Heinz R. Pagels Quotes

In philosophy seminars, the choice is usually between good and evil. In the real world, however, the choice is often between a bad guy and a worse guy.

We are now facing a problem more of ethics than of physics.

The balancing of present wants against the future is really the central problem of ethics.

Science is not inherently good.

Choices of right or wrong are not presented to you in black and white. If they were, I'm sure most people would choose white.

If the end does not justify the means - what can?

D'you know how embarrassing it is to mention good and evil in a scientific laboratory? Have you any idea? One of the reasons I became a scientist was not to have to think about that kind of thing.

It would be most right, and most wise, and, therefore must involve least suffering.

You got to wrestle with your conscience. You got to listen to people. It doesn't come so easy to me that this is right and that's wrong. It's never that simple.

Every act has both good and evil results. The best we can do is lean to the light.

willing me to understand: that people should be sacrificed to causes, that beauty can be built on the backs of the dead.

It might or might not be right to kill, but sometimes it is necessary.

Science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgements of all kinds remain necessary.

When you always know what is right, where is freedom? No one chooses the wrong, Jacen Solo. Uncertainty sets you free." -Vergere

Moral issues rarely have yes or no answers. -Myles to Alanna when she asks about the Gift

The lesser evil is also evil.

Maybe those sorts of yes-or-no life-and-death decisions are easier to make because they are so black and white. I can cope with them because it's easier. Human emotions, well. . .they're just a fathomless collection of grays and I don't do so well on the midtones.

I shook my head. “I don’t think so. This isn’t a good idea. This isn’t right.” “There’s all kinds of right,” he murmured. “On the spectrum, we’re still in the safe zone.” ... “Definitely right. Usually right,” Patch continued. “Mostly right. Maybe right.

From the circumstances of my position, I was often thrown into the society of horse-racers, card-players, fox-hunters, scientific and professional men, and of dignified men; and many a time have I asked myself, in the enthusiastic moment of the death of a fox, the victory of a favorite horse, the issue of a question eloquently argued at the bar, or in the great council of the nation, well, which of these kinds of reputation should I prefer? That of a horse-jockey, a fox-hunter, an orator, or the honest advocate of my country's rights?

Throughout history, one of the biggest problems is that the correct course of action is not always obvious, and the obvious course of action is not always correct.

Every day we make our way through a moral forest, along pathways ever branching. Often we get lost. When the array of paths before us is so perplexing that we can't make a choice, or won't, we can hope that we will be given a sign to guide us. A reliance on signs, however, can lead to the evasion of all moral obligations, and thus earn a terrible judgment.

What interest, zest, or excitement can there be in achieving the right way, unless we are enabled to feel that the wrong way is also a possible and a natural way, nay, more, a menacing and an imminent way? And what sense can there be in condemning ourselves for taking the wrong way, unless we need have done nothing of the sort, unless the right way was open to us as well? I cannot understand the willingness to act, no matter how we feel, without the belief that acts are really good and bad.

If you choose the lesser of two evils, you are still choosing evil.

When people in a country are being hurt, the issues are bigger than sport. Let's hope the right decision is made

Have I been wrong? Have I been wise to shut my eyes?