Every question has an answer?

[Ganesh J. Acharya]

Does every question necessarily have an answer?

[M Purcell]

On Apr 17, 12:39 am, "Ganesh J. Acharya" <ganeshjacha...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Does every question necessarily have an answer?

It would seem questions have the advantage since every answer produces
more than one question.

[Dare]

"Ganesh J. Acharya" <ganeshj...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:d4a8c224-702a-45f8...@googlegroups.com...

> Does every question necessarily have an answer?

It seems questions are formed from concepts we already have...
are they framed in a way based on our pre-conceived idea of
what an answer would look like...
thereby also giving a form for the answer to fit?
"Reality"...or "what is" ....
might have aspects(answers) of which we are unaware.
Could there be "answers" we humans necessarily could not perceive?

[Dare]

"Dare" <clyd...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:kkri3m$7no$1...@dont-email.me...

And from a "higher" or more "universal" perspective,
might out human questions make no sense?
If the question makes no sense or is meaningless,
seems there might not be an answer.

[Ganesh J. Acharya]

Again, answers being out of reach does not mean there are no answers.

I guess to every question there is an answer and they are just out of our reach.

[RedAcer]

On 17/04/13 08:39, Ganesh J. Acharya wrote:
> Does every question necessarily have an answer?
>

What constitutes an answer?
I could answer 'fast 'n' bulbous' to *any* questions whatsoever?

[TruthSlave]

Ganesh J. Acharya wrote:
> Does every question necessarily have an answer?

Ask me again, when i've heard every question.

eg, no answer.

;))

Say, why is the bolong, like the boolonglong?

[Well it looks like a question, it must therefore
have been posited on sound enough principles to
have an answer, right?]

[Dare]

On 4/17/2013 3:39 AM, Ganesh J. Acharya wrote:
> Does every question necessarily have an answer?

Perhaps another issue is: Is an answer useful?
There may be as many "answers" as there are questioners...
for example, what is the answer to the question :
"What is the meaning of Life?"

Is there one "True" or absolute objective answer...
or are there many "True" differing subjective answers?
Or both...
Or neither?

[Ganesh J. Acharya]

Now knowingly the answer bound to human limitations does not mean there is no answer?

[Flasherly]

Life's meaning is two for truth. Should the first be philosophical,
you or Ganesh are then subjectively within reason to a degree of
common accord and precepts (the art of forensic argument) given
philosophical truth. Truth in a pragmatic objective is however
neither, as societies, cities and their nations, do not run on
conjectures, and their multitudes do not engage an obscurity
concerning philosophic learnedness, nor anarchy, but by matters of an
immediacy at hand. Your life's meaning -- if not entirely forfeit by
such judgments, say, by being contractually bound to make war upon
others, within nationalistic interests, honor, it is, to be thus
obliged to die-- is otherwise a matter of revelatory- &
reasoned-decree;- both adequate to a tradition of Christianity, more
notably, of revelatory and divined morality, as by degrees adapted
within classical philosophy (such as Aristotle);- Jews, of a
law-centric tradition, and in a larger sense revelatory Islam, bear in
mind, have shunned a wider influx of the classical/philosophic for the
more direct approach of the prophetic-lawgiver. All in all, but so
many guidelines to better see for potential among social-nationalistic
followings. Power behind any movement, force and coercion, still
speak in words understood from the days of olden languages: Render
unto Caesar what is Caesar's (as later annotated by what is to God,
God's).