Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 09-20-2020, 03:59 AM
 
7,583 posts, read 4,136,360 times
Reputation: 6935

Advertisements

Knowing how things began would be incredible but I don't find myself thinking about it a lot. Instead, I find myself looking up at the night sky a bit disappointed that we are the only known planet with life as it exists today.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
The problem here is the distinction between life and non-life. Life is just an internal chemical reaction that reproduces and replicated itself. Life is a subset of chemistry, it is not distinct from chemistry.
Good post.

I was also thinking about how labeling is a human invention. And while we definitely see how things are alike and how they are different, (we are humans afterall - we notice things) nature doesn't always fit perfectly in these labels.

Take a platypus for example. It is an egg-laying mammal and, yet, one of the characteristics of mammals is that they give live birth. Nature exists in a continuum.

 
Old 09-20-2020, 05:37 AM
 
Location: North America
4,430 posts, read 2,685,411 times
Reputation: 19315
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
I know what you mean, but given the definition of spiritual...

1. relating to or affecting the human spirit or soul as opposed to material or physical things.

2. relating to religion or religious belief.

I can't really claim to be spiritual. Not accurately anyway.

As an atheist who has always had that "sense of wonder," however, I'd just as soon avoid any labels and simply continue to express a true appreciation for the wonder of nature, and all the rest of the universe for that matter.
Seems we agree it's best to accept what we don't know and to take part as best we can.

"Live life like you mean it!" As some might say. To that end I think it's time for me to sign off from this forum again this morning. To get on with doing a bit more of exactly that!
The first time I encountered sequoias, this atheist was in awe - and it occurred to me then that this feeling was what was often called 'spiritual'. It turns out that awe is one of the defining emotions of religious experiences. Of course, a sequoia is no more of a 'wonder' than any random weed sprouting in a vacant lot. Humans just tend to think of them as special because of their extreme size. This was especially so in my case because I was just a 30-something Midwesterner who had never seen such large trees before.

Looking at the night sky often gives me feelings approaching that which I had among the sequoias. Same emotions at work there.
 
Old 09-20-2020, 08:42 AM
 
18,916 posts, read 27,410,665 times
Reputation: 20238
Also, you sort of want to start thinking about non organic forms of life.
AI is already here and it is only getting more and more advanced. Some developments already passed Touring test. They "consume" energy and are capable of replication.

So not all "life" is life, as it used to be.
Add to that strong research on consciousness transfer into non organic media, or transhumanism. Who creates THAT?
 
Old 09-20-2020, 09:00 AM
 
Location: S. Wales.
50,083 posts, read 20,582,163 times
Reputation: 5927
That (consciousness into computers) has to remind me of a Startrek episode where a 'Trial' (a law -expert analysed it and said that it would not do as a trial, but is more a philosophical discussion (1) about whether a robot as a sentient being is entitled to the same rights as any other human. For example, data gives up his life for his friends on a couple of occasions, but (being an android) can be put (unlike Humpty) together again. So is suicide illegal? Should data re-animated be tried for self -immolation?

"Nonsense! It is like a solder diving on a grenade to save his platoon. Rather he'd get a medal."

"Also he is, pretty much, immortal."

"Irrelevant! An action in war has rules different from civilian.."

"Starfleet is more active service than civilian work."

"Irrelevant! The point is that civilian rules must apply to civilian androids. A suicide who fails and lives is deemed to have committed a crime."

"But a human who dies to save another is praised, just as in warfare."

" Oh....allright..He's effectively human."

(1) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjCytqku18M

Of course mention of an immortal soul (lack of) would not be admitted as evidence.

"It does not have an immortal soul."

"Are you sure? How do you know?"

"The Bible makes that clear. Even in your secularist -society starships, you have not forbidden religious belief!"

"The Bible said many things in the Old testment that were changed in the New."

"Not the Dogma of the soul."

"Not yet."

"What do you mean? That will never be changed."

"You don't know for sure. That it could change is an undisprovable claim; and in Theist argument a claim is true until disproven, isn't that so?"

"Only when it suits the religion. That rule does not apply to ...anything that argues against the Dogma."

"Ah, Raff's Law."

"I never heard of that Law."

"Forgive me, a celebrated atheist polemicist of the 21st century. But you get the idea, I'm sure."

This may seem hypothetical, but I believe it was the basis of Mystic's argument against the transfer of human consciousness into Computers. He used the term 'Life' but it was pretty clear that what he meant was 'Soul'. Without a Soul, a conscious computer was a machine imitating Consciousness but it was not a consciousness.

Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 09-20-2020 at 09:37 AM..
 
Old 09-20-2020, 09:08 AM
 
28,432 posts, read 11,521,721 times
Reputation: 2070
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz View Post
Also, you sort of want to start thinking about non organic forms of life.
AI is already here and it is only getting more and more advanced. Some developments already passed Touring test. They "consume" energy and are capable of replication.

So not all "life" is life, as it used to be.
Add to that strong research on consciousness transfer into non organic media, or transhumanism. Who creates THAT?
its not as close as you think. Not with computers as they are right now anyway. Way to much heat. Maybe the net will wake, but that aint today.

