|
On September 22 2015 12:36 whatisthisasheep wrote:
Is happiness a moral obligation considering how you feel affects the ones around you? Poisoning the community atmosphere with entropic energy is bad mojo.
depends on what system of morals your using I would think. Morals is not my strong point in philosophy so I can't really add more than that.
|
On September 22 2015 08:59 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 22 2015 08:41 Yoav wrote:On September 22 2015 03:00 Cazimirbzh wrote:@whatisthisasheep and @Yoav A meme ? Sort of social mimicry ? Like esope and moliere ? Noah's Ark is the meme of Gilgamesh's flood(babylonian) http://www.icr.org/article/noah-flood-gilgamesh/However for cain and abel and for mary, it's a too common meme to link directly the two of them to egyptian mythology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miraculous_births. Bad son vs good son, bad killed good, splitting the world/time. Chinese, shun and yao. Romulus and remus, roman. etheocles and polynices, greek. Mufasa and scar, disney. philosophy doesnt work that way^^ The language of memes works. It's imprecise, but gets the idea across. Really, a better was to talk about it is in terms of common problems. Resurrection/ascension/rebirth stories deal with the problem of death. This is a common human problem, and we should expect treatments of it to be common. And yes, this does happen in philosophy. Echoes of ideas, sometimes conscious and sometimes not, are very common. I don't think it is fair at all to say that philosophers "echo" each others' ideas, unless you are talking about western and eastern philosophies having sometimes similar ideas without actually being in each others' sphere of influence. However, if you are talking about western philosophy only, then I don't think echoing is the right word at all. Every generation read the works of previous generations. So in that sense, idealism can be traced back to Plato, and if you feel like being a dick about it, you could even say that the idea has not really evolved in the last 3000 years. However, that is a horribly simplified way of looking at it, because in the millenia-long discussion that started between Plato and Aristotle and still has not ended, people disagreed, and came up with ingenious arguments against every single previous explanation. And philosophy moved forward as a discipline by showing how such arguments could be resolved, fully cognizant that they were only building upon the ideas of thinkers who had come before.
I'm most certainly counting conscious echoes, as mentioned above.
|
This one is not as stupid as I thought :S
If oxygen comes from plants, how come you can still breath in deserts and oceans, where there are no trees in thousand of kilometres??
|
United States44398 Posts
Light comes from stars but you can still see in deserts, even with no stars for thousands of kilometres. Where something comes from originally is only part of the story.
|
On September 23 2015 00:59 SoSexy wrote:
This one is not as stupid as I thought :S
If oxygen comes from plants, how come you can still breath in deserts and oceans, where there are no trees in thousand of kilometres??
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion
|
On September 23 2015 01:08 oGoZenob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 00:59 SoSexy wrote:
This one is not as stupid as I thought :S
If oxygen comes from plants, how come you can still breath in deserts and oceans, where there are no trees in thousand of kilometres?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion
Yeah ^^ Gases diffuse and spread out to fill their container. If they aren't contained, then they'll spread out reeeeeeeally really far lol. Plus, land plants have been around for hundreds of millions of years (and the earliest organisms that used photosynthesis have been around for 3 billion years) so they've had a lot of time to make oxygen (which spreads out over the entire Earth).
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_evolutionary_history_of_life
|
@Yoav
Echoes of ideas seems very imprecise. I dont even understand what you mean by that^^ You cant understand nietzsche if you havent read ALL aristotle, plato,socrates because he quotes very precise notions and processes that 're not echoes. And even in that regard, you need other thinker works to grasp the ramification of the notions they imply. The commentaries of aristotle and plato by averroes give us a amazing POV (single?). Philosophy and litterature are not the same.
Also i dont get your digression. These is a big different between common human socialogical problems and specific cultural "items".
The after life issue is the perfect example but i prefer to take one that has been already quoted.
http://www.icr.org/article/noah-flood-gilgamesh/ because even if we see a lot of links, that'll support even more the differences.
I'll point only 2 duration of the flood 40 days (Yom Kippour) only family member (blood links very strong).
Even if we can consider ourself social mimetic animal, you should not reduce key culturals "items" into Echoes of ideas . For example, even if we have "similar" litterature, burial procedures are quite different from one place to another.
edit:
@SoSexy
Atmosphere, atmosphere, est ce que j'ai une gueule d'atmosphere ?
It's a clue.
+ Show Spoiler +But like always it's this bitch, gravity that retained gases.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
what school forces you to take classes from the english department?
|
On September 23 2015 01:19 oneofthem wrote:
what school forces you to take classes from the english department?
Are you referring to the primary/ secondary school levels, or university levels?
