What do you think?
Rate this book
Crowd is Untruth
Soren Kierkegaard was a 19th Century Danish philosopher. The Crowd Is Untruth is a very short essay, not a book.
20 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 8, 2009
43 people are currently reading
399 people want to read
About the author
Søren Kierkegaard
1,124 books6,426 followersSøren Aabye Kierkegaard was a prolific 19th century Danish philosopher and theologian. Kierkegaard strongly criticised both the Hegelianism of his time and what he saw as the empty formalities of the Church of Denmark. Much of his work deals with religious themes such as faith in God, the institution of the Christian Church, Christian ethics and theology, and the emotions and feelings of individuals when faced with life choices. His early work was written under various pseudonyms who present their own distinctive viewpoints in a complex dialogue.
Kierkegaard left the task of discovering the meaning of his works to the reader, because "the task must be made difficult, for only the difficult inspires the noble-hearted". Scholars have interpreted Kierkegaard variously as an existentialist, neo-orthodoxist, postmodernist, humanist, and individualist.
Crossing the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, and literature, he is an influential figure in contemporary thought.
Kierkegaard left the task of discovering the meaning of his works to the reader, because "the task must be made difficult, for only the difficult inspires the noble-hearted". Scholars have interpreted Kierkegaard variously as an existentialist, neo-orthodoxist, postmodernist, humanist, and individualist.
Crossing the boundaries of philosophy, theology, psychology, and literature, he is an influential figure in contemporary thought.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews
April 10, 2014
Those looking for the encouragement needed to stand up against opinions blindly accepted by the masses will find a welcome friend in this little gem of an essay.
I found the The Crowd Is Untruth by Soren Kierkegaard to be both autobiographically revealing and refreshingly contrarian. Known to be a loner, and standing at odds with the intellectual climate of his time, Kierkegaard provides a brief defense for offering viewpoints that stand in direct contradiction to prevailing intellectual norms.
Kierkegaard writes,
"There is a view of life which holds that where the crowd is, the truth is also, that it is a need in truth itself, that it must have the crowd on its side. There is another view of life; which holds that wherever the crowd is, there is untruth, so that, for a moment to carry the matter out to its farthest conclusion, even if every individual possessed the truth in private, yet if they came together into a crowd (so that “the crowd” received any decisive, voting, noisy, audible importance), untruth would at once be let in."
To Kierkegaard, simply because an idea is broadly accepted does not add a greater sense of credibility. That’s because crowds can be easily swayed. As the author writes, “For to win a crowd is not so great a trick; one only needs some talent, a certain dose of untruth and a little acquaintance with the human passions.”
The task then of any thinking person is to stand at odds with commonly accepted ideas by looking to those individuals (like Kierkegaard) who are willing to proffer viewpoints that courageously speak the truth. “The crowd is untruth,” Kierkegaard repeats over and over again. For wherever there is a crowd, “…there no one is working, living, and striving for the highest end, but only for this or that earthly end.” That’s because, according to Kierkegaard, only the individual who stands at odds with the crowd will do that.
Simply put, the very fact that an idea has been granted widespread credence points to the probability that it is more than likely an untruth. While that’s certainly not a principle that can be applied in all situations, it’s certainly a message that needs to be heeded both in the church, and in our culture.
I found the The Crowd Is Untruth by Soren Kierkegaard to be both autobiographically revealing and refreshingly contrarian. Known to be a loner, and standing at odds with the intellectual climate of his time, Kierkegaard provides a brief defense for offering viewpoints that stand in direct contradiction to prevailing intellectual norms.
Kierkegaard writes,
"There is a view of life which holds that where the crowd is, the truth is also, that it is a need in truth itself, that it must have the crowd on its side. There is another view of life; which holds that wherever the crowd is, there is untruth, so that, for a moment to carry the matter out to its farthest conclusion, even if every individual possessed the truth in private, yet if they came together into a crowd (so that “the crowd” received any decisive, voting, noisy, audible importance), untruth would at once be let in."
To Kierkegaard, simply because an idea is broadly accepted does not add a greater sense of credibility. That’s because crowds can be easily swayed. As the author writes, “For to win a crowd is not so great a trick; one only needs some talent, a certain dose of untruth and a little acquaintance with the human passions.”
