Sep 19, 2006 1:37:24 AM cite

I would suggest there no right or wrong answers, in this particular venue, just answers. The answers seen here reflect history, bias and agenda ? they reflect the intent of the writer. In science, one can expect right answers, that is until the Peer Review take over and the biases again flair, so then in the end, too, there are no right answers, or maybe less right answers [the last time I checked 1 plus 1 still equals 2] just answers.

by RedSevenOne

Sep 13, 2006 10:50:18 AM cite

Contradiction is detectable by an individual's mind. Now, it might not seem contradict to another individual, who found a way to lift this contradiction from the two seeming-contradict answers. This is the case, when the point of contradiction is not an universal truth and a fact. But if the two contradicting answer are universal truth, then both can not be right. For example, in asnwering the color of an object one says it White and the Other says Black to the same question, then they both contradict and can not be right both.

by sharaf

Sep 10, 2006 8:35:33 PM cite

Ask yourself: What is the true religion? You may answer any number of options, but have to relalize that what may be the correct answer for you may be totally wrong for me. There is room in the heart of God for all possible answers to be true depending on who is talking. If you read some of the writings of the super scientists like Steven Hawking, you may come do decide that there may be all sorts of possible answers. None of them are wrong, none of them are right. All of them are wrong, all of them are right.

by GeorgeSnyder

Sep 10, 2006 12:19:05 AM cite

In my experience all questions may have several answers. Paradox is natural to the cosmos. It is the human mind that is limited to linear thought. The average person only uses 10% of the brain if that much. It is we who must learn to adapt to the greater reality and not the other way round.

by notcriswell

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Antoschka - Ekaterina Moshaeva: Oh, it's so simple. People have different points of view. It is like in detective story. When some people stand in different places before one building they have different views from their places. And if I stand behind the operator who films I see his back and I cannot see anything what it's in front of him. I can say the operator is tall but I cannot see his face. And people who stand in front of him have another information. Both pieces of information about this man are right, these are only different views. And clowns have also different points of view. People are sometimes like animals, they have only one perspective. But you cannot look at life only from one side and say I am right. You must "see around". You must have very wide panorama over things. Only after that you can say maybe I am right. There are a lot of dogmas and truths and people believe in them, it's okay. Now we are laughing about some things, you know. But at that time it was true, it was a reality. For example, such suggestion that the world rested upon elephants , it was true and Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake for his ideas because people didn't believe in what he said, they said it was a lie.

by Antoschka - Ekaterina Moshaeva

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Abbas Beydoun: Of course, two answers can be right but still contradict each other at the same time because there is no specific standard for right answers. Is the standard: the virtual outcome? Or the robustness of an idea? Or should we consider the similarity of 2 answers as standard? Briefly, right answers can be varied and the answer at its proper time is right. This is not sort of blabber at all, and it is not just to consider that good expressed answers are only right. We do not know why there are many contradictious answers, but we just know that answers can be varied.

by Abbas Beydoun

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Alvaro Restrepo:

by Alvaro Restrepo

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Ana Lucy Bengochea: Basically we talk ... when we talk about spirituality and god as if it were something else, it is possible that we are mistaken, but we know exactly that there are things which are contradictory, but the only thing we have to keep in mind is the way in which we are going to deal with these aspects.

by Ana Lucy Bengochea

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Andries Botha: Matthias, there is no truth. There is no right and there is no wrong. There’re just opinions. There’re just theories. There are suppositions and hypotheses. That’s what makes life so interesting. Nothing is concrete.

by Andries Botha

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Angaangaq Lyberth: Answertext will be available soon.

by Angaangaq Lyberth

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Anthony Arnove: Well, the answer in a word is dialectic. But, I am not going to spend three minutes trying to explain that. So, I will leave it as an issue of further exploration and discussion, but I think it’s a concept that is important today given the prevalence of binary thinking in our world to understand contradiction, to understand change, to understand flux, to understand the complexity of the dialectic is an interesting philosophical issue, but this is a question that ultimately gets an understanding of the possibility for social change, understanding the possibility of resolving the contradictions of our society. There will be new contradictions in an emancipated society, but not the kinds of contradictions that we confront today that are such stark and profound ones that threaten the sustainability of the planet.

