Toughest Philosophical Questions

Why God? Your question is biased! you would have asked "can any idea/knowledge" be proved or disproved?"

Tough tougher to Toughest!!! aren't these comparative relative and subjective terms?

You can't be "God" though you can create God to exist in your mind

yes when truth is intelligent freedom then any is alone so cant know else nor see everything as anything, so it would b free like but not intelligent while willin to pretend it always to get the relative sense of being out of freedom intelligence so as truly existing
so basically those that prone knowing the truth are all what is never true by clearly being in opposition to objective right for a fake sense of being free

but what i mean is the objective perspective that there is no start since there is no true free moves nor recognition to, while existence is clearly based on seekin to get attached to freedom sense as an ambition that could never b reached, which prove how all existence is opposed to the fact existing bc of that will to never b constant but as evil ability to kill all else for watever one might profit without being

male gender ambition is to find love so the idea that freedom could b true only if another freedom is found, which is impossible premise of course n they are happy about in existing and living while knowing that all would b forever a lie, then they excuse it by sayin ben it is an infinite pursuit of course wt matter is the way not the end
but wat way when it didnt started at any, opposite way of course to infinite hole down

female gender ambition is to found objective consideration to its superiority in being free as closer to true freedom, so assertin that the whole existence end is to see who is close to true freedom like, so shows of freedom pretenses getting prizes for the best shape
so here again that gender mean clearly to kill freedom being real so never being existing n never will
existence is true in objective perspectives that a lot see while love to take advantage from the opportunity of denyin it in meanin to know it only for own ends, so to deny any obligation to admit n recognize what exist existing

Purpose? This question has long been answered, before creation of mankind.
Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them; and God said to them, " Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth." Gen 1:26-28 furthermore He has given us commandments to help us carry out our stewardship duties wisely. As civilization moved forward, the prophets updated and refined the people's understanding of God's commandments. The Bible urges us to put our trust in God and obey His commandments.
BiBLE everyday stands out to be the greatest/fascinating book ever written, and each year still the best selling book.

At the end of the day,every individual faces the same questions!
what's my purpose, Is life a dream, why am i here, why does life seems to be unfair( FUNERAL HERE, WEDDING NEXT DOOR).all these questions are answered in the Bible, BUT THE GREATEST BLIND FOLD EVER CREATED WAS PHILOSOPHY(Philosophy sometimes labelled as;"the pursuit of wisdom"it isn't the pursuit to wisdom at all, it stand to discredit Bible, the Bible which is the real pursuit of Wisdom) they rather go round and round with endless and pointless arguments ignoring the real solutions to their answeres.

You are drowning in your religion.

Let me guess your preacher does not hold a PhD in theology?

I like the question about figments of imagination? it seems to me that in a way this question is stating something that can be answered at least a little because in a way think of the people you know closely well we make up parts of them based on what we see and think we know so in that since isnt everyone in some way a figment of our imagination?

Well I guess you could see it that way or you could see them as a part of reality and that they do exist but what they share with you may be a part of or a figment of their own imagination.

There is a "selfish DNA" theory which states that the only reason that life exists is to replicate and spread its genetic information. That in turn would apply to humans since we are life and it would imply that our human consciousness is just an offshoot of this goal. Merely a probability. Personally I dont whole heartedly support this extrapolation of the theory to define why humanity exists but as of yet I haven't been able think of anything better.

The basic redneck theological problem: Is there hunting in paradise?

There HAS to be for rednecks to want to go there but, by the same token, a game animal having gotten there clearly could not be killed a second time.

That is not a problem. There is enough booze in paradise to make you drunk enough to convince yourself that clouds are game animals or potential....

Also, don't forget that the human biology has many handicaps when it comes to our biological makeup, our senses, and that includes common sense.

What's so good about common sense? If you ask me it's too damn common--as in the widespread and rigid commitment to Naive Realism.

On the contrary, the problem with common sense is that it isn't so common. Go figure.
Without Naive Realism, applied sciene will have no structure to build upon. Is your alternative metaphysics. Metaphysics tends to get ignored when it becomes inconvenient. Even mathematicians deliberate a perspective that contradictory metaphysics is bad

Maybe I have it wrong but common sense is the meaning that it is common for you to understand because of the sociological currents that you have been exposed to. Meaning that it is common for the majority.
Now if you were to be talking about logical reasoning then yes I would agree that it may not be as common as others who have beliefs without evidence to back them up.

If common sense was common, at least in the sphere of human behavior and interactions, then we won't see as many blockheads running around. Everyday in the news, it isn't uncommon to see a story of some individual or a group doing something incredibly stupid and getting in trouble for it.

What is interesting is how some highly educated individuals are seen to lack a general idea of common sense. I kinda see why that is so. With the advent and explosive growth in science over the years, common sense has become an archaic sense to some.
In cause and effect social and economic systems, humans have come a long way from the past, and a level of certainty can be established, especially to the level of accuracy expected from the physical sciences. With that point made, the major application of common sense is largely in the world of human behavior, commonly known to be a very vast in scope with an indiscernible number of variables. Likely why there are people who are extremely educated, but are lacking in the general idea of common sense, and have a hard time creating smooth social interactions.
Common sense is all about making the world sensible, quickly classifying believable information as old news, ignoring counterfactuals, and rejecting explanations that don’t coincide with experience. This perspective makes common sense seem less like a way to understand how the world works, and rather a tool for survival without having an in-depth understanding of the world. Indeed, common sense isn't with its downsides. Once upon a time, common sense propagated the claim that earth was flat, the sun and the stars revolved around earth, as well as many mistakes in medical history swayed by the notions derived from "common sense."