Today's practicality is often no more than the accepted form of yesterday's theory.

I wanted a theory that would allow one to live outside the office with the same philosophy one uses inside it.

Nobody is as good as he thinks he is.

Fruitful discourse in science or theology requires us to believe that within the contexts of normal discourse there are some true statements.

This required the development of a view which allowed one to integrate research with belief, thing with person, fact with aesthetics, knowledge with application of knowledge.

Normal social behavior requires that we be able to recognize identities in spite of change. Unless we can do so, there can be no human society as we know it.

Revelation and the nature of truth must be viewed in reference to the structure of language.

We assume, to begin with, that the individual is at least as complex in his internal structure as the language is which he speaks - otherwise, how could he speak a language which is complex?

Verbal and nonverbal activity is a unified whole, and theory and methodology should be organized or created to treat it as such.

Today's practicality is often no more than the accepted form of yesterday's theory.

If the scholar feels that he must know everything about any topic, he is in trouble - and will not publish with a clear conscience.

Acceptance of the power of God in one's life lays the groundwork for personal commitment to both science and Christianity, which so often have been in conflict.

So I see that Christianity in believing in a Creator pulls together more facts, data, inner experience and ability than any mechanistic view could hold for me.

The universe extends beyond the mind of man, and is more complex than the small sample one can study.

The view of the local scene through the eyes of a native participant in that scene is a different window.

God cannot be reduced to a sample for analysis.

The detached observer's view is one window on the world.

It is also, I would guess, a universal that in all societies people value respectability granted to them.

When I conform to truth, I do not conform to an abstract principle; I conform to the nature of God.

That a society controls, to a greater or lesser extent, the behavior of its members is a universal; but the methods, the particulars of that control, vary from one culture to another.

If I were to adopt pure mechanism as a philosophy, there would be no way I could choose to be a scholar.

Courage to continue comes from deeper sources than outward results.

Language is not merely a set of unrelated sounds, clauses, rules, and meanings; it is a total coherent system of these integrating with each other, and with behavior, context, universe of discourse, and observer perspective.

With acknowledgement of residues, we can be more easily prepared to grant the unit of science, the overlapping of disciplines, and the total coherence of all facts.

Christianity stands or falls as a living program, a way of life, made concrete in the life of man by the life of God through the life of the concretely living Christ.

Outward failure may be a manifested variant of inward success.

Language is a tool adequate to provide any degree of precision relevant to a particular situation.

The price that one pays for refusing to act on the truth as one sees it, is to be led to believe untruth to avoid guilt.

Identity in the form of continuity of personality is an extremely important characteristic of the individual.

Without a possibility of change in meanings human communication could not perform its present functions.

The marvelous thing is that even in studying linguistics, we find that the universe as a whole is patterned, ordered, and to some degree intelligible to us.

If language did not affect behavior, it could have no meaning.

There is no truth without responsibility following in its wake.

The detached observers view is one window on the world.

I don't think there's any one definition, but to do effective political work you have to have vision and practicality, and learn how to persuade people that what you feel needs to be done does need to be done.

Each of us seems to have a main focus, a particular idea of practicality - a concept of 'what we want out of life' against which we judge our experiences.

Today's practicality is often no more than the accepted form of yesterday's theory.

And when you start talking about the practicality of winning a race like that - you've got to remember we're not talking about winning 51 percent of the vote. We're talking about winning 36, 37, 38 percent of the vote.

My practicality consists in this, in the knowledge that if you beat your head against the wall it is your head which breaks and not the wall - that is my strength, my only strength.

Entropy theory is indeed a first attempt to deal with global form; but it has not been dealing with structure. All it says is that a large sum of elements may have properties not found in a smaller sample of them.

My theory is if you have a religion, it's a good one. Because some people don't have any at all.

There's a statistical theory that if you gave a million monkeys typewriters and set them to work, they'd eventually come up with the complete works of Shakespeare. Thanks to the Internet, we now know this isn't true.

My object will be, first, to show by what connections the history of the fossil bones of land animals is linked to the theory of the earth and why they have a particular importance in this respect.

No theory is good unless it permits, not rest, but the greatest work. No theory is good except on condition that one use it to go on beyond.

From this bestial view that the human mind consists of only sense certainty, pleasure and pain, Locke developed an equally bestial theory of the nation. Man originally existed in a State of Nature of complete liberty.

Science is organized common sense where many a beautiful theory was killed by an ugly fact.

Theory not only formulates what we know but also tells us what we want to know, that is, the questions to which an answer is needed.

The theory of evolution is totally inadequate to explain the origin and manifestation of the inorganic world.

Your theory is crazy, but it's not crazy enough to be true.