Blog

Book review: To Explain the World by Steven Weinberg

Surprisingly, this was actually a good book. The author showed slightly more open-mindedness than I expected, with him a secular writer often treating religious individuals like Newton.

Like most good Jewish intellectuals talking about Arabs/Islam, Steven couldn’t help himself mentioning Sayyid Qutb and proving himself a complete ignoramus about this complex character (literary critic, social activist, revolutionary), adopting Zionist opinions about him right from the can. His treatment of Qutb is as unfair as my treating Steven as if he had the intellectual sophistication of your average Tel Aviv falafel vendor.

To Explain the World makes for some entertaining light reading. It is not a powerful philosophical treatise meant to prove a particular point. It is a fun survey of the history of science and treats topics that any science lover would enjoy rereading about, though don’t expect to learn anything new.

I enjoyed his refusal to take post-modernist social scientific theories seriously. This deserves some respect in a mainstream scientist, though a better scientist of Steven’s status and fame could have used this book to launch a powerful and history-making attack on the field of science revisionism. But I do not blame an old man for not wanting to get involved in academic bickering.

Solve the invisible spaces problem in Word 2013

An annoying issue in Word 2013 is that sometimes the space key seems to stop working, until you press a non-space character, at which point Word deigns to show you both the space and non-space characters.

To solve the problem, press enter to create a new line, then go back to your line. The problem is caused by a bug in Word where having a page break or section break right after the line you are on prevents spaces from showing. Make sure there is a line (empty or not) below the line you are typing on, and the problem disappears.

How to export the entire sequence by default in Adobe Premiere Pro CS6

  1. Move the yellow playback marker far to the right, until it goes into the blank area and the preview window becomes black. If you are doing batch work, move the marker farther than any of your clips are going to be. For example, if you are exporting 1 minute videos, move the marker to the 2 minute mark.
  2. On the bar below the playback marker’s bar, find the right end of the selection bar and move it to the far left, so that there are 0 seconds selected. The left end of the selection marker should also be to the far left, obviously.
  3. That’s all. Now when exporting, Premiere will automatically select the entire sequence for export.

Why there are so few Christian terrorists

Color me curious. Raised Protestant, joined American Navy and saw the world, the Dome of the Rock is a supremely beautiful building. Such beauty, why NO COMPASSION! by radicals? I don’t understand the mindset. .. Beauty and hate

The issue is not religion, but politics. Radical Muslims are no different from radical communists. They believe their countries are being controlled and oppressed by evil capitalist tyrants, and that superpowers like the US are supporting the most evil governments on earth (such as in Saudi and Egypt), and that the US is against freedom and democracy if tyrants fit its needs better, all of which are true. For example, the US orchestrated a coup that ended democracy in Iran in the 50′s.

Religion just happens to be a useful tool for these groups, as it gives their followers the courage to die for their cause.

You should also not forget that many terrorist groups are funded by intelligence agencies, both Western and otherwise. If you are an intelligence agency looking to create havoc anywhere in the world, Islamism provides a great tool for this, since Islamist soldiers are brave and do not require the payments needed for hiring non-religious mercenaries.

Many in the Middle East consider ISIS a US-Israeli creation made to perpetuate war in the Middle East and prevent any Muslim country in the area from getting too strong or stable. For all we know, this might be true.

Radical Muslims could just as easily have been Radical Christians. It just so happens that the political situation in the world today has made Muslims the underdogs controlled and stepped on by mostly Christian superpowers. Christians too have a long history of justifying mass violence and murder for their own ends, but since Christians acquired supremacy over the earth after the Middle Ages, and as Christian belief weakened, Christianity stopped being an effective tool for carrying out political goals. A hot-headed Muslim is easy to convince that he is being oppressed, while it is a lot more difficult to convince a Christian, since he knows Christians rule most of the world.

Terrorism is not common among Muslims. A few in 100,000 might condone violence. But everyone ignores the remaining 99999. Why aren’t they terrorists also? Because terrorism is based on political ideas that most Muslims do not support.

Christianity can just as easily be used to create terrorism. But since modern Islamic terrorism was created by Christians (such as in Afghanistan in the 80′s) to accomplish the goals of Christian countries like those of the US in the Middle East, it is Muslims who die for it and Muslims who are mostly killed by it.

Muslim countries do not have the intelligence capacities to organize and support Christian terrorist groups in Christian countries to weaken such countries and create markets for their defense and intelligence industries. It is extremely easy to use Christianity to create terror groups, it just so happens that there is not enough money and power to be gained by the world’s superpowers through Christian terrorism, therefore they are instead spending their billions organizing and supporting Muslim terrorist groups.

And if Islamic belief weakens in the Middle East and stops being an effective terrorist-recruitment tool, the superpowers will simply switch to another ideology, such as communism or a modern incarnation of it. They would then create and organize communist terror groups to perpetuate war inside the countries they want, and Fox News will start talking about the dangerous communists next door who hate you because of your freedom.

AWS Storage Historical Pricing and Future Projections

Some blogs are calling the recent price wars between cloud providers “a race to zero”. But this is the wrong way to think about it. As technology progresses, we simply need to start thinking in terms of larger units.

Here is a table of historical Amazon S3 prices:

Date $/GB/Month $/TB/Month
14-Mar-06 0.15 150
1-Nov-08 0.15 150
1-Nov-10 0.14 140
1-Feb-12 0.125 125
1-Dec-12 0.095 95
1-Feb-14 0.085 85
1-Apr-14 0.03 30

In terms of gigabytes the prices seem to be approaching zero. But in terms of terabytes, the prices are just barely starting to become reasonable. The linear projection below suggests that we will be using terabytes as our unit of choice when speaking of cloud storage until 2020 and later, when prices will start going below $1 per terabyte per month.

Some time after 2020, perhaps around 2025, we will start speaking in terms of petabytes per month.

Horoscopes and Islam

A Muslim should believe or read horoscopes or not? Because I saw a post that says the person who believes in horoscopes is a disbeliever.

Horoscopes go under the category of superstition, since there is no basis in science or religion for them. Therefore a well educated and intelligent Muslim should take them for what they are: Fancy-sounding nonsense that impress the gullible.

However, we should not be judgmental toward those who believe in horoscopes. Even though this is an obvious flaw in their faith, we ourselves may have greater flaws that are not so apparent. Those who take pleasure in attacking the obvious flaws of others almost certainly have similar or greater flaws themselves.

We shouldn’t be quick to say who is a believer and who is a disbeliever. We can say a person who is not thankful toward God is a disbeliever; but we all show unthankfulness toward God every now and then; therefore are we to say that we are all disbelievers? We should not pass final judgment on people, that is God’s job, not ours. A person who has a part of disbelief in him or her may also have many parts of belief and goodness that outweigh the disbelief.

/ 1 Comment on Horoscopes and Islam

List of 20,000 right-angled triangles with whole-number sides

Some mathematical investigations can benefit from having a handy list of right-angled triangles with whole number sides. We know of the common [a = 3,b = 4, c = 5] triangle often used to illustrate the Pythagorean theorem (5^2 = sqrt(3^2 + 4^2)), but sometimes we need more of these. For this reason I made the following lists, placed inside handy text files. They start from the smallest possible triangle (the [3,4,5] one) and iterate up.

List of 20,000 right-angled triangles with whole-number sides sorted by the smallest side (i.e. side a).

List of 20,000 right-angled triangles with whole-number sides sorted by the largest side (i.e. the hypotenuse or side c).

Should I be a Muslim? Some answers for doubtful people

Below is a question I received on tumblr, I decided to answer it in the article below.

Can you tell me how you know islam is true? I’m considering converting. But I don’t know if I should

To begin, there are two main ideas about how the universe works. The atheist idea is that the universe is a closed system, like a closed cardboard box. Inside it everything happens and nothing that happens inside is caused by anything outside of it. This theory has very important consequences. For example it nullifies the ideas of free will, responsibility, and the existence of a soul. If everything inside the box is caused by particle interactions inside the box, then everything that a human does, or everything that a human thinks, is simply caused by particle interactions, atoms and photons colliding and interacting with each other. When you decide to be kind to someone, it is not because of a choice you made, but because the universe at that moment (your memories, your way of thinking, the environment you are in) lead you to do that act.

The second theory is that the universe is an open system, that the human soul resides outside of it, which means that even though a person is affected by their environment, the part of them that lies outside the universe can act independently for itself, meaning that the person has free will. If we assume this second theory is true, then we immediately need an explanation for why the universe is this way, how it is arranged and for what purpose.

