What are today's most important philosophical questions?

How did Neznaika pay for his questions?
What did the last evil bullet hide?
And for what reason had Alex Sailor laughed before Shishel-Myshel farted and left?
How did blind Ivan run after the sun?
How an angel perches itself upon a shoulder?
How did the last shirt tear and melt?
How and what did Bashlachov find and embrace?

who is the babe?

quads wins

Why live?

W H A T D O T H L I F E

>4. How do we unify General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics?
he asked for pholosophy not science..

they are one in the same

That show is so gay it tried to fuck me in my asshole.

The animation style alone makes it unwatchable, and they put in a joke every fucking line.

go back to Veeky Forums you fucking midge

>How do we unify General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics?
Congrats on your minor in physics ;^)

You slumber, a cu-cumber!

It's Emma Stone. I wish I could get to know her in real life and marry her.

same desu. this is now an emma stone thread.

forgot pic

Yeah. Her pale white skin, her perfect white teeth, her cheerful smile, her raspy voice, her feminine yet quite boyish and smug attitude. Everything about her is perfect. I just want her.

Science is a description of nature. It's the rational approach to understanding the world.
Philosophy is trying to fathom life and figure out how to live. They are completely different from each other because they talk about completely different subjects.

i couldnt agree more. too bad shes with that garfield lad. dont know what she sees in him

I like her voice too

and her butt is CUTE

It is rather safe to assume, just by reading the very first two sentences of your post, that you have a superficial, if any at all, understanding of either science or philosophy, and the interplay of both.

>Science is a description of nature.
You have successfully and unwittingly assumed a bunch of things you're clearly unaware of in asserting this. There's a good chance you couldn't argue your way out of a paper bag if you were pressed to define "Science". Corollary: what does it mean for something to be a scientific description? The notion of "nature" is perhaps most controversial of all as the notion hinges on whether or not naive realism, idealism, or phenomenalism, is the correct interpretation of reality. I'm not gonna touch on much else of what you wrote, but sprinkling your sentences with "rational" isn't helping--based on what you wrote you would have a hard time even defining the notion.

Go read some contemporary philosophy of science and metaphysics please. Why are we still rewarding ignorance on Veeky Forums is beyond me.

PHIL double major reporting for duty.
You could not be more wrong.
Yes, many ranking philosophical proponents have directly or indirectly influenced the sciences and the scientific method; nonetheless science and Phil are not one in the same, or even remotely related.
(hard pill to swallow, I know; took me a little while)

Why?

>or even remotely related.

This is patently false. One need only look at the influence that particular philosophies of science (falsificationism and positivism particularly) have had on scientist's own conceptions of what they're doing and what constitutes proper scientific theorizing as well as the implicit philosophies (instrumentalism, realism) that all scientists adopt in the construction of physical models.

the impetus for that question comes directly out of attempts to resolve the measurement problem (a major philosophical problem in the philosophy of physics) and the dissension between the apparent non-locality exhibited in nature (a rare case of experimental metaphysics) and the formalism of special relativity

This is considerably less retarded than

this.

Kek meant this

Why is it that almost no one in our modern age follows a cogent set of life principles?

Don't remind me

They're not still together.

where is it?

we are generally not a questioning society anymore....hence the "post truth" debacle.

we demand to be breast fed

if payday falls on a sunday, should you get paid monday morning or friday?

to fap or not to fap

cirno was too smart for the mods

as the great jennifer lawrence once said, 'why is it that we're so afraid of women?'

Should plant life have rights?

To seriously answer this question: the 21st century is the Century of Identity. Do people have the right to have a cultural/national identity? That will be a big question going forward.

>anal autism
Back to /r/eddit
STEMspergery is normative nonsense that is totally irrelevant and is based upon cancer epistemolog.
>Go read some contemporary philosophy of science and metaphysics please
See? You read something and immediately presume it to be true.

>2. Are normative statements even meaningful?
Science is elusively normative statements.
>1. Can you derive normative statements from descriptive statements (is/ought problem)
You STEMspergs do this all the time, and base all your nonsense upon it.
>3. What formal system should serve as the foundation for all of modern mathematics: axiomatic set theory, category theory, homotopy type theory, or some other framework
Mathematics is an irrelevant systematic pile of horseshit.
>4. How do we unify General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics?
They're both invalid, so they should be tossed into the grinder and burned away rather than even acknowledged.

I like it.

The most important question imo is:
For what is the point of bettering yourself when reply to this post or your mother will die in her sleep tonight reading this negates immunities

Why does no one do the right thing?

NOW I'VE LOST IT
I KNOW I CAN KILL?

To be or not to be the little girl?

After ~2500 years,

It's still the fucking problem of universals.

There are no real philosophical questions

HOW does one do the right thing?

why is there something instead of nothing

You win the award for biggest psuedointellectual ever. Have fun with grand delusions of enlightenment!

How do you account for the phone you're posting from working on both of those theories?

