Action (Philosophy) Answers
What are some foods that I can eat to follow a low-carb philosophy? I would like to lose 20 lbs by my wedding
Q. I am getting married July 4th and need to shed some lbs. The hand-held body fat% tester at my gym said I was borderline obese or high risk. I am 6'1", 220 lbs with an athletic/strong build but have some spare tire action going on that I want gone asap.
Asked by Jason - Tue Mar 4 22:00:16 2008 - Diet & Fitness - 2 Answers - Comments
A. Eat more protein: eggs, a bit of cheese, fish (non-fried), fresh nuts. Avoid pasta, potatoes, bread, sugar, cakes, etc. Here's a site with more info:
Answered by w2r65 - Tue Mar 4 22:20:58 2008
Q. I am getting married July 4th and need to shed some lbs. The hand-held body fat% tester at my gym said I was borderline obese or high risk. I am 6'1", 220 lbs with an athletic/strong build but have some spare tire action going on that I want gone asap.
Asked by Jason - Tue Mar 4 22:00:16 2008 - Diet & Fitness - 2 Answers - Comments
A. Eat more protein: eggs, a bit of cheese, fish (non-fried), fresh nuts. Avoid pasta, potatoes, bread, sugar, cakes, etc. Here's a site with more info:
Answered by w2r65 - Tue Mar 4 22:20:58 2008
What is the anatomy of a modern-day revolution in America?
Q. revolution | rev lo sh n| - a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system. For the sake of argument, lets say you woke up today to find that the constitution has been suspended indefinitely. Those that have do so explain to the people that America must take 2 steps back in order to take 10 steps forward as the rationale for their actions. The philosophy being that 'you can't fix a car while its running'. Put yourself on both ends of the spectrum. If you as the President, absolutely had to suspend freedoms in order to save us from ourselves, why would you do it and what are your motives? Even if you mean no harm, and intentions are genuinely honorable. As the citizen who has awoken to this news on CNN, what… [cont.]
Asked by Quinton B - Fri Feb 2 13:55:42 2007 - Civic Participation - 7 Answers - 1 Comments
A. We have a history of suspending personal freedoms. During World War II, thousand of Americans of Asian decent were removed from their homes, had their property seized by the government, and were placed in internment camps. During the same time citizens of German heritage were routinely questioned by authorities. In both cases the American public did nothing. If that would happen today, the majority of Americans would rationalize the gravity of the situation and do nothing.
Answered by mediahoney - Fri Feb 2 14:10:02 2007
Q. revolution | rev lo sh n| - a forcible overthrow of a government or social order in favor of a new system. For the sake of argument, lets say you woke up today to find that the constitution has been suspended indefinitely. Those that have do so explain to the people that America must take 2 steps back in order to take 10 steps forward as the rationale for their actions. The philosophy being that 'you can't fix a car while its running'. Put yourself on both ends of the spectrum. If you as the President, absolutely had to suspend freedoms in order to save us from ourselves, why would you do it and what are your motives? Even if you mean no harm, and intentions are genuinely honorable. As the citizen who has awoken to this news on CNN, what… [cont.]
Asked by Quinton B - Fri Feb 2 13:55:42 2007 - Civic Participation - 7 Answers - 1 Comments
A. We have a history of suspending personal freedoms. During World War II, thousand of Americans of Asian decent were removed from their homes, had their property seized by the government, and were placed in internment camps. During the same time citizens of German heritage were routinely questioned by authorities. In both cases the American public did nothing. If that would happen today, the majority of Americans would rationalize the gravity of the situation and do nothing.
Answered by mediahoney - Fri Feb 2 14:10:02 2007
What is/would be a Life philosophy?
Q. I don't get what a 'Life philosophy' is.I read bios' about people and it said 'Life philosophy' and it had,Life philosophy:hand someness.Or it had,Life philosophy:"A man of action, not words." and also Life philosophy:"Eat in moderation."
Asked by Haley Smith - Mon Mar 15 13:42:45 2010 - Philosophy - 7 Answers - Comments
A. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Show compassion for all creatures. Honesty is the best policy. Never give a sucker an even break. (there are many philosophical positions to help guide a person's actions and choices)
Answered by John - Mon Mar 15 13:55:13 2010
Q. I don't get what a 'Life philosophy' is.I read bios' about people and it said 'Life philosophy' and it had,Life philosophy:hand someness.Or it had,Life philosophy:"A man of action, not words." and also Life philosophy:"Eat in moderation."
