Could it be that the ultimate purpose of critical thought is to prevent it, the thought, as well as any thought, from its own excesses, stemming inevitably from its formal predilections and victories; that zealots ought to be sidetracked, diverted, entertained, and busied by means of their own devices (whence the very utility of immanence, dialectics, and other philosophical pranks), and thereby kept as close to their mischievous nests as historically possible; that thus, and only thus, the paradox of positive ends achieved by negative means (as witnessed by the celebrated negation of negation, the hidden hopes of negative dialectics lodged in the residuum, etc.) ought to be understood and practiced for the glory of the divine and enthralled multitudes that have systematically failed to achieve anything but permanent albeit progressive serfdom under the slogans and battle cries of their thoughtful, though insufficiently critical, brethren; and that critical thought ought not to aspire to anything more lofty and enduring than decorative diversions—in perpetuity? Yes, could it be that this ought to be the greatest ideal of negative thought, and consequently its undeniable right to existence, lest the monstrosities of positive thought be unleashed upon the world once and for all in definite abrogation of all rights and duties alike? For if this is indeed so, I can already foresee, with fear and trepidation and bitterness, the end of the protagonists of critical thought: they will be torn limb from limb by the enlightened masses themselves.

To Albert Camus