Search results for query: *

Quote:About nothing being the same -- you seem to have similar views to Heraclitus. Heraclitus believed everything is in a state of flux. Aristotle later said, "If everything is in flux, and nothing is permanent, then how do we know the words you are stating and i am hearing at this instant, are...

the reason y i dun want to include the real world thingy is that i want to c how ppl respond to a question phrased in a diff manner... and hey i get wat i wan..haha

Quote: Standards are discovered, not created. They are produced, not created. a bit of contradiction here? anyway, we percive natural law to b a constant and it is our faith in it that we hold it to b a constant.nothing is constant in this world , onli wat we perceive to be. on a lighter...

my point is you can't define good or evil. you may say that they are standards..but by whose standards?? these standards r come up wif by us humans therefore it is more of a perception rather than a reality

this is sort of a question that examies how far u would gp for freedom big fish small pond...u r the king of the world but yr kingdom is limited small fish big ocean..u r small fry but u r free to roam the 4 corner of the world... so which is better? tough question...

what makes u tink the colour blue you see is the same as the colour blue someone else is seeing?:p besides, if all the animals eat, and survive we would face another whole set of problems that would threaten their survival such as overpopluation, dwindling food supply...going by your...

i disagree wif dekoi. evil and good did not always exist. it only came to b when the first human came to b and perceive the world around him. a sheep a goat a caterpillar do not wat is good or evil: there is no such things to them, onli survival matters to them Besides, the colour blue is...

juz a question to c yr thoughts n tis question is open to interpretation is it better to be a big fish in a small pond or a small fish in a large ocean?

i would like to point out that 'evil' and 'good' are attributes that we humans come up with.as such before humans came to be, there were no such things as evil and good... if there was no evil and no good then there should not be a god... there would just be nothing.

where did the quote come from?

then watz the purpose of living?

just want to know... Whats your purpose in life? what governs the way u live your life?

u believe in reductionism?

greed is essential for the progress of mankind but not for the individual... agree?

thatz not lazy. thatz crazy. hey it rhymns...haha seriously if u don't even go up then what is the purpose of buying a apartment in a high rise building?

so u agree that u order for society to advance we nid to b lazy bcos being lazy means we find new ways to do work faster n more efficiently?

so wat was the outcome of the experiment?

hey omni i saw yr quote n found it very interesting... It has yet to be proven that intelligence has any survival value. Arthur C. Clarke (1917 - ) very cool but having intelligence means u live longer n better isn't it?

i was sitting there in my chair one night admiring the stars when a question struck me. For years since i was born people told me that being hardworking is a virtue. but hey, if u r hardworking won't u walk up the stairs everyday and night? only lazy people would take the lift. but that is not...

but i dun beileve in a exisitent present... look at the thread there is no present...there is only the past and the future prove me wrong by proving there is a present:p

but Iacchus32 u miss my point...what i mean is that everything u do is of free will.just like u can have cooffee then tea or vice versa.so this is where free will comes in. but tis free will is seemingly under the pretext of predestination cos whichever choice u make i can say it is predestined...

but after i drink the cup of coffee can't i still drink the cup of tea? wont i still have free will? n with that free will i am fooled into thinking i actually have free will when the truth is it is predestined. so itz like a chicken and egg ...it goes on in a circle... so i agree that the...

but ppl wat of the present? is it exisitent??

arh... didnt see that...can u tell mi about it?

wow man that took a while to digest haha ok when i thought of the present i think it as an instaneous moment.so perhaps defining the present as an experience does not work here since it does not exisit second u mentioned the present as the instaneous moment which mean it cannot be measured...

so am i right to sae that the present is nothing more than an experience and therefore it does not exist?

ok...i am quite tired now so pardon me for any errors...let goes my agruement is that there is no present becos of two reasons. firstly there is still no clear cut definition for time.hence we cannot define present.it is not an qulaitive value. second, when one say present it have alredi...

lets say in a modern society.and let's have a example. A murders B. C is the wife of A. She knows what A is going to do.lets say you are the judge. Obvously A would get a stiff sentence. But what about C?

i wonder..which is the greater sin: the sin of doing evil or the sin of not preventing evil?