An internet oasis of open discussion without personal attacks
Synthesis wrote:Seems downright blasphemous to suggest that the answer must precede the question, but how can it be any other way?
And, yes, it flies in the face of all scientific inquiry [the greatest of witch-hunts], but allow me to right yourselves so you can to get off your heads and stand on your feet.
In order to ask a question, and I will pick one at random, "What is on the other side of the Universe?" You might say that nobody knows what's on the other side of the Universe so how can you know the answer? I will counter by saying that you know the answer because you know the question is ridiculous. In other words, there is no other side of the Universe [an absurd concept], so what's the difference? It would be like saying what is infinity times infinity?
Let's take another example. You might ask, "What is my friend over there thinking about?" Through "observing" your friend, your mind has already determined what they might be thinking about to the point where your it has generated the question. That is, our minds do not work like we think they do, in a 1+1=2 manner. Instead, we are processing an infinite amount of information to the point where we can then postulate.
Another example. We are driving down the interstate at 85mph along side of hundreds of your closest friends and neighbors. You are processing an enormous amount of information and the answers and questions are coming so fast that they are under the radar, so to speak. Well, this is how all things work. The real thinking is going on outside of our ability to be aware of it. What we do think of as our thinking is interpretation, a lower order process designed to get man into all kinds of difficulty.
Think about it. It might just revolutionize your interface with reality.
Surreptitious57 wrote:Asking the question what is on the other side of the Universe may not be as absurd as it sounds even if it is poorly constructed
Since what exists beyond the observable is not actually known so any enquiry is valid. Also infinity times infinity equals infinity
Burning ghost wrote:Questions are based on premises. That is all. What is your point?
We can of course question the premise and challenge it perhaps. To build a question we require a foundation. If you wish to question that we need a foundation to construct a question I will simply accuse you of playing a language game and trying to pervert language to make some absurdist claim (which is okay if that is your thing).
It is quite clear that the question comes before the answer. What comes before the question are premises on which to found it. These premises are "taken for granted", they are necessarily outside our immediate ability to question. Only once the question is formed are we able to analysis it and discern its reach and application.
Burning ghost wrote:Synthesis -
You don't even know what you're doing or what I am saying. How can I disagree with a statement laden with bizarre uses of language? I simply stated what we generally mean by "question" and how we form questions. We work off premises NOT answers. We can of course pose questions with the intent of adding evidence to a certain answer we may expect.
It is not very difficult. How we "establish" premises is what you are hopefully meaning to ask here? I am not accusing of "playing games" I am saying this IS a language game. If you are using terms differently from everyone else here we have a serious problem communicating.
My point is you are misusing language and expecting us all to define how we use very common words. It is absurd to do such a thing, this is not open to question it is the very premise of communicating. I don't go around insisting people call bananas apples because it is an absurd thing to do.
The question "Does God exist?" depends on the premises in place. Looking at the meaning of the terms we can establish what use the question is and how we frame the question. For example what do we mean by "exist" and "God"?
How can a question be formed without assuming an answer you ask? I can ask for example "Why do things fall?" Do I assume there is an answer simply because I can ask the question? If I say "How many squares are yellow?" does this mean anything? Further I can ask "When does green get bigger?"
What we can do with these is establish if they are rational questions and whether or not they can be meaningfully answered or not. I do NOT assume there is an answer. The grammar of language may pose sentences that appear to be questions yet if they are unanswerable because they are absurd, due to logical consistency, they are not really questions. In this sense we can say "questions" assume "answers". If the question is absurd it is a pseudoquestion, such as stated above.
Other questions may be unanswerable because we don't possess the means to investigate. Such as in the past people said we'd never know what The Sun was made of unless we visited it. This is a case of someone excepting an answer to the question "Can we ever know what The Sun is made of without visiting it?" simply because they were unable to answer it NOT because the question was absurd.
I would say more than many other fields of investigation philosophy is one with which we have to pay particular attention to semantics and use of language. I am assuming you are not completely ignorant and are asking about "premises" and general "experience". Here we'll find ourselves delving into epistemology.
Shaded wrote: I, personally, don't care. In the end I usually find what I'm looking for, and the "what came first? The chicken or the egg" thing doesn't always interest me.
Burning ghost wrote:Evolution says Chicken.
I was hoping you'd differentiate between "premises", "questions" and "answers". If you have some unorthodox definitions of these terms please express them more clearly.
If you are doing mathematical sums you better accept that 1+1=2 obviously? The terms you are using are most certainly not as universal as abstract numbers but we don't generally go around talking about having an answer and looking for a question (unless we are being creative/mystical with our use of the terms).
If I ask a question it has to be based on certain assumptions. If I say "Where am I?" I necessarily present this question with the assumption of being somewhere. The first premise is my existence and from there things get messy. I pose questions and do some investigation and reasoning then see what results show up consistently. To pose a question I MUST do so in language. Questions are not asked without language.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests