Everyone has sufficient reason for evil.

Imagine, with all this in mind, gazing upward into a star-laden sky on the darkest and clearest of nights, far from the city lights, with the infinite expanse of heaven laid in front of you. Consider the apprehension of awe thereby produced. That is the heights, calling to you, in a manner that is deeply embodied, even instinctual—or, more

We reject the necessity of transformation, sticking blindly and stubbornly to our guns. We remain slaves to our own narrow, self-serving whims because we refuse to acknowledge even a hint of our own self-produced inadequacy.

The death of a guiding idea produces disorientation on the way to enlightenment.

The greatest challenge to what is and what should be, by consensus and tradition, is always to be found in what is least familiar and most frightening.

The very words used to describe the revelatory experience indicate exactly the autonomy and externality of its origin: a “truly inspired thought,” a “stroke of brilliance”—“it came to me that,” “I realized that,” “I saw things in a new light,” “I was moved” (or “something moved within me”), “my perspective shifted,” “the ground shifted,” “the gates

the prayer or request for revelation that is the opening up of the psyche to insight and sacrificial restructuring. The scientist (the philosopher, the humanist, the sinner) gets down on his knees, in all humility, and admits to himself, his field, and God the utter depths of his ignorance.

The question put forth must therefore be compelling—the hypothesis sufficiently original—within some difficult to define but communally established bounds. This means that the question must exist on the border between order and chaos;

Paradise would simply not be Paradise if it contained anything unworthy.