The task then of any thinking person is to stand at odds with commonly accepted ideas by looking to those individuals (like Kierkegaard) who are willing to proffer viewpoints that courageously speak the truth. “The crowd is untruth,” Kierkegaard repeats over and over again. For wherever there is a crowd, “…there no one is working, living, and striving for the highest end, but only for this or that earthly end.” That’s because, according to Kierkegaard, only the individual who stands at odds with the crowd will do that.
Simply put, the very fact that an idea has been granted widespread credence points to the probability that it is more than likely an untruth. While that’s certainly not a principle that can be applied in all situations, it’s certainly a message that needs to be heeded both in the church, and in our culture.
September 5, 2011
This is hard work. Take it slow, easy, and with a highlighter.
March 14, 2015
Don't detest crowd,avoid it.
Kierkegaard clarified this duality for us. I appreciate his concern for the reader,read it and contemplate I recommend this gem.
Kierkegaard clarified this duality for us. I appreciate his concern for the reader,read it and contemplate I recommend this gem.
July 24, 2020
Si bien leí este opúsculo kierkegaardiano en inglés, he decidido hacer la reseña en español para que el pueblo hispanoparlante pueda interesarse en el texto.
Para Kierkegaard, tan reacio y hostil al liberalismo y a la sociedad de masas, la multitud (the crowd) representa un peligro no para el ánimo (algo que sostendría Séneca e incluso un autor tan estrafalario como Salvador Freixedo) sino por ser fuente de sinrazón o de mentira (untruth).
Todo esto parte de la filosofía centrada en el individuo del teólogo danés, que muestra que la Verdad es una relación de la persona con Dios, y por tanto habla a cada uno en lo particular y nunca a masas amorfas o abstracciones como la masa. Un texto que no critica tanto a las masas sino el hecho de pensar que de ellas puede surgir la Verdad o apelarse a ellas como tribunal de última instancia para decir qué es la Verdad
Even If I have read this little book in English, I wrote my review of it in Spanish with the aim to show this book to Hispanoamerican readers.
For Kierkegaard the crowd is not only a harm for phsycological healhty of oneself, but the untruth in itself. For the Danish thinker, the Truth is a personal relationship between God and the man. So, the crowd is only an abstraction, an idea without physical reality. So, that's the reason why the crowds are untruth.
Para Kierkegaard, tan reacio y hostil al liberalismo y a la sociedad de masas, la multitud (the crowd) representa un peligro no para el ánimo (algo que sostendría Séneca e incluso un autor tan estrafalario como Salvador Freixedo) sino por ser fuente de sinrazón o de mentira (untruth).
Todo esto parte de la filosofía centrada en el individuo del teólogo danés, que muestra que la Verdad es una relación de la persona con Dios, y por tanto habla a cada uno en lo particular y nunca a masas amorfas o abstracciones como la masa. Un texto que no critica tanto a las masas sino el hecho de pensar que de ellas puede surgir la Verdad o apelarse a ellas como tribunal de última instancia para decir qué es la Verdad
Even If I have read this little book in English, I wrote my review of it in Spanish with the aim to show this book to Hispanoamerican readers.
For Kierkegaard the crowd is not only a harm for phsycological healhty of oneself, but the untruth in itself. For the Danish thinker, the Truth is a personal relationship between God and the man. So, the crowd is only an abstraction, an idea without physical reality. So, that's the reason why the crowds are untruth.
May 14, 2017
The short essay was written by the 19th Century danish philosopher Soren Kierkegaard. What I found remarkable is that the essay is incredibly relevant to present age. Because today's conventional wisdom is to accept that there is such a thing called the wisdom of the crowds or the power of the masses or people's will which I always felt uncomfortable. Soren Kierkegaard's essay eloquently argues why The Crowd Is Untruth.
The crowd is an impersonal abstraction which render the single individual irresponsibility or weakens his responsibility. The crowd is cowardice because the single individual, using the mask of anonymity, would do or say things which he or she perhaps did not have the courage to do/say personally. Can a crowd reach the truth quickly and decisively like a single individual? very unlikely. The only way to honor every individual unconditionally is to "love thy neighbor" and not through some skewed view of ethico-religious crowds. Because "the neighbor" is the absolute true expression for human equality.
Thank you, Soren Kierkegaard.
The crowd is an impersonal abstraction which render the single individual irresponsibility or weakens his responsibility. The crowd is cowardice because the single individual, using the mask of anonymity, would do or say things which he or she perhaps did not have the courage to do/say personally. Can a crowd reach the truth quickly and decisively like a single individual? very unlikely. The only way to honor every individual unconditionally is to "love thy neighbor" and not through some skewed view of ethico-religious crowds. Because "the neighbor" is the absolute true expression for human equality.
Thank you, Soren Kierkegaard.
October 16, 2011
An interesting concept... It caused me to consider the current political activities in America. Hmmm.
March 5, 2022
A great little essay, densely packed with big ideas. I took my time over it and found that time to have been well spent.
Kierkegaard argues that the individual is capable of attaining truth (meaning 'eternal truth') through hard graft and sacrifice, but that this same truth, when passed into the hands of the crowd, becomes untruth. The crowd will always look for the easy option, he says, and since truth is harder to attain than untruth, untruth will forever be what guides the crowd.
No individual would have dared to spit in the face of Christ, he says, but as a crowd they were capable of this and worse. He then takes aim at politicians, church leaders and other influencers of public opinion, writing, 'There is therefore no one who has more contempt for what it is to be a human being than those who make it their profession to lead the crowd', before reminding us that there is no place for exclusivity here and that ANY individual can know the truth, as long as they are willing to take the decision to be separate from the crowd and think freely as an individual.
Clearly a bit of a loner, Kierkegaard promotes the quiet, solitary contemplation of the individual, claiming that a real 'witness to the truth' prefers to pass on what he has learnt to another individual, rather than to a crowd, as he writes below (in heavily edited form):
'A crowd...is detested by the witness to the truth...[who considers those] who address the "crowd" as the court of last resort...to be instruments of untruth'.
Overall then, this is a great essay that serves to remind us that we should never simply follow the trends, but should question everything and decide for ourselves, uninfluenced by those around us. As a reader, you can feel the frustration that Kierkegaard feels towards the 'established' way of thinking, and the warm introduction highlights that he is writing this piece in the hopes of reaching out to and encouraging a potential ally, the reader, to reassure us in difficult times that while we may be an individual unguided by the crowd, that doesn't mean that we are alone.
Kierkegaard argues that the individual is capable of attaining truth (meaning 'eternal truth') through hard graft and sacrifice, but that this same truth, when passed into the hands of the crowd, becomes untruth. The crowd will always look for the easy option, he says, and since truth is harder to attain than untruth, untruth will forever be what guides the crowd.
No individual would have dared to spit in the face of Christ, he says, but as a crowd they were capable of this and worse. He then takes aim at politicians, church leaders and other influencers of public opinion, writing, 'There is therefore no one who has more contempt for what it is to be a human being than those who make it their profession to lead the crowd', before reminding us that there is no place for exclusivity here and that ANY individual can know the truth, as long as they are willing to take the decision to be separate from the crowd and think freely as an individual.
Clearly a bit of a loner, Kierkegaard promotes the quiet, solitary contemplation of the individual, claiming that a real 'witness to the truth' prefers to pass on what he has learnt to another individual, rather than to a crowd, as he writes below (in heavily edited form):
'A crowd...is detested by the witness to the truth...[who considers those] who address the "crowd" as the court of last resort...to be instruments of untruth'.
Overall then, this is a great essay that serves to remind us that we should never simply follow the trends, but should question everything and decide for ourselves, uninfluenced by those around us. As a reader, you can feel the frustration that Kierkegaard feels towards the 'established' way of thinking, and the warm introduction highlights that he is writing this piece in the hopes of reaching out to and encouraging a potential ally, the reader, to reassure us in difficult times that while we may be an individual unguided by the crowd, that doesn't mean that we are alone.
May 25, 2020
I’m always mind-blown when I read Kierkegaard. I mean, his genius perplexes me every single time, and that is not an overstatement. Maybe I'm not of an extraordinary intellect but I would bet I'm not the only one thinking it. I truly believe he revolutionized philosophy and religious thinking.
With that being said, this dedication, this short exhortation, essay or whatever you want to call it, speaks volumes and is extremely relevant for these days we live in. I guess I've always known and believed what he says about truth and untruth: that when brought together, the masses or the crowd, as Kierkegaard calls it, speaks and is untruth; but never have I been so disturbed and awakened by his words.
The way he presented it struck a strong chord. He debunks the notion that truth can be conveyed when shared by a crowd or that truth can be found in the midst of the crowd. “Crowd is untruth”, he repeatedly writes and each time it’s like a blow saying “Wake up!”.
