qualifications: there really are none, however it seems there is a lack of understanding of the english language prevalent among the very ones who speak it. so for those who cannot read carefully and understand: 1) the question IS valid as written, it presupposes nothing.
2) it is NOT a paradox, conundrum, unanswerable riddle, catch-22, relevant syllogism or play on words.
3) it IS philosophical in nature, much more so than waxing on the ratio of fire to earth in the human spirit, or the merits of anarchy and nihilism.
4)it is NOT the 2500 repeat of the question this year, but the first posing (i scanned all 292 related entries at the time of this writing and only 2 others were even vaguely similar, and that was conceptually (one by wesley2711 and the other by muckracker in the form of hot burritos))
5)I certainly recognize the inherent difficulties in dealing with concepts related to infinity and all resultant derivations thereof, (and usually the inherent futility as well!)
2006-12-28
10:41:03
·
16 answers
·
asked by
metroactus
4
in
Philosophy