sauwelios@yahoo.com

I want to say something very specific, reminiscent of "fiat iustitia et pereat mundus" in form, but instead using the words of "naturam expellas furca tamen usque recurret". Thus far, I have "recurrat natura et expellatur furca"--"let nature recur, though it be driven out with a pitchfork." (I wouldn't mind, in fact I might even prefer, if it also meant "let nature recur and let the pitchfork be driven out.") Now the thing is, I would like to include "usque" as well. Is this even possible, and if so, what would the correct word order(s) be? "usque recurrat natura et expellatur furca"? "usque recurrat natura et furca expellatur"? I would like "usque" to apply to both "recurrat" and "expellatur".

I need to know whether I can use the word "mostly" in an essay I'm writing.

Consider the case of my evaluating something as worthless and the case of my evaluating that same thing as valuable. Surely these two cases differ only with regard to the value judgment that is being made. Now consider the case of one evaluator's evaluating something as worthless and the case of the evaluation of another thing, which is as different as possible from the first thing, by another evaluator, who is as different as possible from the first evaluator. Is there a common ground to the latter two evaluations?

"Jebem ti krvavim kurcem defektnu kcer na grobu mrtve matere dok tvoj paraplegicni otac drka na taj prizor a ti mu lizes zadrkana jaja."

All I know is that it's probably insulting.

Can one say, for example, that the Hare Krishnas chant Krishna, meaning that they celebrate him in song? Note the absence of quotation marks: I do not mean to ask whether one can say that the Hare Krishnas chant "Krishna" (i.e., the name Krishna).

http://www.patheos.com/Library/Islam/Beliefs/Human...

On this webpage, it says:

"Islam teaches that God [...] separated us from the rest of creation by giving us three divine gifts: intelligence to distinguish the true from the false, a will that can freely choose between them, and the power of speech to worship."

Is this correct? And if so, where exactly does Islam teach that? For example, does it say so in the Qur'an, and if so, where? I'm especially interested in the first gift.

"constitution (accomplie), nature effective: Ce terme si important se définit bien à l'intérieur de sa catégorie comme 'l'accomplissement (effectué) d'un devenir,' et donc comme la 'nature' en tant qu'elle est réalisée, avec toutes ses propriétés."

It's about the ancient Greek word "phusis" as used by Homer. This is the best I can do:

"[By 'phusis', Homer means] (accomplished) constitution, effective nature: This so important term defines itself well, within its category, as 'the accomplishment of (or effected by) a Becoming,' and then as the 'nature' as which it is realised, with all its properties."

Is this correct? I'm especially unsure about "à l'intérieur de sa catégorie" and "en tant qu'elle est réalisée".

What's big and furry, and alternates between black and white?

Nietzsche is often quoted as saying, "There are no philosophies, only philosophers", or something to that effect. But where, if anywhere, does he say that? I haven't been able to find it, and that's saying something!

And as an optional question: Do you think this is the prime motivation of _most_ scientists? If not, what do you think it is?

Of course, one's birth is a quite important event in one's life, but isn't one's *conception*, for example, even more important? Does a man not have a personality on the day before, *if everything goes right*, he is born? His character suddenly materialises out of nothing the moment he is born??

Actually, I have many questions, but this is the most urgent one. Why do you care about getting a PhD in philosophy? What do you care about the tests and awards devised by academics? Why not devise your own tests?

This is my most urgent question because it seems to me the most glaring inconsistency in your thinking. Another is your regret of not being born in 1844. This is inconsistent with amor fati. But then again, amor is a psychosis, isn't it...

In the announcement it said it would be offline for UP TO 24 hours. Is it worth it to keep checking back? Or will it probably take the full 24 hours?

This is the text I wish to translate:

Satyros hoc excitat

Et Dryadum choreas

Redivivis incitat

Hoc ignibus Napeas

Hoc Cupido concitus

Hoc amor innovatur

Hoc ego sollicitus

Hoc mihi me furatur

Si quis amans per amare

Mereri posset amari

Posset Amor michi velle

Mederi dando beari

This is what I have so far:

"This excites the satyrs

and the choruses of Dryads.

By means of rekindled fires,

this incites the valley-nymphs.

"By this, Cupid is invoked.

By this, love is renewed.

By this, I am shaken.

This steals me from myself.

If a loving one could, by loving,

deserve to be loved,

Amor could make [me] happy

by giving [another person] the will to heal me."

I'm concerned only with the grammar. I know my translation's very clinical, but I just want it to be correct, and as literal as possible. Thanks in advance.

Example:

"If I have no money I can't buy groceries."

Syllogistic form:

Premise: I have no money.

Conclusion: I can't buy groceries.

Silent premise: Buying groceries requires money.

Question: Can you think of an "if...then" construct that is not really a syllogism?

P.S.: Use English only -- no mathematical notation.

How did you find out that injuring yourself made you feel better? What gave you the idea to try it? Or did you do it accidentally the first time? I'm inquiring into the *inception* of your self-injuring habits, for the sake of my Yahoo Group: http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/Injurers_of_t...

From Einstein's famous formula, I know that mass is energy. But what is energy?

Thus far I have found the unsatisfying "definition" that energy is the ability to do work. "Work" is a scientific term, but is "ability"? If so, what is its definition? If not, what is the scientific definition of energy?

You may also turn my question around: "I know that energy is mass, but what is mass"?

Please formulate your answer in English, not in mathematical language (for instance, "is" or "equals" rather than "=", please).

If you play an original Xbox game from the disc on Xbox 360, the Xbox Guide is unavailable. Is it available when you play an Xbox Original you've downloaded from Xbox Live?

If the law of non-contradiction did not apply, it could at the same time apply too. This means that if it applies, that does not mean it does not not apply.

From my last question, I learned that a computer registers bits (a "1" or a "0") by checking whether there is a ~3 volt pulse or no pulse during a certain (short) period of time. I now wonder what happens when there is a ~2 or a ~1 volt pulse. I guess that more or less is good enough for the computer, for instance a ~2.999 volt pulse. My question is: if we count down from ~3 volt, at what voltage does the computer not register a "1" anymore?