Asked by Haley Smith - Mon Mar 15 13:42:45 2010 - Philosophy - 7 Answers - Comments
A. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Show compassion for all creatures. Honesty is the best policy. Never give a sucker an even break. (there are many philosophical positions to help guide a person's actions and choices)
Answered by John - Mon Mar 15 13:55:13 2010
What do you do if somepeople have a wrong philosophy?
Q. You know that their vision of the present and the future is downright unworkable and suicidal, and you don't want to be taken down with them, but they have more numbers on their sides and more ability to put their plans in action. Would you just live your life as normal, joining them, ignoring or perhaps changing whatever differences even though they do and will affect you across the entire society and world (dis)order? Or would you just agree to disagree and because you are the lesser party, accept being the lesser and disgruntledly work to the eventual goal of putting their ideas into action? Or would you fight them in mentality, knowing the tremendous disadvantage you have and the downright unpopular ideas you espouse will never gain… [cont.]
Asked by alistair - Mon Dec 21 03:18:50 2009 - Philosophy - 14 Answers - Comments
A. What we must do is not prescriptive. It will depend upon each unique interaction. What we must know is that no one of us can change another person. To act otherwise is to wrongly assume control. Realizing that each has the responsibility to make his own choices, we can engage with the hope that we may influence the change away from a "wrong" idea. The difference is first in the belief system; a person must want to change. The (perhaps unintended) consequence of our "wrong" thinking is in what we choose to do with/in our lives.
Answered by E P - Tue Dec 22 13:30:02 2009
Q. You know that their vision of the present and the future is downright unworkable and suicidal, and you don't want to be taken down with them, but they have more numbers on their sides and more ability to put their plans in action. Would you just live your life as normal, joining them, ignoring or perhaps changing whatever differences even though they do and will affect you across the entire society and world (dis)order? Or would you just agree to disagree and because you are the lesser party, accept being the lesser and disgruntledly work to the eventual goal of putting their ideas into action? Or would you fight them in mentality, knowing the tremendous disadvantage you have and the downright unpopular ideas you espouse will never gain… [cont.]
Asked by alistair - Mon Dec 21 03:18:50 2009 - Philosophy - 14 Answers - Comments
A. What we must do is not prescriptive. It will depend upon each unique interaction. What we must know is that no one of us can change another person. To act otherwise is to wrongly assume control. Realizing that each has the responsibility to make his own choices, we can engage with the hope that we may influence the change away from a "wrong" idea. The difference is first in the belief system; a person must want to change. The (perhaps unintended) consequence of our "wrong" thinking is in what we choose to do with/in our lives.
Answered by E P - Tue Dec 22 13:30:02 2009
Free will and materialism?
Q. Assuming that the world is composed of solely of matter, how can our actions be considered free? If, ultimately, my actions result from a sequence of atoms bumping into each other (the sequence originating in the Big Bang), how can I be held responsible for "my" actions? Philosophy
Asked by Lokiloo - Tue Feb 16 21:39:29 2010 - Philosophy - 5 Answers - Comments
A. Well, one must look at this through the medium of consciousness. Though it is true that all that happens is just the result of atoms moving, you still control them through your consciousness. The atoms moving and corresponding in your brain create thoughts which allow you to manipulate the atoms as you choose, and since this is the case for all human beings, all must be held responsible for what they do. If one saw the all of the world as being only atoms, the conscious being (the human, in this case) would be no different from a rock or blade of grass.
Answered by Billy - Tue Feb 16 21:49:05 2010
Q. Assuming that the world is composed of solely of matter, how can our actions be considered free? If, ultimately, my actions result from a sequence of atoms bumping into each other (the sequence originating in the Big Bang), how can I be held responsible for "my" actions? Philosophy
Asked by Lokiloo - Tue Feb 16 21:39:29 2010 - Philosophy - 5 Answers - Comments
A. Well, one must look at this through the medium of consciousness. Though it is true that all that happens is just the result of atoms moving, you still control them through your consciousness. The atoms moving and corresponding in your brain create thoughts which allow you to manipulate the atoms as you choose, and since this is the case for all human beings, all must be held responsible for what they do. If one saw the all of the world as being only atoms, the conscious being (the human, in this case) would be no different from a rock or blade of grass.
Answered by Billy - Tue Feb 16 21:49:05 2010
How did Nicholas Romanov II fall short of Niccolo Machiavelli's ideals and standards in "The Prince"?
Q. Would Machiavelli have approved or disapproved of Nicholas' actions and philosophy? Why or why not? And site some examples. A friend and I are working on our paper for English, and we get stumped every time! We're doing the second draft, right now, and we still can't figure stuff out! We've only done three pages, so far. It should be from five to seven. And it's due on Monday! Normally, I wouldn't ask help on here, but we're out of ideas!
