What difference does it make that one should "prove" a philosophical point, if that point has nothing to do with spreading freedom throughout the land? (James Hal Cone)

What difference does it make that one should "prove" a philosophical point, if that point has nothing to do with spreading freedom throughout the land?

James Hal Cone

Related topics

difference freedom land nothing point prove should spreading

Related quotes

The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. View quote
Richard Dawkins
A cucumber should be well sliced, and dressed with pepper and vinegar, and then thrown out, as good for nothing. View quote
Samuel Johnson
You have the freedom to be yourself, your true self, here and now, and nothing can stand in your way". View quote
Richard Bach
Who is more to be pitied, a writer bound and gagged by policemen or one living in perfect freedom who has nothing more to say? View quote
Kurt Vonnegut
Democracy has nothing to do with freedom. Democracy is a soft variant of communism, and rarely in the history of ideas has it been taken for anything else. View quote
Hans-Hermann Hoppe