A friend argues that if a perfect God creates something different from himself, then it's necessarily imperfect, because, if perfect, it would still be God. So the universe implicitly entails evil and our universe is, if not exactly the best of all worlds, the least evil of all worlds. But then I ask: "Why did God create anything at all?" and my friend replies it's not his responsibility to answer that question and we end in deadlock. Is there any way to break the deadlock?

Since one's own reasoning is a basically set of rules of inference operating on a set of axiomatic beliefs, can one reliably prove one's own reasoning to be logically consistent from within one's own reasoning? Might not such reasoning itself be inconsistent? If our own reasoning were inconsistent, might not the logical consistency (validity) of such "proofs" as those of Godel's Incompleteness Theorems, be merely a mirage? How could we ever hope to prove otherwise? How could we ever trust our own "perception" of "implication" or even of "self-contradiction"?

This site is a wonderful idea. Some of the questions seem to ask for moral advice, and I wonder whether the study of moral philosophy alone puts one in the position to give responsible advice. Wouldn't one have to know the person, the circumstances, and so on. And even then, in contrast to many kind of decision, moral decisions seem so personal as to rule out a right and wrong answer, which is not to say some actions and ways of living may be terribly wrong. What do you think?

As far as I am aware most if not all religions promise the possibility of eternal happiness in the next life. However the concept of eternal happiness is impossible to understand. How could we be happy without our negative emotions - don't we enjoy our negative emotions sometimes (watching a sad or scary film)? Aren't our negative emotions a release? People who are happy for extended periods, e.g. people in-love or people suffering from mania cannot keep up being happy because it is exhausting and also people in these states become irrational. So why do we buy into the concept of eternal happiness in the next life so easily?

HERE IS QUITE A CONUNDRUM: Can we meaningfully speak of the "infinity-th" and "infinity+1-th" term of the sequence of natural numbers? If not, then what do we in fact mean by "all" (as distinct from "any" or "each") when applied to an "infinite" set? Given that a real number constructed via the diagonal construction on a F I N I T E set, of n reals, can always be added to the list at position n+1 to give a list of n+1 reals, why couldn't a real number constructed via the diagonal construction simply be included in the "infinite" list of reals at "position" "infinity+1" ??? (Which is to say that, in the "infinite" case, no real could be constructed outside the infinite list of reals at all!) Also, in the case of the natural numbers, if a number m, is defined as the sum from 1 to n of the first n natural numbers, then m is a natural number that is not in the list of the first n natural numbers. If you make this construction on the "entire" set of "all" natural numbers, then by construction, there is...

I believe that the taking of human life in all instances (abortion, euthanasia, suicide, self-defence, manslaughter, murder, etc.) is wrong; however under certain conditions I would take life under all these instances and in doing so I would accept that I am wrong and answerable to the Law but I would hope that the Law would be merciful (e.g., in a case of euthanasia where the person involved was terminally ill, in severe pain and no hope of recovery). Is my attitude wrong?

I am a Chinese undergraduate girl living in China and planning to have further study abroad. For preparation, these days I try to know ABC about Western philosophy, but I find it hard to start. Considering my major is in the field of engineering, I am not sure whether or not Western philosophy will play an important role in my future life in the US or Europe. Could you tell me how much Plato's or Socrates' thoughts have influenced Western people's way of thinking, and how the philosophers' thoughts have exerted an significant influence on various aspects of Western people's life? Could you please enlighten me what should I prepare pertaining to philosophy before going abroad? Thank you ever so much. =)

Recently, a politician announced that (unlike his opponent) he supported a major government initiative that would bring money and jobs to my area. If the initiative passed, my life would almost certainly improve. The rest of the country, however, would be worse off, because the plan is mostly pork spending that wastes money. At first I thought I should vote for the candidate who opposes the initiative, because that would help the most people. But on the other hand, our political system seems to be designed expecting citizens to vote in their interest. Our congress, for instance, is elected on a state-by-state basis, implying that each congressperson should have a special concern for their state. What would be the responsible way to vote?

Hello. I think that I have a personality disorder called the Schizoid Personality disorder. I am actually fairly certain of this. If this is the case, I have a question that pertains to ethics. I am wondering if it is immoral in some sense to cloister oneself from the world and to spend one's time primarily by oneself. I would consider myself of a high intellect with much college behind me and I enjoy intellectual pursuits and the life of the mind very much. Though I currently have some close friends (from high school) and socialize several times a week, I can see a day in which I would like to be mostly alone. I envision a day, after several more years of graduate school, when I could leave America and get lost in Europe and break all ties with former friends, and (as I am a Schizoid) my family--whom I feel nothing for and do not enjoy being around. I am an atheist and a Darwinian and believe this is the only life I am going to get and I would like to, despite what contemporary social standards...

Most people believe that a belief is true if it corresponds to a fact. But facts and ideas are very different things. They exist in completely separate realms. How can they "correspond" to each other?