The two theories (whether the universe is closed or open) are rival theories. Atheists believe in the first one, religious people believe in the second one. But the truth is that there is no scientific way (so far) to prove whether the universe is open or closed, therefore almost all arguments between atheists and religious people are futile, since neither side has a conclusive proof. It is also probable that there will never be a conclusive proof (until the world ends).

Assuming that it is impossible to scientifically prove whether the universe is closed or open, we look to other sources of knowledge regarding this matter, and the only source of knowledge available to us regarding the nature of the universe is scripture, which explains the nature of the universe, how it was made and for what purpose.

Atheists have no evidence that the universe is closed, but the religious have evidence (scripture) that the universe is open. Therefore the matter stands on whether we take this evidence seriously or reject it. Atheists reject scripture, even though they have no conclusive scientific proof that their rejection of scripture is justified. And the religious accept scripture, even though they have no conclusive scientific proof that their acceptance of scripture is justified.

Science and reasoning cannot help us to decide the matter (since everything depends on whether the universe is open or closed, which cannot be proven by science/reasoning). Therefore, when it concerns the individual, the matter fully depends on the act of acceptance or rejection of scripture.

I have made the conscious decision of accepting scripture, as it explains the reason for the existence of the world, and things like why good people suffer and bad people enjoy life (scripture says this life is a test and the true life is after death, therefore a person’s suffering in this world does not prove anything about God’s kindness or cruelty. A person can suffer for many years, but if they are rewarded with an infinitely long and pleasurable afterlife, we can say that God is very kind).

As for telling whether Islam is the best religion, it is for yourself to decide. I have read the Quran and parts of the Bible and I have read books on Christianity and Judaism. When you look at the most pious Muslims and Christians, you will see that they are extremely similar in their way of thought and behavior. For example the Lord of the Rings, which was written by a Christian writer and is full of Christian ideas of good and evil, could have been written by a Muslim.

Christianity is encumbered by the idea of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus. Islam simplifies the matter by saying that Jesus was a human being like any other, he belonged to a long line of prophets sent by God to inform and educate people. Therefore according to Islam Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad all were sent by the same God to give people the same message (that there is one God and that there is a day of Judgment). Each message was specifically written for its recipients, thus according to Islam Jesus was a Jewish prophet sent to the Jews to correct their religion and remove the various corruptions that the rabbis had added to the Torah (such as legalizing usury).

Christianity too was eventually corrupted, and when the time was right God sent his final message, the Quran, which is the simplest and the most global. The Old and New Testaments are mostly concerned with the Jews, which makes sense since they were meant for the Jews.

The books of the Testaments were written and re-written by humans, thus for example we have various gospels covering the same topics, each written by a different person. This made it easy to introduce errors and corruptions into the text, accidentally or otherwise.

The Quran, however, is very different. It is meant to be the direct word of God communicated to the prophet, and the way it is written, and the language in which it is written, make it very hard to change or corrupt it. It is easy to memorize (since it is musical or poetry-like), and during the prophet’s lifetime many people memorized the entire text, and since then it has been passed down orally until the present day. After the prophet’s death the written Quran was collected and many ancient collections exist and can be read to verify the correctness of the oral tradition.

If we assume there is a God and that he acts logically and sensibly, then the Quran is a very good successor to the Bible, written in a manner that makes it nearly impossible to change. God did not make the other scriptures like this perhaps as a test, to see what humans did with God’s words, and perhaps also because God was constantly sending new prophets to correct and guide people. However, during the 7th century, it appears that God decided that the world had reached a sufficient level of development to only need one final prophet and one final text.

The Quran contains some tantalizing scientific statements that add strengths to its authenticity. For example it makes a reference to the Big Bang (“Do not those who deny the truth see that the heavens and the earth were joined together and that We then split them asunder?” 21:30), and to the stages of the growth of the human embryo (which were not known at that time). However, the Quran is not meant to fully stand on its scientific statements, otherwise God could have provided more. If the Quran contained so much science to make it impossible not to believe in it, then that would be like God showing himself to humanity. In such a situation there would be no more point in having faith; it would be like forcing faith upon humanity, which God does not want to do.

Thus the Quran provides a great amount of evidence for its truth and authenticity, but there is always a little room for doubt. We can never be perfectly sure that scripture is true, we always have to take some of it on faith. Only after death we can find out whether the scripture we believed in is true or false.

