Quotes About Validity

Artemidoro, en todo caso, ha hecho algo muy diferente que compilar los ejemplos más célebres de los presagios oníricos confirmados por la realidad. Ha emprendido la tarea de escribir una obra de método, y esto en dos sentidos: deberá ser un manual utilizable en la práctica cotidiana y deberá ser, también, un tratado de alcance teórico sobre la validez de los procedimientos interpretativos.

Tu opinión no es más que tu punto de vista, y no tiene por qué ser necesariamente verdad.

The ludicrous element in our feeling does not make them any less authentic.

The pressure to make public retractions of past statements - there's something medieval about it. What does it mean, anyway, to 'retract' what you've said? How can anyone state categorically that a thought he once had is no longer valid? In modern times an idea can be refuted, yes, but not retracted.

What does it mean, anyway, to 'retract' what you've said? How can anyone state categorically that a thought he once had is no longer valid? In modern times a thought can be refuted , yes, but not retracted . (p. 179)

I still, though, hold on to one single bleak truth: no one is safe, nothing is redeemed. Yet I am blameless. Each model of human behavior must be assumed to have some validity. Is evil something you are? Or is it something you do?

If you believed in something like this, it was true; if you didn't believe in it, it wasn't.

It is certainly true that all beliefs and all myths are worthy of a respectful hearing. It is not true that all folk beliefs are equally valid - if we're talking not about an internal mindset, but about understanding of the external reality.

Those who invalidate reason ought seriously to consider whether they argue against reason with or without reason; if with reason, then they establish the principle that they are laboring to dethrone: but if they argue without reason (which, in order to be consistent with themselves they must do), they are out of reach of rational conviction, nor do they deserve a rational argument.

The percent likelihood of a society becoming physically violent if it is physically affectionate toward its infants and tolerant of premarital sexual behavior is 2 percent. The probability of this relationship occurring by chance is 125,000 to one. I am not aware of any other developmental variable that has such a high degree of predictive validity. [James W. Prescott] p 274

Vigorous criticism is more constructive in science than in some other areas of human endeavor because in science there are adequate standards of validity that can be agreed upon by competent practitioners the world over. The objective of such criticism is not to suppress but rather to encourage the advance of new ideas: those that survive a firm skeptical scrutiny have a fighting chance of being right, or at least useful.

Major scientific insights are characteristically intuitive, and equally characteristically described in scientific papers by linear analytical arguments. There is no anomaly in this: it is, rather, just as it should be. The creative act has major right-hemisphere components. But arguments on the validity of the result are largely left-hemisphere functions.

Emotions are the sums created by details, whether those details are true or not.

She had lived her whole life on shifting quicksand, where reason and the intellect were not to be trusted, where only faith was valid, and blind faith was sacred. She, herself, had enforced mindless conformity to that empty evil.

I don't think you need to justify faith, faith is its own justification.

Emotions are always true, but they're not always right.

It is not allowable in science to make a statement of fact based solely on your own opinion.

But remember. Just because you don't believe in something doesn't mean it isn't real.

Just because you don't believe it[] [...]doesn't mean that it's not true.

More broadly, formal logic of the sort we have been talking about does only one thing well: it allows us to take knowledge of which we are certain and apply rules that are always valid to deduce new knowledge of which we are also certain.

whether you agree with it or not. The truth is not subject to your interpretation.

I think he's real," the boy said. "Me, too," the girl agreed. "Well," the mom said. "If enough folks believe in a thing, I guess it becomes real enough. Don't it?

For Schaeffer rationality concerned the validity of thought, while rationalism concerned someone beginning with himself and his reason plus what he observes, without information from any other source, and coming to final answers in regard to truth, ethics, and reality.

My findings may not be watertight, but they are more than seaworthy.