All things in moderation, including moderation.

The more similar two options are, the more difficult it is to decide between them, and the less consequential the decision becomes. A rational decider might find themself spending the most time on the least important decisions.

Is water wet?

Do you like who you are?

When you die, how will you know that you are dead?

Which is worse, failing or never trying?

When you die, how will you know that you are dead?

Promise me you’ll never promise me anything.

Many documents contain pages on which the text "This page is intentionally left blank" is printed, thereby making the page not blank.

Is time subjective?

Where does the concept of justice come from? Is it man-made or natural to every living being?

What is the color of a mirror?

What shape is outer space?

The more you fail, the more likely you are to succeed.

Imagine that you are holding a postcard in your hand with the words "The statement on the opposite side of this card is true" inscribed on one side. That will be Statement A. The opposing side of the card states, "The statement on the other side of this card is false," when you flip it over (Statement B). A paradox arises when attempting to assign any truth to either Statement A or B: if A is true, then B must also be true, yet for B to be true, A must be untrue. On the other hand, if A is untrue, then B must also be false, hence A must inevitably be true.

Do we ever have a "right" to take free will from another person using our free will?

Do you believe in good and evil?

If given the choice of constant physical pain with peace of mind or no physical pain but constant mental suffering which is better?

What is the difference between living and existing?

Do you have a "right" to tell others what to do?