Here is a question about this article: Kierkegaard criticised Hegel's idealist philosophy in several of his works, particularly his claim to a comprehensive system that could explain the whole of reality. Where Hegel argues that an ultimate understanding of the logical structure of the world is an understanding of the logical structure of God's mind, Kierkegaard asserting that for God reality can be a system but it cannot be so for any human individual because both reality and humans are incomplete and all philosophical systems imply completeness. A logical system is possible but an existential system is not. "What is rational is actual; and what is actual is rational". Hegel's absolute idealism blurs the distinction between existence and thought: our mortal nature places limits on our understanding of reality;
What is the answer to this question: Even though Kierkegaard does not believe in the possibility of an existential system of reality, what sort of system can exist?
****
So... logical

Here is a question about this article: Alsace is one of the most conservative regions of France. It is one of just two regions in metropolitan France where the conservative right won the 2004 region elections and thus controls the Alsace Regional Council. Conservative leader Nicolas Sarkozy got his best score in Alsace (over 65%) in the second round of the French presidential elections of 2007. The president of the Regional Council is Philippe Richert, a member of the Union for a Popular Movement, elected in the 2010 regional election. The frequently changing status of the region throughout history has left its mark on modern day politics in terms of a particular interest in national identity issues. Alsace is also one of the most pro-EU regions of France. It was one of the few French regions that voted 'yes' to the European Constitution in 2005.
What is the answer to this question: Which conservative leader in 2007 received the best score during the second round of elections?
****
So... Nicolas Sarkozy

Here is a question about this article: Peruvian Carnival incorporates elements of violence and reflects the urban violence in Peruvian society following the internal conflict in Peru. Traditionally, Peruvian Andean festivities were held on this period every year because it is the rainy season. It was already violent during the 19th century, but the government limited the practice. During the early 20th century it consisted partying and parading, while in the second half of the 20th century it acquired violent characteristics that continued. It was banned, first from the streets in 1958 and altogether in 1959 by the Prado government. It consisted basically of water battles in a traditional way,[clarification needed] while in later years it included playing with dirty water, mud, oil and colorants -and also including fighting and sometimes looting private property and sexual assaults on women. It has become an excuse for criminal gangs to rob people while pretending to celebrate. As of 2010, it had become so violent that the government imposed penalties of up to eight years in prison for violence during the games (the games themselves are not forbidden, but using violence during the games or coercing others to participate is).
What is the answer to this question: When did the festivities acquire their violent tendencies?
****
So...
second half of the 20th century