Image via Wikipedia
Ernest Hemingway claimed that his best story was only six words long: “For sale: baby shoes, never worn.” Twitter challenges the Twits to tweet profoundly in 146 characters or less. Naturally, this raises the obvious question: can philosophy be done in such tiny packages? After all, we philosophers are known for being rather long winded (or long fingered…if that is how one would change this to a key board metaphor). To make this challenge more interesting, let us see if philosophers can do more with less. As such, I introduce the Philosophy in Three words or 73 Characters (or less) Challenge. Spelling, as always, does not count. Winners will receive the 3 seconds of fame it takes to read and puzzle over their phits (philosophy bits).
Happy Holidays to all.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=fb2ba3fa-8c02-46d9-8fa9-46e9fe857f11)
one’s too many!
Why do anything?
Token not type, token not type, token not type, token not type, token not type, token not type, token…
No self entity.
Seek Truth, Always.
Always double check.
What is this?
knowing nothing.
[...] Mike Labosierre proposed a challenge of twitter-like philosophy in three words / or 73 characters. The answers he got are not very encouraging to think that philosophy in brief is possible. They’re either dogmatic and/or hermetic like ‘no self entity’ or questions, which – although one may argue that they could lead to philosophical thinking – but usually don’t. Three-word philosophy invariably falls into the shallow or the arcane end of the pond. Such brevity is good for commandments, but not necessarily for philosophy, which requires careful analysis and explanations. One could attempt at three-word summaries of different philosophies/philosophers or at expressing a guiding life-maxim (like ‘always double check’ [why not tripple or multiple?]) but the problem is that philosophy invites dialogue, questioning one’s own thinking therefore requiring more that 73 characters. It may be that while literature often profits from brevity, philosophy might be ultimately harmed by it. [...]
Nature rules.
“?”
I don’t know.
Who cares, anyway?
Think for yourself.
existence, knowledge, love.
perception is everything
Pretending it matters
Naivety - winner or loser?
Only three words?
You lost me.
Gnôthi sauton.
revolve, orbit, repeat.
Who ate my sandwich?
Humans crave explanations.
42
I know nothing
what are we?
“I am, therefore I think…”
discern the essential
OK, what’s next?
anything rational and non-empirical
Humans fabricated God.
Born to survive.
“It is of cardinal importance that one should abolish the ‘true’ world.” - Nietzsche, Will to Power
Why?
Why not?
Without is within
What the heck!
love makes you happy
pleasure is morality; assume nothing
I’ve seen this before somewhere…
“I think, therefore I’m broke” =]
Philosophy is something we are born with; for most of us, it changes as we change. We stop changing when we die - we stop thinking, anyway. To think is to put philosophy to use.
Om Mani Padme Hum!
Neti, Neti
Lust to win
priorities matter not
God backwords, dog
what about analysis?
Why why?
Why (why analyze?)?
mu
I disagree
At the limits of the limited, the limitless reveals itself.
all that live are evil as evil spelled backward is live
it is here
Because fecal matters
I admit nothing.
liquor is quicker
Credo ergo dubio
dont have a clue
contrast makes life
Lace,
Actually the post contains no facts. Thanks for the spam comment, though.