Quotes About Analysis

History is an argument without end.

If the September 11 terror attack is supposed to constitute a caesura in world history, it must be able to stand comparison to other events of world historical impact.

History is so indifferently rich, that a case for almost any conclusion from it can be made by a selection of instances.

Never in the history of chess have so many moves been repeated so often so quickly by so many people who didn't really understand them.

All good criticism should be judged the way art is. You shouldn't read it the way you read history or science.

A historian is often only a journalist facing backwards.

But then history does not only consist of documents.

Historians relate not so much what is done as what they would have believed.

Every good historian is almost by definition a revisionist. He looks at the accepted view of a particular historic episode or period with a very critical eye.

History cannot be reduced to a set of statistics and probabilities.

History is wonderful. We have so much we can learn if we would quit making ideology out of history, and just deal with what happened.

I do myself think that history is a set of skills rather than a narrative.

I have always been - I think any student of history almost inevitably is - a cheerful pessimist.

It is clear that history differs from the other disciplines in having an approach and not an area of its own.

People have different ways of interpreting history.

Any event once it has occurred can be made to appear inevitable by a competent historian.

When I go home, sometimes, even when I had an amazing game, I always think about what I missed.

Chess is a game which reflects most honor on human wit.

Unless you understand the history of a situation, you can't ever hope to solve problems.

We look forward to analyzing and working with legislation that will make - it would hope - put a free press's mind at ease that you're not being denied information you shouldn't see.

For the professors in the academy, for the humanities generally, misery is more amenable to analysis: happiness is a harder nut to crack.

Explaining humor is a lot like dissecting a frog, you learn a lot in the process, but in the end you kill it.

Feelings are like chemicals, the more you analyze them the worse they smell.

Why do scientists call it research when looking for something new?