by Anthony Arnove

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Anuradha Koirala: No comments. I don’t have any answer to it. I think it is like two wheels --four wheels of a car walking on the street and one gets punctured, but it still goes. They contradict what’s [inaudible]. I think it is like that.

by Anuradha Koirala

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Anuradha Mittal: Well, two answers to a single question can be right but still contradict each other because there is no such thing as one correct answer. All answers come from our experiences, from our circumstances, and given that there can be many many answers, and that is the beauty and the possibility of this world.

by Anuradha Mittal

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Ashok Gangadean: I love this question. Because it really for me is symptomatic of the whole evolution of consciousness and culture. Because what we see, if we step back from any one particular cultural lens and go into a global space and look at the pattern of all our great teachings across the age. We find that they show us that when we are in the egocentric way of processing ourselves in our world, we always end up in a polarity. And the reality that we see in that ego eyes, ego mental space, will always give us contradictory answers. And that’s been the pattern of all philosophy. If look at the evolution of philosophy, say in the European tradition, from our Greek origins of Socrates, all the way through to contemporary Derry Da, we find that same polarizing position. When Socrates came on the scene, he found these two contradictory answers. Is “being” eternal and unchanging, or is it becoming? And the two great metaphysicians of the day, the geniuses, gave contradictory appearing answers. That being is eternal, unchanging still, and the other answer is “being” is always becoming, never the same, always in process. How can those contradictory answers both be true? Can they be true? Can “being” be to the lens we find from the Bible that God created the universe? Or the answer we get from physics of the Big Bang, is it Big Bang or Genesis? What are these answers? We get this pattern all through history. And so, when we go to this higher integral consciousness of global consciousness and wisdom, we find that what at the lower level is contradictory and apparently contradicting one and another, find a meeting point in this higher place. That “being” in this integral sense is both still in motion, is both being in process. “Being” is becoming, the finite has the infinite within it. The one has the many within it. The global has a local and the local has a global. So, this is the pattern of integral holistic consciousness.

by Ashok Gangadean

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Audrey Kitagawa: It is not necessarily a contradiction but more of a perspective, and the relationship of the perspective of the perceiver to the object. So for example, if you are the child of a woman, then you would say that she is my mother. But if you are the husband of the woman, you would say she is my wife. We are talking about the same person, but the others that are in relationship to this person is different. So the perspective of the child to the mother, and the perspective of the husband to the wife, even though we are talking about the same person, carries with it a different perspective, and therefore the child would say this is my mother, the husband would say this is my wife. These are not contradictory answers, but rather they're talking about their different relationship and perspective in relationship to this person. And so therefore while answers may seem contradictory, we're not really talking about contradictions but really about differing perspectives and different relationships in relationship to the subject matter.

by Audrey Kitagawa

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Avi Primor:

by Avi Primor

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Benjamin Fahrer: Government says it's an intelligence test. Well, everyone comes from their different experiences. Everyone comes from a different perspective. They can be right because of the context in which they’re coming from. They can contradict each other because of the different ways in which the people have experienced that situation. This experience here is very different for each participant. And it might be a question to how your experience was, some will say, “Oh, it was cold”, “I was tired”. They can say, “Oh, I was invigorated and energized”, “I was inspired”, “Oh, I want to go home”, “Oh, I want to stay here forever”, right? These are very different contradicting answers. But yet they’re both right, because they’re all based on our own experiences. It’s our experience that then make our answers. Honor each others experiences, accept the contradictions and try not to judge or have expectations. No judgment, no expectation.

by Benjamin Fahrer

Sep 9, 2006 6:00:00 PM cite

Benson Venegas: How? The point maybe is to make the right question to find the right answer. So two answer to the same questions is possible, and can be right. Because we can see the same problem from different perspectives. So perspective can really lead us to see the same situation and see things from - give the different - the same or the different answer. And at the same time these answers could contradict each other. When you get to this point, the only valid answer is the one that is based on mutual responsibility, and is also based in the use of principles and also related to your values. So solution can be greater and stronger when diverse perspectives are brought together.

by Benson Venegas