The relationship between fascism and robotics, for instance, it's very clear that it's going to become way more important as time goes by.

As it turns out, what looks like science sometimes is not.

Science is based on the possibility of objectivity, on the possibility of different people checking out for themselves the observations made by others. Without that possibility, there is no empirical principle capable of deciding between different arguments and theories.

The way that I sort of direct the writers is, let's do the best story we can. Let's not worry about production issues. 'How much will that cost? How are we going to shoot that?' Let's not set up those constraints on the writing. I don't think it helps the project to work like that.

You're looking for the best way of shooting it, but sometimes the best way of shooting it is changing the script.

Either you look back and deal with your hypocrisy, or you dismiss it.

People can't stand it when you deal with issues of race and class, and also sometimes the church, and you give a perspective that flushes out hypocrisy.