Quantcast

Do you ever wish SodaHead had a "philosophy" category?

rand 2012/11/30 16:49:10
Related Topics: Philosophy, SodaHead
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • LayLady 2012/12/02 08:02:04
    Phil and Sophie who?
    LayLady
    +1
    I guess
  • rand LayLady 2012/12/11 16:13:09
    rand
    +1
    Philosophers do a lot of guessing.
  • LayLady rand 2012/12/11 21:49:24
    LayLady
    +1
    That they do.
  • timothy.hill.14 2012/12/02 01:19:31
    Yes, because...
    timothy.hill.14
    +1
    I think that would be enjoyable and could be a good idea for a group. I took a couple philosophy classes in college as well as read quite a few books on different view points and remember really enjoying both.
  • MichaelDillon 2012/12/01 00:45:23
    Yes, because...
    MichaelDillon
    +1
    Very good idea!
  • Sister Jean 2012/11/30 23:26:04
    Yes, because...
    Sister Jean
    +1
    make people think
  • Sodahead Founders are Fascists 2012/11/30 22:04:16
    No, you've got to be kidding...
    Sodahead Founders are Fascists
    +1
    It would be awfully deserted.
  • rand Sodahea... 2012/11/30 22:08:34
    rand
    +2
    My futile attempt to find a SodaHead group with "philosophy" in the title substantiates your belief.
  • Papillon 2012/11/30 21:32:57
  • Emi 5 2012/11/30 21:32:29
    Phil and Sophie who?
    Emi 5
    +1
    I just liked that choice. It would be nice, especially if people would keep it to philosophical questions, rather than ramming American current politics or their dislike for Republicans or Democrats down our throats.
  • Willski 2012/11/30 19:01:21
    Yes, because...
    Willski
    +3
    I love philosophical debates.
    Of course, they require people to be open minded, that's a trait which is notably lacking on here.
  • rand Willski 2012/11/30 20:58:37
    rand
    +2
    Perhaps the intransigent would avoid the topic. I was just chastised as being argumentative because I brought up the issue of free will and choice in a discussion. Clearly it's not for everyone.
  • Striker Willski 2012/12/10 16:52:00
    Striker
    Open-minded contradicts the necessity of Reason.
    That's where Marx failed, yet managed to con the hordes.
  • Willski Striker 2012/12/10 21:19:07
    Willski
    +1
    Hmm, can’t tell if there’s ambiguity, if I’m just having a stupid day, or if I’m just too tired to think properly, either way I don't seem to be able to figure out quite what you're getting at there. I’ll take a stab at this anyway, and maybe go to sleep, it’s getting late in England.

    Close minded people render debate pointless.
    If you're never willing to consider the possibility you're wrong, there's no point discussing anything.
    To consider it, and weigh up alternate options without bias allows you to find the viewpoint closest to truth.

    Take religion as an example. I'm an atheist, so let’s say the Christian god came down to earth, revealing himself and his religion to be the truth. Close minded me would remain adamant and ignorant in my atheism despite overwhelming proof to the contrary; open mindedness would allow me to consider this new evidence and alter my perspective to one of Christianity.

    To reason everything you must first consider it, or rather assess or think about it. Close mindedness prevents reasonable though, open mindedness facilitates it.
  • Striker Willski 2012/12/10 22:55:06
    Striker
    +1
    Reason must be based on Truth. Truth, once verified, renders open-mindedness useless for that particular item. Reason incorporating falsehoods... is not Reason, it's assumptions which deny Reason.
  • Willski Striker 2012/12/11 12:42:25
    Willski
    To reason is to think in a logical way, or to use rational thought.
    You have to use reason and rational thought on all options to find the truth(s). Otherwise you’re just blindly trying to justify what you already believe. That’s not rational or reason, it’s stupid.
  • rand Willski 2012/12/11 16:19:43
    rand
    +1
    Here's the dilemma: “Beliefs come first, explanations for beliefs follow. The brain is a belief engine. … Once our brains connect the dots of our world into meaningful patterns of belief, we look for and find confirming evidence to support them and employ a host of cognitive biases that insure we are always right.” Mike Shermer
    AND the solution: "Cherish those who seek the TRUTH, but beware of those who find it." Voltaire

    “Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.” Andre Gide
    I think you're both correct. Pardon my butting in.
  • rand Striker 2012/12/11 16:20:14
    rand
    +1
    Here's the dilemma: “Beliefs come first, explanations for beliefs follow. The brain is a belief engine. … Once our brains connect the dots of our world into meaningful patterns of belief, we look for and find confirming evidence to support them and employ a host of cognitive biases that insure we are always right.” Mike Shermer
    AND the solution: "Cherish those who seek the TRUTH, but beware of those who find it." Voltaire

    “Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.” Andre Gide
    I think you're both correct. Pardon my butting in.
  • Striker rand 2012/12/11 16:30:27
    Striker
    +1
    Yes, much begins with theory becoming a belief and then taken as fact.

