I've led a school whose faculty and students examine and discuss and debate every aspect of our law and legal system. And what I've learned most is that no one has a monopoly on truth or wisdom. I've learned that we make progress by listening to each other across every apparent political or ideological divide.

It is hard to see Judge Roberts as a judicial activist who would place ideological purity or a particular agenda above or ahead the need for thoughtful legal reasoning.

I've thought hard about my psychological connections and I think I've managed to separate out the psychological from the legal moral and political.

Hitler never abandoned the cloak of legality he recognized the enormous psychological value of having the law on his side. Instead he turned the law inside out and made illegality legal.

To summarize the particular song a male sings and the behavioral responses of females to song and morphological signals are not genetically inherited in a fixed manner but are determined by learning early in life.

Learning about all those different things psychologically - about grief and my own addictions and problems and stuff like that and really getting an education on it I think it was part of the process of it learning about it and trying to lick it.

So in my freshman year at the University of Alabama learning the literature on evolution what was known about it biologically just gradually transformed me by taking me out of literalism and increasingly into a more secular scientific view of the world.

I continuously go further and further learning about my own limitations my body limitation psychological limitations. It's a way of life for me.

Such manifestations I account as representing the creative leadership of the new forces of thought and appreciation which attend changes in technological pattern and therefore of the pattern of human relationships in society.

But I am just as appalled that my experience knowledge dedication and service relative to defending the United States against biological warfare has been turned against me in connection with the search for the anthrax killer.

A theoretical grounding in agronomy must therefore include knowledge of biological laws.

To attempt this would be like seeing without eyes or directing the gaze of knowledge behind one's own eye. Modern science can acknowledge no other than this epistemological stand-point.

Radical constructivism thus is radical because it breaks with convention and develops a theory of knowledge in which knowledge does not reflect an 'objective' ontological reality.

Nevertheless I consider OOP as an aspect of programming in the large that is as an aspect that logically follows programming in the small and requires sound knowledge of procedural programming.

If we wish to discuss knowledge in the most highly developed contemporary society we must answer the preliminary question of what methodological representation to apply to that society.

Each department of knowledge passes through three stages. The theoretic stage the theological stage and the metaphysical or abstract stage.

We give you the facts. I told you information is power - knowledge is power. We can't be in an ideological battle to redeem the soul of this country if we don't have the facts.

The resistance of policy-makers to intelligence is not just founded on an ideological presupposition. They distrust intelligence sources and intelligence officials because they don't understand what the real problems are.

Making use of human weaknesses in intelligence work is a logical matter. It keeps coming up and of course you try to look at all the aspects that interest you in a human being.

As liberty and intelligence have increased the people have more and more revolted against the theological dogmas that contradict common sense and wound the tenderest sensibilities of the soul.

Within thirty years we will have the technological means to create superhuman intelligence.

They have involved co-operation between the Iraqi intelligence and al-Qaeda operatives on training and combined operations regarding bomb making and chemical and biological weapons.

By the 2030s the nonbiological portion of our intelligence will predominate.

All of the biggest technological inventions created by man - the airplane the automobile the computer - says little about his intelligence but speaks volumes about his laziness.

The question that will decide our destiny is not whether we shall expand into space. It is: shall we be one species or a million? A million species will not exhaust the ecological niches that are awaiting the arrival of intelligence.

There is no logical reason why the camel of great art should pass through the needle of mob intelligence.

One way we can enliven the imagination is to push it toward the illogical. We're not scientists. We don't always have to make the logical reasonable leap.

There are psychological repercussions to illness and we need a little more help to get through the effects not only on the afflicted but on the family. And I think there's even a place for humor in that.

Sure the comedians who swear or use scatological humor can get laughs but they're uncomfortable laughs.

Logic is one thing the human animal another. You can quite easily propose a logical solution to something and at the same time hope in your heart of hearts it won't work out.