A: I don’t know how you are interpreting this quote, but here are some of my thoughts:

On the surface this sounds quite true - a warning against those who would thrust their beliefs down the throats of others - particularly since this has been done since the beginning of time (and I would expect that’s how Mr. Born meant for it to be understood). But since it was presented here without explanation, and because it could almost be seen to make a certain point against the voicing of one’s opinions/truths, I wonder if the author’s original intent wasn’t misunderstood, perhaps being read too literally?

Read literally, Mr. Born’s quote IMPLIES that if someone believes he or she has the truth, then they must also believe that others do not have the truth, but this isn’t necessarily the case. What if the one truth you believe in is that everyone makes their own truth?

Again, read literally, this quote also seems to negate the validity of an individual’s perspective:

First, it implies that there could be no truths that apply to everyone, because if there were, and someone recognized just one of them, they would then be guilty of "the deepest root of all evil". But what of the idea/truth that “we make our own realities”? To me, this is an inviolate principal that makes our adventure possible, in fact, Max Born would likely agree, because this is the very principal that enables everyone to have/live/experience their own, differing truths!

Secondly, I believe “individuals” are the heroes and heroines of time and space - the Prime Movers of the Universe, as Ayn Rand would say, and I believe that they are nothing but for the truths they are free to believe in. We ARE because we THINK we are, yet the literal interpretation of this quote virtually asks us not to think. What audacity, it implies, to stand in the middle of the Universe and proclaim “I know,” “I am.”

Lastly, again if read literally, doesn’t believing that someone who "believes that their truth is the only truth,” constitute Max Born’s own personal truth, stated as if it were the only truth?

Of course, none of my arguments work unless Mr. Born’s original intent (as I believe it to be) was substituted by the literal interpretation of his words, and it’s very possible that that was never meant!