Even philosophies who have denounced pseudosciences like psychoanalysis, have condoned pseudoscientific economic theories like neoclassical microeconomics. It is far safer and easier to criticize Freud and Jung than to criticize Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek, because the latter are backed by political movements whereas the former are not.

The motto of science is not just Pauca but rather Plurima ex paucissimis - the most out of the least.

There is a continuum between science and philosophy. As Fichte said (but did not practice), philosophy should be the science of sciences.

I believe that modern science supports free will, in showing that the brain can act spontaneously, not only in response to external stimuli.

One can discern a few very general myths that facilitate the birth of further myths: that everything is possible; that whatever we have failed to explain in normal and earthly terms must have paranormal or supernatural explanations; and that science, being rational, cannot explain the irrational, such as taste and love.

In the scientific community you find competent teachers and original researchers, just as in the musical community you find many good performers but very few good composers.

The fact is that all the important political philosophers and scientists from the great Aristotle on, with the exception of those of the French Enlightenment and Mill, have sided with the powers that be.