to dissimulation. Augustus has escaped them, for there was in him so apparent, sudden, and continual variety of actions all the whole course of his life, that he has slipped away clear and undecided from the most daring critics. I can more hardly believe a man’s constancy than any other virtue, and believe nothing sooner than the contrary. He that would judge of a man in detail and distinctly, bit by bit, would oftener be able to speak the truth. It is a hard matter, from all antiquity, to pick out a dozen men who have formed their lives to one certain and constant course, which is the principal design of wisdom; for to comprise it all in one word, says one of the ancients, and to contract all the rules of human life into one, “it is to will, and not to will, always one and the same thing: I will not vouchsafe,” says he, “to add, provided the will be...
Master this chapter. Complete your experience
Purchase the complete book to access all chapters and support classic literature
As an Amazon Associate, we earn a small commission from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
Available in paperback, hardcover, and e-book formats
Intelligence Amplifier™ Analysis
The Road of Human Contradictions
Humans are fundamentally inconsistent, driven by immediate circumstances rather than fixed character traits.
Why This Matters
Connect literature to life
This chapter teaches how to recognize that people's actions shift based on context, not character flaws.
Practice This Today
This week, notice when someone acts differently than expected and ask what pressure or circumstance might be influencing them instead of judging their character.
Now let's explore the literary elements.
Terms to Know
Irresolution
The inability to make firm decisions or stick to consistent behavior patterns. Montaigne sees this as humanity's most common trait - we constantly change our minds and contradict ourselves based on circumstances.
Modern Usage:
We see this in people who flip-flop on decisions, or when someone acts completely different at work versus at home.
Human inconsistency
The natural tendency for people to behave in contradictory ways depending on mood, situation, or company. Montaigne argues this isn't a character flaw but simply how humans are built.
Modern Usage:
Think of someone who's generous with friends but cheap with strangers, or brave in some situations but fearful in others.
Circumstantial behavior
Acting differently based on immediate conditions rather than fixed principles. Montaigne shows how external factors like anger, wine, or peer pressure shape our actions more than our 'true' character.
Modern Usage:
How people act completely different when they're stressed, drunk, or trying to impress someone versus their normal personality.
Moral relativism
The idea that there's no single 'true' version of a person's character. Montaigne suggests we're all multiple people depending on the situation, making moral judgments complex.
Modern Usage:
When we realize the 'mean' boss might be dealing with personal problems, or the 'perfect' neighbor has their own struggles we don't see.
Self-contradiction
Montaigne's honest admission that he finds himself both bashful and bold, honest and deceptive, depending on the moment. He sees this as normal rather than shameful.
Modern Usage:
When you catch yourself being hypocritical or acting in ways that surprise even you - like being confident at work but shy at parties.
Historical exempla
Using famous historical figures as examples to prove a point. Montaigne cites rulers and emperors to show that even powerful people are inconsistent and contradictory.
Modern Usage:
Like pointing to celebrities or politicians who act one way in public but completely different in their personal scandals.
Characters in This Chapter
Marius the Younger
Historical example
Roman general who Montaigne describes as sometimes acting like Mars (god of war) and sometimes like Venus (goddess of love), showing dramatic personality shifts.
Modern Equivalent:
The boss who's a hardass one day and your best friend the next
Pope Boniface VIII
Historical example
Montaigne says he entered the papacy like a fox (cunning), ruled like a lion (fierce), and died like a dog (miserably), demonstrating how one person can embody completely different traits.
Modern Equivalent:
The politician who campaigns one way, governs another way, and leaves office in disgrace
Nero
Historical example
The notoriously cruel Roman emperor who nonetheless wept when asked to sign a death warrant, showing that even the most seemingly consistent people have contradictory moments.
Modern Equivalent:
The tough guy who cries at movies or the strict parent who secretly spoils their kids
Montaigne himself
Self-reflective narrator
Admits his own contradictions openly - being bashful yet insolent, chaste yet lustful, depending on circumstances. Uses himself as the primary example of human inconsistency.
Modern Equivalent:
The honest friend who admits they don't always practice what they preach
Key Quotes & Analysis
"All story is full of such examples, and every man is able to produce so many to himself, or out of his own practice or observation"
Context: After giving examples of historical figures acting inconsistently
Montaigne points out that inconsistency isn't rare or shameful - it's so common that everyone can think of examples from their own life. This normalizes human contradiction rather than condemning it.
In Today's Words:
We've all seen this stuff, and if we're honest, we've all done it ourselves.
"Irresolution appears to me to be the most common and manifest vice of our nature"
Context: Explaining why human actions seem so contradictory
Montaigne identifies our inability to be consistent as humanity's defining characteristic. By calling it our 'most common vice,' he suggests it's universal rather than a personal failing.
In Today's Words:
Being wishy-washy and contradictory is basically the most human thing there is.
"O that I had never been taught to write!"
Context: When presented with a death warrant to sign
This shows even history's most notorious tyrant having moments of conscience and regret. It demonstrates that no one is purely evil or purely good - we all have contradictory impulses.
In Today's Words:
I wish I didn't have to be the bad guy here.
Thematic Threads
Identity
In This Chapter
Montaigne shows that our 'true self' is actually multiple, contradictory selves responding to different situations
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You might notice you're a different person at work than at home, and that's completely normal.
Self-Knowledge
In This Chapter
True wisdom comes from accepting our contradictions rather than trying to eliminate them
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
Understanding your own inconsistencies helps you make better decisions about when and how to act.
Human Relationships
In This Chapter
Judging others fairly requires understanding that everyone acts differently under different pressures
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You can improve relationships by expecting people to be inconsistent rather than holding them to impossible standards.
Social Expectations
In This Chapter
Society demands consistency that humans can't actually deliver, creating unnecessary shame and judgment
Development
Introduced here
In Your Life:
You can free yourself from the pressure to be perfectly consistent and focus on being appropriately responsive to situations.
You now have the context. Time to form your own thoughts.
Discussion Questions
- 1
Montaigne gives examples of people acting completely differently in different situations - like Nero weeping over a death warrant despite his cruelty. What examples does he use to show human inconsistency?
analysis • surface - 2
Why does Montaigne think we're so inconsistent? What forces does he say drive our changing behavior from moment to moment?
analysis • medium - 3
Think about someone you know well - maybe a family member or coworker. Where have you seen them act completely differently in different situations? What circumstances seemed to trigger the change?
application • medium - 4
If you accepted that everyone (including yourself) is naturally inconsistent, how would you handle disappointment when someone doesn't live up to your expectations?
application • deep - 5
Montaigne suggests that accepting our contradictory nature is actually wisdom, not weakness. What would change in your relationships if you stopped expecting perfect consistency from people?
reflection • deep
Critical Thinking Exercise
Map Your Contradictions
Think of a trait you consider central to who you are - maybe you're 'honest' or 'patient' or 'organized.' Now identify three different situations where you've acted against this trait. For each situation, note what pressures or circumstances pushed you to act differently. This isn't about shame - it's about recognizing the pattern Montaigne describes.
Consider:
- •Focus on circumstances, not character flaws - what external pressures were you responding to?
- •Notice if certain environments or relationships consistently bring out different sides of you
- •Consider how stress, fatigue, or strong emotions might have influenced your behavior
Journaling Prompt
Write about a time when someone's inconsistent behavior really frustrated you. Looking back through Montaigne's lens, what pressures might they have been responding to that you couldn't see at the time?
Coming Up Next...
Chapter 59: The Hierarchy of Vice and Human Weakness
Moving forward, we'll examine to distinguish between different levels of moral failings without excusing your own, and understand losing self-control is the most dangerous state for any person. These insights bridge the gap between classic literature and modern experience.