{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
1/7/2019 4:27:32 PM
18
-
Energy is a form that can be shifted as one or another. It can’t be destroyed. All the love, emotions (in whatever form) don’t just disappear. Could you not call those energy forms soul?
-
We can call them what we want, but when I say that I do not assume souls exist, I’m talking about the traditional disembodied spirit that goes off to an afterlife. I don’t assume that there’s an afterlife either.
-
[quote]We can call them what we want, but when I say that I do not assume souls exist, I’m talking about the traditional disembodied spirit that goes off to an afterlife. I don’t assume that there’s an afterlife either.[/quote] Firstly - traditional? Ughhh what an ugly word. That would also assume there is a hell and unless you are baptized you are going to hell. I was talking from a thinking persons perspective. If energy can’t be destroyed - that is after life. The body dies but energy is just shifted into another form.
-
Edited by Ogma: Destroyer of Worlds: 1/7/2019 6:58:50 PMOk then. I don’t assume it’s the same thing. I don’t assume that energy is the same thing as what the implication of the word soul is. Of course there’s “afterlife” I just see no reason that it directly involves anyone that has died. I don’t assume that anything of what we are now transcends that outside of the minds of those that are still alive. If anything of our original form survives into another life, I wouldn’t call it death. I’d call it a transition, and thus far there is nothing to suggest that.
-
This makes me think of the scene in blade runner (the original movie) with Harrison Ford. He says that the AI has and shared memories of its experiences. He thought and had the same questions as the mortals who created it. It’s energy, it’s after life, it’s beginnings and where it came from and even “how long it had left.”I t couldn’t have a “soul” as it was AI but he comes to realize the AI shared had consciousness and feelings enough to save him. In the traditional sense it couldn’t have a soul but it caused him to question his job in “killing” or terminating it. If humans were created also then we have energy, memories and consciousness (you could say a soul) in a non traditional sense.
-
One of my favorite films. I particularly like Roy’s quote about fear at the end. Makes me wonder how many people assume things like gods and afterlifes and souls because they fear the potential(and I think seemingly very likely), nonexistence of death. I think our fear of death is responsible for more than we want to admit. Referring to what you said though, IF is the key word there. That’s another thing I don’t assume. That we were created.
-
We would then have to find that important currently missing link in our evolutionary train. In terms of creation. Even in the most basic of terms something happened to cause life. That’s a creation.
-
I don’t really find the idea of creation in that context to be a satisfying one because it can’t be reconciled. Creation is either never ending, referred to as infinite regress, or we have to arbitrarily make a special exception somewhere. I’m not willing to do that.
-
Ok what about designed? It’s a hard topic to find A - middle ground or B - definitive answers, but what about advanced or coaxed along certain defining paths. What really set us on a completely different tangent? Fire? Maybe The ability to point? Maybe It still seems like we are leagues above anything on this planet. Even if we teach our closest relatives how to make fire now, they are not going to be processing micro chips in 100,000 years time. Or would they?
-
Edited by Ogma: Destroyer of Worlds: 1/7/2019 8:23:16 PMCouldn’t say. We don’t have a frame of reference in which to compare our situation to. That notion is basically “we can’t explain it therefore (insert whatever higher power here) must have done it.” Not exactly a compelling argument in my opinion. Especially since we originally thought that about countless things that we now have natural explanations for. My thing is accountability. If there is no demonstration, there is no accountability. I’d rather have no answer than impose what I could only call a bad answer because of that lack of demonstration and accountability. The other issue is the implications that come with assuming an intelligent creator. It comes with A LOT of baggage. Including intent. I have yet to see any reasonable/rational investigation into that idea that results in anything other than an entity of inexplicable origins that set a universe in motion while it sits back and watches with indifference. In which case, I see no reason I should be concerned with such a thing even if it does exist.
-
Very true - BUT on the other side of the coin we can’t say that a hurricane can come through a junk yard and create a car. Cars are engineered and designed. Made real by accurate measurements and engineering feats. If we were to teach monkeys how to produce fire could we guarantee in evolutionary terms they could a micro chip thousands (even hundreds of thousands) of years down the line? What about the universe, it’s a fcking amazing coincidence (?) we are in the perfect place and location for such diversity in life’s grand scale. I strongly believe we are not alone or even altered when looking at the other species inhabiting the earth alone.
-
Edited by Ogma: Destroyer of Worlds: 1/7/2019 9:42:27 PMI wouldn’t think a puddle was in a hole because the hole was specifically designed for it. But there it is fitting in seemingly nicely. Again, we have no frame of reference in which to make that claim. We have only ONE observation in which to cite. Ourselves. And again we are left with infinite regress unless we make a convenient special exception. For which I don’t think we should be making.
-
Let’s look at ourselves vs any other form on planet earth. How did we get so far above the rest? We don’t quite fit in.......
-
We do though. We share more common DNA with chimps than different cat species share with each other. When it comes to alien life, I think it would be more or less absurd to assume that we’re alone. Considering the vastness of the universe, probability says that we’re not. I see no reason to assume that they’re responsible for our existence though. Many people seem to replace “I can’t it explain it therefore god” with “I can’t explain it therefore aliens.” Not a compelling argument either in my opinion. There are also many logical notions as to why we haven’t encountered intelligent life. As to why it’s likely that intelligent life rarely ever encounters other intelligent life, if at all.
-
Edited by ill skillz: 1/7/2019 10:08:15 PM[quote]We do though. We share more common DNA with chimps than different cat species share with each other. [/quote] Yes! My point exactly. How did we advance above and well above something that shares 99% of our DNA? Teach that chimp how to light a fire and then have it teach it’s baby. Will the monkey evolve to make a plane in hundreds of thousands years time? It’s almost like we don’t fit in with the comparison or closets forms. We seem above the lifeforms (trying not to sound arrogant) here ...... but higher or on a higher consciousness . [quote] When it comes to alien life, I think it would be more or less absurd to assume that we’re alone. Considering the vastness of the universe, probability says that we’re not. I see no reason to assume that they’re responsible for our existence though. Many people seem to replace “I can’t it explain it therefore god” with “I can’t explain it therefore aliens.” Not a compelling argument either in my opinion. There are also many logical notions as to why we haven’t encountered intelligent life. As to why it’s likely that intelligent life rarely ever encounters other intelligent life, if at all. [/quote] Again - who created them? Are they responsible for creating matter? Did they design the universe or if NOT what created them? Are they old enough to have evolved so much further? Is time the only prerequisite for knowledge? Do they in turn serve higher powers or “god?”
-
Edited by Ogma: Destroyer of Worlds: 1/7/2019 10:54:28 PMWhich leads us back to square one. Infinite regress or special exceptions. I say neither. I say just continue to look for what’s out there without pretending to know what we might find. I think an objective pursuit of truth is the most admirable way in which to observe and investigate this universe we find ourselves in. If we were created and we ever find that creator, the very first thing we should ask it or them is where they came from. Until then, we should make no such assumptions because I think our own history shows us what happens when we do that.
-
Always. Always question - as I’m always questioning. “Truth” is sometime a matter of perception. One of my biggest is where did we come from and when.
-
I find it interesting, but I wouldn’t say I’m concerned with it. Creation of life stories are my favorite ones in fiction. Especially when it’s us that have created it. I like what it makes us think about.
