Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Nov, 2013 12:25 pm
Regarding the old question- "What would happen if an iresistible force met an immovable object?",
why did Isaac Asimov say the question makes no sense and therefore requires no answer?
Fil Albuquerque
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Nov, 2013 12:54 pm
@brenndo,
You see you are framing the wrong question, you are confusing the problem at hand...you see, dreams are REAL dreams...if reality was a dream within another reality then reality would be the sum of both things and not either one or another. Your question regards knowledge or lack of it about reality but such won't change the nature of the world even if you are dreaming all this up.
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  1  
Reply Mon 18 Nov, 2013 04:40 pm
@brenndo,
I think there's a subconscious "safety valve" that tells us we're dreaming so that we don't take the dream seriously. I mean, some dreams can be pretty weird and we'd wake up in a bit of a panic if we really did think they were real..Smile
0 Replies
 
MandlaPetC
 
  1  
Reply Thu 16 Jan, 2014 05:55 am
@TickTockMan,
I have correctly followed all the steps to prove this. Like we all know, the process is justified by the product. My final step was the product of it all. It entails: You are the figments of my imagination because, I have proven that I am the figment of your imagination.

Like people, figments have got their own life as well. They also do Martial art to defend themselves from other figments.

Mandla Che Chala
0 Replies
 
Romeo Fabulini
 
  0  
Reply Thu 16 Jan, 2014 06:57 am
Re this topic title: 'Toughest Philosophical Questions', I once read a small item in Readers Digest where a philosophy tutor held up a pencil and said to his class "Write an essay about this pencil".
At the end of the lesson he collected the essays and gave top marks to one guy whose essay consisted of just two words- "What pencil?"
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 08:44 am
@Justin,
a part of the animal kingdom
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 08:44 am
@Deftil,
define proof.
to some it can to other no
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 08:52 am
@Victor Eremita,
the question assumes that there is samething.

live according to your mind.
your own ideas.

your imagination is not that creative.
otherwise imagine samething complex and new
if the physical world is your imagination then float up off the floor
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 08:53 am
@CarolA,
no..................
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  0  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 08:55 am
@Aedes,
you assume that we get to choose.
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 09:36 am
@Whoever,
too many mind
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 09:42 am
@TickTockMan,
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn24473-entangled-toy-universe-shows-time-may-be-an-illusion.html

it would also suggest cause and effect are not real
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 09:43 am
@xris,
laying down fastens your digestion.
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 09:46 am
@GUILLOTINEinc,
you can kill the body but not the soul.
thus god would not care
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 09:48 am
@Whoever,
to give direction to the subject.
meaning.
to find a mode of living
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 10:17 am
@manfred,
to revaluate the answer u think is correct
0 Replies
 
void123
 
  1  
Reply Sun 4 May, 2014 10:19 am
how to infect the masses with active nihilism?
0 Replies
 
Deborah1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2015 06:46 am
@Deftil,
Time/energy is almost tangible when seen as past/present/future, because I can use the knowledge from the memory of past and apply the energy/feeling/knowledge to things in any time. Question: Does this energy come away from the past or create more energy when I learn from my past? Does this energy grow or am I just moving it? 😰😊
0 Replies
 
Deborah1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2015 10:48 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
Wouldn't the immovable object have to be not a living organism? Which is a strange thought because if space is constantly growing than there is no such thing an immovable object even if it is being pushed or pulled everything is always moving somewhere...? To what source though? What does nothing look like?😊😰
0 Replies
 
Deborah1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 5 Feb, 2015 10:55 pm
@Romeo Fabulini,
If space is always expanding than there is no such thing as an immovable object...even if it is not living it is still being pulled or pushed some where at all times. Everything is always in constant motion/vibration. Question:What is on the other side of EVERYTHING/What does NOTHING look like?
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
DOES NOTHING EXIST??? - Question by mark noble
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2017 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/23/2017 at 02:33:33