I prefer to believe in the Quran rather than the Bible since the Quran is clearly superior. The Old Testament contains many ridiculous things, such as Jacob wrestling with God, which seems to be taken right out of pagan mythology, and the idea of the Christian Trinity is too cumbersome and unnecessary. There is no good reason for God having a son, and this too seems too similar to pagan mythology.

The Quran provides elegant and logical solutions to the problems of the Bible. There is one God, who sent various prophets to guide various sections of humanity, ending with Muhammad as the last prophet and the first global one, meant to teach all of humanity. God does not show himself to us, and he has made it impossible to prove his existence, so that humans can have the choices of believing and disbelieving in him. The reason why God saw it necessary to create humans and this universe is not very clear to us, but if he is a God then he can do what he pleases, and he doesn’t have to explain himself to us. Therefore even though we do not know the perfect explanations for God’s actions, if we believe that the Quran is true, then the only logical thing to do is to follow it to gain a good afterlife. God says in the Quran that his plan for mankind is that they should spread on earth while acting according to God’s commands, and this is basically every Muslim’s program in life: to build a good family and make the world a better place through doing good and avoiding evil (which is very similar to the program also followed by many faithful Christians and Jews).

Mashing two regular expressions together in JavaScript on the fly

var pattern1 = /Aug/;
var pattern2 = /ust/;
var fullpattern = (new RegExp( (pattern1+'').replace(/^\/(.*)\/$/,'$1') + (pattern2+'').replace(/^\/(.*)\/$/,'$1') ));

Explanation:

  • pattern1+'' turns (“casts”) the regular expression object into a string.
  • .replace(/^\/(.*)\/$/,'$1') removes the beginning and ending slashes from the pattern
  • new RegExp() turns the resultant string into a regular expression object. There is no need to add back a regular expression delimiter (i.e. slashes usually) since the RegExp() function (“constructor”) adds the delimiter if it is lacking.
  • If you want the resultant expression to have a flag, for example i, you add it so: new RegExp(string,'i');
  • This code is quite unreadable and you might be doing yourself and others a kindness if you use a less clever method. To make it more readable, the technique can be wrapped in a function:
var rmash = function(reg1,reg2) {
var fullpattern = (new RegExp( (reg1+'').replace(/^\/(.*)\/$/,'$1') + (reg2+'').replace(/^\/(.*)\/$/,'$1') ));
return fullpattern;
};

var my_new_pattern = rmash(pattern1,pattern2);

Generalizing the mash function to handle an arbitrary number of regular expressions and flags is left as an exercise.

How to do long-running computations in JavaScript while avoiding the “maximum call stack size exceeded” error

The following program calculates the value of the series of the Basel Problem. The result is a number that starts with 1.644934. Like π, this sequence can go on forever, which means the program never exits. Without proper design, such a program runs into the maximum call stack size exceeded error, which is designed to prevent a program from using too much memory.

var cr = 1;
var total = 0;
var x = function() {

    total = total + (1/(cr*cr));

    
    if(! (cr % 20000)) {
        $('#t1').val(total);
        $('#t2').val(cr);
        setTimeout(x,0);
    }
    else {
        x();
    }
    cr++;

};
x(); //initial call to x().

The solution is to add a setTimeout call somewhere in the program before things get too close to exceeding the call stack. In the above program, cr is a counter variable that starts with 1 and increases by 1 for every iteration of the x function. Using the conditional if(! (cr % 20000)) allows the program to catch its breath every 20,000 iterations and empties the call stack. It checks whether cr is divisible by 20,000 without a remainder. If it is not, we do nothing and let the program run its course. But if is divisible without a remainer, it means we have reached the end of a 20,000 iteration run. When this happens, we output the value of the total and the cr variables to two textboxes, t1 and t2.

Next, instead of calling x() the normal way, we call it via setTimeout(x,0);. As you know, setTimeout is genearlly used to run a function after a certain amount of time has passed, which is why usually the second argument is non-zero. But in this case, we do not need any wait time. The fact that we are calling x() via setTimeout is what matters, as this breaks the flow of the program, allowing proper screen output of the variables and the infinite continuation of the program.

The program is extremely fast, doing 1 million iterations about every 2.4 seconds on my computer. The result (the value of total) is not perfectly accurate due to the limitations of JavaScript numbers. More accuracy can be had using an extended numbers library.

