Philosophy - November 2007

The old people of today are normally less into computers and usually not at all into games, current music etc. I am a disc jockey, I actually appreciate almost all forms of music except maybe death metal, although I do like other forms of hard rock death metal is eh... And I love my computer and playing MMORPG's and shooters and I wish I had a virtual reality headset etc. even though that technology is available but not popular and has to be ordered over the internet. So am I gonna become an old man that only wants to listen to "oldies" like system of a down, daddy yankee, linkin park, jet, etc. and hates playing mmorpgs and shooter games? Or will the "new" age of old people be in fact more hip than before? I can't honestly imagine what could come out that I would hate when I am an old man?

2007-11-11 07:17:29 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-11 06:42:56 · 40 answers · asked by PLUTO 6

as above ^^^

2007-11-11 06:32:37 · 18 answers · asked by blondebombs10179 1

Not only physical work but mental emotional and spiritual as well.......

2007-11-11 05:04:59 · 23 answers · asked by Rita 6

How can you mediate between the imponderable or irreconcilable things in this matter?

2007-11-11 04:52:21 · 18 answers · asked by Astro 5

2007-11-11 04:47:30 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Therefore, every rational being must so act as if he were through his maxim always a legislating member in the universal kingdom of ends..... this is what i have so far Which practically states that act on rationality based decisions. If two people cannot come to a equal conclusion this could be solved by a rational debate. This leads to harmonizing our ends with all other humans and having/making moral decisions

2007-11-11 04:02:53 · 2 answers · asked by Chinita L 1

S- Spirit
A- Adhering
T- To
A- Animalistic
N- Nature
This came as a vision in meditation, the realizatoin was that we have animal natures with a "mind" to pervert them!

2007-11-11 03:44:02 · 5 answers · asked by Premaholic 7

Terms that are bandied about easily in the vernacular will not help us here. I'm thinking especially of the recent series of questions of a particular Yahoo questioner.

A description of an ideal is not compulsory. My thought is very simple. It may mean that there are ideals some are aware of and others are not.

2007-11-11 03:36:33 · 2 answers · asked by Baron VonHiggins 7

2007-11-11 03:17:08 · 4 answers · asked by Baron VonHiggins 7

Please , please be extra-careful in what you say answering this Q as this Q has been deleted once already after it got 26 answers in 20 minutes. It was not deleted by me. Apparently it angered some people who reported it vigorously. Be sure to copy the webpage with the Q with your A , in case it gets deleted again. I wish others would post my Q on their own in protest of censorship at this public venue.

BTW this Q was a couterpart to the Q : How do ignorant people know that they are ignorant? The now closed Q got a good answer. They ask Q's!

2007-11-11 03:00:44 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-11 01:49:17 · 13 answers · asked by TD Euwaite? 6

i has some thing in my heart which is no good and it is not healty for me but no one is believing me i was ab...............

2007-11-11 01:48:26 · 10 answers · asked by Aditya 2

“John Donne". is my favarite poet & his great poem `Go and catch a falling star. Get with child a mandrack root...' is too much inspired my Girl friend. she thinks its possible for me but how I dont know. U know pleas ans.

2007-11-11 01:47:33 · 6 answers · asked by anjan k 1

2007-11-11 01:29:38 · 9 answers · asked by TD Euwaite? 6

2007-11-11 01:01:43 · 6 answers · asked by Adham 1910 4

would you expect them to tell the people or let you live in ignorant bliss for the last few months.
Would you want to be told or just plod along until the end.

2007-11-11 00:15:04 · 12 answers · asked by bigpete767 3

Science has logic, reason, measurement, proof and experiments. Theories can be postulated then backed up with solid data. Evidence is searched for and analysed. Knowledge is slowly but steadily built up.Tiny accretions accumulate in layers to build solid bulwarks of unassailable fact. Yes there is debate, discussion, opposing theories, but the main thrust is mutually constructive and collaborative.

In the absence of empirical evidence does philosophy always involve arguments and end up being messily subjective?
How do you calibrate or measure what comes down to a matter of opinion or interpretation?

2007-11-10 23:34:10 · 18 answers · asked by Anonymous

Obviously no right or wrong answers here, I was just interested in hearing what others have to say.

Thanks =)

2007-11-10 22:59:07 · 10 answers · asked by financebarbie78 2

Thanks to all your answers. Have a great day!

2007-11-10 22:56:40 · 36 answers · asked by Third P 6

2007-11-10 22:26:49 · 6 answers · asked by practitioner 1

You might think that this is a silly question but it has been going about in my mind for quite sometime. Just think, what would've happened if humans did not exist? Would it effect the space, time, universe or anything? I don't think so. Are we just made to grow up, earn mney, fame n name, increase the popoulation and then die? No, there must be some reason, thnk for a minute and then temme, what was can be the reason behind creating us?

2007-11-10 21:55:22 · 19 answers · asked by Akanksha 2

2007-11-10 21:28:09 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-11-10 21:19:14 · 3 answers · asked by josh k 1

What would the world be like If it was ruled by Rock, Paper, Scissors, Harmony or Chaos?

2007-11-10 21:14:50 · 2 answers · asked by smokey_crim 3

2007-11-10 21:06:10 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

A peace full world.

2007-11-10 20:36:19 · 9 answers · asked by paparika 1

1) If the Bible is inerrant, God inspired it, but if it is not, God did not inspire it.

2) If the Bible is not inerrant, then it is not trustworthy, and one cannot be sure his faith is valid.

Give more examples of false dichotomies if you can, please.

2007-11-10 20:16:25 · 2 answers · asked by enarchay 2

2007-11-10 19:59:56 · 4 answers · asked by Red 2

Does postmodern philosophy in combination with Christianity completely rule out rationalism when it comes to defining doctrine and keeping order in churches? For example, a church is claiming that the Holy Spirit is causing people's hair color to change. Can the postmodern Christian rationally examine these seemingly anti-biblical claims and refute them, or does the philosophy rule that out? Or, to give a more realistic example: a church claims that God is telling them Universal Salvation is a correct doctrine. Can the postmodern Christian examine this claim with the Biblical texts? If not, then perhaps we should seek a better alternative to both modernism AND postmodernism. Is there such a thing?

What I am getting at is this: will postmodernism in combination with Christianity result in many people reverting back to pure, unwarranted, superstition?

What do you think? Provide examples, also.

2007-11-10 19:56:35 · 2 answers · asked by enarchay 2