2007-03-09 06:16:19 · 16 answers · asked by pax veritas 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
ABRIDGED
Jeffr.., PureN.. – “"No" is the only unambiguously adequate answer there is.”
:: How and then some !
Col. .., darth.., scott.., ♪Hey.., Jabbe.., Julia.., canad.., Veritas, Saucier, Rowan.. – “There are no truly definitive answers to anything only opportunities to find new questions..because it is not possible to know whether they are adequately answered..once a question is adequately answered it ceases..to be good”
Gabri.., Lesli.. – “..any answer could be adequate but not necessarily true.”
2007-03-17 06:01:47 · update #1
Rowan:: In Halls are we ?
2007-03-17 06:02:39 · update #2
"No" is the only unambiguously adequate answer there is.
Saying yes means yes is not adequate.
So, No.
All you "Yes" people... pfft.
2007-03-09 06:19:49 · answer #1 · answered by Jeffrey W 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, because it isn't possible to know whether they are adequately answered or not, or whether the questions themselves make any sense. This tends to give rise to 'moral relativism', ie. the moral base changes to suite the agenda of whichever authority is in charge at the time. Moral values become a matter of opinion, rather than a given. Human kind has a genius for being able to justify almost anything.
If moral values were derived from 'Christian Doctrine', eg the 'Ten Commandments', then this would provide, for believers, a moral compass/template, which would be fixed, and not subject to the uncertainties and manipulations of Philosophy.
PS. I am not making any value judgements here. Simply comparing the two approaches to creating moral values.
2007-03-11 09:58:49 · answer #2 · answered by Veritas 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, because once a question is adequately answered it ceases to be a good philosophical question...so the questions that are repeatedly and constantly asked are the ones that are good ones. (I always feel like I have to climb a ladder to answer philosophical questions)
2007-03-16 07:25:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Will I ever see the elusive purple dog my reason says could be?
There are no truly definitive answers to anything only opportunities to find new questions.
2007-03-09 06:30:18 · answer #4 · answered by canadaguy 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes, because there is no definite answer, so I don't think you'll ever get what you might call an 'adequate' answer
2007-03-09 06:19:53 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
there is often contract--someplace. Hegel believed Kant. Marx believed Hegel. Lenin believed Marx. Augustine believed Plato. That delivered approximately the dark an prolonged time. Ayn Rand believed Aristotle. That delivered approximately her being forged, earlier "political correctness" had a recognition, as being "hateful." yet Thomas Aquinas believed Aristotle, and that delivered approximately the Enlightenment. The Cato Institute, The Ayn Rand Institute, the middle for Objectivist learn, Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie be responsive to "enlightenment" whilst they see it--choose those 2 success getting "Atlas Shrugged" made. are you able to ensure Pitt as John Galt? Jolie would be awsome as Dagney Taggart. maximum readers revere the "benign existentialism" of Albert Camus. Who can deny "The Plague" is a large novel? "The revolt" is a considerate artwork on philosophical insurrection. Kant is the main influential actuality seeker; additionally the main complicated and the main irrational. he's in charge for greater confusion in philosophy than Socrates who's obtainable in 2nd. yet many take him "at his be conscious," "on faith," and have not any concept what they are agreeing to simply by fact one can not understand the irrational--take purely take it on "faith." yet Rand is obtainable in 2nd in being influential--influential to those who take not something on faith and each thing on reason. She has tens of millions of dedicated followers international, and much greater critics who're too "politically terrific suited" to settle for that she gave Aristotle back to the 20 th century the way Aquinas gave him back to the middle an prolonged time.
2016-10-17 23:24:25 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The asker could consider any answer adequate, but that doesn't make it true.
2007-03-09 06:23:36 · answer #7 · answered by Gabrielle 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No system is complete therefore no question can be adequately answered.
2007-03-09 06:21:29 · answer #8 · answered by Jabberwock 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably. The nature of the questions are so subjective.
There is no way to qualify an answer.
2007-03-09 06:21:08 · answer #9 · answered by ♣Hey jude♣ 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Precisely; philosophical questions are basically one's opinion, many times factually backed, yet, still one's opinion. Great question.
2007-03-09 06:25:15 · answer #10 · answered by leslie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