Input: Read this: The materialist view is perhaps best understood in its opposition to the doctrines of immaterial substance applied to the mind historically, famously by René Descartes. However, by itself materialism says nothing about how material substance should be characterized. In practice, it is frequently assimilated to one variety of physicalism or another.
Question: Materialism defines what?

Output: unanswerable


QUES: According to the Omnipotence paradox or 'Paradox of the Stone', can God create a stone so heavy that he cannot lift it? Either he can or he can’t. If he can’t, the argument goes, then there is something that he cannot do, namely create the stone, and therefore he is not omnipotent. If he can, it continues, then there is also something that he cannot do, namely lift the stone, and therefore he is not omnipotent. Either way, then, God is not omnipotent. A being that is not omnipotent, though, is not God, according to many theological models. Such a God, therefore, does not exist. Several answers to this paradox have been proposed.

Does either outcome of the Paradox of the Stone prove the existence of God?
What is the answer?
ANS: God is not omnipotent. A being that is not omnipotent, though, is not God


QUES: About the creation-evolution controversy, Popper wrote that he considered it "a somewhat sensational clash between a brilliant scientific hypothesis concerning the history of the various species of animals and plants on earth, and an older metaphysical theory which, incidentally, happened to be part of an established religious belief" with a footnote to the effect that "[he] agree[s] with Professor C.E. Raven when, in his Science, Religion, and the Future, 1943, he calls this conflict "a storm in a Victorian tea-cup"; though the force of this remark is perhaps a little impaired by the attention he pays to the vapours still emerging from the cup—to the Great Systems of Evolutionist Philosophy, produced by Bergson, Whitehead, Smuts, and others."
What controversy involving science did Popper believe was sensationalized because of its connection with religion?

ANS: creation-evolution


The Treaty of Versailles prevented Germany having AA weapons, and for example, the Krupps designers joined Bofors in Sweden. Some World War I guns were retained and some covert AA training started in the late 1920s. Germany introduced the 8.8 cm FlaK 18 in 1933, 36 and 37 models followed with various improvements but ballistic performance was unchanged. In the late 1930s the 10.5 cm FlaK 38 appeared soon followed by the 39, this was designed primarily for static sites but had a mobile mounting and the unit had 220v 24 kW generators. In 1938 design started on the 12.8 cm FlaK.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): When did the 10.5 centimeter FlaK 38 appear in Germany?
Ah, so.. In the late 1930s


Question: The rediscovery of Aristotle's works–more than 3000 pages of it would eventually be translated –fuelled a spirit of inquiry into natural processes that had already begun to emerge in the 12th century. Some scholars believe that these works represented one of the most important document discoveries in Western intellectual history. Richard Dales, for instance, calls the discovery of Aristotle's works "a turning point in the history of Western thought." After Aristotle re-emerged, a community of scholars, primarily communicating in Latin, accelerated the process and practice of attempting to reconcile the thoughts of Greek antiquity, and especially ideas related to understanding the natural world, with those of the church. The efforts of this "scholasticism" were focused on applying Aristotelian logic and thoughts about natural processes to biblical passages and attempting to prove the viability of those passages through reason. This became the primary mission of lecturers, and the expectation of students.
Try to answer this question if possible: What language did 12th century scholars studying Aristotle speak in?
Answer: Latin


Input: Read this: The effect of these differences was accentuated by the pre-war preparations. The Prussian General Staff had drawn up minutely detailed mobilization plans using the railway system, which in turn had been partly laid out in response to recommendations of a Railway Section within the General Staff. The French railway system, with multiple competing companies, had developed purely from commercial pressures and many journeys to the front in Alsace and Lorraine involved long diversions and frequent changes between trains. Furthermore, no system had been put in place for military control of the railways, and officers simply commandeered trains as they saw fit. Rail sidings and marshalling yards became choked with loaded wagons, with nobody responsible for unloading them or directing them to the destination.
Question: What factor especially affected travel to the front in Alsace and Lorraine?

Output:
frequent changes between trains