Tuesday, March 29, 2005

125 questions

What is truth? Is there truth? Absolute truth? Approximate truth? Dualistic truth? Gestalten truth? Intuitive truth? Embodied truth? Can we ever have a reliable arbiter of justice? Are ethics objective? Are they subjective? If so, are they relative? Mutable? Fixed? Gendered? On what basis can we ever teach other human beings anything? Is there a line between education and paternalism? Is all teaching coercive? What are the determinants of human behaviour? Must we always acknowledge our assumptions? How should we make assumptions? On the basis of usefulness? Pragmatism? Happiness? Coherence? Is there an external world? Do other minds exist? What are metaphysics? Do metaphysical ideas exist? What is existence? What is perception? What is the limit of reliability of sense-data? What are the limits of logic? Does logic apply to (the abstracted philosophical) God? Is there an (abstracted philosophical) God? Is the question meaningless? Is it so important as to elude categorization? What is the good life? Is the good life attainable for all? Does humanity stand or fall together? How should society organize its production? Efficiently? Equitably? Randomly? Nepotistically? Neo-liberally? Are human rights a house built on sand? Are they a powerful simplifying assumption? Is war avoidable? What is the limit of pacifism? How should humans relate to the rest of the biosphere? Where is technology taking us? Are we alone? Should we embrace this world? Selectively? Arbitrarily? Madly? Do we renounce it? How should we teach children about death? Should we value carefree playing? Is the media rotting our minds? Does doubt corrupt? Can drugs replace other forms of transcendence? Is transcendence subljective? Are all dichotomies misguided? Is less really more? What is art? What should be the role of art? What is the scope of art? Just how powerful is scientific inquiry? How shallow is reason? How deep is emotion? What is love? Does love spring from the good life? Is true altruism possible? How many of the above-mentioned concepts have non-nebulous definitions? What are the limitations of precise language? Just how useful a tool is langage? Rationality? Manual dexterity? Keen eyesight? What are the limitations on embracing dualisms and multiplicities? Is socialism the God that failed? What is the source of stochastic effects? What are mathematical objects? Is history linear? Cyclical? Progressive? Regressive? Uplifiting? Degrading? What is meaninglessness? What is meaning, anyway? Is everything permitted? Is human egocentrism to blame for all social problems? What is the difference between friendship and romantic love? Between love and marriage? Betwene marriage and sex? Between children and trophies? Between careers and schoolyard games? What will save the world? Does the world need saving? What is imagination? To what extent should one engage in politics? Do other people exist? Does mind-body duality hold? Does materialism hold? Are all acts ultimately selfish? Does reductionism hold? Are there any alternatives? Is evolution gradual or a punctuated equilibrium? Do emergent properties hold any value? What is an object? What is a property? Can linguistic concepts be reflexively defined? Can the underpinnings of mathematics be mathematically defgined? Metamathematically defined? Recursively defined? What is hope? What is happiness? What is evil? Does evil exist? What is inspiration? What are things? What are sets and categories?

And finally, the most awe-inspiring yet unanswerable question: why is there anything at all?

Consider: "...[Plato's] method of reaching [his] conclusions, by a precise process of honest and careful step-by-step searching after absolute answers, has been, and remains, the one great distinguishing feature of the European way of thinking. It underlies the impossible search for perfection which has given rise to Europe's science, politics, psychology, education and much of its angst."

3 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

i wish you would share some of your political views.

this is a very intriguing blog!

5:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

a-dawg, you know what i just realized? you could use the abbrieve "OB-CYN" for your blog.. you konw, like an Ob-Gyn, the kind of doctor...how cool is that?

swig

11:05 PM  
Blogger A. D. said...

1) When it comes to politics, I'd rather not takes ides unless I know a lot about a topic. Having waid that, I'm probably over-opinionated about many things. Political rants are in order. I just have to work up the energy.

2) OB-CYN? Dude, that rocks! But what does it imply? Meh.

11:26 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home