God the absolute truth
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
02-10-2012, 05:43 AM
RE: God the absolute truth
(01-10-2012 11:26 PM)Janus VI Wrote:  LIFE is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have signaling and self-sustaining processes from those that do not.

CONTROL to exercise restraint or direction over; dominate; command.

-----===================================------

A ) Life will get the control of the universe

B) Life will not get the control of the universe

Being you part of life which of those two Hypothetical futures will you recommend to believe?

VOSUR:_ half of the universe is the same than the entire universe

GIRLYMAN:________________________

FREE THOUGHT:___________________

NACH_IN:________________________

EARMUFFS:______________________

GODLESS:_______________________

GUITAR_NUN:____________________

KidCharlemagne1962: B - Life will not control the universe.

DLJ : I do not know what life is

Bucky Ball: I do not know what life and control are

LOL
Who is this Janus guy?
He's quite sarcastic lol
This last post of his made me laugh out loud at my work cafeteria. XD

“What you believe to be true will control you, whether it’s true or not.”

—Jeremy LaBorde
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ideasonscribe's post
02-10-2012, 05:53 AM
AW: RE: God the absolute truth
(01-10-2012 11:26 PM)Janus VI Wrote:  LIFE is a characteristic that distinguishes objects that have signaling and self-sustaining processes from those that do not.

CONTROL to exercise restraint or direction over; dominate; command.

-----===================================------

A ) Life will get the control of the universe

B) Life will not get the control of the universe

Being you part of life which of those two Hypothetical futures will you recommend to believe?

VOSUR:_ half of the universe is the same than the entire universe

GIRLYMAN:________________________

FREE THOUGHT:___________________

NACH_IN:________________________

EARMUFFS:______________________

GODLESS:_______________________

GUITAR_NUN:____________________

KidCharlemagne1962: B - Life will not control the universe.

DLJ : I do not know what life is

Bucky Ball: I do not know what life and control are
Good job on committing the strawman fallacy three times in one post. DLJ and BB actually asked with which definitions of the word you are working with. Also, I specifically said that the two options are not the same, but that mine is a third one which is independent from the other two.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 05:56 AM
RE: God the absolute truth
Finally some clarity. The question relates to life-forms. It kinda makes sense now.

Answer: Who cares?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like DLJ's post
02-10-2012, 07:10 AM
RE: God the absolute truth
It looks like Janus has renamed me 'Guitar_Nun.' I like it.

If Jesus died for our sins, why is there still sin? If man was created from dust, why is there still dust? If Americans came from Europe, why are there still Europeans?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like guitar_nut's post
02-10-2012, 11:25 AM
RE: God the absolute truth
Since I'm not a biologist I might missing the whole point of this convo...

But from what I can remember from HS/college biology life only has 2 basic goals and, in order, they are to A. Survive and B. Reproduce/replicate. That's it.
Any control that life gains or exerts in the process is incidental to those 2 basic goals.

[Image: 21omssh.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes LostLocke's post
02-10-2012, 09:04 PM
RE: God the absolute truth
(02-10-2012 11:25 AM)LostLocke Wrote:  Since I'm not a biologist I might be missing the whole point of this convo...

But from what I can remember from HS/college biology life only has 2 basic goals and, in order, they are to A. Survive and B. Reproduce/replicate. That's it.
Any control that life gains or exerts in the process is incidental to those 2 basic goals.

You didn't miss anything cos it's not a convo... it's sparring practice.

Thing is... is "goal" the right word? Goals (in sport or business) are pre-defined objectives. Does a weed that is taking over your garden (surviving and reproducing / replicating) have a goal?

Also, is "life" the right word, cos we see these rules (surviving etc.) in the game of life and these rules apply for the very small and the very big but we call it a "law of nature".

Plants and animals consume and excrete. One creature's excretion is another creature's energy source, a process of outputs and inputs (oxygen, CO2, meat, flower pollen)

So the rules could be:
"acquire" and "merge" or "conquer" and "assimilate"
"produce" and "consume" or "give" and "take".

The successful "life" forms (plants and animals and football teams and businesses and even (hey, why not?) religions) are the ones that are "fittest" (in the Darwinian sense) but not all have a conscious goal.

Can it be seen in the same way that atoms react by "producing" and "consuming" each other's electrons? Is this "life"?

A bee takes C, O, H etc. in the form of pollen; a business produces and consumes to survive and acquires and/or merges to grow. We have predators and prey and we have symbiosis and partnerships and unions (physical and organisational).

Given that all living things are made up of non-living things aren't we just talking about surviving and replicating as a more complex form of atomic exchange?

At a cosmic level galaxies are doing the same thing.... sucking up cosmic dust, chucking out heat, colliding and merging, growing or dying.

The OP is challenging his/her reader to explain how all this can happen without a prime mover which is an interesting topic because it's the "how did it all start?" question.

The laughable bit is the leap to there being a prime mover that actualy gives a shit. Everyone else here sees no evidence for this ... even KC's deity doesn't seem to go that far.

However, I'm more interested in coming up with some universal terms for the process (rules in the game of life) that can be appled/attributed at all levels (quantum, molecular, cellular, plant, animal, pack/herd, society, business, culture, nation, planetary, solar system, galactic, cosmic).

Any suggestions?

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
02-10-2012, 09:22 PM
RE: God the absolute truth
(02-10-2012 09:04 PM)DLJ Wrote:  The successful "life" forms (plants and animals and football teams and businesses and even (hey, why not?) religions) are the ones that are "fittest" (in the Darwinian sense) but not all have a conscious goal.

No, no, no.
This is NOT the Darwinian sense, and is the basic misunderstanding that gives us the ugly and dangerous "Social Darwinism". Darwin did not use the phrase 'survival of the fittest' - that came from Herbert Spencer.
Darwinism is a theory of differential reproductive success. It requires reproduction with inheritance and modification, and differential survival.

See this.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
02-10-2012, 10:07 PM
RE: God the absolute truth
(02-10-2012 07:10 AM)guitar_nut Wrote:  It looks like Janus has renamed me 'Guitar_Nun.' I like it.

This would be you then. Tongue
You are VERY famous.




Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-10-2012, 10:08 PM
RE: God the absolute truth
(02-10-2012 11:25 AM)LostLocke Wrote:  Since I'm not a biologist I might missing the whole point of this convo...

Look no further. There isn't one. Big Grin

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
02-10-2012, 10:24 PM (This post was last modified: 02-10-2012 10:29 PM by DLJ.)
RE: God the absolute truth
(02-10-2012 09:22 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(02-10-2012 09:04 PM)DLJ Wrote:  The successful "life" forms (plants and animals and football teams and businesses and even (hey, why not?) religions) are the ones that are "fittest" (in the Darwinian sense) but not all have a conscious goal.

No, no, no.
This is NOT the Darwinian sense, and is the basic misunderstanding that gives us the ugly and dangerous "Social Darwinism". Darwin did not use the phrase 'survival of the fittest' - that came from Herbert Spencer.
Darwinism is a theory of differential reproductive success. It requires reproduction with inheritance and modification, and differential survival.

See this.

Sorry. My bad. I'll say "in the Spencerian sense" in future. I was forgetting the knowledge-level of my audience.

Although I could argue that I used it correctly... "Darwin first used Spencer's new phrase "survival of the fittest" as a synonym for natural selection in the fifth edition of On the Origin of Species, published in 1869.[2][3] Darwin meant it as a metaphor for "better adapted for immediate, local environment", not the common inference of "in the best physical shape".[4] Hence, it is not a scientific description"
... cos I did use it in that same sense as did Darwin.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: