From The Saintly And Single-minded Idealist To

If Democracy Is A Means Rather Than An End, Its Limits Must Be Determined In The Light Of The Purpose We Want It To Serve.

The Task Of The Political Philosopher Can Only Be To Influence Public Opinion, Not To Organize People For Action. He Will Do So Effectively Only If He Is Not Concerned With What Is Now Politically Possible But Consistently Defends The "general Principles Which Are Always The Same." In This Sense I Doubt Whether There Can Be Such A Thing As A Conservative Political Philosophy. Conservatism May Often Be A Useful Practical Maxim, But It Does Not Give Us Any Guiding Principles Which Can Influence Long-range Developments.

Socialist Thought Owes Its Appeal To The Young Largely To Its Visionary Character; The Very Courage To Indulge In Utopian Thought Is In This Respect A Source Of Strength For Socialism Which Traditional Liberalism Sadly Lacks. Speculation About General Principles Provides An Opportunity For The Play Of The Imagination Of Those Who Are Unencumbered By Much Knowledge Of The Facts Of Present-day Life. Their Ideas Suffer From Inherent Contradictions, And Any Attempt To Put Them Into Practice Must Produce Something Utterly Different From What They Expect.

It Is Only Because The Majority Opinion Will Always Be Opposed By Some That Our Knowledge And Understanding Progress. In The Process By Which Opinion Is Formed, It Is Very Probable That, By The Time Any View Becomes A Majority View, It Is No Longer The Best View: Somebody Will Already Have Advanced Beyond The Point Which The Majority Have Reached. It Is Because We Do Not Yet Know Which Of The Many Competing New Opinions Will Prove Itself The Best That We Wait Until It Has Gained Sufficient Support.

Human Reason Can Neither Predict Nor Deliberately Shape Its Own Future. Its Advances Consist In Finding Out Where It Has Been Wrong.