Philosophy; I bequeth thee.

[ioxles]

This is a counter-topic to the two philosophy threads created by Mr. Switchblade. In this I hope to come to some conclusion as the elusive nature of philosophy.

Now, casting off the shackles of education and the mass hypnosis that consists of life (conspiricists take note) and getting down to brass tacks (edit:corrected), what is at the bottom of it all?

Now for me philosophy coexists hand in hand with science, religion, art and pretty much everything else under the sun. It is invoked in attempts to see the world around us in a light different then is accustomed to, outside or indeed without a box, constructing ideas that challenge and illuminate issues pertaining to any subject.

Now a philosophical argument to me is one that cannot be solved simply by empirical fact or belief, it writhes under scrutiny, malleable by logic but not certain, constructed by faith but not scripture, it is a puzzle that requires the mind to sidestep sanity and look through it from the other side if necessary, it is a metaphor stretched to infinity (well I've run out of steam).

There are my thoughts, now a question, a philosophical one: A goose is trapped inside a glass bottle, unable to escape. How do you free the goose without damaging it or breaking the bottle?

Remember this is a philosophical question.

 

[Hunde Des Krieg]

brass tacks... And I have no idea how to get the goose out...

 

[SquirrelPants]

None of the above. If the goose got itself trapped, it may as well stay there. *Ruffles Socrates-esque robes and nods*

 

[Easykill]

Blue pill? Frig, was it Blue? Whatever, the Matrix is kinda dumb anyway. I'll just use the real life equivalent; lots and lots of narcotics.

 

[black lincon]

You don't. I don't care about the goose, call be mean but I'd rather eat a delicious goose than save it from a bottle it somehow got into.

 

[ioxles]

Well, since you don't say the size of the goose, I'll say its a little duckling and I'll pour grease down the bottle, than put it upside down as the goose slips out.

Say it is a fully sized goose in a bottle with a neck too small for it pass through.

 

[Gavmando]

A goose is trapped inside a glass bottle, unable to escape. How do you free the goose without damaging it or breaking the bottle?

Realise that the goose and the bottle are all connected and that they are one with each other. Then raise the vibration of the goose, or the bottle, to match the bottle, or the goose. Once their vibrations are the same, they will simply pass through each other.

...Of course by that stage the goose wont care, as it will have reached a level of enlightenment.

 

[implodingMan]

The bottle is enormous. I climb in and carry the goose out.

edit: crap. Just read your last post.

 

[ioxles]

Well, since you don't say the size of the goose, I'll say its a little duckling and I'll pour grease down the bottle, than put it upside down as the goose slips out.

Say it is a fully sized goose in a bottle with a neck too small for it pass through.

Well, I'd kill you for creating such a scenario. How the fuck did the goose get in the bottle if its that big, unless its already dead

Say this improbable thing happened: "If a man puts a gosling into a bottle, and feeds him until he is full-grown, how can the man get the goose out without killing it or breaking the bottle?"

 

[Candybar]

Just take it out of the bottel!

Please ask me how.

 

[ioxles]

I resist the urge to just say 'fire' for no reason...

'Breaking' is different the 'cutting' (I assume when you said 'damaging' you were talking about the goose). Just get some glass cutting tools and some glue.

Thats what I thought when I first heard it, completely wrong track though.

 

[baker80]

Since when are trick questions philosophy? This is more like a zen koan, not a proper philosophical problem. You'd better ask what is more ethical: Saving the goose at the cost of breaking an invaluable handcrafted goose bottle (Ming dynasty) or preserving the bottle at the cost of having the goose starve to death.

 

[filbertim]

Rhetorically, what does it mean for the goose to be free?

Does its death free it? If not, does its death preclude its being free? What led to that assumption?
Edit: Wait this was dealt with. It can't be killed, huh? And no broken bottle. Different than I've heard it before.

And this actually is a koan, btw.

 

[Candybar]

Now were are getting somewhere thanks filbertim

Better yet does the mere thinking about the gooses state change it?

Was it free befor we determind that is was trapped?

 

[filbertim]

Is it trapped, because it thinks it's trapped, etc...that's one line of thinking.

Again:
A goose is trapped inside a glass bottle, unable to escape. How do you free the goose without damaging it or breaking the bottle?

We have been told it is trapped , and asked for a way to un-entrapped it. (or whatever, free has a lot of baggage) Implicit in that is that it can be detrapified. Except... 'unable to escape' could either mean it cannot escape under its own power (so much for sympathetic vibrations) or that it is unable to escape period. We cannot help.

Haha! It's all semantics! Define your terms

 

[ioxles]

Okay, spoiler time.

Spoiler: Goose question answered

Spoiler: Think about it some more.

Okay well, here goes.

Q:A goose is trapped inside a glass bottle, unable to escape. How do you free the goose without damaging it or breaking the bottle?

A: There never was a goose or a bottle, they were just things I created with words, imagine the goose free of the bottle and see. There, now it is free.

This wasn't a puzzle or a test of knowledge, it was if anything a koan.

For a more detailed explanation (if you are feeling cheated or thought the answer was lame for some reason) go here: http://www.osho.nl/New-Osho-NL/EnglBooks/GooseOut.htm

 

[filbertim]

Uh...philosophy is a huge field. Questions from "How do you know you know what you think you know?" to "What is philosophy?" to "What is good/ethical/moral?" to "Why was that personal attack inappropriate in this formal debate?"

Philosophy means love of knowledge.
Philology is the study of knowledge (and is a subset of philosophy).
What can we humans claim but knowledge and its application?

 

[Easykill]

...Y'know, I thought of that, then decided it was too lame to possibly be right.

 

[filbertim]

Heh. Nothing is below a philospher. The truly dedicated would cut off a leg, if lameness were required.

 

[baker80]

Another koan: What is the sound of one hand fapping?

Answer:

Spoiler

Osho. Worst rip-off guru ever.