I hear a lot of talk about how "the people are correct" and the saying "one million people can't be wrong." However, there has to be some absolutist force present some of the time to keep anything and everything from becoming chaotic. For example, when sending soldiers off to a war that will violate human rights, but which is widely supported by the people, some would argue that makes it the right thing to do. On the other hand, imagine the pickle the world would be in if people had taken that standpoint towards Nazi Germany, and no one had stepped in. Can the masses truly be morally wrong, or does widespread belief of something make it right absolutely?

I'm not too sure if you can help me out. Here goes. It seems to me that there is a general agreement on the necessity of the nation state. The whole war in Afghanistan is premised on the necessity of the state. Is civilization, whatever that is, premised on the state? Can humanity exist without the state? Are we living in a period in which humanity cannot be without the state?

For much of my life, I have defined myself through my intellectual pursuits. I loved learning, reading, and poetry. Thinking held a genuine excitement for me, and I craved academic and literary challenges. Within the past few months, for no reason that I can discern, all of that changed. I am not an unhappy person aside from the fact that I have lost this part of my identity (so I don’t think that I am clinically depressed), but I have become lazy. I still read a little, but I no longer enjoy it. When I try to do the things I loved, they now seem boring or, at least, like work. And I like the person I was then much better than the person I am now. She was more thoughtful, had higher standards for herself, and was searching for her purpose in life. And it also feels kind of like, if I am not an intellectual, then what good am I? My sense of morality, my worldview, and my desire to achieve all came from my intellectual concept of the world. How do I bring back this “spark”? Is there a way to fall back in...

This is more of a sociological question *about* philosophers than it is a strictly philosophical question, but what is the general view, if there is one, among philosophers concerning political pundits, political television and radio shows, and what may more broadly be called media-politics? I am interested in knowing how big the gulf is between such "everyday" politics and the politics of academics. I, for one, notice an enormous gulf such that most of what I hear on television and radio shows has little to do with political theory--and rarely if ever even makes reference to it--and is much more focused on empty rhetoric and party-love and hate. Am I in good company?

In general, it seems that an action is considered morally wrong when it harms a person (or animal). Is there anything morally wrong with profanity? To clarify, I do not mean swearing at someone, but profanity in general. E.g.: I spent my whole &*@&#$ night writing that %*@&# paper! Sure, it may be "tasteless", but is there any basis on which to call it wrong?

Does it put me in any particular philosophical camp to believe that most questions taken as philosophical questions could be made more tractable by first settling (or agreeing not to settle) issues of definition and acceptable evidence?

What does it mean to live authentically? I think Heidegger wrote about this, but can't recall where.

What is a poem? I'm thinking about this in reference to developments from Modernism on. The writer presents something novel in form with some familiar signs such as appearance on the page, embedded quotations or references, etc. The reader likes or dislikes, but basically accepts. It seems this is a new attitude, less tied to conventional definitions, but is it? Is there still a point to asking, "What is a poem?"

Is man mortal given he assumes new forms of life even if he is reduced to dust (from dust sprouts new vegetative forms of life which in turn sustains animal life)? But what about the people who are cremated; they cannot make the mother earth richer. The only remains left of them may be their spirit (if there is one). Do they still live through their spirit or other etheric or esoteric bodies? In short the question is whether man is reduced to naught after death?

What is the value of hard work?