I find it hard to read Derrida. Is one supposed to grapple with every word, in the same way that one would do with maths, or to just surf along the text, going 'I can sort-of-understand' in the same way one would read some poems (I am sure I am offending some poets here, but just want to illustrate my point).

If Descartes believed that God would not deceive him and God can defy logical impossibilities, then wouldn't it follow that God could be deceiving him nonetheless since God can be both evil and Good? I hope I'm getting Descartes' position right.

I understand that Socrates went along with a death sentence because he believed it right to obey the laws of the country even when they were unjust. He had ample opportunity to escape into exile, and his friends encouraged him to do this, but he said no. Aristotle was a Macedonian. With the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC there was very strong anti-Macedonian feeling in Athens. Aristotle became a target and he sought asylum in Chalcis. He did it because he did not want comply with what would have been an unjust law/judicial process and 'to prevent the people of Athens sinning a second time against philosophy' (Socrates being the first victim). So, did Aristotle think Socrates was virtuous in not taking up the opportunity to go into exile? Is it not also virtuous to find ways of surviving?

Dear Philosopher(s), I would like to ask what would be Wittgenstein's view about sexuality? I'm not sure whether Wittgenstein would consider sexuality philosophically interesting. Note that I'm interested in what would be strictly Wittgenstein; NOT Wittgensteinian. Thank you for your time.

Hello, I have to do a report on women philosophers and I really am having a problem finding someone to do my report on. Does anyone know any notable women philosophers I could do my report on?

What, in summary, was Kant's objection to the Ontological argument for the existence of God.

Is it significant that great modern philosophers like Descartes, Leibniz, Spinoza, Hume, Kant, Hegel, and Wittgenstein were all unmarried? Is there an incompatibilty between major philosophical standing and the state of matrimony? Once a guy has savored the consolations of philosophy, does the idea of a wife leave him cold?

I notice that Socrates, for all his claims to know nothing, never concedes anything to an opponent. He never stops in his tracks and says to an interlocutor, "You're right. I never thought of that! Well, that's given me second thoughts, for sure. Thank you." Apart from Wittgenstein, is there any other known case of a philosopher who has undertaken a major revision of his thoughts?

What are the names of some respected philosophers or schools of thought that believe things are as they should be in the sense that much of what we consider to be bad is in fact of value to life when considered in a larger context?

How does chaos theory effect Mill's philosophical interpretations? It seems that through chaos theory and the butterfly effect, it is impossible for anyone to know what action is the one that will create the most happiness in the world. It doesn't even have to be extreme cases like someone saving a child Hitler from drowning. But even in regular every day cases, every action we take has literally billions of results that are impossible to know about and thus a person would never know which action was the morally right one. Did Mill take this into account in his writings?