s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) Life is the reason for being; the living carry the burden of life. The burden of life outweighs the burden of proof – a man need not prove he exists to exist, for that he needs only life. While we are alive we can answer many questions, but we cannot answer the question “what is life?” The question “what is life?” is too complex. There are many reasons for this; one reason is that we cannot travel to the far ends of the universe to retrieve the knowledge we require to build the correct answer, and another is that we cannot access another being to experience life from its perspective; humans cannot create the correct answer. There are many more reasons why. Life’s complexity is all its conceivable associations; we are not capable life-scientists. However, we exist amongst the complexities of life; we are supported pre-scientific observation. We cannot understand, but we can live. What makes life life-supporting? How are things able to live with this complexity? Edited October 1, 2013 by s1eep
Phi for All Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 That's a lot of unsupported assertions. You should read the rules about the Speculation section. People are going to want you to support statements like, "The question 'what is life?' is too complex" and they'll want to know what "we are supported pre-scientific observation" means. And you keep talking about burdens. Nobody knows what you mean by "burden of life". Burden of proof simply means you need to support what you assert (e.g., "the burden of proof is on the accuser").
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 To me it sounds like he is having problems with understanding ecology and TOE is a cosmological theory, it has nothing to do with life...
Phi for All Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 To me it sounds like he is having problems with understanding ecology and TOE is a cosmological theory, it has nothing to do with life... WTF3, I didn't notice he'd changed the title!
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) Life itself cannot/has not been answered, but it is the greatest significance to us, it is the reason we are alive, which means that it comes before everything else. When you go about your daily activities, you can simplify what you're doing down to only "Life", you need not say a word at all. We were confronted by a complexity that we couldn't comprehend, and it confronts us for all of our lives; it is the only question we should be trying to answer, as we are never away from it- it is the ultimate significance to us. Edited October 1, 2013 by s1eep
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 Life itself cannot/has not been answered, but it is the greatest significance to us, it is the reason we are alive, which means that it comes before everything else. When you go about your daily activities, you can simplify what you're doing down to only "Life", you need not say a word at all. We were confronted by a complexity that we couldn't comprehend, and it confronts us for all of our lives; it is the only question we should be trying to answer, as we are never away from it- it is the ultimate significance to us. No, the complexity of life might be something you don't comprehend but I and others do... Life is not as question...
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) No, the complexity of life might be something you don't comprehend but I and others do... Life is not as question... No you don't. That would mean you have a complete answer to every question. Can you tell me how the universe truly looked minutes after the big bang in the form of a conscious observer? No, you cannot create conscious observers through which we can propagate observation. You are not above the complexity of life, you just believe you might be in the future, which is still submitting to it's complexity. Enough wordplay, you don't know what you're talking about where life is concerned. Edited October 1, 2013 by s1eep
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 How do you know that? That's putting the complexity of life upon my head. That's my point, I don't.
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 That's putting the complexity of life upon my head. That's my point, I don't. Then why did you assert you knew I didn't know? No you don't. That would mean you have a valid answer to every question. Can you tell me how the universe truly looked minutes after the big bang in the form of a conscious observer? No, you cannot create conscious observers through which we can propagate observation. You are not above the complexity of life, you just believe you might be in the future, which is still submitting to it's complexity. Enough wordplay, you don't know what you're talking about where life is concerned. Actually, yes, mathematics can indeed show us what the universe was like minutes after the big bang, your lack of knowledge does not negate what we do know...
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 Then why did you assert you knew I didn't know? Actually, yes, mathematics can indeed show us what the universe was like minutes after the big bang, your lack of knowledge does not negate what we do know... No it cannot, it can show me it's own version of said events, but not the actual event, checkmate science. -2
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 No it cannot, it can show me it's own version of said events, but not the actual event, checkmate science. No there is not many versions of said events, math is not an opinion...
