A Quote by Keith Ellison

Publicly criticizing people, even when I don't have the facts, is not that good of an idea. — © Keith Ellison
Publicly criticizing people, even when I don't have the facts, is not that good of an idea.
When I talk about places like Saudi Arabia or Israel or even now with Venezuela, I'm not criticizing the people. I'm not criticizing their faith. I'm not criticizing their way of life.
I'm not afraid of facts, I welcome facts but a congeries of facts is not equivalent to an idea. This is the essential fallacy of the so-called "scientific" mind. People who mistake facts for ideas are incomplete thinkers; they are gossips.
We realize that by criticizing Jewish fundamentalism we are criticizing a part of the past that we love. We wish that members of every human grouping would criticize their own past, even before criticizing others.
[The scientist] believes passionately in facts, in measured facts. He believes there are no bad facts, that all facts are good facts, though they may be facts about bad things, and his intellectual satisfaction can come only from the acquisition of accurately known facts, from their organization into a body of knowledge, in which the inter-relationship of the measured facts is the dominant consideration.
I'm totally fine with people criticizing me in shows... people like this show, or don't; you're entitled to your opinion. But when people are criticizing you as a person, I have to say it's a little bit different.
Criticizing lawyers for lawsuits is like criticizing linebackers for knocking people down.
Facts are simple and facts are straight. Facts are lazy and facts are late. Facts all come with points of view. Facts don't do what I want them to. Facts just twist the truth around. Facts are living turned inside out.
If you're criticizing Israel, but you're doing it in a way that implies that the Jewish people in America have a dual loyalty, that's anti-Semitism. It's more than just criticizing Israeli policy.
Facts are neutral until human beings add their own meaning to those facts. People make their decisions based on what the facts mean to them, not on the facts themselves. The meaning they add to facts depends on their current story … facts are not terribly useful to influencing others. People don’t need new facts—they need a new story.
Facts from paper are not the same as facts from people. The reliability of the people giving you the facts is as important as the facts themselves.
I want to avoid sounding like I'm criticizing because I don't have all the facts in front of me yet. And I am trying to be a unifier.
There are two things that have to happen before an idea catches on. One is that the idea should be good. The other is that it should fit in with the temper of the age. If it does not, even a good idea may well be passed by.
It might be a good idea if the various countries of the world would occasionally swap history books, just to see what other people are doing with the same set of facts.
I have people criticizing me every day - even on my own website - so when you have people that are constantly bringing you down, it's not that hard to stay grounded.
People don't ask for facts in making up their minds. They would rather have one good, soul - satisfying emotion than a dozen facts.
A good autobiography is like a document: a mirror of the age on which people can 'depend.' In a novel, by contrast, it's not the facts that matter, but precisely what you add to the facts.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!