“Ideology, legitimacy, authority: Such topics used to interest academics no end. The mania for quantifying the social sciences and the attendant decline in foreign-language acquisition have changed things. I remember Sovietologists lamenting this trend when I was at school in the 1980s. It’s gone much, much further since. What cannot be researched with the proper statistical-numerical methodology is thought beneath serious analysis. On the rare occasions when a non-quantifier takes the microphone at a conference, the Gradgrinds lean back with an indulgent smile: Time for some light relief.”

Remarks after the Solvay Conference (1927)
Context: I feel very much like Dirac: the idea of a personal God is foreign to me. But we ought to remember that religion uses language in quite a different way from science. The language of religion is more closely related to the language of poetry than to the language of science. True, we are inclined to think that science deals with information about objective facts, and poetry with subjective feelings. Hence we conclude that if religion does indeed deal with objective truths, it ought to adopt the same criteria of truth as science. But I myself find the division of the world into an objective and a subjective side much too arbitrary. The fact that religions through the ages have spoken in images, parables, and paradoxes means simply that there are no other ways of grasping the reality to which they refer. But that does not mean that it is not a genuine reality. And splitting this reality into an objective and a subjective side won't get us very far.

Interview with The Sunday Times, quoted in "Brian May Converts Estate Into Wildlife Refuge", in Contactmusic.com (9 July 2012) http://www.contactmusic.com/queen/news/brian-may-converts-estate-into-wildlife-refuge_1359933.

Having done that one begins to understand why the North appeals strongly to an influential minority in the South. They don’t want to live up there anymore than a moderate Muslim wants to live under the Taliban, but they see it as the purer Korea in many ways, the real deal.
2010s, League Confederation Goes Outer-Track (September 2018)

e.g. reliability, availability, performance
Source: Object-oriented design (1991), p. 18.

Discrepancies among the Social Sciences (1981)

OQHI, 65 http://www.mlat.uzh.ch/MLS/text.php?tabelle=Rogerus_Baco_cps4&amp;rumpfid=Rogerus_Baco_cps4,%20Opus%20tertium,%20%2020&amp;corpus=4&amp;lang=0&amp;current_title=Opus%20tertium&amp;links=&amp;inframe=1 as cited in: Jeremiah Hackett (2009) &quot;&quot;&quot;&quot; Roger Bacon http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2012/entries/roger-bacon&quot;&quot;&quot;&quot; in: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta (ed.) <br class="br">Opus Tertium, c. 1267 <br class="br">Context: I have labored much in sciences and languages, and I have up to now devoted forty years [to them] after I first learned the Alphabetum; and I was always studious. Apart from two of these forty years I was always [engaged] in study [or at a place of study], and I had many expenses just as others commonly have. Nevertheless, provided I had first composed a compendium, I am certain that within quarter or half a year I could directly teach a solicitous and confident person whatever I know of these sciences and languages. And it is known that no one worked in so many sciences and languages as I did, nor so much as I did. Indeed, when I was living in the other state of life [as a Magister], people marveled that I survived the abundance of my work. And still, I was just as involved in studies afterwards, as I had been before. But I did not work all that much, since in the pursuit of Wisdom this was not required.

Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature (1979). 87-88.
Context: The future will not "be with" anybody in the sense of falling to them as a conquest. The need for many different methods is not going to go away, dissolved in a quasi-physical heaven where all serious work is quantitative... Quantification, like surgery, is an excellent thing in the right place, but a very bad topic for obsession. Unless you know just what you are counting--unless you are sure that the things counted are standard units--and unless you understand what is proved by results of your counting, quantifying provide you only with the outward show of science, a mirage, never the oasis.

Source: A History of Reading

Khushwant Singh: "Japji Sahib is Based on the Upanishads