Asked by Tamahome - Fri Mar 27 16:43:27 2009 - History - 1 Answers - Comments
A. Machiavelli would not have approved of Nicholas's actions. Machiavelli's works, the Prince and The Discourses on Livy, are a guide book for rulers in how to stay in power. machiavelli draws upon historical examples of how both good and bad leadership have led to success or failure. He would have been appalled at how Nicholas threw away supreme power through his own actions. He would have admired his attempts at industrialisati on, although he would have looked at Britain and Germany and how they became industrial powers. He would also have examined why France threw off their absolute monarchy in such a bloody way. Machiavelli said "...it is better to be feared than loved." Nicholas thought that the Russian people loved him.… [cont.]
Answered by Spellbound RIP Poly Styrene - Fri Mar 27 17:28:56 2009
Q. Would Machiavelli have approved or disapproved of Nicholas' actions and philosophy? Why or why not? And site some examples. A friend and I are working on our paper for English, and we get stumped every time! We're doing the second draft, right now, and we still can't figure stuff out! We've only done three pages, so far. It should be from five to seven. And it's due on Monday! Normally, I wouldn't ask help on here, but we're out of ideas!
Asked by Tamahome - Fri Mar 27 16:43:27 2009 - History - 1 Answers - Comments
A. Machiavelli would not have approved of Nicholas's actions. Machiavelli's works, the Prince and The Discourses on Livy, are a guide book for rulers in how to stay in power. machiavelli draws upon historical examples of how both good and bad leadership have led to success or failure. He would have been appalled at how Nicholas threw away supreme power through his own actions. He would have admired his attempts at industrialisati on, although he would have looked at Britain and Germany and how they became industrial powers. He would also have examined why France threw off their absolute monarchy in such a bloody way. Machiavelli said "...it is better to be feared than loved." Nicholas thought that the Russian people loved him.… [cont.]
Answered by Spellbound RIP Poly Styrene - Fri Mar 27 17:28:56 2009
is philosophy simply about theories,quotes , and talking, or does it include actual physical action?
Q. if there is actual physical action and actual proven ideologies, in philosophy sans quotes and theories, and regurgitation if so what is it called? I am curious to review philosophies that are based on ACTUAL proven concepts. preferable nothing borrowed, stolen or plagerized and CURRENT.
Asked by Destined - Mon Jun 21 23:26:38 2010 - Philosophy - 5 Answers - Comments
A. Bruce Lee studied philosophy in college and it's said that Jeet Kun - do is basically based on his personal philosophies. I don't believe it's anywhere near as good a fighting system as it looks in movies or karate/kung fu tournaments, but it involves physical action, so there you go. It means the "way of the intercepting fist" which is countering, more or less, while your opponent is in mid-strike and vulnerable. Like if they're trying to throw a flying wheel kick and you take advantage of the opportunity to hit them before they finish the kick, which takes forever to deliver. More generally, there's a philosophy for everything. Jeet Kun Do is a philosophy of fighting, most other martial arts styles have their own philosophies… [cont.]
Answered by kozzm0 - Tue Jun 22 00:37:57 2010
Q. if there is actual physical action and actual proven ideologies, in philosophy sans quotes and theories, and regurgitation if so what is it called? I am curious to review philosophies that are based on ACTUAL proven concepts. preferable nothing borrowed, stolen or plagerized and CURRENT.
Asked by Destined - Mon Jun 21 23:26:38 2010 - Philosophy - 5 Answers - Comments
A. Bruce Lee studied philosophy in college and it's said that Jeet Kun - do is basically based on his personal philosophies. I don't believe it's anywhere near as good a fighting system as it looks in movies or karate/kung fu tournaments, but it involves physical action, so there you go. It means the "way of the intercepting fist" which is countering, more or less, while your opponent is in mid-strike and vulnerable. Like if they're trying to throw a flying wheel kick and you take advantage of the opportunity to hit them before they finish the kick, which takes forever to deliver. More generally, there's a philosophy for everything. Jeet Kun Do is a philosophy of fighting, most other martial arts styles have their own philosophies… [cont.]
Answered by kozzm0 - Tue Jun 22 00:37:57 2010
Which alignment does my philosophy correspond to?
