Quotes About Debate

One might even say that he had the last word. Derrida had criticized him for being too Christian. And Nancy replied to Derrida that he was too rabbinic.

if a man believes the nonsense that there is only one god then there's no point in arguing because it would be like discussing a rainbow with a blind man.

Once you write something down it becomes fixed. It becomes dogma. People can argue about it, they become authoritative, they refer to the texts, they produce new manuscripts, they argue more and soon they're putting each other to death. If you never write anything down then no one knows exactly what you said so you can always change it.

The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holders lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately.

The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way.

Find more pleasure in intelligent dissent than in passive agreement, for, if you value intelligence as you should, the former implies a deeper agreement than the latter.

It is clear that thought is not free if the profession of certain opinions makes it impossible to earn a living. It is clear also that thought is not free if all the arguments on one side of a controversy are perpetually presented as attractively as possible, while the arguments on the other side can only be discovered by diligent search.

Those who defend traditional morality will sometimes admit that it is not perfect, but contend that any criticism will make all morality crumble.

Consequently people fight for and against quite irrelevant measures, while the few who have a rational opinion are not listened to because they do not minister to any one's passions.

In general, if a man says, for instance, that the earth is flat, I am quite willing that he should propagate his opinion as hard as he likes. He may, of course, be right but I do not think he is. In practice you will, I think, do better to assume that the earth is round, although, of course, you may be mistaken. Therefore, I do not think we should go in for complete skepticism, but for a doctrine of degrees of probability.

Many orthodox people speak as though it were the business of sceptics to disprove received dogmas rather than of dogmatists to prove them.

The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holder's lack of rational conviction.

When there are rational grounds for an opinion, people are content to set them forth and wait for them to operate. In such cases, people do not hold their opinions with passion; they hold them calmly, and set forth their reasons quietly. The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holder's lack of rational conviction.

But between theology and science there is a No Man's Land, exposed to attack from both sides; this No Man's Land is philosophy.

I do not agree with Plato, but if anything could make me do so, it would be Aristotle's arguments against him.

Change is scientific, 'progress' is ethical. Change is indubitable whereas progress is a matter of controversy.

Între teologie ÅŸi ÅŸtiin?? exist? îns? un No Man's Land, expus atacurilor din ambele p?rÅ£i; acest teritoriu intermediar este cel al filozofiei.

Republicans - well, we're all part of the same family. We need to have some good disagreements with each other; we need to debate, but in the end, it's all about uniting, not dividing.

There have been so many times when I challenged Republicans on air - in big moments.

With Donald Trump as president and Republicans in control of Congress, our healthcare is under attack.

We all know members of the House and Senate - especially the House - who are just crazy and say things that aren't true, Democrats and Republicans.

Evolution and creationism both require faith. It's just a matter of where you choose to place that faith.

As all Members of Parliament know, the ease and flow of making a speech outside the House is not at all the same as that required in the Chamber.

If you believe you are right, then you should believe that you can make the case that you're right. This requires you to deal with serious objections properly.