Question:

If you could invite any ten people (living or dead) from over the course of history to a dinner, who would you choose?

Answer:

I will certainly invite ...

1- Hammurabi ... I don't know! The idea of having him become so drunk and ask him to come up with new set of laws that fit the present time ... seems to be intresting! Besides, what is it with the punishments of cutting off the ears and hands in his old laws?!
2- Jim Carrey ... so to facilitate the meeting and defuse any signs of heat with his own and unique style.
3- Albert Einstein ... My Man! ... and also to have him explain if his "the rest are details" includes the Devil.
4- George W. Bush ... well, .. he must be invited because of the presence of the next and previous characters.
5- Lt. Col. Frank Slade ... "HOO-HAH!" ... He must be invited because of the presense of the above handsome and intelligent gentleman!
6- Norman Schwarzkopf ... so to make things happen as "swift & just" as possible ... whatever that is .. was!
7- Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart ... so he can tell us from where he gets his inspiration? And how did he end up becoming a Freemason?
8- Brigitte Nielsen ... so to add some spice to the flavour ... specially when her sexual orientation is a matter of ... dispute <wink>
9- Sting ... so to promote the idea that this gathering is for "adult audiences only" like his songs and who knows .... he may write for us one at the end.
10- And... of course ...Mother Nature (Sitting close to my right ... so I can hear every word she utters ... watch her every single expression and gesture)

O&O (... If she would only come!)

Question:
I had an interesting lecture this morning, it was supposed to be about metaphysics and the differing models of reality. But as usual the middle-aged professor drove off in tangents about one thing or another.

Anyways, he was talking about his theory of the future of the philosophical profession. Stating first, that beginning in the late 19th century and continuing onto the 20th century, that philosophical thought was centered around the notion that philosophy was all about the study of languages. That in one language a concept can mean one thing and in the other a slightly different meaning. This was all and well, but arguing that this is going to change, as it doesn't promote any progress in philosophical thought. We'd deject, for example, the Chinese philosophy just because we couldn't understand their concepts through our translation into our "vulgar" language of English. So, in the coming century we are going to change this, going to implement a new style of thought, as now philosophy is lacking a supported method of inquiry.

Any thoughts?

Answer:
The most general and abstract features of the world today with which we think: mind, matter, reason, proof, truth, etc. have become issues extraneous to debate. The green leaf is no more intelligent than us, knowledge based systems are becoming more conscious and ... "I can't have someone like you here."

The systematic inquiry of the fundamental questions with which we approach the world , these days, concerning, among other things, the nature of reality (metaphysics), the justification of belief (epistemology), and the conduct of life (ethics), themselves should ripen into being the topic of inquiry.

<pause>

It seems the human thoughts have "evolved" into needs that are so seldom met by today's reality. "Philosophy was all about the study of languages," said the middle-aged professor!

<pause>

BTW, you can debate (at the given link) whether or not ALICE is a conscious intelligent chatbot for as long as you please. However, just don't call her "stupid"... I dare you!

<pause>

Rest in peace, dear Plato.

O&O

- He has no family life (His parents died when he was an infant)
- Is separated from the outside world
- He avoides certain modern technologies such as automobiles, telephone and electricity.
- He is a Rumspringa (German/Deitsch, "running, climbing or jumping around") person who likes to wrestle with full grown bull apes and gorillas, rhinos, crocodiles, anacondas, sharks, big cats and even dinosaurs.
- His feet are just as useful to him as his hands, having clung to trees just by his toes.
- His loincloth dress made from uncured animal hide follows a dress code which doesn't call attention to the wearer by cut, color or any other feature ... and most importantly the prohibitions against buttons.
- He did not join the military, apply for Social Security, take out insurance or accept any form of financial assistance from the government.
- His adquate lifestyle was spoofed as "lord of the drapes" and "Lord of Shapes".
- His comics were the first publications put on the index by the German Bundesprüfstelle für jugendgefährdende Schriften or BPjM (Federal Department for Media Harmful to Young Persons)

Then, ..

Answer: If Tarzan character had a beard, he would immediately be identified as an Amish! The thing which his creator; Edgar Rice Burroughs, didn't want it to be seemingly obvious!

- Neither negative ("twice as cold" of -8°C is -4°C *warmer*!)
- Nor zero ("Twice as cold" of 0°C is 0/2 = 0).

Zero Degrees C = 32 degrees F and 273 Kelvin
Twice as cold would be 273 / 2 = 136K
Now, using a temperature converter, 136K = -459°F and -137°C

Zero Degrees F = -18 degrees C and 255 Kelvin
Twice as cold would be 255 / 2 = 127K
Now, using a temperature converter, 127K = -146°C and -230°F

Answer: If today's temperature is 0 degrees F then tomorrow's temperature will be -230°F (Twice as cold as today)



O&O ( ... 2 down, 29 questions still to go.)