youmour:
Deez nutz

youmour:
Deez nutz

sushieater:

johnydon22:
I would like to mention that atheism is not a doctrine, the only thing that label people atheists is disbelief in Gods. . so i can only speak for myself.



What i hold to be sacred is "LIFE" as we know it now. . .Human life, animal life and every other life form this planet harbours. .

Reyginus:
If I may ask, why Life?

Reyginus:
If I may ask, why Life?

johnydon22:
Because it is more special than gold, money, belief and wealth. . If you ever value belief more than "LIFE" then one can only say pity .. The wealth of this planet is not in what we take from it but what we give it. .and that entails how we treat ourselves and other life forms

plaetton:


Why not Life?

Life is the total sum of individual experience on this universe.
Every creature has the right live out its cosmic or evolutionary purpose.
Therefore, that right is something that non should interfare with.

The meat that ate for food today, did that creature fullfil its cosmic purpose by nourishing and adding to your life or did your need for nourishment usurp its own cosmic purpose?

This is a question you should ponder before you eat that bushmeat your planning to eat later today.

Reyginus:
I think life is the greatest thing in the world too. I just want to know your reasons.

Good one. A very intelligent man asked this question some time ago, on this forum, I'd like to see how you respond to it.

Is life better than no life? That is, is existence better than nonexistence? I would like you to use this illustration to answer it.

In life tasks are executed and problems are solved. Imagine there were no problems and something happens and a problem is created. A tool, a person, encounters it and tries to solve it. Imagine also there were no problems as a result of no tool, a person, in existence. Is any of the two better than the other?

Reyginus:
What do you mean by 'its cosmic purpose'?

plaetton:

The universe is the sum of its parts.
Therefore, every atom, every molecule, every conscious life adds value to the universe by participating in its evolution.

Being able to fully participate, without interruption, in the grand symphony of the universe is the Cosmic purpose that I refer to.

johnydon22:

For every action in physics there is a reaction. . So for the fact there are activities (life) there must be reactions therefore the activities that spring forth as a result of life is life itself.

Now without these activities, there is nothing and this position (inexistence) itself is a separate and distinct tilt to the former ..

One cannot determine that which is better, certainly not me because Existence and Inexistence are both different sides of the same coin. . They both negate each other and are dependent on each other for meaning. .

Without the idea of existence there will never be the concept of inexistence, so none is greater or better than the other

plaetton:

The universe is the sum of its parts.
Therefore, every atom, every molecule, every conscious life adds value to the universe by participating in its evolution.

Being able to fully participate, without interruption, in the grand symphony of the universe is the Cosmic purpose that I refer to.

Reyginus:
Nice. Very good. Thank you. My thoughts exactly. But we may have a problem.

So, by implication, life is the most sacred thing when compared with life. Now I'm feeling uncomfortable with the result. Wouldn't that mean that life is only sacred when compared to life because with no life it is nothing?

And if that is so, how can the only sacred thing about a thing be the thing? I hope you get my point. As in, the good thing about good is that it is good. You get where I'm driving at?

johnydon22:
Simply put.

"We are all different parts of the same whole and our activities affects others"

johnydon22:


I think apparently you have mistaken existence to mean life directly. . Let me even get something straight here.


"What is Life?"

plaetton:


This the fundamental misunderstanding that dogmatic theists like Deepsight seem to miss.

They think that Life and consciousness are extraneous imports to our universe, rather than being organic, homegrown derivatives of the universal grand symphony.

Reyginus:
In this sense, existing as a living being.

johnydon22:
Yes i know, am asking "what living is" so we can differentiate and see the premise from whence my postulation of life being special is based..

What is living? or in order words "what is a living being?"

Reyginus:
Plaetton!!! What do you mean by life and consciousness are 'being organic, homegrown derivatives of the universal grand symphony'.

plaetton:


Like I said before, the universe is the sum of its parts.
Everything in the universe, including and especially conscious life, is homegrown in the universe.
Simple.

It is utterly ludicrous to suggest a divine or extraneous provenance for conscious life in the universe.

Reyginus:
I hope we don't move in circles now. A living being is a being that has life.

johnydon22:
...lol..In other words you cannot biologically define for us what life is, anyway i get the gist so let's move on..

I will list our 3 existing things

1) A stone (inanimate entity)
2)Euglena Viridis (Biological entity)
3)Politics (A concept or an idea)

Which of this three things is alive ?

johnydon22:
...lol..In other words you cannot biologically define for us what life is, anyway i get the gist so let's move on..

I will list our 3 existing things

1) A stone (inanimate entity)
2)Euglena Viridis (Biological entity)
3)Politics (A concept or an idea)

Which of this three things is alive ?

plaetton:


I wish Deepsight we here, because This bring to mind the debates we have had about which begat the other, consciouness or the universe.

It is similar to asking which begat the other, Politics or Life?

Politics is an interactive activity derived from Life, that then thereafter shapes the activities of Life.
Similarly, consciouness is derived from the activities (neural interactions) of life, and then thereafter controls the activities of Life.

Therefore, consciouness, like politics, couldn't have preceded Life, but is an organic derivative of the symphony of Life.

Reyginus:
I'm not about the biological aspect. I think anyone can define that.

They are all alive depending on the angle you are looking at it from. A stone is composed of Silicon, Carbon, Oxygen and other chemical elements, compounds and mixtures. These chemicals are active and the electrons, protons and neutrons are participating in the cohesion. In that sense, it is alive.

Euglena is biologically active. The elements of our MR NIGER D found in it simplify this. An idea is alive in the symbolic and mental realm of things. The idea to kill a person cannot be visible but is explained in the act. They all are depending on the angle from which you huge them from.

Reyginus:
Plaetton again! Consciousness derived from neural interactions? In essence, their will be no consciousness where there is no brain?