And, we will have nin.com@poops.com that will hold firm on "It can't reproduce like we know reproduced really means so its not alive."
 
Old 09-20-2020, 09:50 AM
 
Location: Germany
16,632 posts, read 4,916,196 times
Reputation: 2086
Default ^needs a dictionary

Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz View Post
Also, you sort of want to start thinking about non organic forms of life.
AI is already here and it is only getting more and more advanced. Some developments already passed Touring test. They "consume" energy and are capable of replication.

So not all "life" is life, as it used to be.
Add to that strong research on consciousness transfer into non organic media, or transhumanism. Who creates THAT?
Yes, that would need a redefinition of what live actually means. We can already simulate life with agents that are aware of their simulated environment, that evolve new behaviors for that environment, and that can replicate copies of itself (not just change into a different form as one science denier has argued).
 
Old 09-20-2020, 10:06 AM
 
29,435 posts, read 9,617,720 times
Reputation: 3451
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post
Check out Phoenix's botanical garden if you get down this way. Just amazing...and huge!
Will do. If there is a botanical garden anywhere along our travels, we check it out. We'll be in Phoenix on our way to Sedona in October. Thanks. Likewise if ever up north of us, in Mendocino, there is a botanical garden of botanical gardens right next to Mendocino in Fort Bragg that is second to none. Only two of its kind in the United States.
 
Old 09-20-2020, 10:19 AM
 
29,435 posts, read 9,617,720 times
Reputation: 3451
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Diogenes View Post
There was a paper that looked at probable early genes suggests life started at hydrothermal vents, so the extremophiles would be normal, and our cool loving genes would be the extremophiles.

The problem here is the distinction between life and non-life. Life is just an internal chemical reaction that reproduces and replicated itself. Life is a subset of chemistry, it is not distinct from chemistry.

Is life 'miraculous' or spectacular? Considering what life is, it might be common. Complex, multicellular may be the difficult, spectacular part.
I read a book not long ago titled, "A Brief History of Creation: Science and the Search for the Origin of Life,"
by Bill Mesler, H. James Cleaves. It is a fascinating read even before getting to the end where various theories are presented about the possible origins of life. What we know and what we still don't.

Depending on what definitions we use for "normal," "miraculous," and/or "spectacular," we may or may not agree about such things...

Extremophiles are exceptions to the rule when it comes to most life forms on the planet today, having little to do with how life began. Very rare and quite different, astonishing, compared to most other life forms here today that wouldn't do too well or too long in such temperatures. Though life is a chemical reaction and not distinct from chemistry, of course, it seems rather miraculous to me for a variety of reasons. Say as compared to a brick, but maybe that's just me.

Can't help but suspect the first life form didn't originate here on Earth. So I'm not sure hydrothermal pools on Earth can be considered all that likely to be where we all began. I mean the universe has been around for a long time and is a rather large space with a vast array of galaxies full of space stuff including planets like ours. What are the odds life started here first rather than somewhere else in the universe and somehow transported here?
 
Old 09-20-2020, 10:39 AM
 
29,435 posts, read 9,617,720 times
Reputation: 3451
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER View Post
I visited this place on my 2018 trip. Loved it. If there is one thing to focus a spotlight on the question of adaptation vs. Intelligent design, it is butterflies and moths (They have both, here (some are socking Huge ) They also have a good indoor zoo of wrigglies.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oReyC5-ZIac
I live on the path of the Monarch Butterfly migration, very close to a Monarch sanctuary where we enjoy seeing them cluster every year in the Fall, soon to peak in October. On a few occasions I've had one as a pet and watched it go through it's amazing life cycle from caterpillar to chrysalis to butterfly. If there is any more miraculous mind-bending deal to make one wonder how such a thing could have come about as a result of evolution, I don't know what it is!
 
Old 09-20-2020, 10:48 AM
 
29,435 posts, read 9,617,720 times
Reputation: 3451
Quote:
Originally Posted by elyn02 View Post
Knowing how things began would be incredible but I don't find myself thinking about it a lot. Instead, I find myself looking up at the night sky a bit disappointed that we are the only known planet with life as it exists today.

Good post.

I was also thinking about how labeling is a human invention. And while we definitely see how things are alike and how they are different, (we are humans afterall - we notice things) nature doesn't always fit perfectly in these labels.

Take a platypus for example. It is an egg-laying mammal and, yet, one of the characteristics of mammals is that they give live birth. Nature exists in a continuum.
Would be incredible, yes, and I don't think about it a lot either, but when I do, I'm more than average perplexed. It is an intriguing question that I would love to have answered before I'm gone. Looking up at the night sky doesn't usually disappoint me either (unless there is fog, or cloud -- or smoke -- cover), but your disappointment is same as mine either way.

As a human that notices things, did you notice that "In the primate world, plump breasts last only as long as breastfeeding does except in humans. Women are busty all the time, even after menopause. According to some scientists, the trait is an evolutionary trick for snagging men and signals a woman's ability to feed her children."

https://www.livescience.com/32745-wh...her%20children.

Amazing. Right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:43 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top