Could this quote be a misattribution or taken out of context from a longer remark—what is the original full quote if so?

1. What the record here actually contains: patchy tools and tip‑taking

The results include a mix: a curated list of context‑related aphorisms (John Paul Caponigro) ^[1], an AI quote‑origin tool ^[2], and community Q&A where a user traces a paraphrase to Douglas Adams then possibly to an earlier source ^[3]. None of these search results present a definitive “original full quote” for the unspecified sentence you asked about; they mostly illustrate methods people use to trace citations rather than provide primary evidence ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

2. How scholars and communities try to resolve misattribution

Online question threads like the English Stack Exchange example show the usual workflow: a reader posts a remembered paraphrase, community members propose candidate authors and earlier attributions, and the thread narrows candidates by matching wording and known publications ^[3]. That thread mentions Douglas Adams as a memory and then notes others may have been quoted within his work—demonstrating that a famous writer can itself propagate an older line ^[3].

3. The specific danger of “quoting out of context” and contextomy

Wikipedia’s entry on quoting out of context (here returned in results) explains the pitfall: removing nearby clauses or sentences can flip meaning, and selective excerpting—“contextomy”—is a known informal fallacy used sometimes intentionally to misrepresent an authority ^[4]. The entry also notes institutional and legal responses (e.g., EU rules) that target deceptive condensed quotation practices, underscoring that short‑form repeats are especially vulnerable to distortion ^[4].

4. Practical steps implied by the search results to find the full original

The returned material suggests three practical avenues: (a) use dedicated quote‑origin tools to search databases and earlier publications ^[2]; (b) consult community intelligence on forums like English Stack Exchange where readers may recall exact phrasing and sources ^[3]; (c) scan curated quote lists or collections for variants that show the longer context ^[1]. The results imply no single fast fix—investigation across these channels is typical ^{[1] [2] [3]}.

5. How to interpret chains of attribution when you find them

When you find a candidate source, be alert to two patterns the results illustrate: a famous author repeating or paraphrasing someone else (the Stack Exchange example: Adams possibly quoting a prior writer) ^[3], and the risk that the snippet you started from was intentionally shortened so as to change emphasis (Wikipedia on contextomy) ^[4]. Both patterns demand checking the primary source text rather than relying on later reproductions ^{[3] [4]}.

6. Limitations in the available reporting and next recommended actions

Available sources here do not provide the original full quote you asked about; none of the pages supplies the definitive pre‑truncated wording or records a single disputed sentence’s provenance ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. To proceed: run the exact wording through the quote‑origin tool ^[2], post the paraphrase with context (where you saw it) on a specialist forum ^[3], and when you locate a candidate, read the surrounding paragraph to check for contextomy as explained on Wikipedia ^[4].

7. Final note on hidden agendas and source reliability

Quote lists and motivational pages (e.g., ^[1], ^[5] in the search set) often prioritize memorable brevity over scholarly sourcing and sometimes omit citations; that creates an incentive to popularize catchy fragments regardless of provenance. Tools and forums can help, but they reflect users’ research and biases—always verify by consulting the primary text cited in any proposed attribution ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}.