I’ll read it again and then again every other month or two, only to remind myself of its raw validity for our times and never let myself swayed by the voice of the crowd which is "untruth".
“There is a view of life which holds that where the crowd is, the truth is also, that it is a need in truth itself, that it must have the crowd on its side. There is another view of life; which holds that wherever the crowd is, there is untruth, so that, for a moment to carry the matter out to its farthest conclusion, even if every individual possessed the truth in private, yet if they came together into a crowd (so that "the crowd" received any decisive, voting, noisy, audible importance), untruth would at once be let in.”
"The crowd is untruth. And I could weep, in every case, I can learn to long for the eternal, whenever I think about our age’s misery, even compared with the ancient world’s greatest misery, in that the daily press and anonymity make our age even more insane with the help from “the public”..."
With that being said, this dedication, this short exhortation, essay or whatever you want to call it, speaks volumes and is extremely relevant for these days we live in. I guess I've always known and believed what he says about truth and untruth: that when brought together, the masses or the crowd, as Kierkegaard calls it, speaks and is untruth; but never have I been so disturbed and awakened by his words.
The way he presented it struck a strong chord. He debunks the notion that truth can be conveyed when shared by a crowd or that truth can be found in the midst of the crowd. “Crowd is untruth”, he repeatedly writes and each time it’s like a blow saying “Wake up!”.
I’ll read it again and then again every other month or two, only to remind myself of its raw validity for our times and never let myself swayed by the voice of the crowd which is "untruth".
“There is a view of life which holds that where the crowd is, the truth is also, that it is a need in truth itself, that it must have the crowd on its side. There is another view of life; which holds that wherever the crowd is, there is untruth, so that, for a moment to carry the matter out to its farthest conclusion, even if every individual possessed the truth in private, yet if they came together into a crowd (so that "the crowd" received any decisive, voting, noisy, audible importance), untruth would at once be let in.”
"The crowd is untruth. And I could weep, in every case, I can learn to long for the eternal, whenever I think about our age’s misery, even compared with the ancient world’s greatest misery, in that the daily press and anonymity make our age even more insane with the help from “the public”..."
September 14, 2021
“My dear, accept this dedication; it is given over, as it were, blindfolded, but therefore undisturbed by any consideration, in sincerity. Who you are, I know not; where you are, I know not; what your name is, I know not. Yet you are my hope, my joy, my pride, and my unknown honor.
It comforts me, that the right occasion is now there for you; which I have honestly intended during my labor and in my labor. For if it were possible that reading what I write became worldly custom, or even to give oneself out as having read it, in the hope of thereby winning something in the world, that then would not be the right occasion, since, on the contrary, misunderstanding would have triumphed, and it would have also deceived me, if I had not striven to prevent such a thing from happening.”
SK was one of the greatest writers, despite the fact he was a philosopher and theologian, rather than a novelist. This little essay about the "group" serves as a warning to people who indulge in any ideology that diminishes personhood- which is personal responsibility.
The group is essentially an eraser of individual excellency since the group renders individual responsibility for decision-making and repentance. The group is also a gatherer for the collected "courage" of the cowards since the stupid physical force of the crowd usually overpowers an individual.
Do you go on to the playground for the mediocracy? Or do you dare to claim that "the truth" requires knowledge, schooling, discipline, abstinence, self-denial, honest self-concern, and patient labor?
It comforts me, that the right occasion is now there for you; which I have honestly intended during my labor and in my labor. For if it were possible that reading what I write became worldly custom, or even to give oneself out as having read it, in the hope of thereby winning something in the world, that then would not be the right occasion, since, on the contrary, misunderstanding would have triumphed, and it would have also deceived me, if I had not striven to prevent such a thing from happening.”
SK was one of the greatest writers, despite the fact he was a philosopher and theologian, rather than a novelist. This little essay about the "group" serves as a warning to people who indulge in any ideology that diminishes personhood- which is personal responsibility.
The group is essentially an eraser of individual excellency since the group renders individual responsibility for decision-making and repentance. The group is also a gatherer for the collected "courage" of the cowards since the stupid physical force of the crowd usually overpowers an individual.
Do you go on to the playground for the mediocracy? Or do you dare to claim that "the truth" requires knowledge, schooling, discipline, abstinence, self-denial, honest self-concern, and patient labor?