    An major example of theory being long disproven yet applied as "fact" is Keynesian economics. It has so much to do with our irrational world today.
  • rand Striker 2012/12/11 17:14:46
    rand
    Keynes or Hayak? It depends on the particular circumstance. (Keynes would have agreed I think.) I assume your proof is in the inordinate duration of FDR's efforts. I've read most of "Human Action" by Von Mises (years ago) and am not convinced that Keynes doesn't have application. But then I see economists as being speculators, "liars, damned liars, and statisticians." I think evolution demonstrates that belief can border on fact. IF it lacks scientific evidence, I seriously avoid using the word "proven".
  • David 2012/11/30 18:51:13
    Phil and Sophie who?
    David
    +1
    They have a news and politics section, but that doesn't seem to keep politics from over flowing into other categories!
  • Sonny 2012/11/30 18:41:26 (edited)
    Yes, because...
    Sonny
    +1
    There would be many good topics to discuss on.. so many issues about philosophy
  • webcrawler 2012/11/30 18:27:43
    Yes, because...
    webcrawler
    +2
    I'd love to see the questions people might come up with.
  • Luke 2012/11/30 18:18:58
    Yes, because...
    Luke
    +2
    as long as it's used just for philosophy. Soda should screen questions for proper category.
  • rand Luke 2012/11/30 21:01:17
    rand
    +2
    Screening would be a monumental task given that philosophy covers virtually all aspects of life. I think the category itself would discourage most close-minded people.
  • Luke rand 2012/12/01 18:15:36
    Luke
    +2
    True.. philosophy is a broad term...but I'm sure the "Am I cute?" and "What color sox are you wearing?" questions can be eliminated pretty easy.....
  • roman.espla 2012/11/30 18:06:14
    Yes, because...
    roman.espla
    +1
    It could keep all the american politics out and focus on world problems.
  • rand roman.e... 2012/11/30 21:02:25
    rand
    +1
    Perhaps. The discussion would probably be more general, less specific. THX for your reply.
  • wolf sloan 2012/11/30 18:01:11
    Yes, because...
    wolf sloan
    +4
    We need a category for all those "Am I cute?" questions.
  • rand wolf sloan 2012/11/30 21:03:30
    rand
    +2
    It could be termed "egocentric trivialities". LOL
  • Striker wolf sloan 2012/12/10 16:55:42
    Striker
    +1
    Yes, I call such "Trivia". I've dropped many friends who waste my time with such!
  • Gone Away 2012/11/30 17:55:29
    Yes, because...
    Gone Away
    +2
    but, they'd fill it with politics & religion! So...may need to be more specific!
  • rand Gone Away 2012/11/30 21:04:43
    rand
    +2
    Unfortunately philosophy is all-encompassing. My hope would be that the discourse would remain more general. THX for your reply.
  • OBEY 2012/11/30 17:49:44
    Yes, because...
    OBEY
    +2
    And also a science category.
  • rand OBEY 2012/11/30 21:05:46
    rand
    +2
    Perhaps divided even further into physics and biology. THX for replying.
  • Sir Ant (♞) DeviANT of PHAET 2012/11/30 17:36:03
    Yes, because...
    Sir Ant (♞) DeviANT of PHAET
    +2
    Sounds good to me.
  • Jesterz 2012/11/30 17:11:17
    Yes, because...
    Jesterz
    +2
    Could be interesting...
  • gnice123 2012/11/30 17:09:49 (edited)
    Yes, because...
    gnice123
    +2
    if not I tend to put my philosophical questions in the "Living" category and I don't really think they belong there along side posts about what one's favorite room of the house is.



    Greg P.
  • rand gnice123 2012/11/30 21:06:35
    rand
    +2
    Couldn't agree more.
  • The Pale Man 2012/11/30 17:08:21
    Yes, because...
    The Pale Man
    +1
    That sounds interesting.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/04/23 15:19:59

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals