Niels Bohr — "It is not enough to be wrong, one must also be polite."
It is not enough to be wrong, one must also be polite.
It is not enough to be wrong, one must also be polite.
Click any product to generate a realistic preview. Up to 3 at a time.
* Initial load can take up to 90 seconds — revising the preview in another color is nearly instant.
"We are suspended in language."
"The meaning of our words is always context-dependent."
"What is it that we human beings ultimately depend on? We depend on our words. We are suspended in language. Our task is to communicate experience and ideas to others."
"Accuracy and clarity of expression are a matter of degree."
"We must be clear that, when it comes to atoms, language can be used only as in poetry. The poet, too, is not nearly so concerned with describing facts as with creating images and establishing mental c…"
Found in 2 providers: gemini,grok
2 sources checked
Being incorrect is forgivable, but how you deliver a wrong idea matters just as much as the idea itself. Intellectual discourse requires civility alongside honesty. You can challenge, question, and even be mistaken, but maintaining respectful exchange is the foundation that keeps dialogue productive and relationships intact. Rudeness poisons the well of collaboration even when you happen to be right.
Bohr built the Copenhagen school of quantum mechanics through relentless collaborative debate with Einstein, Heisenberg, and Pauli. His famous debates with Einstein over quantum indeterminacy stretched decades and were famously courteous despite deep disagreement. Bohr believed physics advanced through cooperative argument, not combat, and his institute in Copenhagen became legendary precisely because he cultivated an atmosphere where being wrong was safe.
Early 20th-century physics was violently revolutionary, with relativity and quantum theory overturning centuries of Newtonian certainty. Scientists were forced to publicly abandon positions they had defended for careers. Bohr operated through two world wars, witnessing how ideological rigidity and contempt destroyed both science and civilization. Civility in disagreement was not just etiquette but a precondition for the collaborative science that era demanded.
AI-generated insights based on extensive research and information for context. Factual errors? Email [email protected].
Your cart is empty