[182] in terms of that attitude which later developed as the scientific attitude. So there are two elements in every philosopher, an element of ultimate concern which gives the passion, the eros, ^athe driving power, to the philosopher; and at the same time, the detached attitude^b, the coldness of observation and of adequate description. In this polarity and this tension, all great philosophers were living. And you can observe how these two elements supported each other - the passion for the ultimate opened the eyes of the observer; and very often also were in tension with each other---the passion went beyond what COULD be observed. But there is no philosophy where there are not these two elements. This is shown in the fact that philosophy^c could become the mother's womb out of which science^d and history^e have grown, and that, as we are never completely separated from our mother, even if she has died long ago, so science and history are never completely separated from philosophy and those two elements, the passion for the ultimate and the conceptual sharpness and discipline. Let me first make this more concrete. The frame of reference within which the physicists^f have seen and are seeing the universe of their inquiries, is philosophical. I just got a report about a discussion which took place---I think it was in New York---this weekend, where a very well known scientist gave a paper in a group of theologians, and his main point was that the metaphysical universe can never be eliminated in everything the physicist ^gdoes (in this case, for instance, the problem of the original production of matter and its time and its space). Now I wouldn't say this is a confirmation