You May Also Like / View all maxioms
The first law of dietetics seems to be: if it tastes good, it's bad for you.
The first law of dietetics seems to be: if it tastes good, it's bad for you.
Law is no explanation of anything; law is simply a generalization, a category of facts. Law is neither a cause, read more
Law is no explanation of anything; law is simply a generalization, a category of facts. Law is neither a cause, nor a reason, nor a power, nor a coercive force. It is nothing but a general formula, a statistical table.
Who to himself is law, no law doth need,
Offends no law, and is a king indeed.
Who to himself is law, no law doth need,
Offends no law, and is a king indeed.
The law of heaven and earth is life for life.
The law of heaven and earth is life for life.
The law is above the law, you know.
The law is above the law, you know.
If we consider that all we deal with represents constantly changing sub-microscopic, interrelated processes which are not, and cannot be read more
If we consider that all we deal with represents constantly changing sub-microscopic, interrelated processes which are not, and cannot be ‘identical with themselves’, the old dictum that ‘everything is identical with itself’ becomes in [today’s understanding of the universe] a principle invariably false to facts.
Thus, we see that one of the obvious origins of human disagreement lies in the use of noises for words.
Thus, we see that one of the obvious origins of human disagreement lies in the use of noises for words.
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage read more
Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand.
There was an ancient Roman lawyer, of great fame in the history
of Roman jurisprudence, whom they called Cui read more
There was an ancient Roman lawyer, of great fame in the history
of Roman jurisprudence, whom they called Cui Bono, from his
having first introduced into judicial proceedings the argument,
"What end or object could the party have had in the act with
which he is accused."