Tolstoi explains somewhere in his writings why, in his opinion, โScience for Science's sakeโ is an absurd conception. We cannot know all the facts, since they are practically infinite in number. We must make a selection. Is it not better to be guided by utility, by our practical, and more especially our moral, necessities?
Henri PoincareSo is not mathematical analysis then not just a vain game of the mind? To the physicist it can only give a convenient language; but isn't that a mediocre service, which after all we could have done without; and, it is not even to be feared that this artificial language be a veil, interposed between reality and the physicist's eye? Far from that, without this language most of the initimate analogies of things would forever have remained unknown to us; and we would never have had knowledge of the internal harmony of the world, which is, as we shall see, the only true objective reality.
Henri PoincareThus, be it understood, to demonstrate a theorem, it is neither necessary nor even advantageous to know what it means.
Henri PoincareThe aim of science is not things themselves, as the dogmatists in their simplicity imagine, but the relation between things.
Henri PoincareOften when works at a hard question, nothing good is accomplished at the first attack. Then one takes a rest, long or short, and sits down anew to the work. During the first half-hour, as before, nothing is found, and then all of a sudden the decisive idea presents itself to the mind.
Henri Poincare