The Terminology Of Philosophical Art Is Coercive:

And Although It Might Be Best Of All To Be Socrates Satisfied, Having Both Happiness And Depth, We Would Give Up Some Happiness In Order To Gain The Depth.

You Can't Satisfy Everybody; Especially If There Are Those Who Will Be Dissatisfied Unless Not Everybody Is Satisfied.

Our Principles Fix What Our Life Stands For, Our Aims Create The Light Our Life Is Bathed In, And Our Rationality, Both Individual And Coordinate, Defines And Symbolizes The Distance We Have Come From Mere Animality. It Is By These Means That Our Lives Come To More Than What They Instrumentally Yield. And By Meaning More, Our Lives Yield More.

Given The Complexity Of Interpersonal Relationships And Institutions And The Complexity Of Co-ordination Of The Actions Of Many People, It Is Enormously Unlikely That, Even If There Were One Ideal Pattern For Society, It Could Be Arrived At In An A Priori Fashion. And Even Supposing That Some Great Genius Did Come Along With A Blueprint, Who Could Have The Confidence That It Could Work

Philosophical Argument, Trying To Get Someone To Believe Something Whether He Wants To Believe It Or Not, Is Not, I Have Held, A Nice Way To Behave Towards Someone; Also It Does Not Fit The Original Motivation For Studying Or Entering Philosophy. That Motivation Is Puzzlement, Curiousity, A Desire To Understand, Not A Desire To Produce Uniformity Of Belief. Most People Do Not Want To Become Thought-police. The Philosophical Goal Of Explanation Rather Than Proof Not Only Is Morally Better, It Is More In Accord With One's Philosophical Motivation.