Philosophy (Arts & Humanities) - June 2007

i have no argument with his first maxim
basically
i doubt everything -> i am doubting -> someone must be doing this doubting -> i am
(cognito ergo sum)

but i wonder about his second
i have the image of a perfect being in my mind ->as an imperfect being i would not be able to put it there myself -> someone else must have put it there -> god exists

the problem about this (among others) as i see it is that if he was an imperfect being he would have no way of knowing if the image was perfect or not. a perfect being would be to vast to comprehend. and as it can not be comprehended its limits if the do or do not exist remain unknown. as he only has himself to compare with he can only conclude that this image is of a being better than him.

thoughts?

2007-06-26 12:16:20 · 9 answers · asked by oliver h 2

6 ⤊

I saw a bumper sticker today that said "Teach Peace". What does that mean to you?

2007-06-26 12:15:28 · 7 answers · asked by Justin H 7

5 ⤊

for atheists. which life is more valuable ? a Human life or an animal's life?

Considering that atheists don't believe in God and thus they don't believe in a soul, it is just natural to think that to them a dog or a cat and elephant or a cow's life is just as valuable as a human life. Or is it not? If not, what makes it different?

2007-06-26 11:57:03 · 19 answers · asked by red_Al 2

5 ⤊

Is it appropriate for a doctor to call his patients, “sweetie”?

2007-06-26 11:12:35 · 18 answers · asked by fleecy.bear 1

0 ⤊

Physicalists, how do you account mental states?

I can follow the materialists to a point, however, I cannot totally wrap my head around a materialist account of mental states. I don't believe in an immortal soul as my namesake did. But there seems to be a qualitative difference between synaptic connections or C-fiber stimulations and that feeling that I have when eating a nice, juicy steak or downing a tall cold draft beer. Philosophers refer to the experiences that I have when seeing red, tasting beer or steak as qualia. There have been questions on qualia here at YA. I guess I'd just like to know how materialists or physicalists account for qualia or mental states.

2007-06-26 11:01:14 · 4 answers · asked by sokrates 4

12 ⤊

Violence can never have morally good results?

What is your opinion?

2007-06-26 10:52:58 · 12 answers · asked by poisson_rouge 2

3 ⤊

What does a philosopher do when he's not working?

2007-06-26 10:39:29 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous

1 ⤊

If you were the ruler of Atlantis, would you go down with the island?

2007-06-26 10:22:40 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

3 ⤊

Why do we want peace?

What are some negative effects of peace?

The most profound answer gets the 10 points.

2007-06-26 10:09:16 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous

5 ⤊

If televisions were banned...what effect would it have on society? Better? Worse?

there would obviously be pros and cons..for example, it would be harder to publicise wanted criminals and warn people of dangerous weather etc...but there would be less violence, swearing etc for childrens eyes...

tell me your thoughts...thanks!

2007-06-26 09:28:03 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

4 ⤊

Why do theists accuse non theists of having closed minds?

After all we allow for most possibilities you only allow one

2007-06-26 09:23:41 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

10 ⤊

Is the Meaning of Life irrelevant?

Humanity has a universal hunger for purpose, but what (in *evolutionary* terms) is its significance?

Why does humanity need this quest for meaning?

Is it just a side effect of our awareness of our mortality?

In short: why do we ask why?

2007-06-26 09:10:27 · 19 answers · asked by Ms Informed 6

9 ⤊

What is your favourite chinese saying or quote?

2007-06-26 09:09:02 · 28 answers · asked by I dont know 4

19 ⤊

Would TEMPTATIONS Exist if All of Us Dont Have WEAKNESSES?

:-)

2007-06-26 08:54:27 · 16 answers · asked by enki 4

3 ⤊

Objectification: Is it ever possible not to be thought of as an object?

For example, many are against sexual objectification as one's humanity is not considered when evaluating sexual interest - humans are stipped down to their physical atttributes for the purposes of sexual gratification and//or exploitation. Some counter that human sexuality is by its very nature objective. Is it ever possible to not be though of as an object (devoid of all physical form)?

2007-06-26 08:24:59 · 6 answers · asked by ycats 4

11 ⤊