Order and reason, beauty and benevolence, are characteristics and conceptions which we find solely associated with the mind of man.
Karl PearsonRead
All great scientists have, in a certain sense, been great artists; the man with no imagination may collect facts, but he cannot make great discoveries.
Interpretation
Imagination is crucial for making significant scientific discoveries.
This quote emphasizes the vital role of imagination in the realm of science, suggesting that while collecting factual data is important, it is the creative and artistic aspect of a scientist's mind that leads to groundbreaking discoveries. It implies that true genius lies not just in rote knowledge, but in the ability to envision possibilities beyond the existing facts.
In practice
In a lecture on innovation, one could quote this to highlight the importance of creativity in scientific research.
Order and reason, beauty and benevolence, are characteristics and conceptions which we find solely associated with the mind of man.
If I have put the case of science at all correctly, the reader will have recognised that modern science does much more than demand that it shall be left in undisturbed possession of what the theologian and metaphysician please to term its 'legitimate field'. It claims that the whole range of phenomena, mental as well as physical-the entire universe-is its field. It asserts that the scientific method is the sole gateway to the whole region of knowledge.
The classification of facts and the formation of absolute judgments upon the basis of this classification-judgments independent of the idiosyncrasies of the individual mind-essentially sum up the aim and method of modern science. The scientific man has above all things to strive at self-elimination in his judgments, to provide an argument which is as true for each individual mind as for his own.
Statistics is the grammar of science.
That which is measured improves. That which is measured and reported improves exponentially.
The scientific method of examining facts is not peculiar to one class of phenomena and to one class of workers; it is applicable to social as well as to physical problems, and we must carefully guard ourselves against supposing that the scientific frame of mind is a peculiarity of the professional scientist.
It's hard to imagine anything more interesting than learning how we're woven into the enormous tapestry of existence. Where did our universe come from? How special is our world, and how special are we? We allocate tens of billions of dollars annually to NASA, NSF and academia in search of the answers.
Venus has a runaway greenhouse effect. I kind of want to know what happened there because we're twirling knobs here on Earth without knowing the consequences of it. Mars once had running water. It's bone dry today. Something bad happened there as well.
To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.
I think that in the discussion of natural problems we ought to begin not with the Scriptures, but with experiments, and demonstrations.
If we could honestly promise young couples that we knew how to give them offspring with superior character, why should we assume they would decline? Common sense tells us that if scientists find ways to greatly improve human capabilities, there will no stopping the public from happily seizing them.
The press still thinks [global warming] is controversial. So they find the 1% of the scientists and put them up as if they're 50% of the research results. You in the public would have no idea that this is basically a done deal and that we're on to other problems, because the journalists are trying to give it a 50/50 story. It's not a 50/50 story. It's not. Period.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.