You may wonder why we cannot put all calls to x() inside a setTimeout(). The reason is that doing so prevents the JavaScript interpreter from optimizing the program, causing it to run extremely slowly (about 1000 iterations per second on my computer). Using the method above, we run the program in optimized blocks of 20,000 iterations (the first block is actually 19,999 iterations since cr starts from 1, but for simplicity I have said 20,000 throughout the article).

Using an object anonymously in JavaScript

var month = 'Jan'; //or another three-letter abbreviation

//After the following operation, proper_month will contain the string "January".
var proper_month = {'Jan':'January',
                              'Feb': 'February',
                              'Mar' : 'March',
                              'Apr' : 'April',
                              'May'   : 'May',
                              'Jun'  : 'June',
                              'Jul'  : 'July',
                              'Aug'   : 'August',
                              'Sep'  : 'September',
                              'Oct'   : 'October',
                              'Nov'   : 'November',
                              'Dec'   : 'December'
                             
                             }[month];

My comments on media outlets refusing to publish the Prophet Muhammad cartoons

As a Muslim myself, I see the refusal of NYT and other sources to show the cartoon not as a kindly act of sensitivity, but as a typically pretentious and sly method of portraying Islam as dangerous and threatening. It’s Fox News all over again, except they do it in a subtle way, and has the following advantages (for them):

  • Pretending that Muslims are a lot more powerful than they actually are. NYT has no qualms or fears about being a zealous supporter of Israel’s crimes, often serving as Israel’s mouthpiece in the US. But publishing a few cartoons puts it in a more dangerous position?
  • Pretending that all Muslims share the same intolerance toward anti-Islamic speech and that all Muslim communities contain at least a few terrorists ready to become violent on demand. To a Muslim like myself, anti-Islamic speech is part and parcel of daily life and I honestly couldn’t care less about the cartoons.
  • Causing moral indignation in those who respect these corrupt newspapers, giving them a reason to fear and dislike Muslims (“Now the Muslims can decide what I can and cannot view in my local newspaper?”).
  • Creating an artificial controversy where some media outlets get to be the brave supporters of free speech by publishing the cartoons, or good and honest people too scared of Islam to publish them. Either way, Muslims lose.

Meanwhile, the media ignore the glaring fact that Charlie Hebdo fired one of its cartoonists for making a jibe at a person’s Jewish background. Since when did this anti-free speech organization become the moral capital of free speech?

Societal infinite loops: The anti-demographic nature of feminism/post-modernism

Feminism, post-modernism and cultural Marxism (here on referred to as “feminism”) depress birth rates in every society they take hold. The systemic effects of F/PM are hard to appreciate for most, therefore below I will lay them out.

Lack of direction, or self-referentiality

A nation that believes in God has direction. It believes it is going somewhere. It does not limit itself to thinking and worrying only about itself and its woes. It always looks forward to something better. And thus we had the United States of the 50’s, a religious nation in love with science on an unstoppable march to conquer the stars.

But then, in 1965 feminism spread. And thus the forward-directional arrow that society had turned into an arrow that pointed to itself, representing an infinite-loop of self-attention and self-worry. A nation of adults bent on creating a better, richer world turned into a nation of directionless children bent on their own personal satisfaction and happiness.

Thus mental illness, depression, out-of-wedlock births and crime went up, while birth rates, happiness and the nation’s pride decreased. The future no longer held promise, but death.

The fading of the family

Feminism diminishes the importance of families. Sexual pleasure can be had outside of one, therefore short-term relationships spread while long-term relationships dedicated to creating families become an exception. Men and women dedicate themselves to their own satisfaction, instead of dedicating their energy to creating the newer generation.

Destruction of wealth and income inequality

The self-refrentiality of feminist society and the fading of the family cause the destruction of wealth. People are more focused on their own pleasure and care less about family-building, thus saving for the future becomes less important. Most wealth is readily consumed on pleasures and is transferred to the rich elite, thus the middle class of the religious period fades, incapable of holding onto wealth. When this happens, family-creation becomes more difficult as buying a home in a good area becomes increasingly difficult. People will have to delay having children in hope of better financial situations that may never materialize.

