Evolutionary Cosmology Formulates Theories In Which A

Philosophical Argument, Trying To Get Someone To Believe Something Whether He Wants To Believe It Or Not, Is Not, I Have Held, A Nice Way To Behave Towards Someone; Also It Does Not Fit The Original Motivation For Studying Or Entering Philosophy. That Motivation Is Puzzlement, Curiousity, A Desire To Understand, Not A Desire To Produce Uniformity Of Belief. Most People Do Not Want To Become Thought-police. The Philosophical Goal Of Explanation Rather Than Proof Not Only Is Morally Better, It Is More In Accord With One's Philosophical Motivation.

Wisdom Is Not Just Knowing Fundamental Truths, If These Are Unconnected With The Guidance Of Life Or With A Perspective On Its Meaning. If The Deep Truths Physicists Describe About The Origin And Functioning Of The Universe Have Little Practical Import And Do Not Change Our Picture Of The Meaning Of The Universe And Our Place Within It, Then Knowing Them Would Not Count As Wisdom.

The Trouble With Government Regulation Of The Market Is That It Prohibits Capitalistic Acts Between Consenting Adults.

Whatever The Practical Origins Of Aesthetic Discernment May Have Been, It Has Been Used To Create Great Works Of Art. When The Very Loftiest Human Creations Are Seen To Derive From Humble Origins And Functions, What Needs Revision Is Not Our Esteem For These Creations But Our Notion Of Nobility.

I Guess My Tendency Is To Think Essentially That The New Wrinkles Won't Do The Job If The Old Major Idea Didn't, And So You Have To Try Something Different. Then Maybe They Can All Be Combined In Some Coherent Piece.