I think the answer to this is more benign than anything. In an infinite series something will occur.

The better question is why can there be nothing? Is nothingness a construct we've made as an approximation for what we cannot perceive? Does the idea of nothingness entirely contradict the possibility of nothingness since even without a universe, all ideas exist separate of being? Is that second statement itself confidence in objective reality or a necessity for humans to be able to make sense of anything?

Follow up: the modern physics discipline examines that reality exists only as we observe it (the more we look, the more is real). Is this the same for though? Was communism 'real' before it was conceptualized?

Not being a sociopath is a good placr to start

A collection of experiences and feelings

If you need to ask, then don't. Your doubt actively negates the net happiness.

>stemfags confusing autism and technological advances again

say it aint so

Don't get me wrong, now that I know who it is I wouldn't say no, but the clothes don't do her much justice. Looks too unfeminine and lorry driver-ish.

please never post here ever again thank you

1) Do you think that the task of philosophy is not to offer conclusive answers but to ask better questions? Justify your answer.

2) If everything is relative, is this sentence relative as well?

3) If the aim of philosophy is to know ourselves and, as Kant says, one should not learn philosophy but to philosophize, why the teaching of this discipline is structured from what others thought, normally dead white males? To what extent do we learn to philosophize or do we know ourselves by memorizing what a Greek, Roman, French, German, or Anglo-Saxon did or did decades ago, centuries or millennia?

4) Do you agree with Wittgenstein that "Whereof one cannot speak thereof one must be silent"? Explain exactly what can not be spoken.

5) Most modern philosophers did not make a living working as high school or college professors. Descartes was advisor to queens; Spinoza, lens polisher; Locke, surgeon; Leibniz, diplomat; Berkeley, pattern of a slave plantation; Hume, librarian; Schopenhauer, rentier. Why, then, did professors of philosophy defend their departments and faculties as if they were the last trench of Western thought, since from the sixteenth century practically all philosophical innovations have come from outside those faculties and departments?

>anybody who criticizes muh STEMspergery is just le pseud!

I'm not on a phone you stupid phoneposter
I don't think you understand epistemology.

How does one go easy on the carrots?

no more philosophical questions
just sex

>dead white males
Are you white?

Weird, that sounds like two philosophical problems, then a math problem and a physics problem.

Today's most important philosophical question is:
What is the importance of most philosophical questions today?

Nope it's because the answers lack even more insight than the inspiration that went into them

Same as the greeks.

On second thought I was wrong. Saying that math is irrelevant is one of the most wildly ignorant statements ever. You're just retarded.

Nope, the fucking hurricane killed my power.

Are you implying that people once did?

Aren't "back in my day" fags just the worst?

>why the teaching of this discipline is structured from what others thought, normally dead white males? To what extent do we learn to philosophize or do we know ourselves by memorizing what a Greek, Roman, French, German, or Anglo-Saxon did or did decades ago, centuries or millennia?
>dur why should we learn from the brightest minds of the past, dey white boys

@10011992
Nice try, I have a "reading this negates immunities" immunity

A spook
A meme
Nothing that means
Anything

How do you know sociopaths aren't doing the right thing?

>not what is the right thing

>when you can't think critically and answer questions truthfully and have to defensively strawman like a brainlet
Embsay

Wtf *embarrassing

Why are Europeans so open to destruction of their own culture?

Unironically
WHAT DOTH LIFE?

I was making fun of your question, not attempting to answer it. I don't think its intelligent enough to warrant an answer.

probably tylo be chillin

What are "real news" in comparison to "fake news" or generally speaking what is truth?

diogenes solved this problem long ago

Life doth not, life itself doth not live!

It's for more likely that the overwhelming majority that experiences guilt, empathy and emotional depth isn't the one that's fucked up, and that's ignoring that other animals also experience emotional complexity that is lacking in people with antipersonal disorder.

A war of all against all

Besides you can totally be a sociopath/psychopath and do the "right thing" with some cultural awareness and some friends/family to let you know if you're being too narcissistic.

I'm not the same guy as the person who posted the question.

>when you can't defend your viewpoints so you denounce threatening questions as not intelligent enough to answer
Lmao

>How do you know sociopaths aren't doing the right thing?

The death of common sense.

>common sense
You should despise yourself if you unironically posted this. Common sense is a hack for people who can't rigorously and completely justify what they do. Kys

WHAT. DOTH. LIFE?

Whomst is the meaning of life?

You're not even that guy but being a snarky faggot anyway? What viewpoints have I stated that I need to defend? None? Oh. The question doesn't warrant an answer because its retarded. You study what the most intelligent people thought because its the only thing to relate to besides your own thought. You don't read black lesbians to learn philosophy. The entire question is retarded and made by some nitwit PC professor, its meant to conclude that you can also read black lesbians and get as much out of them if you want to "philosophize".

>UR JUST IGNANT
Good argument. So this is critical thinking...