Question by Kerbachard! -El Wapo™ ©: Philosophers, do you wear Levi’s? Is this stuff crazy? What are your opinions about the “Chip”?

http://www.spychips.com/

RFID and the Telescreen | May 14, 2006
Ubisense combines the remote tracking power of Radio Frequency Identification with a modern-day version of the telescreen from George Orwell’s novel 1984, says Liz McIntyre, commenting at FreeMarketNews.

Worldwide reaction to Levi’s RFID spychipping initiative…
Privacy advocates across the globe are sounding-off on spychipping of clothing. Our recent Levi’s story is generating responses in places such as Australia, India, and Europe…

http://www.rense.com/general69/vfid.htm

The VeriChip can be hacked! This revelation along with other worrisome details could put a crimp in VeriChip Corporation’s planned initial public offering (IPO) of its common stock, say Katherine Albrecht and Liz McIntyre.
intersting “ads” that showed up on the side bar!

Best answer:

Answer by Yup_ItsMe
wow well this has been comming to us and no one has even done a thing. remember the people who we became independent from?? well aparently most of us don’t, and they gave them the power back, sounds intereting how now after 300 years we start realizing that the Queen still controls us and this spychip is the way they can have total control they will get rid of actual money (like they ahven’t already) and make all the money digital and they will make the chip our identity without it we do not exist and the trouble makers are easier to get rid of and disapear. so who is willing to be free? all i got to say is

Remember Remember the 5th of november

please remember the christian bible was a book for rebullution not a book of religion where they did warn us about this control of powers…
i am not religious but a free thinker and my kind will be extinct or at least persecuted again for free thinking in the near future. i sure know that with this chip people say that counterfeiting is close to impossible i say yes it is but corruption is the result and hey did someone say Hitler is in the house?

What do you think? Answer below!

Find More Modern Philosophers Articles

Question by David: What are some of the problems with this solution to the mind-body problem?
Most people tend to lead towards materialism or dualism as I understand it. Obviously dualism can’t be fully explained (a non physical matter exerting influence on a physical matter) and materialism doesn’t do well for those hoping for an afterlife. What if you were instead to view the brain as a computer tower or the hard drive? The actual brain would be the hardware, the mind would be the software or operating system. An operating system obviously consists of code and data, which cannot be held or seen such as a rock on the ground. Obviously I’m talking about the physical matter that data really is, not a C.D. or memory stick.

Anyways, the mind would be our own Windows 7. It would exist within the brain, telling the brain what it should do physically (as far as sending signals to your arm to get it to move, for example). However, it wouldn’t BE the brain. And, just like data can be transferred, your mind could leave the brain itself. This would lend itself to a possibility of life after death, with the mind still being a physical thing. In a sense, you would almost be joining the afterlife via a wireless file transfer This could also explain the possibility of reincarnation (for those that believe in such a thing).

I know this has had to have been proposed before, as I thought of it almost immediately as we went over the basics of the mind body problem in philosophy class. We’re also only halfway through the course, but we seem to have left this particular topic for now. So forgive me if I sound ignorant of new theories (or this one). However, I can’t seem to find a problem with it myself, though admittedly a beginner in philosophy. Can anyone else tell me how this theory has faired when weighed with modern philosophers?
Barbie: you do realize the point of throwing in how the theory dealt with the after life is because fans of dualism reject materialism due to the fact that it doesn’t have room for one, right? Seriously, no one cares what your religious or non religious beliefs are. It’s about the theory being plausible.
Aaron: yes I remember the Chineese room arguement. However, that was to show that just because something appears to do something, doesn’t mean that that is the case. Such was the example of the people in the room responding in Chineese, though they knew not what it meant. I would believe more along the lines of the identity thesis than functionalism. While I draw a parallel between the mind and the OS, I don’t mean that they are identical. I simply use that example to explain how the mind can be physical, as can the brain, and be two seperate entities, as well as how the mind can survive the death of the body. However, more elaborating and fine tuning would be desired, agreed. I’ll have to do this.
Aaron: yes I remember the Chineese room arguement. However, that was to show that just because something appears to do something, doesn’t mean that that is the case. Such was the example of the people in the room responding in Chineese, though they knew not what it meant. I would believe more along the lines of the identity thesis than functionalism. While I draw a parallel between the mind and the OS, I don’t mean that they are identical. I simply use that example to explain how the mind can be physical, as can the brain, and be two seperate entities, as well as how the mind can survive the death of the body. However, more elaborating and fine tuning would be desired, agreed. I’ll have to do this.

Best answer:

Answer by Vintage Barbie
What makes you think there is an afterlife?

Give your answer to this question below!

Question by freethinker: according to the psychiatric community Christians are delusional, does this surprise you?
Although non-specific concepts of madness have been around for several thousand years, the psychiatrist and philosopher Karl Jaspers was the first to define the three main criteria for a belief to be considered delusional in his 1917 book General Psychopathology. These criteria are:

* certainty (held with absolute conviction)
* incorrigibility (not changeable by compelling counterargument or proof to the contrary)
* impossibility or falsity of content (implausible, bizarre or patently untrue)

These criteria still continue in modern psychiatric diagnosis.

