Without compassion, true gratitude is an impossibility. If we are to feel gratitude towards another for their deeds, then we must have compassion for the suffering and self-sacrifice which they endured in carrying out those deeds. If their actions were free of suffering or sacrifice, then are they truly deserving of gratitude?

The nobility which exists within any cause is to be found not in any achievement, but instead within the struggle.

There has got to be a point that exists somewhere, when a rational person just has to shake his head and say: 'You know what? Maybe all the crack-pots are right!'

It would seem to me that If this physical life, of which we are now aware, does indeed comprise the entirety of human experience, then what we seem to intuitively know to be true is entirely backwards. For if this is the case, then it must be the despicable tyrant, free of any moral values, and not the selfless compassionate who sacrifices himself for the good of mankind that is truly the one most deserving of our reverence and emulation.

Whether or not anyone could have done it is not what's important. What is important is whether or not anyone would have done it.

The universal methodology of the tyrant is always incrementalism.

When the established members of academia start becoming vocal as to how poor your art is, then you know you're on to something.