Q. Here is my philosophy: I believe strongly in freedom and self-empowermen t. I think that there should be no state but a community run by the people in which people can work together to socially improve society. I believe that justice should be retributive and play out like karma, the punishment should always fit the crime. Tax and debt should be abolished, religion should not be allowed to be involved in politics or decision making and reason and science should be trusted to make government decisions. Saving lives, doing important things and scientific experiments shouldn't need to cost money, let alone huge amounts of money, for it is a selfish attitude that could be self-destructiv e. Money should only be used to help you… [cont.]
Asked by swordbuster - Sun Aug 8 06:10:33 2010 - Philosophy - 2 Answers - Comments
A. Sounds like you prefer modern physicalist/emp iricist naturalism in terms of epistemology. Definitely a secularist and some what libertarian/Mar xists in terms of political orientation (which is some what contradictory) unless you meant that vital resources like food should be a right not a privilege or luxury. Philosophy does not use the categories you listed (Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good..etc.) as it's branches or classifications . I would call it a chaotic good alignment. I say chaotic because of the gaps in your overall philosophy but good because you seem sincerely convicted in being moral, tolerant, and just. However, because you have not expressed definitively an entire philosophy there is potential for… [cont.]
Answered by mtheoryrules - Sun Aug 8 08:18:39 2010
Q. Here is my philosophy: I believe strongly in freedom and self-empowermen t. I think that there should be no state but a community run by the people in which people can work together to socially improve society. I believe that justice should be retributive and play out like karma, the punishment should always fit the crime. Tax and debt should be abolished, religion should not be allowed to be involved in politics or decision making and reason and science should be trusted to make government decisions. Saving lives, doing important things and scientific experiments shouldn't need to cost money, let alone huge amounts of money, for it is a selfish attitude that could be self-destructiv e. Money should only be used to help you… [cont.]
Asked by swordbuster - Sun Aug 8 06:10:33 2010 - Philosophy - 2 Answers - Comments
A. Sounds like you prefer modern physicalist/emp iricist naturalism in terms of epistemology. Definitely a secularist and some what libertarian/Mar xists in terms of political orientation (which is some what contradictory) unless you meant that vital resources like food should be a right not a privilege or luxury. Philosophy does not use the categories you listed (Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good..etc.) as it's branches or classifications . I would call it a chaotic good alignment. I say chaotic because of the gaps in your overall philosophy but good because you seem sincerely convicted in being moral, tolerant, and just. However, because you have not expressed definitively an entire philosophy there is potential for… [cont.]
Answered by mtheoryrules - Sun Aug 8 08:18:39 2010
Gandhi and Mother Teresa comparison? Spiritual influence, philosophies, programs of social action?
Q. Two great spiritual figures of twentieth-centu ry India have been Mahatma Gandhi, a devout Hindu, and Mother Teresa of Calcutta, a Roman Catholic nun. Compare and contrast their spiritual influence, philosophies, and programs of social action.
Asked by elphabathropp - Thu Jul 2 05:12:38 2009 - History - 3 Answers - Comments
A. They were exactly the same, except for one thing: Mother Teresa was a fanatical christian(she didn't try to convert a lot of people but was herself very attached to christianity), whereas Mahatma Ghandi, was not very religious and considered all religions the same.
Answered by |O|bm - Thu Jul 2 05:21:10 2009
Q. Two great spiritual figures of twentieth-centu ry India have been Mahatma Gandhi, a devout Hindu, and Mother Teresa of Calcutta, a Roman Catholic nun. Compare and contrast their spiritual influence, philosophies, and programs of social action.
Asked by elphabathropp - Thu Jul 2 05:12:38 2009 - History - 3 Answers - Comments
A. They were exactly the same, except for one thing: Mother Teresa was a fanatical christian(she didn't try to convert a lot of people but was herself very attached to christianity), whereas Mahatma Ghandi, was not very religious and considered all religions the same.
Answered by |O|bm - Thu Jul 2 05:21:10 2009
Are there any Religious people who follow the philosophy of Utilitarianism?
Q. - Utilitarianism is the philosophy that an action is determined as right or wrong on the basis of the pleasure and pain it produces. E.g killing one person to save two. If you are religious and believe this, does't this clash with the teachings of your religion?
Asked by tullfrog - Sat Sep 20 03:03:06 2008 - Religion & Spirituality - 1 Answers - Comments
A. J.S. Mill didn't think so. He argued that God was also a Utilitarian in his famous essay Utilitarianism.
Answered by Citizen Of The Cosmos - Sat Sep 20 03:19:30 2008
Q. - Utilitarianism is the philosophy that an action is determined as right or wrong on the basis of the pleasure and pain it produces. E.g killing one person to save two. If you are religious and believe this, does't this clash with the teachings of your religion?
