Philosophical Question

Remove all ads!

If a man talks in a forest and there's no woman around to hear him is he still wrong?

 

oh yes indeed!!

You think the tree doesnt make a sound if it falls and no one is around to hear it!! Well of course it does, thus .. when a man speaks, and there are no women .. he is still WRONG

[This message has been edited by Kitiara (edited July 21, 2001).]

 

agreed, there's just noone to tell him

 

Didn't we have this one in a topic some months ago? Those mind teasers topics....

Anyway, conclusion: Tyresian is either a female, or a traitor to the masculine cause!

Or he is just trying to impress some of the females on these boards? Can't blame him for trying then!

 

If we take the axiom that absolute truth exists then that is valid.
However if we assume that there is no absolute truth, and therefore no absolute right or wrong, these terms are relative. Relative "rightness" or "wrongness" is meaningless without a reference point, and since there is no reference of superior rightness, then the statement can neither be said to be right or wrong, but simply is.

 

It's always good to hear the wisdom that is Kitiara!

Another Philosophical question:

If one tries to fail, but succeeds, what have they done?

 

if he succeded in his try to fail, he failed.

though, if you try to prove murphy's law, will it fail?

 

So basically, for all you dumb people like me, this is someone who succeded at failing.

Hmm, that's a good question. I'll think about that one. I would say both, but I don't think there's an answer.

 

hmmmmm, i reckon, if a tree falls, then someone must be there to here it, otherwise why would it have fallen in the first place?

 

I am none of those grovflab. Im just speaking from experience.

Me: That movie sucked ass.
Girlfriend: Marc, what are you talking about, that was the greatest movie i've seen.

Me: I hate pizza.
Girlfriend: Don't lie, i know you like it.

Here's another,

How much slower is woman time compared to man time?

 

Tyresian, I wonder if you have any proof of variable correctness eg.
Him: I think XXXXXX
Her: Don't be stupid!
Him: Of course, I agree with you entirely
Her: Don't just mindlessly agree with me, why can't you think for yourself sometimes.

 

Tyresian - The lag is at least 20 minutes!

But remember: If you're waiting for a guy friend, they can be 5 minutes late - you can bail after 6.

For a woman: Take the time you were supposed to meet, add ten minutes and multiply the ten minutes by her degree of hotness on a 1-10 scale.

 

Aggreed that the lag rate is high. as for previous thing about if a person trys to fail he had both failed and succeeded. Failed at what he was doing yet succeeded at trying to fail.


So you can try to fail at an action or you can fail at trying to fail and and succeed at the action.


Is anyone confused by what I just said?

Edit some spelling fixed.

[This message has been edited by kemanmaldea (edited July 23, 2001).]

 

From the chaos of this thread, I think I have seen the light!

1) My wife is right . . . I really am wrong! All this time I just thought she was being "her", now I know that there is something ontologically wrong with me and all of the other males on the planet.

2) In my attempts to be "right" I have been trying to fail - and then have found myself caught in "Bel's Dilemma" (see above).
This dilemma occurs because the following axioms are true:
a) Men are always wrong
b) Therefore, any attempt for a man to be right is doomed to failure
c) Attempts to succeed at failure result in multiple failures, which is evidenced by the tears of the involved female and the male sleeping on the couch.

Thanks for the insight!