What I'd like is to turn out like Jessica Simpson, with her whole brand
History, if viewed as a repository for more than anecdote or chronology, could produce a decisive transformation in the image of science by which we are now possessed.
The answers you get depend upon the questions you ask.
All significant breakthroughs are break -“withs” old ways of thinking.
The transition between competing paradigms cannot be made a step at a time, forced by logic and neutral experience. Like the gestalt switch, it must occur all at once (though not necessarily in an instant) or not at all.
What a man sees depends both upon what he looks at and also upon what his previous visual-conceptual experience has taught him to see.
Far from being magisterial in its objectivity, science was conditioned by history, society, and the prejudices of scientists.
Ruskin's much-derided moral theory of art was part of an attempt to show that this human activity, which we value so highly, engaged the whole of human personality. His insistence on the sanctity of nature was part of an attempt to develop Goethe's intuition that form cannot be put together in the mind by an additive process, but is to be deduced from the laws of growth in living organisms, and their resistance to the elements.
Let the name of Whitefield perish, but Christ be glorified
I read reviews of critics I respect and feel I can learn something from. Right now there are a lot of bottom-feeder critics who just have access to a computer and don't necessarily have an academic or cinema background that I can detect, so I tend to ignore that and stay with the same top-tier critics that I've come to respect. I like reading a good review - it doesn't have to be favorable, but a well-thought-out one - because I very much appreciate the relationship of directors and critics.
I feel like sometimes people on television shows can start taking things for granted, or they don't want to be here or something like that.