Asked by tullfrog - Sat Sep 20 03:03:06 2008 - Religion & Spirituality - 1 Answers - Comments
A. J.S. Mill didn't think so. He argued that God was also a Utilitarian in his famous essay Utilitarianism.
Answered by Citizen Of The Cosmos - Sat Sep 20 03:19:30 2008
What are the various mechanisms of action by which a Full Moon can affect human behavior?
Q. I do believe that they affect behavior in odd and unpredictable ways. For example: emergency room admissions are higher, more arrests take place, and others I cannot think of right now. I am an inquisitive person, a Philosophy Major and a Pharmacy Technician--and son of a Doctorate in Pharmacy, and he is skeptical regarding this issue. However, I am not; I am not at all. Please elaborate and explain your opinions and beliefs--and preferably, scientific postulates.
Asked by nmcollegestudent - Sat Jan 10 20:43:58 2009 - Parapsychology - 13 Answers - Comments
A. The link below provides a very complex (and controversial) argument for gravity (that the moon does effect) being influenced in the microtubules of the human brain (and possibly effecting behavior). One article stated that 81% of mental health professionals hold this belief despite a lack of research findings. This makes me wonder if any of the studies have been conducted only with mental patients (that can't see the moon phases) and what measure ( it is usually observation in mental health) would be accepted as objective evidence that this effect is occurring. Psiexploration
Answered by psiexploration - Sat Jan 17 14:29:57 2009
Q. I do believe that they affect behavior in odd and unpredictable ways. For example: emergency room admissions are higher, more arrests take place, and others I cannot think of right now. I am an inquisitive person, a Philosophy Major and a Pharmacy Technician--and son of a Doctorate in Pharmacy, and he is skeptical regarding this issue. However, I am not; I am not at all. Please elaborate and explain your opinions and beliefs--and preferably, scientific postulates.
Asked by nmcollegestudent - Sat Jan 10 20:43:58 2009 - Parapsychology - 13 Answers - Comments
A. The link below provides a very complex (and controversial) argument for gravity (that the moon does effect) being influenced in the microtubules of the human brain (and possibly effecting behavior). One article stated that 81% of mental health professionals hold this belief despite a lack of research findings. This makes me wonder if any of the studies have been conducted only with mental patients (that can't see the moon phases) and what measure ( it is usually observation in mental health) would be accepted as objective evidence that this effect is occurring. Psiexploration
Answered by psiexploration - Sat Jan 17 14:29:57 2009
What countries would most agree with my philosophy?
Q. I believe strongly in freedom and self-empowermen t. I think that there should be no state but a community run by the people in which people can work together to socially improve society. I believe that justice should be retributive and play out like karma, the punishment should always fit the crime. Tax and debt should be abolished, religion should not be allowed to be involved in politics or decision making and reason and science should be trusted to make government decisions. Saving lives, doing important things and scientific experiments shouldn't need to cost money, let alone huge amounts of money, for it is a selfish attitude that could be self-destructiv e. Money should only be used to help you live and to buy groceries… [cont.]
Asked by swordbuster - Sun Aug 8 17:28:05 2010 - Philosophy - 2 Answers - Comments
A. There may not yet be any countries that espouse the noble principles you describe but I'm sure that if you only communicate your 10 points widely enough, you will find enough followers to found your own new utopia! You could call it teenage-opolis.
Answered by Lunerousse - Sun Aug 8 19:32:39 2010
Q. I believe strongly in freedom and self-empowermen t. I think that there should be no state but a community run by the people in which people can work together to socially improve society. I believe that justice should be retributive and play out like karma, the punishment should always fit the crime. Tax and debt should be abolished, religion should not be allowed to be involved in politics or decision making and reason and science should be trusted to make government decisions. Saving lives, doing important things and scientific experiments shouldn't need to cost money, let alone huge amounts of money, for it is a selfish attitude that could be self-destructiv e. Money should only be used to help you live and to buy groceries… [cont.]
Asked by swordbuster - Sun Aug 8 17:28:05 2010 - Philosophy - 2 Answers - Comments
A. There may not yet be any countries that espouse the noble principles you describe but I'm sure that if you only communicate your 10 points widely enough, you will find enough followers to found your own new utopia! You could call it teenage-opolis.
Answered by Lunerousse - Sun Aug 8 19:32:39 2010
Atheism's opposite is theism Rationalism's opposite is irrationalism Why the controversy?
