A Quote by J. D. Trout

The important question is whether [a theory] is true, not whether envisioning an alternative is too intellectually painful to bear. — © J. D. Trout
The important question is whether [a theory] is true, not whether envisioning an alternative is too intellectually painful to bear.
The wrong question to ask of a myth is whether it is true or false. The right question is whether it is living or dead, whether it still speaks to our condition.
The alternative position to whether torture is acceptable - that's not an alternative position, that's barbarism. The question here is not whether torture is acceptable or whether it works. It should be simply seen as a war crime. There's no other position on torture.
The question is not whether a doctrine is beautiful but whether it is true. When we wish to go to a place, we do not ask whether the road leads through a pretty country, but whether it is the right road.
One does not ask whether a scientific theory is true, but only whether it is convenient.
The question is whether you can bear freedom. At present the vast majority of men, whether white or black, require the discipline of labor which enslaves them for their own good.
When I was eleven or twelve years old, I became for a while fixated on the question whether there could be two 'identical' stones. This is, of course, the question whether the principle of identity of indiscernibles is true and, as I formulated it then, I was bound to fall into confusion about it.
The monopoly of science in the realm of knowledge explains why evolutionary biologists do not find it meaningful to address the question whether the Darwinian theory is true.
It's not so much a question of whether we've shot it through 35mm or digital video; what is important is whether the audience accepts it as real.
There is a fluency and an ease with which true mastery and expertise always expresses itself, whether it be in writing, whether it be in a mathematical proof, whether it be in a dance that you see on stage, really in every domain. But I think the question is, you know, where does that fluency and mastery come from?
Whether or not we have personality disturbances, whether or not we have the ability to overcome deficiencies of early environment, is like the answer to the question whether or not we shall be struck down by a dread disease: "it's all a matter of luck." It is important to keep this in mind, for people almost always forget it, with consequences in human intolerance and unnecessary suffering that are incalculable.
Here we are, worrying about whether we're thin enough or whether our bottom looks too big in this pair of trousers or even whether or not I should wear a hat - does it really matter in comparison to the important things that are going on in the world?
My point is that true leaders...understand the possible consequences of their decisions, and are willing to bear that weight. The question is whether that's a step you're willing to take." -Carlist Rieekan
The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether government works.
In the descent from a world of factual discourse into a world of emotions and alternative realities, the first step you take, whether you're the Russian media, whether you're Breitbart, is that you manufacture lots of stuff that isn't true. The second step is that you claim that everyone is like this.
God is good whether or not His choices seem right to us, whether or not we feel it, whether or not it seems true, and whether or not He gives us everything that we want.
The important question is, therefore, not whether anarchy is possible or not, but whether we can so enlarge the scope and influence of libertarian methods that they become the normal way in which human beings organise their society.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!