Philosophy - December 2007

I reckon so. :)

2007-12-21 18:55:56 · 25 answers · asked by The B 2

2007-12-21 18:47:15 · 9 answers · asked by smokey_crim 3

why be successful in the first place, don't you?

2007-12-21 17:57:00 · 14 answers · asked by ? 2

2007-12-21 17:40:56 · 13 answers · asked by Faranak 1

2007-12-21 17:36:26 · 19 answers · asked by jamussails 6

Could Technology Spark Evolution?

After hours to the various BBC documentaries about the evolution of our planet and our species I wondered about this.
It has been assumed any further evolution in the human species is probably unlikely. Previous changes in our evolution (ie biological) might have been forced by drastic changes in enviroment. Our enviroment for dated civilizition has been stabble. Could this new world of Technology spark evolution? The changes that caused evolution before was changes in enviroment and the evolution took millions of years. All of our technology has been invented in the last 100 or so years. That to me seems like a very drastic change in a very short time.


Watch a 50-year old try to play with a gameboy,
and watch 7-year old master the computer.
This gap in comprehension is huge in only one generation.

There has been confusion about 'evolution', I am addressing the inherited characteristics that become more a articulated/dominate.

2007-12-21 17:25:24 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-12-21 17:22:06 · 30 answers · asked by Anonymous

think

2007-12-21 17:15:02 · 9 answers · asked by mahesh 1

2007-12-21 16:35:41 · 19 answers · asked by Rita 6

2007-12-21 16:13:40 · 26 answers · asked by Rita 6

Since God loved Lucifer enough to give him so many second chances, that means that He loves him. Lucifer was the second to Him. Since it is well known that Lucifer still loves God, wouldn't it be considered instant salvation if he just repented and allowed himself to be christened back into Heaven? The only thing that he did was get jealous. He got jealous of man. If you wana get technical, we are the same as angels, except we have no wings, God endowed both humans and angels alike with free will, Lucifer loved Him unconditionally. He got a little jealous because He spent a little more time with man rather than gazing on Lucifer himself. If Lucifer was all that evil, then God could have at that time, uncreated him. Since God is omnipotent, couldn't he have just gotten rid of Lucifer? If Lucifer realizes his folly and repents, what would happen? Would the balance of good and evil shift? Would there be a new ruler of Tartarus, and new Satan? Would God walk with us again?

2007-12-21 16:07:12 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous

Since gravity is the fabric of the space-time continuum, the universe has a distinct point of origin. An infinite gravitational singularity that appeared about 13 billion years ago. It is a validated fact that time and matter began then. Some do not except this truth and postulate elegant mathematical equations to describe an eternal universe without a cause. Many would rather believe the universe is a natural construct that has always existed, then to believe in an eternal everlasting God.

2007-12-21 15:43:12 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous

Pls, nothing but thoughtful Answers with explanations &/or examples. If you don't know, pls be considerate and skip the Q! This Q is specifically directed at Philosophy participants

2007-12-21 15:39:45 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

Pls, nothing but thoughtful Answers with explanations &/or examples. If you don't know, pls be considerate and skip the Q! This Q is directed at philosophy participants.

2007-12-21 15:33:09 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

I've been struggling with this particular question. My mom strives for me to believe in God, but it does not really make sense to me. Sometimes I wonder if we really exist. I find human existence really fascinating because none of us really know the truth. My dad is trying to tell me we evolved from the sea? But I have not idea what he is talking about.

What do you think about how humans got on this planet?

2007-12-21 15:08:35 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous

Is it right for me to be trying to cut through the grime and meaningless grit that seems to be prevading over all of man's existence, and trying to find what it is that makes us human?

If its wrong, what do you suggest I focus on instead?

2007-12-21 14:39:27 · 4 answers · asked by Tuna-San 5

Why is it that I can give advice and get best answers but I just can't answer my own problems. I'm always so conflicted about everything, just confused, lost, and don't know what my next move should be on anything?

2007-12-21 14:30:59 · 13 answers · asked by summer 2

1900>The Planck constant (denoted h) is a physical constant that is used to describe the sizes of quanta. It plays a central role in the theory of quantum mechanics.
1905-1915>The Copenhagen interpretation is an interpretation of quantum mechanics, usually understood to state that every particle is described by its wavefunction, which dictates the probability for it to be found in any location following a measurement. Each measurement causes a change in the state of the particle, known as wavefunction collapse.
1925-1930>The Uncertainty Principle is now understood not so much as a consequence of trade-offs inherent in the measurement process, but rather as a property of quantum states, corresponding to the statistical properties of measurement in quantum mechanics.
1935>In quantum mechanics, the EPR paradox is a thought experiment which challenged long-held ideas about the relation between the observed values of physical quantities and the values that can be accounted for by a physical theory. "EPR" stands for Einstein, Podolsky, and Rosen, who introduced the thought experiment in a 1935 paper to argue that quantum mechanics is not a complete physical theory.
The EPR experiment yields a dichotomy. Either
The result of a measurement performed on one part A of a quantum system has a non-local effect on the physical reality of another distant part B, in the sense that quantum mechanics can predict outcomes of some measurements carried out at B; or...
Quantum mechanics is incomplete in the sense that some element of physical reality corresponding to B cannot be accounted for by quantum mechanics (that is, some extra variable is needed to account for it.)
1964>Bell's theorem is the most famous legacy of the late physicist John S. Bell. It is famous for showing that the predictions of quantum mechanics (QM) are not intuitive, and touches upon fundamental philosophical issues that relate to modern physics. Bell's theorem states:
“ No physical theory of local hidden variables can ever reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics. ”
1978>Wheeler's delayed choice experiment is a thought experiment proposed by John Archibald Wheeler in 1978 (Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Theory, edited by A.R. Marlow, Academic Press). Wheeler proposes a variation of the famous Double-slit experiment of quantum physics, one in which the detector screen can be removed at the last moment, according to a "delayed choice" of the observer, i.e. a choice made after the presumed photon would have cleared the midstream barrier containing two parallel slits. Behind the screen are two tightly focused telescopes, each one aimed to observe its own slit, and it is claimed that seeing a flash of light through one telescope or the other would detect by which path the photon traveled. According to the results of the double slit experiment, if we know which slit the photon goes through, we change the outcome of the experiment and the behavior of the photon. If we know which slit it goes through, the photon will behave as a particle. If we do not know which slit it goes through, the photon will behave as if it were a wave. This wave-particle duality of photons (and in fact all quantum particles) is one of the fundamental mysteries of quantum mechanics.
1982-2007>Bell test experiments serve to investigate the validity of the entanglement effect in quantum mechanics by using some kind of Bell inequality. John Bell published the first inequality of this kind in his paper "On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox". Bell's Theorem states that a Bell inequality must be obeyed under any local hidden variable theory but can in certain circumstances be violated under quantum mechanics. The term "Bell inequality" can mean any one of a number of inequalities — in practice, in real experiments, the CHSH or CH74 inequality, not the original one derived by John Bell. It places restrictions on the statistical results of experiments on sets of particles that have taken part in an interaction and then separated. A Bell test experiment is one designed to test whether or not the real world obeys a Bell inequality. Such experiments fall into two classes, depending on whether the analysers used have one or two output channels.
Today all of this reveals the importance of consciousness and how it relates to "physical reality" Which exists as only a probable non-local timeless state prior to observation, further to say that "physical reality" can or does exist prior to human observation necessitates a primary or original consciousness to make the observation/state collapse. Deeper still, the consciousness must be said to have a non-quantum/physical quality or you will reach infinite descent which is not possible in a quanta/physical reality as quanta are finite therefore at the end of the chain of physical obsevation there must exist a nonquantum quality to the nature of concsiousness for the obseveration of physical reality. So it is logical to either dismiss all assumptions about empirical knowledge and the ablitity to know our nuniverse or we must accept the non-quantum and primary consciousness aspects that are required of physical reality both prior to and existent after the evolution of other forms of consciousenss and also that physical reality is dependent upon and to some extent determined by the primary/original and our own individal/self consciousness.
Fear not one day we will all come to realize this simple fact that has been stated many times and in many forms throughout history, for one day each consciousness will be parted from the physical form.
Sources
quantum physics and logical reasoning.
Also if there is a flaw in my logical reasoning based on current data as provided by the jurgurnaught that is emperical science then please point it out in detail via e-mail
the refinement of ideas is always nice.

2007-12-21 14:20:42 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous

how ! !!!!!!! when your heart is broken?

2007-12-21 14:11:26 · 20 answers · asked by ♥BEX♥ 7

Do you know what I mean?

2007-12-21 14:03:04 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous

if you will be given a chance to change your life would you like to do it?

2007-12-21 14:02:32 · 13 answers · asked by Khristel Jane S 1

It's funny...historians have been pasting together evidence and studying and analyzing footage and some of them are concluding that Hitler may have had Parkinson's disease. I'm NOT trying to play down the seriousness of the atrocities he committed, but what if he really did have a mental illness that impaired his judgement?

2007-12-21 13:47:19 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous

Is it true that darwin really refuted his own theories? I heard that he only did it because he started to become a strong christian on his deathbed. Which could mean he might have been doing it so that he will go to "heaven" instead of "hell".
31 minutes ago - 3 days left to answer.

2007-12-21 13:40:57 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous

Look at our society!
A good education equals intelligence; and only a minority can afford a good education.
And because of that our society is completely controlled by that minority in detriment of the masses that are exploited and lied to constantly.

2007-12-21 13:40:23 · 20 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-12-21 13:07:25 · 17 answers · asked by John 1

2007-12-21 12:57:14 · 20 answers · asked by ♥BEX♥ 7

Why is knowledge power? Is knowledge really power?

2007-12-21 12:47:56 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous

2007-12-21 12:35:16 · 13 answers · asked by stale mate 3

And what can I do to help strengthen it.

2007-12-21 11:20:59 · 14 answers · asked by vitraux 6

I am wondering what evidence actually exists for the theory of intelligent design or creationism depending on what you call it.

I am pretty set on believing evolution as the correct theory but as an open-minded person would like to know if there is any really credible evidence supporting intelligent design.

Note: I put this question into the Philosophy section because it seems the best fit for a part religious, part scientific question.

2007-12-21 10:52:42 · 15 answers · asked by ThE_HooLiGaN 3