RE: 10 Questions to make your Brain Hurt Challenge #3 Drag your friends in and present the most awesome answers :-)
Laws are abstract principles that don't need protecting, so I guess you mean enforce (in which case it's no longer a play on words). The answer is both. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
I imagine it would be the same as the speed of light. Darkness is absense of light, therefore darkness appears at the same speed light disappears—the speed of light. Also, can an absense of something have a speed? I mean, you wouldn't talk about the size of nothing.
If it's true and obvious why would I try to prove it wrong?
Give up crime. Then Batman thinks he's only pretending to give up crime, when he really is giving up crime.
I would never use it. It sounds kind of like income redistribution, too. I would reject it, lest I be tempted, unless the power goes to someone else if I reject it, in which case I would keep it to keep it safe.
No (?). I don't think so. As for the second question, some actions are morally neutral, like choosing to repaint your house or not.
The only decisive factor is the part where the first option gives average virtue. I would much rather be poor and virtuous.
Zeno argued that motion didn't exist, and your questions sound like his arrow paradox. I think (not sure) I would answer that time can't be divided into moments, so the progress of time is a continuation, not a collection of snapshots.
You lost me. Haven't studied advanced physics yet.
This sounds more like psychology than philosophy. If it were philosophy, you'd ask what people ought to do in these situations. I admit not knowing the answers to your questions.
Pretty much how I think about it. Darkness isn't a thing but a derivative based on other existing information.
3)It's actually not true. I ripped it off from a historical event: http://journals.sfu.ca/cjbs/index.php/cjbs/article/download/60/57
5)Good thinking. There aren't many on steemit who are dumb enough to be a user. All the responses I got were reject it or just to keep it around.
7)A noble choice. Hats off!
8)My take is that time only exist in retrospect. I'd even go as far as to claim that time doesn't exist; only chronology does.
My personal take is that there are no classical systems; only quantum systems. That way many of Zeno's paradoxes can be explained away.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Zeno_effect
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Darwinism
There is no such thing as movement; only static events that change which appear as movement like in computer animation. Each new frame is slightly different from the previous. You can only measure static instances existing. The phenomenon called movement is somethings that is manufactured in the mind using perceived data.
9)I haven't studied advanced physics either. I've just read some material. My question was a thought experiment.What if there is a Class 1 lever with Mechanical advantage of 10. I'll mix the relativity to the question and ask what if you use enough force to move the lever at 20% of the speed of light. If we keep adjusting the fulcrum to get different amounts of Mechanical advantage, what would happen when the mechanical advantage hit 5 or more?
10)I think the situation would create a sort of natural selection. A society that go full superficial zombie would eventually crumble and self-destruct and a society that takes it slow would survive without any problem (given that no context altering elements like an alien invasion/meteor etc aren't introduced)