The best reaction to a paradox is to invent a genuinely new and deep idea.

Every once in a while, something happens to you that makes you realise that the human race is not quite as bad as it so often seems to be.

Thers is this wonderful iconoclast at Rutgers, Doron Zeilberger, who says that our mathematics is the result of a random walk, by which he means what WE call mathematics. Likewise, I think, for the sciences.

Molecular biology has routinely taken problematic things under its wing without altering core ideas.

Cutting up fowl to predict the future is, if done honestly and with as little interpretation as possible, a kind of randomization. But chicken guts are hard to read and invite flights of fancy or corruption.

Philosophers of science constantly discuss theories and representation of reality, but say almost nothing about experiment, technology, or the use of knowledge to alter the world. This is odd, because 'experimental method' used to be just another name for scientific method.... I hope [to] initiate a Back-to-Bacon movement, in which we attend more seriously to experimental science. Experimentation has a life of its own.

By legend and perhaps by nature philosophers are more accustomed to the armchair than the workbench.