Q. Rationalism=Rel iance on reason as the best guide for belief and action. Philosophy. The theory that the exercise of reason, rather than experience, authority, or spiritual revelation, provides the primary basis for knowledge. Irrationalism=1 : a system emphasizing intuition, instinct, feeling, or faith rather than reason or holding that the universe is governed by irrational forces 2 : the quality or state of being irrational People I don't make up these definitions. They are from the dictionary. It is not my fault they accurately describe christians.
Asked by Cool Lou - Wed Jan 14 13:19:35 2009 - Religion & Spirituality - 11 Answers - Comments
A. Or anyone else, for that matter. Like everyone. Except Spock.
Answered by Rebekah - Wed Jan 14 13:24:59 2009
Q. Rationalism=Rel iance on reason as the best guide for belief and action. Philosophy. The theory that the exercise of reason, rather than experience, authority, or spiritual revelation, provides the primary basis for knowledge. Irrationalism=1 : a system emphasizing intuition, instinct, feeling, or faith rather than reason or holding that the universe is governed by irrational forces 2 : the quality or state of being irrational People I don't make up these definitions. They are from the dictionary. It is not my fault they accurately describe christians.
Asked by Cool Lou - Wed Jan 14 13:19:35 2009 - Religion & Spirituality - 11 Answers - Comments
A. Or anyone else, for that matter. Like everyone. Except Spock.
Answered by Rebekah - Wed Jan 14 13:24:59 2009
*Action in inaction and inaction in action" Can you explain in science and philosophy?
Q.
Asked by nia - Sun Nov 29 06:49:18 2009 - Philosophy - 3 Answers - 1 Comments
A. ..."Balance"... The question that you have posed relates to "The Science of Living" and "The Art of Being". Balance in ones life is imperative. One must develop balance within ones life. "One must balance the spiritual aspects of ones life with the material aspects of ones life." It's much like the 'east' meeting with and intermingling with the 'west'. This is indeed tough, but this is the curriculum that we have been handed, within this school that we have been born into. One must observe the action within inaction. One must observe the inaction within action. ...and to gain balance within ones life, one needs wisdom ... May we all develop "Balance" within our lives. Peace be always… [cont.]
Answered by WillRogerswannabe - Sun Nov 29 12:18:16 2009
Q.
Asked by nia - Sun Nov 29 06:49:18 2009 - Philosophy - 3 Answers - 1 Comments
A. ..."Balance"... The question that you have posed relates to "The Science of Living" and "The Art of Being". Balance in ones life is imperative. One must develop balance within ones life. "One must balance the spiritual aspects of ones life with the material aspects of ones life." It's much like the 'east' meeting with and intermingling with the 'west'. This is indeed tough, but this is the curriculum that we have been handed, within this school that we have been born into. One must observe the action within inaction. One must observe the inaction within action. ...and to gain balance within ones life, one needs wisdom ... May we all develop "Balance" within our lives. Peace be always… [cont.]
Answered by WillRogerswannabe - Sun Nov 29 12:18:16 2009
Can anyone think of a writer opposite of Marx in the sense that the philosophy sounds unappealing and horrible?
Q. almost universally, but the application has had markedly useful benefits, and its original proponent remembered as great; RATHER than a man like Marx, whose work has at various times since publication, enjoyed great popularity and whose ideas sound appealing to a large segment of the population, YET he is quite reviled now because of the historical attempts to put his thoughts into action. Remember my original question now, but don't let that deter you from general comments on K. Marx.
Asked by blaukrieg - Wed Nov 25 07:00:27 2009 - Philosophy - 4 Answers - Comments
A. Ayn Rand. And she writes novels like King Herod practices good childcare.
Answered by British Shorthair - Wed Nov 25 07:55:14 2009
Q. almost universally, but the application has had markedly useful benefits, and its original proponent remembered as great; RATHER than a man like Marx, whose work has at various times since publication, enjoyed great popularity and whose ideas sound appealing to a large segment of the population, YET he is quite reviled now because of the historical attempts to put his thoughts into action. Remember my original question now, but don't let that deter you from general comments on K. Marx.
Asked by blaukrieg - Wed Nov 25 07:00:27 2009 - Philosophy - 4 Answers - Comments
A. Ayn Rand. And she writes novels like King Herod practices good childcare.
Answered by British Shorthair - Wed Nov 25 07:55:14 2009
How many Philosopher throughout time have actually lived in actions there own philosophy?
Q. How many philosophers simply remain writers, professors or thinkers living their philosophy's only in theory and not in everyday actions? And should one take those ideas written by men and women who never lived what they preached seriously? Can such a philosophy have any validity? sorry,English is not my mother tongue.
