From Each As They Choose, To Each

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.

Is There Really Someone Who, Searching For A Group Of Wise And Sensitive Persons To Regulate Him For His Own Good, Would Choose That Group Of People That Constitute The Membership Of Both Houses Of Congress?

It Goes Without Saying That Any Persons May Attempt To Unite Kindred Spirits, But, Whatever Their Hopes And Longings, None Have The Right To Impose Their Vision Of Unity Upon The Rest.

Our Principles Fix What Our Life Stands For, Our Aims Create The Light Our Life Is Bathed In, And Our Rationality, Both Individual And Coordinate, Defines And Symbolizes The Distance We Have Come From Mere Animality. It Is By These Means That Our Lives Come To More Than What They Instrumentally Yield. And By Meaning More, Our Lives Yield More.

One Way To Determine If A View Is Inadequate Is To Check Its Consequences In Particular Cases, Sometimes Extreme Ones, But If Someone Always Decided What The Result Should Be In Any Case By Applying The Given View Itself, This Would Preclude Discovering It Did Not Correctly Fit The Case. Readers Who Hold They Would Plug In To The Machine Should Notice Whether Their First Impulse Was Not To Do So, Followed Later By The Thought That Since Only Experiences Could Matter, The Machine Would Be All Right After All.