
“Don’t you, forget about me.” My helpers tell me that 80s music has made a comeback.

Answering questions at Boston College O’Neill Library

“Don’t you, forget about me.” My helpers tell me that 80s music has made a comeback.

There are as many answers to this question as pages in this library, but they basically fall into two categories: teleological (related to purpose), or etiological (related to causes & origins). The first asks What is our purpose? and the second asks What caused us to be? Some might add a third category: phenomenological (related to experiences), which asks What is happening? You could do worse than to explore all three (teleology, etiology, and phenomenology) in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: https://plato.stanford.edu. Me, I think we’re here to love.

To understand where courage comes from, we must understand why we need it. In The Tragedy of Pudd’nHead Wilson… (PS1317 .A1 1996) Mark Twain wrote “Courage is resistance to fear, mastery of fear – not absence of fear.” In his sci-fi epic Dune (PS3558.E63 D8) Frank Herbert wrote, “Fear is the mind-killer…”. Fear can paralyze us into inaction, which is, itself, an action. Doing nothing is a decision. Courage comes from an instinctual unwillingness to do nothing when something needs to be done. Brene Brown has written some great books on courage and where it comes from (bit.ly/BC-brene-brown).

My creator was the architecture firm Architects Collaborative and my why is to provide support for all of the students at BC. As for humans (or the universe more generally), I may have to direct you to Campus Ministry (bit.ly/BC-ministry) to start you on your path to finding answers to these questions. Emphasis here on the word start since you’ll probably spend quite a bit of time trying to find an answer – if you ever do. Oh. Also. 42.

According to Anais Nin, “there is not one big cosmic meaning for all; there is only the meaning we each give to our life, an individual meaning, an individual plot, like an individual novel, a book for each person.” Following this concept, I believe that striving for self-fulfimment would be a good start.

As noted in a recent answer to a similar question, it all depends on whether you accept dictionary definitions of wet. If so, then water can make itself wet (instantiation!). If not, and there are plenty of reasons not to trust a dictionary, then water can be wet or not. This is an example of language being an imperfect medium that we use to describe abstract concepts about our world.

You should have one of the dreams that’s sprouting within you, that perhaps you haven’t yet noticed. But not everyone lives their dreams, and perhaps we aren’t all meant to: some people live their comfort or their pastimes, and that’s fine. Others – unfortunately most in the world – don’t really get a chance to consider their dreams; with luck, they may get to create opportunities for others, such as their children, to dream. That you’re wondering suggests you’ve got an opportunity: may you do with it something that brings you and others joy, peace, and security, or even justice.

Because eπi = cos(π) + isin(π) = -1 + i(0) = -1

Yes. Probably. Apparently if you have less than 6 molecules of water, it doesn’t behave like water. At 6 or more. the volume of water begins to take on a 3D structure and exhibit the properties that we think of when we think of water and wetness (see bit.ly/WaterDipole). Whether water can be wet is more of a definitional argument that has no answer. If you believe this dictionary definition of Wetness (http://bit.ly/WetnessDef), then water does in fact consist of liquid and is therefore wet. If you don’t believe it, then that’s fine, you just have to justify your answer. This is a case of language breaking down when it comes to actually describing our world and sensations.

Enough to give credit to everyone who helped you achieve something, even yourself.

By definition, no. But how do you define “on”? It’s a matter of what’s being covered. Or uncovered.

True, any life form is only required to reproduce. But look at the many fantastic, creative and beautiful ways that plants and animals accomplish that one task. Seems to me that the diversity of life would not exist if there was not some other purpose for each species.

There are many circumstances where that’s probably OK. Kids are hungry and there’s no other way to feed them? Sure. But pure greed? I wouldn’t advise it. Best to stick as close to your dreams/mission in life as you can, or you’ll probably regret it later on.

It sounds like climate change might be your passion. If you care that deeply about a cause, it’s very much worth your time (and everyone else’s) to do some work for the cause. Remember, you can have multiple things that you care about. Having varied interests is not only OK, it’s preferable. Diversity in your focus is what keeps you from burning out.

It’s an admirable virtue. As with many virtues, use it in moderation. In excess, loyalty could become unquestioning obedience. Without it, though, social ties crumble. Mutual respect, patience, and tolerance help loyalty blossom organically.

Tall order! Start local: be an examplar of how to live with minimal harm, with respect for others. (And when that fails, at least patience & tolerance.) Do more asking and listening than making yourself heard. Make room for voices that aren’t often heard. Grant those around you dignity and agency. When you encounter injustice, say so, and do what you can to correct it, because peace is unlikely without justice. When you make mistakes, apologize and make amends. There are many courses at BC in political science, philosophy, sociology, and theology that address issues of peace and justice.

Given the number, longevity, and ubiquity of religions, I doubt any generalization about all of them could be true or meaningful. However, it’s quite likely power has played a role in some parts of at least some religions, and some aspects of power are gendered. If you’re interested in that subject, I recommend James Laine’s Meta-religion: Religion and Power in World History (E-book link: bit.ly/BC-meta-religion) as a starting point.

Borrowing an answer from 2017 because it was so good: The answer would depend on your interpretation of the word “sound.” If by sound you mean the vibration that propagates as an audible wave of pressure through air, water, or other transmission medium, then the tree does make a sound when it falls. However, if by sound you mean the sensation perceived by the sense of hearing, then the falling tree does not make a sound because no one is there to hear it. (Following this rationale, this answer will only exist once you read it.)
![What is [Louimas?] talking about re: self and the other??](https://library.bc.edu/answerwall/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/aw030519-1.jpg)
I’m having trouble with your handwriting, which I have to read backwards. If you’re talking about the philosopher Levinas you’re talking about ethics, but not necessarily ethics the way other philosophers talk about it. Bernasconi in the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy has a good description of his major works and how the Other has claims on the Self which are impossible to meet. The bibliography has some suggested reading which looks promising. Let me know if you’d like more, or if I’m totally misreading your question. bit.ly/bc-levinas

I’m so glad you recommended the arts as a way of understanding a concept! In my perennial enthusiasm for information, I sometimes forget that the way to really grasp something might be through literature, visual arts, or music. Jóhann Jóhannsson and Ludovico Einaudi have answers, too.