I see people asking questions about topics which philosophers really do ask about, and not just in populist terms.

Though admittedly framed in a personal way, that's not "pushing a personal philosophy". Is it that the question should show a prior engagement with philosophy? Then lots of very naive questions should have been closed

  • i find it kinda funny how literal people are about questions, but not answering them lol – user6917 Jun 3 '16 at 18:12

You proposed the answer in your question: "Is it that the question should show a prior engagement with philosophy?" -- Yes.

The noted close reason is "While this question may be related to philosophy or occur in a philosophical context, the question itself doesn't seem to be about philosophy, and is therefore not a good fit for our site." To me, this close reason is here for exactly these kinds of questions. The overall topic is something philosophy has to deal with but there is not enough connection to, or constraints from, prior philosophical thought to make the question narrow enough for effective answers in the SE format.


I voted to re-open just now. It seems like a good answer could address the question and still be relatively concise by finding one or two examples. I think the question could be cleaned up a bit though - not sure the question's title and the body really match up, since the body seems to be about confessing to a lie.

You must log in to answer this question.