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) No there is not many versions of said events, math is not an opinion... Thus, life is too complex to understand. What supports us against the complexity? Edited October 1, 2013 by s1eep
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 Thus, life is too complex to understand. What supports us against the complexity? I disagree that life is too complex to understand, maybe for you, but not to everyone. How do we need support against our own complexity...
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 I disagree that life is too complex to understand, maybe for you, but not to everyone. How do we need support against our own complexity... How can the the present, and that moment we cannot comprehend truthfully, co-exist, or how could that moment have existed in the same universe? What supports the two predominantly?
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 How can the the present, and that moment we cannot comprehend truthfully, co-exist, or how could that moment have existed in the same universe? What supports the two predominantly? Comprehension does not mean something is real or not real, I comprehend Star Trek, doesn't make it true. I do not comprehend why children are sexually brutalized by adults but it still happens, you are making unjustified assumptions...
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 Comprehension does not mean something is real or not real, I comprehend Star Trek, doesn't make it true. I do not comprehend why children are sexually brutalized by adults but it still happens, you are making unjustified assumptions... It doesn't change the fact we can't comprehend it.
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 It doesn't change the fact we can't comprehend it. You can't, you do not know what I can or cannot comprehend...
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) You can't, you do not know what I can or cannot comprehend... That's because life is too complex, I told you this before. I cannot possibly enter your "soul" and learn your every perception of life; I believe that you cannot know the true knowledge of the universe, like the big bang in it's actual state, and that this and things like it make life too complex to answer. You take advantage of one of life's perks, 'I can't enter the soul', I will never be able to know what you can and cannot comprehend. Again, what supports me against your complexity, how am I able to understand you, wordlessly? Is there some special relation? Edited October 1, 2013 by s1eep
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 That's because life is too complex, I told you this before. I cannot possibly enter your "soul" and learn your every perception of life; I believe that you cannot know the true knowledge of the universe, like the big bang in it's actual state, and that this and things like it make life too complex to answer. You take advantage of one of life's perks, 'I can't enter the soul', I will never be able to know what you can and cannot comprehend. Again, what supports me against your complexity, how am I able to understand you, wordlessly? Is there some special relation? Excuse me for taking the time out to think ahead, and already point out the fact I can't acquire certain types of knowledge from you. Took you long enough to cut to the chase... There is no "truth" no one knows everything about anything, and everything we know is subject to some degree of error. You clearly do not understand me wordlessly, you like me are depending on communication to understand my stance and I am depending on that same communication to understand you, all we can do is be honest so our true point comes across...
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 Well at least you admit life is too complex to do things perfectly. And I do understand you wordlessly, we think with our tongues which is truly our heart, if I paused, I comprehend you somehow, you are digested. What allows me to digest? What makes you food for my brain?
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 Well at least you admit life is too complex to do things perfectly. And I do understand you wordlessly, we think with our tongues which is truly our heart, if I paused, I comprehend you somehow, you are digested. What allows me to digest? What makes you food for my brain? Perfection is an illusion and it's dishonest to say life is too complex to do things perfectly. There is nothing in my heart but blood, I think with my brain, your analogies are what is muddying the water here. Digest? Your stomach is what digests food, your brain comprehends ideas... 1
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 Perfection is an illusion and it's dishonest to say life is too complex to do things perfectly. There is nothing in my heart but blood, I think with my brain, your analogies are what is muddying the water here. Digest? Your stomach is what digests food, your brain comprehends ideas... Maybe comprehension is like digestion, where it intakes whole subjects and not only bits at a time. In fact, I believe it is, I think life was that perfect.
Moontanman Posted October 1, 2013 Posted October 1, 2013 Maybe comprehension is like digestion, where it intakes whole subjects and not only bits at a time. In fact, I believe it is, I think life was that perfect. Life was that perfect when?
s1eep Posted October 1, 2013 Author Posted October 1, 2013 Life was that perfect when? When it came into formation.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now