Our panel of 91 professional philosophers has responded to

134
 questions about 
Love
77
 questions about 
Emotion
151
 questions about 
Existence
110
 questions about 
Biology
110
 questions about 
Animals
244
 questions about 
Justice
170
 questions about 
Freedom
58
 questions about 
Punishment
221
 questions about 
Value
2
 questions about 
Action
284
 questions about 
Mind
80
 questions about 
Death
75
 questions about 
Beauty
70
 questions about 
Truth
43
 questions about 
Color
51
 questions about 
War
81
 questions about 
Identity
154
 questions about 
Sex
36
 questions about 
Literature
31
 questions about 
Space
1280
 questions about 
Ethics
34
 questions about 
Music
75
 questions about 
Perception
374
 questions about 
Logic
89
 questions about 
Law
208
 questions about 
Science
69
 questions about 
Business
218
 questions about 
Education
282
 questions about 
Knowledge
4
 questions about 
Economics
39
 questions about 
Race
67
 questions about 
Feminism
287
 questions about 
Language
105
 questions about 
Art
68
 questions about 
Happiness
392
 questions about 
Religion
124
 questions about 
Profession
2
 questions about 
Culture
117
 questions about 
Children
32
 questions about 
Sport
574
 questions about 
Philosophy
27
 questions about 
Gender
88
 questions about 
Physics
5
 questions about 
Euthanasia
54
 questions about 
Medicine
23
 questions about 
History
24
 questions about 
Suicide
58
 questions about 
Abortion
96
 questions about 
Time

Question of the Day

There is a finite number of arrangements of letters; thus there is a finite number of definitions.

Is that true if we're allowed to use each letter an increasing number of times? If our stock of letter tokens increases without limit, then can't the number (and length) of our definitions also increase without limit? Certainly the names of the numbers will tend to get longer as the numbers they name increase, and those names will reuse letters to an ever-increasing degree.