 I think one has to stay with one's feet on the ground. I think it's too easy to lose oneself to big ideas, expressions that have many meanings, somehow get lost in this. I mean, I very often find myself unable to understand exactly what it is people are arguing about. To tell you the truth, I enjoyed the debate this morning, but it will take me some time yet, it will take me some time, I assure you, to bring down the ideas that were being thrown around to their workable size so that I can really deal with them. I think we tend to blow things up. By blowing things up, we tend to become lost in between major ideologies that we come to see as either conflicting with one another or being inconsistent with one another. I think we should use the word here, reduce or reductionism, basically to reduce things to things that we can actually talk about. I think exactly the opposite. Exactly the opposite. I love big ideas for a number of reasons. First of all, I think that crimes and mistakes can be committed in the names of big ideas, small ideas, practical ideas, impractical ideas. I'm not sure that the size of an idea necessarily matters, certainly not in regards to its truth. I also think that the universal obligation to do good and to help others should not take the place of philosophical thought or reflection on life. In other words, philosophers and non-philosophers should both teach in the prisons. I think that big ideas give people a sense of the magnitude of human life, of the grandeur of human life, what I said earlier, the tremendousness of human life, and give them a sense that we are not trivial beings, even if we are cosmically small, but we're not trivial beings. The attempt to formulate a worldview, Musil, the Austrian writer once said, wrote that to have a worldview, you have to have a view of the world. It seems sort of obvious, but he was right, that there is a kind of scale that big ideas lift the human spirit up to. I certainly have nothing against the rules of doing good and the practices of doing good. But I wonder what our self-conception should be in terms of our own significance. And there I think I'm prepared, actually, to live with a certain lack of clarity, I guess, because there are things that are not clear and there are things that can't be made entirely clear, and I wouldn't hold it against a large concept that it is not completely clear. That doesn't mean I shouldn't continue working on it, but et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. I think there are certain values that are common sense. I think this is what we can all agree on, like doing good, being tolerant, not kidding, being accepting, empathizing. These are common values that we can all adapt. There's no argument about that. I don't think we can argue about that. But what was for centuries the ideas of tolerance and empathy and doing good were not platitudes and were not common sense. And in fact, if you study the emergence of toleration in Europe, you discover that what we now take for granted as common sense actually had to be established by means of big ideas overthrowing earlier big ideas. Now we enjoy the fruits of those earlier big ideas.