In the United States, most primary and secondary public schools require an English class every year (or almost every year), and most universities require a few English/ writing/ reading courses as part of a general education graduation requirement.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i must hvae slept through that class. bummer
|
On September 23 2015 01:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 01:19 oneofthem wrote:
what school forces you to take classes from the english department? Are you referring to the primary/ secondary school levels, or university levels? In the United States, most primary and secondary public schools require an English class every year (or almost every year), and most universities require a few English/ writing/ reading courses as part of a general education graduation requirement.
Its strange that a country wants to teach its population its national language. So strange.
|
On September 23 2015 01:08 oGoZenob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 00:59 SoSexy wrote:
This one is not as stupid as I thought :S
If oxygen comes from plants, how come you can still breath in deserts and oceans, where there are no trees in thousand of kilometres?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion
Also wind. Not sure which is the dominating effect in this case.
|
On September 23 2015 13:10 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 01:31 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On September 23 2015 01:19 oneofthem wrote:
what school forces you to take classes from the english department? Are you referring to the primary/ secondary school levels, or university levels? In the United States, most primary and secondary public schools require an English class every year (or almost every year), and most universities require a few English/ writing/ reading courses as part of a general education graduation requirement. Its strange that a country wants to teach its population its national language. So strange.
lol yeah I have no idea why he even bothered to ask that question. If a country didn't have classes that reinforced learning how to read and write and interpret in their primary language (especially at an early age), I would think that that would be ridiculous.
|
On September 23 2015 15:17 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 23 2015 01:08 oGoZenob wrote:On September 23 2015 00:59 SoSexy wrote:
This one is not as stupid as I thought :S
If oxygen comes from plants, how come you can still breath in deserts and oceans, where there are no trees in thousand of kilometres?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion Also wind. Not sure which is the dominating effect in this case.
wind is actually the consequence of diffusion ^^ it's not the only factor accouting for it tho
|
@oGoZenob
Consequence ? isnt wind the process of gasses diffusion on earth ?
|
On September 24 2015 00:47 Cazimirbzh wrote:
@oGoZenob
Consequence ? isnt wind the process of gasses diffusion on earth ?
wind is a displacement of particles from one point to an other, which can be caused by atmospheric diffusion
|
On September 24 2015 04:05 oGoZenob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2015 00:47 Cazimirbzh wrote:
@oGoZenob
Consequence ? isnt wind the process of gasses diffusion on earth ? wind is a displacement of particles from one point to an other, which can be caused by atmospheric diffusion
Wind is a collective movement of particles caused by the sun and earth rotation and is different from diffusion which is the movement of single molecules due to Brownian motion, without an average movement of air.
Both help spread oxygen, but I'm not sure which of the two is dominating. On large scale I'd guess wind is more important, as we see in volcanoes and so on, that mess up mainly things down wind, while diffusion dominated spreading would be more isotropic. Then again, ash doesn't have nearly as much Brownian motion as oxygen, so may not apply.
Also, I can't immediately come up with a region of the earth that has a strong imbalance is oxygen creation and consumption. Yes, there are few plants in the desert, but also few animals that breath it.
|
On September 24 2015 17:38 Cascade wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2015 04:05 oGoZenob wrote:On September 24 2015 00:47 Cazimirbzh wrote:
@oGoZenob
Consequence ? isnt wind the process of gasses diffusion on earth ? wind is a displacement of particles from one point to an other, which can be caused by atmospheric diffusion Wind is a collective movement of particles caused by the sun and earth rotation and is different from diffusion which is the movement of single molecules due to Brownian motion, without an average movement of air.
well only is the two species have the same partial pressure beforehand. But yeah, the sun is probably orders of magnitude more important than the rest in the making of wind
|
On September 24 2015 18:29 oGoZenob wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2015 17:38 Cascade wrote:On September 24 2015 04:05 oGoZenob wrote:On September 24 2015 00:47 Cazimirbzh wrote:
@oGoZenob
Consequence ? isnt wind the process of gasses diffusion on earth ? wind is a displacement of particles from one point to an other, which can be caused by atmospheric diffusion Wind is a collective movement of particles caused by the sun and earth rotation and is different from diffusion which is the movement of single molecules due to Brownian motion, without an average movement of air. well only is the two species have the same partial pressure beforehand. But yeah, the sun is probably orders of magnitude more important than the rest in the making of wind
Without average movement of air, not average movement of oxygen. Diffusion of oxygen from varying oxygen concentration will of course be related with an average movement of oxygen. Just meant that wind (or convection if you want maybe?) is a different effect than diffusion. Anyway, not important. I am not sure any net oxygen even needs to be transported globally, or if regions are oxygen-neutral already.
|
yeah you're right, sorry
Now I'm interested to know if there is a noticeable surplus in the oxygen concentration in a forest compared to a desert. I really have no idea, but I doubt it's significant
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
