Philosophy - March 2007

Thought experiment: Try to locate the "I" within yourself. Can't do it, can you?

2007-03-25 23:11:10 · 8 answers · asked by hammond_eggor 2

Their are cold days ahead? {it's very breezy outside} Nobody can stand the tempature. Goes up to 100 percent almost" anger stiring inside. But why all this pain? {people blame it on our Awesome president} But it is not He. Nobody is to blame but us. Since Adam and Eve ate the fruit fom the forbidden tree to today, we are in the last days. The rapture is ahead, and all who don't make a comittment with God is left to be layed to to death. 1 John 3:21- Dear friend's, if our hearts do not condemn us we have confidence before God. 22- and receiveanything we ask, because we we obey His commands and do What pleases Him. 23- And this is His command: to believe in the name of the His Son, and love one another as He comanded us.

2007-03-25 23:06:12 · 6 answers · asked by calltoperservence 2

what do you mean by that?....

2007-03-25 23:02:15 · 9 answers · asked by Celine 3

2007-03-25 23:00:26 · 5 answers · asked by tan_precious 2

2007-03-25 22:59:28 · 13 answers · asked by tan_precious 2

2007-03-25 22:58:46 · 8 answers · asked by tan_precious 2

2007-03-25 22:56:48 · 16 answers · asked by rusalka 3

You have the social power to communicate ideas, facts, and reflections of human condition to a massive audience.

Perhaps it is time to implement some alternative ideas on how your voice-a global teaching device, indeed-can aid in specific areas of global need?







I thought about Bono, Dr. Hawking, and others that have posed great questions on yahoo answers-and the thousands that eagerly responded, wanting to share their thoughts.


As the internet begins to erase the lines of culture and educational limitation, it is inherently important for critical thinking to be implemented in the ways you execute your power to influence.

2007-03-25 22:20:54 · 3 answers · asked by Jean Low 2

2007-03-25 22:00:34 · 6 answers · asked by small 7

does the following say that he private language argument is wrong or right??

One famous argument along these lines is the private language argument of Wittgenstein. In brief, this states that since language is for communication, and communication requires two participants, the existence of language in the mind of the thinker means the existence of another mind to communicate with. There is a direct fallacy in this: either, language is for communication between two agents, in which case it is still to be proved that what is in the head of the agent is a language, or what is in the head of the agent is language, in which case it is yet to be proved that language is for communication between two minds. To complicate the situation, the language in the mind of the agent may be for communication between the agent at this time, and the agent at a future time. However, this is no objection to the original argument, which explicitly mentions a kind of "diary" and therefore communication across time.

2007-03-25 21:56:50 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

agiasnt skepticism of the external world?

2007-03-25 21:53:10 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

we may bend the sky too when hardwork and unity on our heart., so ,don't curse our indian team., try to boost and give a hardsuit to them.,

2007-03-25 21:51:35 · 8 answers · asked by puno ad 1

2007-03-25 21:45:09 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous

Everyone says that they would choose love over money but I am asking why.

Why would you choose love over money?

I am looking for a good philosophical argument for or against having love over money and not just a short responce.

Thanks in advance.

2007-03-25 21:18:53 · 13 answers · asked by Arthur N 4

Where does this idea of absolute "right" or "wrong" come from and what makes it valid?

If you answer from God then consider Socrates question; Is something right simply because God says so (making it only God's opinion and subject to change on a whim) or does God base what is right or wrong on a universal law that is greater than God (suggesting God is not the supreme existence, that something greater than he exists.)

Or is moral right and wrong purely based on social ideologies and cultural beliefs, and if this is the case then wouldn't this suggest that there is no universal morality that exists?

2007-03-25 21:14:59 · 16 answers · asked by PeaceFrog 2

2007-03-25 21:06:10 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-25 21:04:35 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-25 21:03:40 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

Been puzzling over this for a while.

2007-03-25 21:02:01 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-25 21:01:47 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-25 20:58:15 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

The more I read him, the more confused I get.

I think he's mostly saying, "And I'm better than you, and I'm better than you," and, "The definition of the Ubermensch: not you," and "Men are being and women are seeming," and "Live in the moment," and some stuff about how we should be all tough and hroargh.

But he's running circles around my head.

Also, what's up with the Will to Power? I don't understand it.

2007-03-25 20:56:45 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous

to evolve....and what will probably be the next......
(This is NOT A Religious question.....so please no religious answers)

2007-03-25 20:53:02 · 2 answers · asked by Odyssey 4

to evolve....and what will probably be the next......
(This is NOT A Religious question.....so please no religious answers)

2007-03-25 20:52:24 · 3 answers · asked by Odyssey 4

Dead is dead. There will be no memory of pain or suffering. So it shouldn't matter if one dies under torture or when sleeping.

2007-03-25 20:43:10 · 8 answers · asked by Ejsenstejn 2

2007-03-25 20:28:18 · 14 answers · asked by manju 1

did he prove there was an external world? and was he correct in his philosophy or was he contradicted?

2007-03-25 20:12:33 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-03-25 19:58:05 · 25 answers · asked by man 1

This question is to define the majority’s perception of the minority. Please answer within the bounds of the question unless expanding on a point.

You are presented with a choice, you have no other options and there is no way to back out once the choice is made.

Choice 1:
You can be highly skilled and able at a particular task or job i.e. Finance . You are given a great interest in this field and it is all that you can think and talk about in most cases. This ability gives you the ability to get and hold a good, well paid job and live comfortably (financially) forever more.

The catch is that this trade requires you to give up all of your social skills, you can only connect with others on a very basic plutonic way at best. You can never marry and must live alone forever, but at the same time understand what you are missing out on to have this great ability. You are guaranteed to die alone unmourned by any but siblings and extended family.

Choice 2:
You can give up your higher level skills and settle for a menial life and low paid job where you have to scrimp and save for every penny.

The up side is that you are given great social skills and are guaranteed to find the 'love of your life' and have a happy future with them. You have a few great kids and share in there lives, before dieing an old happy person loved by all and mourned by everyone.

Which one would you choose and why?

Thanks in advance.

2007-03-25 19:44:15 · 8 answers · asked by Arthur N 4

Often times in life things will happen that will leave us with nothing but questions. You spend the next 20 years of your life behind bars because you were framed, the love of your life gets blind sided by a drunk driver on a thursday morning, your stillborn child never knowing what the junior prom is. Are our lives predestined? Is there a masterplan behind all of this? Or is every instance of life just a series of random unrelated occurrences? And is it a cop out to say that everything does indeed happen for a reason?

2007-03-25 19:40:04 · 12 answers · asked by anjaru@sbcglobal.net 2