Women’s work

Feminism spreads the idea that a woman’s success is in how closely she can mimic a man. Maternity is looked down upon, unless it is accompanied by masculine success. A woman is not supposed to marry young and settle for a calm life of rearing children, being called derogatory terms like “soccer mom” by feminists. Instead, she is supposed to gain success and wealth just like a man, and then, after succeeding in doing a man’s job, she then earns the right to maternity.

Needless to say, such a state of affairs reduces birth-rates through women delaying maternity until they achieve some kind of masculine success, which may never happen. Many women toil in their boring jobs year after year, until their fertile period is almost over, then with panic realize that this is not the life they want, and take the difficult leap of settling down with an unattractive male.

Misandry, or the destruction of men

The role of men is diminished and disparaged. Attractive and powerful men get easy access to many attractive females, while less attractive men can only marry older women who have had their share of relationships with attractive men and are now ready to settle. Thus being with less attractive men becomes the sign of failure and desperation for women, and thus they will avoid it for as long as they can, delaying birth and reducing birth rates.

Powerful men readily support feminism because they do not see any direct harm in it to their own selves. The average man, however, has to deal with a court system strongly biased against him, so that his hope and desire in marriage is faded. Women of lesser skill than him are hired, promoted and celebrated over him for the simple reason of having female sexual organs.

Feminism turns man into an object of a woman’s pleasure. A man’s greatest success is portrayed as a woman’s love for him, or the amount of pleasure he is able to give to a woman. A man’s love for another man is laughed at, unless he takes the anti-masculine, anti-patriarchal pledge of homosexuality, in which case he becomes a cute minority to be protected from the big bad world of men.

In this way, men’s productive function to society is greatly diminished. He is meant to either marry a woman who is more interested in her own satisfaction than in her place in society and her long-term work of creating the new generation, or to marry another man in an unproductive union. Some men reject both and live as bachelors, “going their own way”, and again, contributing little demographically to the future of society.

How to: Become wise

If you want to become wise, read 100 books that interest you. The books you choose to read can be about any topic and they can be of any quality, good or bad. The important thing is that you should find them interesting, because the fact that you find a book interesting means it contains information that is new1 to you (and thus it increases wisdom), because “interesting” simply means “something that provides new information to the brain”.

No book is going to solve all of your problems. Each book may make you a 1% wiser person. Thus if you want to become double as wise as you are now, you would have to read about 70 books. 100 books would be a safer number.

Some of the books you read will contain false information, because almost any book will contain some claims and assumptions that are false. But if you don’t give up and continue reading books one after another, as your knowledge increases, so will your awareness of what is true and what is false. Wisdom is simply a map of reality (accurate information about how things really are), and each book you read (even a simple story) tries to give you a small piece of the map. Some books will give you false pieces that do not describe anything that actually exists on the map. But as you read more books, your knowledge increases about the other pieces that surround the false piece, and thus you start to have an intuitive sense of what the false piece should actually look like, and thus you recognize the false piece for what it is: false. Recognition of the falsehood in itself increases your knowledge, for your brain can abstract the patterns of falsehood, and it can actually build a map of what falsehood itself looks like, and thus it will become increasingly hard for falsehoods to mislead you.

If you start to read a book that at first seems interesting, but eventually lose interest in it and start to find it boring and tiring, you should feel no qualms about abandoning the book and starting another. When this happens, it can be due to one of two things:

  1. The book does not contain anything that’s new to you, and thus your brain recognizes it as a repetition of things that you already know very well, and therefore you brain is asking you to stop wasting your time with the book.
  2. The book contains information that has too many prerequisites, and thus your brain is not equipped to handle the information. You should abandon the book now and return to it after reading many other books.

Spend a year doing this and at the end of it you may laugh at how unwise and biased you used to be a year ago. During your journey you would have picked up some new biases, therefore it is unwise to stop your journey. Continue reading books and these biases will be cleared up. You will never stop picking up biases, but their frequency will decrease as your wisdom increases, for biases have patterns of their own and the wise mind can learn to avoid many of them. This is why you find the wisest people to be those who are least ready to make final judgments on any topic–they are “open-minded”, knowing when they do not have enough information.

In most cases, when it comes to most topics, humans rarely have perfect knowledge, therefore the wisest often refuse to give final answers on anything or to give counsel freely to those who ask for it. They will speak about what they know, and refuse to delve into what they do not know.

/ No Comments on How to: Become wise