So I went onto Philosophy SE main looking for good substantive questions, and Instead I find:

Is Gravity The Fundamental force?

The question seems like an obvious joke, so I said, and scrolled down. Behold, there I found an answer by some person let us call it x. So I downvoted the duo: question and the answer and flagged it for mod-review. After I got out of that question, I had a deja vu:

Is Gravity a force?

A variant of the same non-sensical question, though garbed in a slightly ranty cloak. A down-vote and flag later, I scroll down to find an answer by the same person who answered the first one, but this one had a twist: there was another nonsensical answer, but this time by OP. So I went onto OPs profile and I find another question:

Is This Proof of Existence and a Solution to P=NP Problem?

First off, I must admit I have no Idea what the question is about, but I am glad that it is now closed. Furthermore, at the bottom of the last question OP seems to be plugging for his "book." I am no detective, but I do think the questioner of Questions 2 and 3 is a troll. What do you guys think?

Here is another one, though by "seemingly" another author:

What makes matter different from energy?

it is getting ridiculous now!

Here are two others:

Is everything right and wrong?

Is right and wrong the only thing that matters?

Immediate closure and account suspension is the way to go IMO.

  • 3
    I noticed your question after mine : philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/q/5050/37256 . My focus is a bit different from yours but it shares the irritant-origin!
    – Rushi
    Commented Sep 7, 2019 at 4:55
  • @Rusi No problem, I am glad you voiced your concerns. Regards Commented Sep 7, 2019 at 5:02
  • 2
    Is all of this from the same user? Do these users have a similar writing style? Commented Sep 7, 2019 at 19:01
  • 1
    @TautologicalRevelations Actually the sets of questions are by two different accounts. As for the accounts being run by the same person, this I am not sure of. Commented Sep 7, 2019 at 20:44
  • 1
    Thanks for responding. I'm not sure what is going on, but it pays to be a bit careful. Best wishes. Commented Sep 7, 2019 at 20:46
  • They seem like legitimate questions to me. Good question, I'm not sure why they're [on hold]. Commented Sep 8, 2019 at 4:36
  • 1
    @AndrewKoster Whatever floats your boat! Commented Sep 8, 2019 at 4:48
  • 1
    @BertrandWittgenstein'sGhost : Is Andrewkosher a sock puppet for the question in question? See comments to my question...
    – Rushi
    Commented Sep 8, 2019 at 6:01
  • 1
    @Rusi No socks involved, just like minds.
    – Philip Klöcking Mod
    Commented Sep 8, 2019 at 7:44
  • I don't have the rep to see the deleted questions, but not long before this was asked, I'd mentioned that gravity can be a fictitious force. Dunno if that may've led to someone asking the two questions about gravity.
    – Nat
    Commented Sep 10, 2019 at 3:38
  • 2
    Since you asked, there was also this beaut: philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/67044/…
    – Chelonian
    Commented Sep 13, 2019 at 17:15
  • @Chelonian haha That is Gold, thanks for that. Regards Commented Sep 14, 2019 at 1:47
  • 2
    I wanted to flag the P != NP proof as spam, but I couldn't bring myself to do it. It's just too horrible to destroy. I counted only three sentences in the entire proof that aren't either wrong or meaningless (and even that requires really stretching the definition of "meaningful"). It's so appallingly bad as math that I think that it might instead be a form of unintentional art; is there a dada.stackexchange it could be moved to?
    – Ray
    Commented Sep 17, 2019 at 7:04
  • @Ray Rofl, unintentional art. This is absolute Gold! Thanks for the chuckle! Regards Commented Sep 17, 2019 at 7:10

1 Answer 1


I don't think any of those questions are beyond philosophical discussion. I like this site because people here are less despotic about what kind of questions are "allowed", and I think it is consistent with the spirit of philosophy.

  • 2
    Can you really look at this question for example and say that it has any kind of redeeming value at all? Commented Sep 20, 2019 at 17:31
  • @NoahSchweber Whether you consider the proof is correct or not, I don't see why this question should not be asked, especially for the author the critique could be enlightening.
    – Daniel Li
    Commented Sep 20, 2019 at 20:38
  • 3
    It's not a "proof," it's gibberish. Surely there are some standards, at all. Commented Sep 20, 2019 at 20:41
  • @NoahSchweber Then we should enter into a debate as to what constitutes as "gibberish" and why the proof put forth there fits the criteria. As far as I can see, the author does have some sense of where he is heading although the presentation is not very clear. Same applies to some philosophical writings by well-known philosophers. In principle, only answers rather than questions should be discouraged.
    – Daniel Li
    Commented Sep 20, 2019 at 21:10
  • 1
    @DanielLi "Only answers rather than questions should be discouraged." -7... oof! Commented Sep 23, 2019 at 21:00
  • @BertrandWittgenstein'sGhost I stand by what I said. It might not be popular but I said it out of principle. It is never wrong to ask a question, no matter the way it is asked or what it is about. There should not be a mechanism of control applied to what questions we can ask, especially in philosophy.
    – Daniel Li
    Commented Sep 23, 2019 at 23:13
  • 1
    @DanielLi "What we can ask" and "what we can ask in this particular venue" are simply not the same. The claim that this site should have no standards for questions frankly boggles my mind. Commented Sep 24, 2019 at 17:01
  • @NoahSchweber I disagree that there are special "venues" where questions should not be asked. And there is no such thing as "standards" as far as questions are concerned: purpose of a question is not to provide some sort of service. I agree that there should be standards applied to answers, but not to questions. Philosophy should always encourage questions, not control them.
    – Daniel Li
    Commented Sep 24, 2019 at 18:34
  • I'd say this is the right attitude but attached to the wrong question. A better one for it would be philosophy.meta.stackexchange.com/questions/5074/…
    – Rushi
    Commented Oct 8, 2019 at 5:55

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .