Area 51 » Science

189

followers

Announcements

This is subjective and argumentive! – Ivo Flipse Jun 3 '10 at 12:12

Philosophy itself is basically a series of debates of ethical issues and morality. How can it be a Q&A site if there are no answers? Just a lot of questions and a lot of debates. The only things that can be answered are history questions, which is the really boring part of philosophy. :( – Corey Jun 5 '10 at 8:38

@Corey Sarnia: Philosophy is not about just ethical issues and morality. It's also about pure reasoning. I personally would love to see a site where someone could post: "Help me strengthen this thesis" or: "Help me find the holes in my argument" and answers would be provided by users with a background/talent in logic & reasoning. I could definitely see the benefit. – Dan Tao Jun 15 '10 at 12:30

show 29 more announcements

90 Example Questions (13 closed)

active newest votes

up vote 1 down vote

added by Satanicpuppy Jul 1 '10 at 15:05

	I don't think this question makes any sense. Wittgenstein did not elaborate any rules or standards for language games. – adrianos Jul 15 '10 at 11:11
	insofar as language games are defined and illustrated at all there can be an analysis of whether of the [dilemma/paradigm X] and whether it constitutes a language game. Free will dilemmas would fit the 'builder's language' metaphor perfectly fine: instead of knowing what to do with 'slab' (etc) the discourse revolves around what to with terms like 'causation.' – mfg Jul 21 '10 at 17:24
	The question doesn't make sense. If it were `Is the debate about free will an example ...?' it wouldn't be an especially interesting question, but it would at least be clear. – vanden Jul 23 '10 at 6:18
	This poses an interesting question if you look at it from the perspective of reducing all arguments [ie. for/against free will, determinism, etc] to language games. In the question above, any respondent would be able to write a concise and direct answer that answers whether [problem x] qualifies as an example of [group a]. you could write a senior thesis on the question above, as well as lay out a 5 bullet-point explanation of your argument. – mfg Jul 23 '10 at 13:17

up vote 1 down vote

added by Tom Boardman Jul 7 '10 at 11:04

Off topic: go see wikipedia/stanford – Tom Boardman Jul 7 '10 at 11:04

up vote 1 down vote

added by Ryan Elkins Jul 9 '10 at 3:51

well phrased question, on-topic – mfg Aug 19 '10 at 17:43

up vote 1 down vote

added by ianfuture Jul 13 '10 at 13:29

up vote 1 down vote

added by Matt Jul 14 '10 at 18:40

up vote 1 down vote

added by Wikis Jul 15 '10 at 17:32

up vote 1 down vote

added by Noldorin Jul 20 '10 at 10:10

up vote 1 down vote

added by vanden Jul 23 '10 at 6:39

up vote 1 down vote

added by Seamus Aug 3 '10 at 14:08

up vote 1 down vote

added by Seamus Aug 3 '10 at 14:12

up vote 1 down vote

added by Tom Boardman Aug 28 '10 at 13:24

	(*the copenhagen (istigkeit) interpretation) – Tom Boardman Aug 28 '10 at 13:27
	Only well known philosophers can seriously attempt to deal with philosophical problems? – Seamus Aug 31 '10 at 12:21

up vote 1 down vote

added by James Power, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Sep 12 '10 at 16:30

up vote 0 down vote

added by Robert Harvey Jun 3 '10 at 4:02

closed as off topic by Casebash, DustyD, Sarhanis, user6376, Jamie Banks Jun 27 '10 at 7:12

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Way too subjective – Casebash Jun 5 '10 at 4:42

This raises the question of the role of "conversation starters" versus objective, philosophy-related facts. "When did Socrates live?" pertains to history, not philosophy, but I have a hard time identifying bona fide philosophical points that are not open to debate. Maybe 1) What [philosopher] said, or 2) something to do with logical fallacies. – moioci Jun 8 '10 at 6:23

up vote 0 down vote

added by Gordon Gustafson Jun 24 '10 at 20:24

closed as off topic by Shane, Satanicpuppy, Matt, murgatroid99, Don Aug 5 '10 at 17:16

