If a spectator with a philosophical mind, somebody accustomed to reading books, gets the same kind of information in a movie, he might not fully understand it.
[Commenting on Ronald Reagan:] I don't think he ever thought anything through.
Thought must be hidden in the verse like nutritional virtue in a fruit.
Intellect is a magnitude of intensity, not a magnitude of extensity.
Think deeply about things. Don’t just go along because that’s the way things are or that’s what your friends say. Consider the effects, consider the alternatives, but most importantly, just think.
It's hard to pay attention these days because of multiple affects of the information technology nowadays. You tend to develop a faster, speedier mind, but I don't think it's necessarily broader or smarter.
There is within every human being a deep well of thinking over which a heavy iron lid is kept clamped.
Isn't it odd how much fatter a book gets when you've read it several times?
We are deceived if we think that mind and judgment are two different matters: judgment is but the extent of the light of the mind. This light penetrates to the bottom of matters; it remarks all that can be remarked, and perceives what appears imperceptible. Therefore we must agree that it is the extent of the light in the mind that produces all the effects which we attribute to judgment.
Of our thinking it is but the upper surface that we shape into articulate thought; underneath the region of argument and conscious discourse lies the region of meditation.
The diameter of each day is measured by the stretch of thought - not by the rising and setting of the sun.
They think so small, they use small words. But not me, I'm smarter than that, I've worked it out. I'm stretching my mouth to let those big words come on out.
Inside was where she lived, physically and mentally. She resided in the horn of plenty of her own prodigious mind, fertilized by inexhaustible curiosity.
One can imagine that the ultimate mathematician is one who can see analogies between analogies.
I don't think people are averse to thinking about things in a deep way, but we have limited time and opportunity to think about things in a deep way. I think that's why there is an appetite for non-fiction - it gives people the opportunity to reexamine ordinary experience and be smarter about it.
Difference of thoughts will produce difference of language. He that thinks with more extent than another, will want words of a larger meaning; he that thinks with more subtilty will seek for terms of more nice discrimination; and where is the wonder, since words are but the images of things, that he who never knew the original should not know the copies?
I do believe that there are some universal cognitive tasks that are deep and profound - indeed, so deep and profound that it is worthwhile to understand them in order to design our displays in accord with those tasks.
It is my nature to thin where others read.
We must form our minds by reading deep rather than wide.
Even now when I am answering a question I am at the height of my own meditation.
People laugh at me because I use big words. But if you have big ideas, you have to use big words to express them, haven't you?
I'm not really deep enough to have enough to think about for fifteen minutes.
The more lucidly we think, the more we are cut off: the more deeply we enter into reality, the less we can think.
No knowledge, however thorough and extensive, no brilliance and perspicuity, no dialectic sophistication, will preserve us from the commmonness of thought and will. It is truly not the merit of the school if we do not come out selfish.
If we understood something just one way, we would not understand it at all.