January 27, 2024
this guy makes my FREAKING head hurt. It’s a 7 page essay so not really a book and yet I was going “🫨😵💫🤯😳” the whole time. kierkegaard my weird little freak i love you so much <3
It’s very intriguing for a self-proclaimed christian to assert “the eternal truth of the single individual” in an environment where the congregation (i.e. the crowd) would be considered the arbiter of truth. reframing truth as something entirely intimate and personal is like. kinda crazy lmao. BUT how do u reconcile the idea that truth can only be received by an individual with the human need for community and mutual reassurance? At a certain point we all want to be told that we’re not crazy, that there is some sense in the things we believe. Is finding comfort/communion in shared values the same thing as “following the crowd”, which is, as mr Kierkegaard says, the inevitable path to untruth? How can the truth exist within individuals without existing inside a vacuum?
It’s very intriguing for a self-proclaimed christian to assert “the eternal truth of the single individual” in an environment where the congregation (i.e. the crowd) would be considered the arbiter of truth. reframing truth as something entirely intimate and personal is like. kinda crazy lmao. BUT how do u reconcile the idea that truth can only be received by an individual with the human need for community and mutual reassurance? At a certain point we all want to be told that we’re not crazy, that there is some sense in the things we believe. Is finding comfort/communion in shared values the same thing as “following the crowd”, which is, as mr Kierkegaard says, the inevitable path to untruth? How can the truth exist within individuals without existing inside a vacuum?
February 4, 2018
This short essay is as relevant today as it has ever been. Kierkegaard argues that the beliefs held by the masses is not necessarily true. If only those who fell under the spell of the Third Reich could have heeded this important warning. With today's social media explosion and 'fake news' about, Kierkegaard still cries out to us to not fall into the hype too quickly, but assess all sides of the argument before we enter the pen with the rest of the wayward, uninformed sheep.
April 23, 2024
Quote from the book -
"The crowd is untruth. Therefore was Christ crucified, because he, even though he ad-
dressed himself to all, would not have to do with the crowd, because he would not in any
way let a crowd help him, because he in this respect absolutely pushed away, would not
found a party, or allow balloting, but would be what he was, the truth, which relates itself
to the single individual."
This indicates further that the theory of Girard is correct and adds to the credibility of his interpretation of the gospel within the protestant christian tradition. The objection from unfamiliarity is solved by the existence of the writing of Kierkegaard
"The crowd is untruth. Therefore was Christ crucified, because he, even though he ad-
dressed himself to all, would not have to do with the crowd, because he would not in any
way let a crowd help him, because he in this respect absolutely pushed away, would not
found a party, or allow balloting, but would be what he was, the truth, which relates itself
to the single individual."
This indicates further that the theory of Girard is correct and adds to the credibility of his interpretation of the gospel within the protestant christian tradition. The objection from unfamiliarity is solved by the existence of the writing of Kierkegaard
April 20, 2019
If you are interested in the ideas of western civilisation per the Judeo/Christian/Greco tradition this little essay is important. He speaks to the the epistemological reality that in ways that truly matter, the 'truth' is essential and is the responsibility of the individual to find.
May 14, 2025
يد الله مع الجماعة يا أخ كيركير.
لا بصراحة المقالة تتلخص في إن الناس في المجموعات مبيبقوش نفس الناس لوحدهم و دي فكرة جيدة متكررة في كتابات علم الإجتماع، بس شغل المبررات اللي بيديها للموضوع ده مش فلسفي خالص.
لا بصراحة المقالة تتلخص في إن الناس في المجموعات مبيبقوش نفس الناس لوحدهم و دي فكرة جيدة متكررة في كتابات علم الإجتماع، بس شغل المبررات اللي بيديها للموضوع ده مش فلسفي خالص.
March 12, 2019
A brief and brilliant example of Kierkegaard's writing
This is not a long book. It is, however, a profound one and it more or less states the general themes of his philosophy.
This is not a long book. It is, however, a profound one and it more or less states the general themes of his philosophy.
May 25, 2019
Thought provoking.
He provides unique insights into common scripture passages. It also seems so very relevant to today's social media as the newest crowd.
He provides unique insights into common scripture passages. It also seems so very relevant to today's social media as the newest crowd.
August 3, 2019
True, has its moments of insight, but not profound and rather obtuse.
