This is the first age that's ever paid much attention to the future, which is a little ironic since we may not have one.
Human judges can show mercy. But against the laws of nature, there is no appeal.
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
It has yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value.
I don't pretend we have all the answers. But the questions are certainly worth thinking about.
Every revolutionary idea seems to evoke three stages of reaction. They may be summed up by the phrases: 1- It's completely impossible. 2- It's possible, but it's not worth doing. 3- I said it was a good idea all along.
New ideas pass through three periods: 1) It can't be done. 2) It probably can be done, but it's not worth doing. 3) I knew it was a good idea all along!
Sometimes I think we're alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we're not. In either case the idea is quite staggering.
If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
When a distinguished but elderly scientist states that something is possible, he is almost certainly right. When he states that something is impossible, he is very probably wrong.
It is not easy to see how the more extreme forms of nationalism can long survive when men have seen the Earth in its true perspective as a single small globe against the stars.
The best measure of a man's honesty isn't his income tax return. It's the zero adjust on his bathroom scale.
We have to abandon the idea that schooling is something restricted to youth. How can it be, in a world where half the things a man knows at 20 are no longer true at 40 - and half the things he knows at 40 hadn't been discovered when he was 20?