Asked by Gokkun Therapy - Mon Sep 15 20:54:22 2008 - Religion & Spirituality - 4 Answers - Comments
A. most of the true philosophers throughout time have lived their ideals. the Dali lama is a prime example of this in modern times. also Gandhi is another prime example. some would call bob marley a philosopher, and i'd have to agree, and he also lived his teachings of peace and harmony.
Answered by shanneygannock - Mon Sep 15 21:01:56 2008
Q. How many philosophers simply remain writers, professors or thinkers living their philosophy's only in theory and not in everyday actions? And should one take those ideas written by men and women who never lived what they preached seriously? Can such a philosophy have any validity? sorry,English is not my mother tongue.
Asked by Gokkun Therapy - Mon Sep 15 20:54:22 2008 - Religion & Spirituality - 4 Answers - Comments
A. most of the true philosophers throughout time have lived their ideals. the Dali lama is a prime example of this in modern times. also Gandhi is another prime example. some would call bob marley a philosopher, and i'd have to agree, and he also lived his teachings of peace and harmony.
Answered by shanneygannock - Mon Sep 15 21:01:56 2008
Can you ever plan a spontaneous action?
Q. What I mean by this question is that, to be defined as 'spontaneous', does an action have to be completely impulsive, with no prior planning whatsoever? The answer may seem obvious at first, however consider this brief thought experiment before you pass your final judgment over the question: As people grow older they begin to obtain new sets of responsibilitie s. These may connected towards their family, towards their job, or maybe even both, however what is clear is that you must obey these new responsibilitie s in order to live a life which functions and runs as smoothly as possible. Pretty much everyone agrees its a fact of life that we must accept these new responsibilitie s at some point and most people create a… [cont.]
Asked by Mike B - Fri Aug 28 06:33:59 2009 - Sociology - 2 Answers - Comments
A. Interesting concept, but to me a spontaneous action is one that happens in the moment without thinking about it or any planning first. That's what makes being spontaneous fun and interesting. I do however, understand what you are saying and I still think that the action itself still remains spontaneous. Even after deciding to live in a more unconstructed, freer way, the specific spontaneous act is not thought out. if it is, then it's indeed, not spontaneous.
Answered by vanhammer - Fri Aug 28 08:29:14 2009
Q. What I mean by this question is that, to be defined as 'spontaneous', does an action have to be completely impulsive, with no prior planning whatsoever? The answer may seem obvious at first, however consider this brief thought experiment before you pass your final judgment over the question: As people grow older they begin to obtain new sets of responsibilitie s. These may connected towards their family, towards their job, or maybe even both, however what is clear is that you must obey these new responsibilitie s in order to live a life which functions and runs as smoothly as possible. Pretty much everyone agrees its a fact of life that we must accept these new responsibilitie s at some point and most people create a… [cont.]
Asked by Mike B - Fri Aug 28 06:33:59 2009 - Sociology - 2 Answers - Comments
A. Interesting concept, but to me a spontaneous action is one that happens in the moment without thinking about it or any planning first. That's what makes being spontaneous fun and interesting. I do however, understand what you are saying and I still think that the action itself still remains spontaneous. Even after deciding to live in a more unconstructed, freer way, the specific spontaneous act is not thought out. if it is, then it's indeed, not spontaneous.
Answered by vanhammer - Fri Aug 28 08:29:14 2009
In philosophy, what is the difference between an action and a bodily movement?
Q. I have a 15mark AS-Level philosophy question to answer as my homework, but I don't know the answer to it. We have not been taught this in class and I tried to Google it but didn't find anything that I can quickly understand. I will have to write roughly half a page/ three quarters of a page but any input at all would be much appreciated and then I can obviously try to expand on that. The question is: 'Explain and illustrate the distinction between an action and a mere bodily movement.' I need to explain the difference and also give one or more relevant example(s). Like I said, any help is much appreciated! Thanks, Maddy x
Asked by MaddyMONSTER - Tue Jan 4 13:49:37 2011 - Philosophy - 2 Answers - Comments
A. The body has many movements that are autonomic, you don't have to think or decide. Action as relates to philosophy is something you consider and decide to do. Even instantaneous decisions, like the impulse to rescue someone in an emergency. Autonomic movements would include: heart beat, digestion, elimination(tho ugh we learn to control it), blinking. sweating, etc. Action arising from thought and decision is connected to our "free will" I hope this helps.
