The Problems Of Language Here Are Really

Can Quantum Mechanics Represent The Fact That An Electron Finds Itself Approximately In A Given Place And That It Moves Approximately With A Given Velocity, And Can We Make These Approximations So Close That They Do Not Cause Experimental Difficulties?

Whether We Electrons, Light Quanta, Benzol Molecules, Or Stones, We Shall Always Come Up Against These Two Characteristics, The Corpuscular And The Undular.

The Positivists Have A Simple Solution: The World Must Be Divided Into That Which We Can Say Clearly And The Rest, Which We Had Better Pass Over In Silence. But Can Anyone Conceive Of A More Pointless Philosophy, Seeing That What We Can Say Clearly Amounts To Next To Nothing? If We Omitted All That Is Unclear, We Would Probably Be Left Completely Uninteresting And Trivial Tautologies.

By Getting To Smaller And Smaller Units, We Do Not Come To Fundamental Or Indivisible Units. But We Do Come To A Point Where Further Division Has No Meaning.

It Is Probably True Quite Generally That In The History Of Human Thinking The Most Fruitful Developments Frequently Take Place At Those Points Where Two Different Lines Of Thought Meet. These Lines May Have Their Roots In Quite Different Parts Of Human Nature, In Different Times Or Different Cultural Environments Or Different Religious Traditions: Hence If They Actually Meet, That Is, If They Are At Least So Much Related To Each Other That A Real Interaction Can Take Place, Then One May Hope That New And Interesting Developments May Follow.