God's consequent nature, on the other hand, is anything but unchanging – it is God's reception of the world's activity. As Whitehead puts it, "[God] saves the world as it passes into the immediacy of his own life. It is the judgment of a tenderness which loses nothing that can be saved." In other words, God saves and cherishes all experiences forever, and those experiences go on to change the way God interacts with the world. In this way, God is really changed by what happens in the world and the wider universe, lending the actions of finite creatures an eternal significance.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): What effect does Whitehead claim that experiences have on God?
Ah, so.. those experiences go on to change the way God interacts with the world

The Flying Fathers, a Canadian group of Catholic priests, regularly toured North America playing exhibition hockey games for charity. One of the organization's founders, Les Costello, was a onetime NHL player who was ordained as a priest after retiring from professional hockey. Another prominent exhibition hockey team is the Buffalo Sabres Alumni Hockey Team, which is composed almost entirely of retired NHL players, the majority of whom (as the name suggests) played at least a portion of their career for the Buffalo Sabres.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): What exhibition team is made up of almost all NHL players?
Ah, so.. unanswerable

Western philosophy regarded emotion in varying ways. In stoic theories it was seen as a hindrance to reason and therefore a hindrance to virtue. Aristotle believed that emotions were an essential component of virtue. In the Aristotelian view all emotions (called passions) corresponded to appetites or capacities. During the Middle Ages, the Aristotelian view was adopted and further developed by scholasticism and Thomas Aquinas in particular. There are also theories of emotions in the works of philosophers such as René Descartes, Niccolò Machiavelli, Baruch Spinoza and David Hume. In the 19th century emotions were considered adaptive and were studied more frequently from an empiricist psychiatric perspective.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): What school of thought saw emotion as not an impediment to virtue?
Ah, so..
unanswerable