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

hmmm...A philosopher with morals...five bucks says that is an oxymoron. Ethics ?...maybe...Morals ?...nope. – Rusty Sep 3 '10 at 18:49

up vote 0 down vote

added by Shane Jun 24 '10 at 21:14

up vote 0 down vote

added by Satanicpuppy Jul 1 '10 at 15:11

seems like a leading question to me. – Matt Jul 18 '10 at 2:42

up vote 0 down vote

added by Ryan Elkins Jul 9 '10 at 3:53

up vote 0 down vote

added by Matt Jul 10 '10 at 21:22

How should translation/resource questions be considered? I know i would be interested in having a layout of the virtues of different translations for a book i am picking up, but is this more of a comm wiki question? – mfg Jul 23 '10 at 14:14

up vote 0 down vote

added by ianfuture Jul 13 '10 at 13:31

too generalized; becomes a list of X question – mfg Jul 21 '10 at 17:26

up vote 0 down vote

added by colithium Jul 17 '10 at 1:48

up vote 0 down vote

added by mfg, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Aug 7 '10 at 14:39

closed as off topic by moioci, Don, Massimo, Mael, hudsonsedge Sep 7 '10 at 12:50

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

up vote 0 down vote

added by mfg Jul 21 '10 at 18:14

up vote 0 down vote

added by mfg Jul 21 '10 at 18:15

up vote 0 down vote

added by vanden Jul 23 '10 at 6:37

up vote 0 down vote

added by Noldorin Jul 23 '10 at 13:50

up vote 0 down vote

added by Seamus Aug 3 '10 at 14:07

up vote 0 down vote

added by Seamus Aug 3 '10 at 14:10

up vote 0 down vote

added by Faiz, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Aug 30 '10 at 23:50

up vote 0 down vote

added by James Power, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Sep 12 '10 at 16:35

Surely this is a question for anthropology, evolutionary psychology or related disciplines? Not for philosophy – Seamus Sep 4 '10 at 10:09

up vote 0 down vote

added by James Power, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Sep 12 '10 at 16:34

up vote 0 down vote

added by James Power, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Sep 12 '10 at 16:33

This possibly belongs more in the realm of (evolutionary) biology or anthropology, but I can see a metaphysical aspect too, so +1. – Noldorin Sep 14 '10 at 1:11

up vote 0 down vote

added by James Power Sep 3 '10 at 19:52

up vote 0 down vote

added by NimChimpsky, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Sep 20 '10 at 16:45

up vote 0 down vote

added by PLed76 Sep 20 '10 at 12:07

up vote 0 down vote

added by milesmeow Sep 28 '10 at 18:29

up vote -1 down vote

added by Rog Jun 3 '10 at 1:39

closed as off topic by Casebash, Blorgbeard, zvolkov, Klas Mellbourn, Vortico Jun 21 '10 at 16:53

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

This is a famous Zen Koan. While it may be useful in the context of a discussion, it is not helpful as a question in and of itself. – Anonymous Jun 23 '10 at 16:54

Clap! – Nathan Osman Jul 12 '10 at 18:38

In the context of a really bad movie: It sounds very much like money being burned....the producers money. – Rusty Sep 6 '10 at 22:09

up vote -1 down vote

added by herzmeister Jun 3 '10 at 10:10

closed as off topic by Casebash, Blorgbeard, dsolimano, Christian, Satanicpuppy Jul 1 '10 at 15:00

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	...also without any other means of exchange or bartering, considering the progress in technology and automation. – herzmeister Jun 3 '10 at 10:11
	Too vague to be answerable. Perhaps, it would be better to ask whether anyone has tried starting a society without money or if we have any idea of how society worked before money – Casebash Jun 5 '10 at 4:34
	This would be better suited on a board about economics or sociology. – Anonymous Jun 23 '10 at 16:53

up vote -1 down vote

added by Nathan Osman Jun 18 '10 at 16:04

This seems to straightforward. Of course you will conscious in the new person's body because that is where your brain would "physically" be. Perhaps Edison means "conscious of the new person's body"? That would depend on the wiring of the brain. A better question is, perhaps, "If my brain were transplanted, would I still be me?" – Ron Gejman Jun 18 '10 at 22:42

Isn't this more akin to Neurophysiology than Phylosophy? – Massimo Jun 19 '10 at 3:37

@Massimo: Dennet, Davison, and Putnam would disagree. – Satanicpuppy Jul 6 '10 at 21:50

up vote -1 down vote

added by Matt, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Aug 7 '10 at 14:39

Snarky response: the same way the static vs. dynamic typing camps works on StackOverflow. Or Windows vs. Unix on Server Fault. – Tom Morris Sep 6 '10 at 13:06