When people nowadays speak about curiosity, they usually mean the open, random, wide-range interest in a multiplicity of subjects. They mean the curiosity of children exploring their environment in a disorderly, superficial, inconsistent manner.

Renaissance authors such as Michel de Montaigne (1533-1592) employed a different definition of curiosity. They carried out research in a multiplicity of subjects, but in the pursuit of a tightly defined goal. Their efforts were neither disorderly nor random.

Montaigne displayed a remarkable curiosity in his literary work, to which he devoted the last two decades of his life. He researched classical authors, taking copious notes, and seeking to draw conclusions of universal value.

For Montaigne, all humanistic research revolved around one single goal, namely, to find recipes for happiness. His curiosity was focused, even if it encompasses dozens of subjects. When Montaigne referred to the lifestyle of ancient Greece or Rome, he was pursuing a clear goal, not just retelling amusing stories.

I find specially noteworthy that Montaigne never hesitated to address difficult subjects. He routinely picked up subjects or angles that no author had considered so far. He did not fear the unknown because he was seeking the truth.

Montaigne’s essay “On the inconstancy of our actions”

Montaigne would frequently start writing an essay without having yet made up his mind about the conclusions. He began by quoting a sentence from Plutarch, Seneca, or Julius Caesar, and see where it took him. Those essays show us Montaigne’s mind assessing the facts and weighing the arguments.

I characterise Montaigne and other Renaissance authors by the road they did not take. By embracing curiosity, they did not take the road of blind conformity. By carrying out their own research, they did not take the road of regurgitating tradition.

By elevating curiosity to a work method, Montaigne attains astonishing results. He puts together ideas and historical events that nobody before had combined. He gathers solid arguments against and in favour, prompting readers to think along.

I consider Montaigne’s essay “On the inconstancy of our actions” the best example of curiosity in action. On every page, we can follow Montaigne’s own intellectual struggle to assess the facts and draw accurate conclusions.

The sheer number of historical citations used by Montaigne is mind-boggling. For instance, he quotes Plato’s “Phaedrus” to argue that the human soul often behaves inconsistently.

Examples of Montaigne’s intellectual curiosity

Plato (427-347 BC) had categorized the soul as “difficult to predict” because it is driven at the same time by rationality, emotions and bodily self-preservation. Plato compares the soul to a charioteer (reason) striving to control the horses (passion).

Montaigne points out that the balance in the human soul depends on circumstances. Unknown environments can deepen curiosity and make it harder to control. The more striking the novelty, the harder it becomes to stay rational.

When quoting Aristotle (384-322 BC) and in particular his “Nicomachean Ethics,” Montaigne introduces the concept of alignment. Individuals may be committed to keep their actions aligned with their moral values, but unusual circumstances can sharpen curiosity, induce errors, and cause misalignment.

The stranger the circumstances, the deeper the curiosity, and the harder it becomes to remain aligned with our moral values. On those occasions, consistency goes out of the window and chaos takes over.

Montaigne also quotes Seneca (04-65 AD), especially from the letter to Lucilius titled “On the Happy Life.” Seneca agrees that disruptions make it extra hard for humans to maintain their mental focus, control curiosity, and keep moral consistency.

Critique of Montaigne’s intellectual curiosity

Unfortunately, Montaigne draws rather bland conclusions. I think that, in this case, he devoted far more effort to historical research than to assessing the outcome of his research.

I find it especially annoying that, in this essay, Montaigne is underestimating the power of reason. He describes the human intellect as “a diverse and shapeless patchwork” and by default expects humans to “follow the inclinations of their appetite.”

Montaigne’s own life belies his philosophical statements. It takes an iron will to devote oneself for two decades to writing erudite, thoughtful essays.

One cannot produce a vast amount of high-quality work by following the inclinations of one’s appetite. Montaigne’s mind was far better than “a diverse and shapeless patchwork.”

When he writes that “I cannot keep my subject still,” he is conveying the impression that his curiosity is driving him. This might be the case in some essays, but those represent a small percentage. Most of Montaigne’s essays are cogent, thoughtful and focused.

Luckily, Montaigne stated the need to establish clear goals for ourselves. “Without fixed goals, the soul loses itself,” he pointed out.

Inconsistency and uncontrolled curiosity go hand in hand. I regard one as dangerous as the other. I agree with Montaigne’s statement that humans find it hard to “keep a steady course,” but that’s no reason to relinquish control of your life.

Let us devote sufficient effort to understand ourselves, set long-term goals, and pursue them steadily. Circumstances may change, but in the face of setbacks and opposition, it’s essential to maintain the right course. Never use curiosity as an excuse for laziness, disorganization, and mental confusion.

Changes in time, place or other circumstances don’t justify moral inconsistency. Montaigne wrongly viewed inconsistency as “the mark of our humanity.” Actually, reason is the mark of humanity, even if it requires effort and self-discipline.

Let’s determinedly reject Montaigne’s relativistic statements that compare human character to “a fluid that takes the shape of the receptacle where it is contained.” His own character was resolute and strong, and speaks louder than his writings.

If you are interested in putting rational philosophy into daily practice, I recommend you my book “Consistency: The key to permanent stress relief.”