[…] You see, we usurp something by giving it a name. We say it is this and nothing else, and think we have the purest substance of the thing when we name it. It is like qualifying a thing, as when one says that this is such and such a man. How can we say what man is?—or what man is in general? He is a million things. By saying he is such and such a man, you have classified him and then he is no longer free. If he allows it, he will be forced into that category. Usually we defend ourselves against being put into cages. But the State puts everybody into a category, and popular movements do it, and the church—those who belong to it are marvelous people and otherwise they belong to the devil. Or one is a German and beloved by God, and the other is a Frenchman and Satan’s own son. You see, those are all names, and it is the same when you name or specify certain qualities. I don’t say that this is all wrong of course, or that we have to give names is simply a tragedy. But don’t forget that behind all names is the nameless and unutterable; beyond all our virtues there is one real virtue that has no name….