In order to refute a conclusion, you have to put forth the best possible argument for it.

It was while I was studying philosophy that I came to understand. . . that it is no sign of moral or spiritual strength to believe that for which one has no evidence, neither a priori evidence as in math, nor a posteriori evidence as in science. . . . It's a violation almost immoral in its transgressiveness to shirk the responsibilities of rationality.

Plato dramatically puts the detachment of the philosopher from his time this way: to philosophize is to prepare to die.

In order to refute a conclusion, you have to put forth the best possible argument for it.

When we call a philosopher distinguished, we are not saying that she is worthy and not saying that she is recognized, but we are saying that she occupies the intersection of both - that she is recognized and worthy; even that she is recognized because she's worthy.

We may not need God to tell us where the world came from, but we need God to be able to live moral lives and for there to be morality in the first place.

To matter ... Is there any human will deeper than that? ... We don't want to live when we become convinced that we don't, can't, will never matter. ... We no sooner discover that we are than we desperately want that which we are to matter.