Answered by Laura - Tue Jan 4 15:02:50 2011
Q. I have a 15mark AS-Level philosophy question to answer as my homework, but I don't know the answer to it. We have not been taught this in class and I tried to Google it but didn't find anything that I can quickly understand. I will have to write roughly half a page/ three quarters of a page but any input at all would be much appreciated and then I can obviously try to expand on that. The question is: 'Explain and illustrate the distinction between an action and a mere bodily movement.' I need to explain the difference and also give one or more relevant example(s). Like I said, any help is much appreciated! Thanks, Maddy x
Asked by MaddyMONSTER - Tue Jan 4 13:49:37 2011 - Philosophy - 2 Answers - Comments
A. The body has many movements that are autonomic, you don't have to think or decide. Action as relates to philosophy is something you consider and decide to do. Even instantaneous decisions, like the impulse to rescue someone in an emergency. Autonomic movements would include: heart beat, digestion, elimination(tho ugh we learn to control it), blinking. sweating, etc. Action arising from thought and decision is connected to our "free will" I hope this helps.
Answered by Laura - Tue Jan 4 15:02:50 2011
A philosophy of life or philosophy...Do es this have merit? (Enumerate please)?
Q. Philosophy, like rain through the trees, only bounces off of life or falls between the leaves, gathering then, to the low spots - the small puddles of unused knowledge - the Lowest Common Denominators of thought. Philosophy is that which is too soft - too fleeting for the rigors of daily life. It is something ready to be steam-rolled by a "philosophy-of- action" (to borrow a term by Charles Daniel, I think) Philosophies gather on the ground like puddles of mercury; (pretty to stare into if you like the view of your own mind from a backward perspective.) What is really important... What should really be inspiring is our everyday life... the breezes and breaths, the give and take,* the calm and the storm. That Tree we build… [cont.]
Asked by sincere12_26 - Mon Aug 3 08:06:55 2009 - Philosophy - 10 Answers - Comments
A. Any personal belief about how to live or how to deal with a situation is philosophy
Answered by void - Mon Aug 3 08:19:05 2009
Q. Philosophy, like rain through the trees, only bounces off of life or falls between the leaves, gathering then, to the low spots - the small puddles of unused knowledge - the Lowest Common Denominators of thought. Philosophy is that which is too soft - too fleeting for the rigors of daily life. It is something ready to be steam-rolled by a "philosophy-of- action" (to borrow a term by Charles Daniel, I think) Philosophies gather on the ground like puddles of mercury; (pretty to stare into if you like the view of your own mind from a backward perspective.) What is really important... What should really be inspiring is our everyday life... the breezes and breaths, the give and take,* the calm and the storm. That Tree we build… [cont.]
Asked by sincere12_26 - Mon Aug 3 08:06:55 2009 - Philosophy - 10 Answers - Comments
A. Any personal belief about how to live or how to deal with a situation is philosophy
Answered by void - Mon Aug 3 08:19:05 2009
How is Camus's work toward philosophy regarded to the intellectual community?
Q. I'm 17 highly interested in philosophy and I began reading this book called The Stranger. I'm basically trying to get an understanding of the perception of others with regards to it and Camus's other work in general. I personally think that it's strong step into the acceptance of truth and that Mersault's ideology reflects that of a most sincere individual. I feel that although Mersault's actions may not have been justified he ultimately portrays a mindset that does not reflect perception and deception.
Asked by jmcarroll1991 - Mon Jan 12 19:18:37 2009 - Philosophy - 2 Answers - Comments
A. Camus had a great deal of influence on me when I was in college, and I still think he's worth reading, though he's not the final word on anything. I suggest reading Camus' 'The Myth of Sisphyus'. It is a companion volume to The Stranger.
Answered by jimbeau - Mon Jan 12 21:05:48 2009
Q. I'm 17 highly interested in philosophy and I began reading this book called The Stranger. I'm basically trying to get an understanding of the perception of others with regards to it and Camus's other work in general. I personally think that it's strong step into the acceptance of truth and that Mersault's ideology reflects that of a most sincere individual. I feel that although Mersault's actions may not have been justified he ultimately portrays a mindset that does not reflect perception and deception.
Asked by jmcarroll1991 - Mon Jan 12 19:18:37 2009 - Philosophy - 2 Answers - Comments
A. Camus had a great deal of influence on me when I was in college, and I still think he's worth reading, though he's not the final word on anything. I suggest reading Camus' 'The Myth of Sisphyus'. It is a companion volume to The Stranger.
Answered by jimbeau - Mon Jan 12 21:05:48 2009
From Yahoo Answer Search: 'action (philosophy)'
Wed Apr 27 01:58:21 2011
[Hide]▼
)
worldculturepictorial.com
337px x 510px | 33.30kB
[source page]
quote
[Hide]▲