• Why do democrats blame trump for winning the election?

    Shouldnt they be blaming themselves for losing to someone who is "racist, stupid arrogant, and a facist"?
    Shouldnt they be blaming themselves for losing to someone who is "racist, stupid arrogant, and a facist"?
    9 answers · 5 hours ago
  • Is life just like a battery?

    82 answers · 4 days ago
  • Is there a country called China?

    19 answers · 7 hours ago
  • How Important is Money in the World?

    9 answers · 15 hours ago
  • Is it possible to completely not care what people think?

    Because it seems a little difficult for me because for me if we value ourselves we also automatically value other people since they are like ourselves. We are made of matter yet so is everyone else. If we think about matter in this sense do we value other people because we ourselves made of matter value ourselves?
    Because it seems a little difficult for me because for me if we value ourselves we also automatically value other people since they are like ourselves. We are made of matter yet so is everyone else. If we think about matter in this sense do we value other people because we ourselves made of matter value ourselves?
    14 answers · 2 days ago
  • How philosophy is seen as an activity?

    7 answers · 12 hours ago
  • Do people in who study philosophy have any foundation of truth?

    Best answer: Foundation or truth or foundation of knowledge? Truth is that which describes reality. If a proposition describes reality it is true. If it doesn't it is false. If a sentence does not refer to a proposition it is meaningless, and therefore neither true nor false. Philosophy doesn't end when you accept... show more
    Best answer: Foundation or truth or foundation of knowledge?

    Truth is that which describes reality. If a proposition describes reality it is true. If it doesn't it is false. If a sentence does not refer to a proposition it is meaningless, and therefore neither true nor false.

    Philosophy doesn't end when you accept that anything is possible. What is meant by "possible"? Does possible simply mean you don't personally know it to be false? Then "possibility" is a statement of your knowledge, not a statement about reality. I take "possible" to mean "consistent" "conceivable" or "non-contradictory".

    The only things we can say are absolutely impossible are contradictions, such as the existence of married bachelors. But they are only impossible because there is no concept that the words "married bachelor" refer to, and so really the word "meaningless" might make more sense than "impossible". Any meaningful proposition is possible, because we can always imagine a version of reality where it is the case. So in a sense, all things are possible.

    But reality is the way it is, and given all knowledge, the only things which are truly "possible" are things that are true. Because if something is true, it is impossible for it to be false, for that would mean the possibility of being simultaneously true and false, which is a contradiction.

    You probably spend a lot of time doing philosophy without even realising it. If you think about fundamental questions, or seriously try to understand something from the bottom up, you are doing philosophy. The scientific method is one of the achievements of philosophy. Science itself was once called "natural philosophy".

    I would argue every field of study that exists draws upon philosophy, because all fields need to begin with a question and a method of reasoning.

    You will also find you only know a half-truth, if you understand the field but not the philosophy. What is the point of absorbing scientific facts, one-by-one, if you haven't developed a consistent framework in which to make sense of these facts? For example, special relativity talks about time dilation at high speeds. If you have studied the B-theory of time, you will be able to visualise how time moves at different speeds for different observers. But if your only concept of time is the flow of events in front of your eyes, you will have a hard time conceiving of how the flow of time is not constant, and will just have to accept it on faith. Or if you have studied the philosophy of free will, you would be able to understand the relationship between the brain and behaviour better than someone with the intuitive view that all action originates in consciousness.

    Philosophers don't tend to entertain themselves with ideas they know are probably not true, unless for the purpose of a hypothetical which helps their understanding of an abstract concept. Everything philosophers do is for the purpose of developing a deeper understanding of the world. You should watch some debates of philosophers and see how they reason and what ideas they appeal to. You will find they almost always have practical importance. It's like mathematics. Mathematics is fundamentally just numbers and patterns, but these patterns have the power to take us to the moon. These patterns have the power to develop particle accelerators. These patterns have the power to give us cars, and electricity, and modern society.

    I was brought up in the physical sciences, and I looked down upon philosophy because I didn't really know what it was. I thought philosophy was for people who weren't smart enough to study science. And I still think today that there is little point in learning philosophy if you're don't have a foundation in science, because you will be wasting time asking questions we already have the answer to, and you will often delude yourself into believing in things we know to be false. The reason we learn philosophy is specifically to avoid doing this. But if you care about understanding reality for its own sake the most important questions you can ask are philosophical questions. They are not questions we don't have an answer to. Philosophers are not people who just shrug at every question and say "maybe, maybe not". They have strong opinions and can back them up with reason and evidence, and you will also find that even if we don't know the truth with certainty, there is still an objectively "best" or "most valid" position to hold, when you look at all the evidence holistically. We learn, teach, and test the validity of our beliefs by arguing with others. (The word "argue" here means simply to exchange arguments, and does not suggest any hostility). Building and strengthening your worldview is rewarding in itself.
    13 answers · 3 days ago
  • What difference does it make that there is or isn't a meaning to life?

    Would it change your goals? Why not have a different purpose base on your experience of life or someone else's? How would you apply the meaning to life? - It's not like knowing it would bring any direct happiness. Unless your purpose is to find the meaning of life, but such a person wouldn't be happy... show more
    Would it change your goals? Why not have a different purpose base on your experience of life or someone else's? How would you apply the meaning to life? - It's not like knowing it would bring any direct happiness. Unless your purpose is to find the meaning of life, but such a person wouldn't be happy regardless. It doesn't make you stronger or more intelligent. So many failed to find it your odds are better somewhere else ultimately; but how can the pessimistic be optimistic? Is the question, a deeper reflection to our lack of strength as beings. A question of a thing that has been defeated? Just want someone other thoughts.
    15 answers · 3 days ago
  • Philisophical debate: what defines "eternity"?

    Best answer: Eternity is an abstract concept, kind of like infinity. We humans are limited in space and time. To our minds, everything has a beginning and an end so eternity is somewhat difficult to wrap one's head around.
    Best answer: Eternity is an abstract concept, kind of like infinity. We humans are limited in space and time. To our minds, everything has a beginning and an end so eternity is somewhat difficult to wrap one's head around.
    11 answers · 2 days ago
  • How would you tell the difference between your thoughts and the thoughts of others?

    I'm doing an essay for my philosophy class and this prompt really makes me realize how trippy the whole afterlife thing is. The prompt says if there was an afterlife, and people were only thoughts, without a body, how would they know they were hearing the thoughts of themselves, or the thoughts of others. I... show more
    I'm doing an essay for my philosophy class and this prompt really makes me realize how trippy the whole afterlife thing is. The prompt says if there was an afterlife, and people were only thoughts, without a body, how would they know they were hearing the thoughts of themselves, or the thoughts of others. I appreciate you checking this out. Thanks.
    11 answers · 3 days ago