Stile writes:
I find most humanities' "answers" to be the opposite of "much intellectual consequence or interest." Well, that's not true. They certainly are interesting but they really can't have too much consequence (in the grand scheme of reality sense) because there's no way to know if they're actually true. And, in most cases, it's obvious that there's no single correct answer.
I think "having no correct answer" has another name, life.
A quiz:
Who/What is better:
1. Shakespeare or Sagan?
2. Bach or AC/DC?
3. Kurosawa or Spielberg?
4. Michelangelo or Dali?
5. Tacitus or Suetonius?
6. Hugo or Dickens?
7. Math or physics?
6. Physics or engineering?
7. Engineering or computer science?
8. Computer science or chemistry?
9. Chemistry or geology?
10. Geology or biology?
11. Biology or Economics?
12. Economics or political science?
.............. and so on.........
Sarah Palin or Carl Baugh?
Score:
A = all of the above (except Palin and Baugh)
B = math
C = political science
D = Sarah Palin
F = Carl Baugh
Edited by anglagard, : add the question so i could score the answer
Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.
Edited by anglagard, : correct scoring
The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen
™ Version 4.2