Read
August 4, 2022A very intriguing read packed with a lot of ideas to reflect on, despite its brief length. Definitely worth going over a second time!
October 29, 2023
Self-explanatory: the crowd is untruth—written in the usual Kierkegaardian brilliance.
October 7, 2023
Kierkegaard rightly critiques society's stifling of individual expression and independent thought. In urging us to overcome conformity to "the crowd," his philosophy values self-discovery through questioning norms rather than mere outward compliance. This prioritizes connecting to one's true essence over cursory social acceptance, and I couldn't agree more.
July 12, 2024
Soren Kierkegaard entreats his readers to seek God for themselves rather than following the crowd. One must encounter God personally and do whatever God calls one to do, even if doing so seems impolite, ridiculous, or even wicked to everyone else.
October 8, 2014
This brief essay offers a compelling spin on worldliness and a deference of one's personal responsibility and relationship with God. Kierkegaard rightly vilifies the crowd as the death of the individual. If the crowd is exalted, where are the individuals to be seen. It is a facade behind today's very institutions and for their genuine lack of transparency. Who does wish to stand before God, in His Shekinah glory? Not the faint hearted and not the ones who are deep down, the rebellious of heart.
Kierkegaard's style is undoubtedly inimitable and hard to pin down into a certain genre but there are some laconic insights into the ways to true spirituality and the dead-end paths which lead to close avenues. Here are some highlights.
'A crowd - not this or that, one now living or long dead, a crowd of the lowly or of nobles, of rich or poor, etc., but in its very concept is untruth, since a crowd either renders the single individual wholly unrepentant and irresponsible, or weakens his responsibility by making it a fraction of his decision.'
'And to honor every individual human being, unconditionally every human being, that is the truth and fear of God and love of "the neighbor"; but ethico-religiously viewed, to recognize "the crowd" as the court of last resort in relation to "the truth," that is to deny God and cannot possibly be to love "the neighbor." And "the neighbor" is the absolutely true expression for human equality; if everyone in truth loved the neighbor as himself, then would perfect human equality be unconditionally attained; every one who in truth loves the neighbor, expresses unconditional human equality; every one who is really aware (even if he admits, like I, that his effort is weak and imperfect) that the task is to love the neighbor, he is also aware of what human equality is.'
'To become a crowd, to gather a crowd around oneself, is on the contrary to distinguish life from life; even the most well-meaning one who talks about that, can easily offend a single individual.'
Kierkegaard's style is undoubtedly inimitable and hard to pin down into a certain genre but there are some laconic insights into the ways to true spirituality and the dead-end paths which lead to close avenues. Here are some highlights.
'A crowd - not this or that, one now living or long dead, a crowd of the lowly or of nobles, of rich or poor, etc., but in its very concept is untruth, since a crowd either renders the single individual wholly unrepentant and irresponsible, or weakens his responsibility by making it a fraction of his decision.'
'And to honor every individual human being, unconditionally every human being, that is the truth and fear of God and love of "the neighbor"; but ethico-religiously viewed, to recognize "the crowd" as the court of last resort in relation to "the truth," that is to deny God and cannot possibly be to love "the neighbor." And "the neighbor" is the absolutely true expression for human equality; if everyone in truth loved the neighbor as himself, then would perfect human equality be unconditionally attained; every one who in truth loves the neighbor, expresses unconditional human equality; every one who is really aware (even if he admits, like I, that his effort is weak and imperfect) that the task is to love the neighbor, he is also aware of what human equality is.'
'To become a crowd, to gather a crowd around oneself, is on the contrary to distinguish life from life; even the most well-meaning one who talks about that, can easily offend a single individual.'
October 28, 2019
I was very pleased to read this short piece.
One nowadays can tend to 'go with the flow', but reflecting upon this work reestablishes that "The Crowd is Untruth" and will give the reader many things to ponder.
Any multi-level analytical thinker will enjoy this piece.
One nowadays can tend to 'go with the flow', but reflecting upon this work reestablishes that "The Crowd is Untruth" and will give the reader many things to ponder.
Any multi-level analytical thinker will enjoy this piece.
June 6, 2017
Pain. Didn't mean to. Did anyway.
January 6, 2018
This work reflects what I've always said, I prefer the company of individuals, not so much that of people.
May 27, 2012
Dug it.
Displaying 1 - 27 of 27 reviews