The philosopher is not a citizen of any community of ideas, that is what makes him a philosopher.

Is it even always an advantage to replace an indistinct picture by a sharp one? Isn't the indistinct one often what we need?

Architecture immortalizes and glorifies something. Hence there can be no architecture where there is nothing to glorify.

Everything that can be said, can be said clearly.

Proof, one might say, does not merely shew that it is like this, but: how it is like this. It shows how 13+14 yield 27.

The popular scientific books by our scientists aren't the outcome of hard work, but are written when they are resting on their laurels.

I think I summed up my attitude to philosophy when I said: philosophy ought really to be written only as a poetic composition.