Best answer:

Answer by indiegeek22
Hell no, it’s true.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Question by travis w: thoughts on this quote?
Ancient ethics always dealt with 3 questions. Modern ethics deals with only 1, or at the most 2. The 3 questions are like the 3 things a fleet of ships is told by its sailing orders. First, the ships must know how to avoid bumping into each other. This is social ethics, and modern as well as ancient ethicists deal with it. Second, they must know how to stay shipshape and avoid sinking. This is individual ethics, virtues and vices, character building, and we hear very little about this from our modern ethical philosophers. Third, and most important of all, they must know why the fleet is at sea in the first place…I think I know why modern philosophers dare not raise this greatest of questions: because they have no answer to it.

Best answer:

Answer by Hatchetman Jack
+2

Add your own answer in the comments!

Question by Cliff Harris: Can any of you evolutionists dispute this?
Natural Philosophy = Philosophy based on laws determined by philosophy.

Natural Science – Philosophy that passes the scientific method but usually gets disproven eventually anyway.

Whether you are a natural philosopher like charles darwin, or an equally philosophical natural scientist, you have no claim to any truth unless you get it from God. There is no truth except that which comes from Him.

Any scientific fact is only a scientific fact until new philosophies (evidence) are discovered (or crafted) that disproves it.

And any scientific experiment intended to conclusively determine any absolute truths, would have to require every single factor in the universe (an infinite amount) to be present, and the person doing the experiment would have to have infinite knowledge of every single factor from the infinitely smallest to the infinitelety largest. And with that knowledge, you would be able to determine an absolute truth. But modern science is no where near that. So all they do is guess using philosophies to try to understand life which are comstantly replaced with new and equally ignorant philosphies on a daily basis without coming at all closer to attaining absolute truth. Man lacks the capacity to determine absolute knowledge of all things in existance. We can’t even remember 10,000 phone numbers much less complete knowledge of even 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,0…
things in the universe which is actually infinately less then infinity.

For example to make any absolute statement in truth about molecules you would have to have complete knowledge and understanding of not just 1 but every molecule in existance. And we lack that capacity. So complete knowledge of every molecule, atom, and quark, are just the beginning. We’d have to know everything else also. And that is not likely to happen through science/natural philosophy.

The Correct Way to go about it is to ask The One who made everything in existance, the one who keeps the trillions of laws that govern the universe not just every second, or every billionth of a second, or even a trillionth of a second, but the one who keeps the universe running constantly even to the innfinately smallest fraction of a second.

Still not convinced? Lets examine the odds that every law in the universe would remain constant even for 2 trillionths of a second. being that there are over 100 trillion laws in place we’ll say just 1,000 laws governing the universe to make this more relative. So here are the odds.

for every .000000000001/second you will have to guess the correct random number between 1 and 1,000 and get the correct number every time.

in other words.

.000000000001
“Quick roll the 1,000 sided dice and hope it lands on 1, wow it landed on 1! Let’s hope it does it again!”

.000000000002
“Quick roll the 1,000 sided dice and hope it lands on 1, wow it landed on 1! Let’s hope it does it again!”

.000000000003
“Quick roll the 1,000 sided dice and hope it lands on 1, wow it landed on 1! Let’s hope it does it again!”

And it would have to be correct at least a trillion times per second, and never guessing incorrectly even once.

This is the logic of the philosophers trying to support a Godless universe.
einstein: 100.00%
redstapl: try again
jack very good statement. Since However perhaps better said, Christians can determine truth by the Bible and know absolute Truths.. however Atheists, play trial and error and have been for thousands of years and have not even 1 absolute truth to go by.
The best science can do is “the sun rose yesterday, therefore the sun will rise tomorrow”
taikutsu: Actually philosophy has not done any such thing. modern philosophy (science) uses metaphysics and probablity to lead people to believe such things about the universe. They have absolutely no way at all of determing if the earth is the center of the univers or not. 25,000,000,000 galaxies to the east as well as to the north south and west. In fact, modern philosophy/science/metaphysics contracdicts itself, in regards to quantum theory by the light from the east, not having yet met with the light from the west, which according to the big bang nonsense should have happened billiion upon billions of years ago.
thank you for your response alex l, but in additon to eliminating the laws of time and motion, you are also eliminating the laws of thermodynamics, and at least 100 other ones. For example, what law specifies how long a single law is in place for? The 3000 year law? the 2999 year law? And these laws are based on math, so what law determined the mathemtical laws of math, and how long have the mathmatical laws of math been present, unless math was a constant law before the laws of mathmatics were created. The entire atheistic imagination is designed for those who choose not to think beyond the limits of their philosopher role models.
taikutsu: no they actually haven’t they use metaphysics and probabilty, to form philosophies. But have no true knowledge of anything about space.
actually you need to do some studying, YES all those sciences you named are metaphysics – “we can’t prove any of this garbage we are telling you but just believe us ok?” that is metaphysics motto. here try this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics

alex modern natural philosophers have philosophically stated (which passed the scientific method making them empirical philosophies) that the universe is always changing. So how can the laws remain constant if that is the case?
Saeed well said, so why are you giving up your soul to eternal seperation from God and all the Goodness that only comes from him, like love, mercy, compassion, generosity, trust, and kindness, condemining yourself to eternity without any of those for evolution which you don’t even believe is absolutely true?

Best answer:

Answer by Einstein
To how many decimal points do you know the existense of a god?

Add your own answer in the comments!

Related Modern Philosophers Articles

Question by Mad Mac: For child development specialists, please help me with this matter…?
Cognitive psychology seems to consider love as not being a primary emotion. Post modern philosophers say good and evil are relative not intrinsic. Humans seem to me to have a “built in” sense of right and wrong and a need for love as evidenced by very young children’s recognition of incidents of violence to others or self as being negative. This seems to me to be due to an intrinsic sense or a learned sense of goodness maybe learned from mothers TLC of them. TLC = tender loving care.
Does this latter seem true to you?

Best answer:

Answer by studenttherapist
you seem to look st one side of the coin… look at maslow’s hierarchy of needs..especially with the recent research…

Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Question by Evelin: What is your understanding of this paragraph?
This comes from the book “John Perkins Confessions of an Economic hit man” In modern times, Colombia has had a reputation for producing some of Latin America’s most brilliant writers, artists, philosophers, and other intellectuals, as well as fiscally responsible and relatively dem¬ ocratic governments. It became the model for President Kennedy’s nation-building programs throughout Latin America. Unlike Guate¬ mala, its government was not tarnished with the reputation of being a CIA creation, and unlike Nicaragua, the government was an elected one, which presented an alternative to both right-wing dictators and Communists, finally, unlike so many other countries, including powerful Brazil and Argentina, Colombia did not mistrust the United States. The image of Colombia as a reliable ally has continued, de¬ spite the blemish of its drug cartels.

Best answer:

Answer by Mr.Moakes
Well basically it’s giving a history of highlights that Colombia has done and contrasting it with different South American countries. The way it explains is a view that Colombia has been loyal to the United States despite it’s reputation of drug cartels. The paragraphs also gives a view that Colombia is one of the few countries in south American that deferred to a democratic system of government rejecting a communist or dictatorial rule.

Add your own answer in the comments!

Question by Batman: Does anyone know the answers to this crossword puzzle?
The puzzle is mostly about Toaism and Confucianism.

1. Hero of nationalistic movement in China; Chinese republic. (starts with either “s” or “i” mostlikely “i” and is 9 letters long)

2. Leader of the communist revolt. (ends with “o” has 3 letters)

3. Modern Chinese philosopher. (starts with “L” and has 9 letters 6th one is “t”)

4. Man must bend with it says Taoism. (6 letters, 3rd one is “o” and 5th one is “r”)

5. Something one gives as the noble. (starts with”p” has 5 letters)

6. Formalized Toaism into a religion. (9 letters, 4th is “n” and 8th is “n”)

7. Devoured for nourishment. (4th letter is “a” and has 5 letters)

8. The imortals of Toaism. (starts with “h” has 5 letters)

9. Creator of the Jade Emperor. (starts with “c” 5th letter is “t” and has 9 letters)

Whoever answers the most of these and correctly will be given BEST ANSWER! Thanks for your help!

Best answer:

Answer by Elly M
7. Eaten?

Maybe hit Wikipedia for the others.

Give your answer to this question below!

Question by God of the Hipsters: Would this explain the arise of religion in both historical and modern society?
“Society’s greatest weakness, is its discontent with uncertainty, and its mission to answer the unanswerable, no matter if the answer is non-sensical”

This is a quote from the famous philosopher, Teh Atheati Kitteh King.

Best answer:

Answer by Jonny
Three guys are standing before Saint Peter at the Pearly gates. Peter asks a question to the first one and MUST get the right answer to enter. “Who were the first two people? ans Adam and Eve. Just then bells started ringing-birds started singing and behold the gates open. To the next a question “Who was given the ten commandments”. ans Moses. Just then the bells started ringing and the birds started singing, behold the gates opened. Then the last person was asked, “What was Eve’s first words to Adam”? reply Oh my,… that’s a really hard one. Just then the bells started ringing and …..

Give your answer to this question below!

Question by Mogk: Does the universe have a purpose? IF so, what is this purpose?
If not, is it, as some modern philosophers have argued, just a universe of “matter in the motion” – particles and electromagnetic field acting according to the laws of physics?

Best answer:

Answer by Shnike
That’s the big question, isn’t it?

What do you think? Answer below!

Related Modern Philosophers Articles