The philosopher is opposite the gambler. — ucarr
[Please don't analyze. If you explain what you intend to express, you will still not explain it (because you will have to explain the explanation) and kill your style.] — gikehef947
Wait a minute! What if some audacious philosopher, knowing ultimate laws of everything must paradoxically fail, intentionally sets about attacking the quest for a theory of everything, being fatally curious about the nuggets that shower forth from this Hadron Super-Collider of a theory? — ucarr
Herein, my word choice of "attack" is unfortunate. In this context, "attack" means "line of attack," or "approach to the solving of a problem," not "attack" as in "find fault with," or "criticize." — ucarr
Why must ultimate laws fail? — EugeneW
But my most favorite part is the misspelling of Strange in the thread title. It's like printing a whole bunch of twenty dollar bills on your computer at home, leaving the W out of Twenty. — god must be atheist
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.