Toughest Philosophical Questions

Because if Christianity is right, as it claims. Then it's the only thing that matters. Just that, it's better to just ignore it though, right?

You said;
What do you think are the toughest philosophical questions to answer? I'm not looking for your answers (that would be too much for one thread), but I'm looking for your specific questions. What philosophical questions do you find yourself unable to answer? Which ones, if any, do you think are impossible to answer?

Questions:
1. could god make a 10 dollar bill that is not counterfeit?
2. since an oak tree, by definition, has to come from an acorn that came from an oak tree, could god make one of those if he isn't an oak tree?
3. a squirrell and a man are moving around a tree in the same clockwise direction but on opposite sides of the tree never seeing each other. which one is circling the other?
4. (and of course) There are two errors in in this sentence. (is it true or false?)

Well..

1. Yes. If god is the omnipotent creature he is made out to be in the Bible. Of course he could, but why would he want to? (Same goes for any other religion, but they don't call him/her/it God). Then again, if god doesn't exist, he couldn't do anything, not to mention something that stupid.
2. Seen as this is the part where science and religion contradict; Stating the existence of a god (by our, perhaps modern, perhaps just ingorant, definition) in the first place, might aswell leave you to believe he actually could do something scientifically impossible. In which case the answer could be yes. Then again, if god doesn't exist, mr. oak try is going to have to pop up some other way, isn't he?
3. Neither, seen as 'circling' implies one makes a circle that is at least bigger than the area the other is on, wether the other is walking, standing, jumping or lying down. Us humans call the behaviour you described 'following'. The presence of a tree doesn't change that.
4. You're pulling out a liars paradox on a philosophy forum. How.. imaginative. Now, if you really do not understand;
Whatever my given answer could be, the question itself is not a philosophical question, not to mention one of the harder ones. Seen as there's no value to the question, it's nothing but a puzzle. Finding the answer doesn't affect anything other than the sentence itself. It doesn't affect anything in reality, your percepted reality, your idea of reality or anything that doesn't class under either of those three. The inevidable pointlessness of the question leaves me to believe it could never be of any philosophical value, therefor it's nothing but a liar's paradox. Then again, any liar's paradox is of no philosophical value, just a fun trick.

ps.
4. There are two errors in in this sentence. (is it true or false?)|

The statement is most obviously false; There is only one error in the sentence; there should be but one 'in'.

both are circling each other

The question that has been tormenting me lately is as follows:

1. What is life about?

And if the answer happens to be 'about finding happiness' then:

2. why is it that we look for happiness when it merely last a few seconds before sending us into a wild chase after more?

That's because seeking happiness and our environment are often at odds.

When I shoot the solipsist in the head and he doesn't imagine anymore I prove the existence of some external entity other than the solipsist. It's the existence of another entity that causes the solipsist to cease to exist that disproves the theory. True the solipsist is none the wiser but that's what you get for subscribing to faulty philosophy..

...how about disprovinh the principle, the great solipsist, the system itself ? ad it ocurred to you that just maybe the "you" and the "I" can be reduced to something else? ...It is not that I like solipsists but I wich you presented a less mediocre argumentation...

When I say 'all is mind then people think of Solipsism but I could say 'all is mind' but can't say all is 'one' mind because others report the same appearance (phenomena) as different to my experience of the same apparent phenomena but also you can't say each has their own unique mind separate from others' minds because we interact and communicate with each other. So its possible to start by understanding all is mind and end by saying mind is neither one mind or not one mind i.e. in this respect it is beyond elaboration, ineffable.

The advantage of understanding all is mind is that we don't have to examine every (external to mind) object to understand its fundamental characteristics we just examine the mind (one type of thing) and understand the mind's fundamental characteristics. So first understand all is mind then understand the true nature of mind itself.

AxMaliavi,
I agree. Happiness leads to discontent because, as you say, (1) it is temporary/ephemeral, and that's bad because of the desire to have a "happiness" that is constant and permanent, and (2), the addiction to happiness/pleasure reflects a delusional spiritual status. It reflects a desire to control Reality, to experience it solely on one's terms. Contentment, wisdom, or Joy derives from the ability--the willingness--to live with Reality on its terms or as it is.

Quote:

3. a squirrell and a man are moving around a tree in the same clockwise direction but on opposite sides of the tree never seeing each other. which one is circling the other?



both are circling each other


No, that's called following. Two indivuals can't 'circle eachother'.

See it doesn't have to be temporary. Get me an i.v. of dopamine and I'll be fine. :]

but why I said " both are circling each other " is because they are anti-clockwise from each other

But it says they're in the same clockwise direction... ?

it does



but thats not possible

do what I did , imagine

do clockwise direction on one side , now do the same thing, clockwise direction , on the opposite side

they are going in the opposite direction to each other

are you mad!?

now why would you suggest this ?

I kinda get what you are saying, that at no time are they traveling in the same direction relative to the center of the circle, as if their movement was rectalinear... You could never say, of course, that the crank of an engine was moving opposite of itself though in relation to one side the other is moving in a absolute opposite direction, since it is a whole moving about a common center... It is only with a fixed plane that directions can be considered opposite... We have North opposed to South in relation to the equator... Standing at the North Pole, all directions are South... In circular movement there is no fixed plane, and in the illustration there is no fixed plane unless one considers at any moment that the fixed center, and the two points in movement around it make an infinite plane... Does any of this make sense to you???

There is likely no global purpose for human kind but instead personal purpose of individuals such as survival. As a naturalist I agree with the notion that there is no purpose to any aspect of existence only what has occurred naturally. Purpose is just a human created idea to give their existence more meaning than it actually possesses, in my personal views.

I believe life offers a bit more than you surmise; it also depends a great deal on the environment in which one is born, because opportunities are not equal between countries or even within countries.

I also believe having been born in developed countries during this generation is a lucky one for the small percentage of humanity. We have lived through the Great Depression, WWII, and the growth of our country into the Superpower with only 5% of the world population. Our economy expanded after WWII into what has become admired and respected by many around the world. Our country created the high tech industry, and California remains within the top 10th economic power in this world. San Jose, California, enjoys the second highest income in the US after Washington DC.

We have essentially enjoyed living in a democratic republic with our many freedoms and choices. Our health care system is one of the best in this world. Travel is relatively easy, and access to communication and media are still within most people's budget.

We create meaning for our lives by setting and meeting goals, and trying our best to treat humanity equally.

The value of our life depends on how we live it.