Honestly, I don't know the correct terminologies for all this philosophy. When I said Defender of Science, I was just kidding. My beliefs are certainly not religious. I also don't think my beliefs conflict with our current knowledge of biology. I say this because we know that our brain is responsible for memory and thinking. Well what is a person, but a animal with a brain capable of complex thinking and memory storage. Your personality is the sum of your genetics coupled with everything you've experienced in life. That is all we are. We are what our brain does. The body just keeps the brain (who we are) functioning. When the body dies, the brain does not function, therefore, we lose our memories and ability to think. Who we are, our personalities, just do not exist anymore. I have no idea what type of philosophy this is. This is just my opinion based on what I know. I do not think it conflicts with science in any way. EDIT: I just looked up "mechanistic worldview" on the Internet and found this: "The biologist Richard Dawkins and the philosopher Daniel Denning are two such writers who work hard to convince the public that a mechanistic worldview and a scientific approach are one and the same thing." If my philosophy is similar to a mechanistic worldview, the above person is saying that it is the same thing as scientific approach (which is why I used the term Defender of Science earlier).
aren't you mixing two questions here: 1) at what point does a combination of elements reach the point of being "life"; and 2) what is the thing that allows human-specific logical thought and self-realization? maybe a third question regarding the existence of a "soul" or "spirit" independent of the body - but that might be part of the second question.
I looked up some more Richard Dawkins stuff and found this: "The greatest danger of this reductionist biology is that we end up denying and explaining away all that is good in organisms and human beings, such as altruism, love and compassion." Although it may seem disappointing that we can explain away everything, the truth should not be denied just to make things sound nice. As in the above sentence states, love can be explained away. I DO concur with that also. Although love is something we do experience, it really is nothing more than a description of something that our brains do. What I'm saying is, our brains create what we call "love." I will give an example which may disturb some people. It does not bother me, however, because I see it as just the way things are; it's not my fault it isn't pretty. I do, (what we call) "love" my parents. However, let's examine what love really is. It is nothing more than connections formed in your brain of a fondness for a person. Over years and years, the connections grow strong. This is why we generally love and care for people we know well. We have had many experiences with them throughout our lives and, therefore, there are many connections in our brain related to them. The result is that you end up caring about them. Also, I do believe a person can do things which will help forge "love connections" in another person's brain. For example, if you have a nice mother, the things she does will be easily stored in your brain as positive experiences. Therefore, over time, if this keeps up, you will end up liking this person and "love" them.
1) IMO, "life" is an active brain. Very simple. We all know about drowning victims. If their body can not be turned back on quickly, their brain will not be able to function any more. We know this because some people have had their body turned on again, but it was too late and they are brain dead. These are facts and they fit perfectly with my beliefs. 2) A more evolved brain than other animals. 3) Souls, spirits, "extra ingredients" do not exist. PERIOD!
Lundy, Were you born into the world or out of the world? If you hold the view that the universe or nature 'peoples' the same way as an apple tree 'apples' and a seed 'flowers' then it is quite obvious who you are... If you are in GG's camp and believe that you were suddenly born into the world and exist as some sort of separate entity trapped within a bag of bones and a mechanistic universe -- then you will never truly know who or what you are. You will suffer from the hallucination that you are the mask you wear... PEACE, Commisso
Fluidity, Elaborate more, please. What are your beliefs? I'm always interested to know what people think about these big questions. Open up, man.
GG, Please do not take this as an attack, but you are one of the most spiritually bankrupt people I have ever encountered (besides maybe Danny_M). You are allergic to anything religious (which I happen to be also) but the problem with you is that you equate anything outside of objective material as 'religous'. For you there is no metaphysical/spiritual whatsoever. So then you try and use science as a crutch, but when it comes right down to it you are ignorant there as well. What I am trying to say GG is that nothing I say is going to make anysense to you whatsoever -- so it is not worth my time. Hope you understand and no ill will meant at all... PEACE, Commisso
Gordan, If you think you are your brain... how do you explain people that only have liquid in their head? What about life in general... must there be a brain to be alive? What is an amoeba? Dead? I think not. Certainly Brainless. Modern science has identified about 7 key features that seperate matter that is living and matter that is dead. Heres a few: ability to reproduce ability to adapt or defend the matter is in a highly active state as opposed to relatively low active states of matter not under the influence of life etc etc. Humans all they way down to the lowest speicies of animals have all of the characteristics that scientists have defined as life. So, I think I should have questioned, what is life? But I don't mind regressing a little to get to the point of who we are. So my question is GG, what are your thoughts on life in general regarding the brain, body, and thought in humans all the way down to the amoeba. Certainly a dog can think, although it is also has instincts. Just want to widen the subject a little, since really who we are is the question of what is life. By the way, humans have instincts too. The same instincs as an animal. Eating, Mating, Sleeping, and Defending. Just as each animal on the evolutionary scale is smarter than the last.... Humans are at the top of the scale, and so they are the smartest. Back to what you are saying, although you seem to say you are the brain, I think what you really mean is a functioning brain, correct? Or a functioning body. So the question is, what determines whether a body/brain functions? Is it the molecules that comprise the brain/body. What is it that makes us function? If you don't know.... then you are basically at the same point where modern scientists are at. However, using science as a tool, and not simply implying religious faith, we can determine that what moves our body, and causes our brain to function, is life. Life is a seperate energy than matter. There are other energies like electricity that we cannot see, and it is not made up of molecules. However, we can observe it's effects and know that it is an energy that is not made of matter. Electricity can cause heat. The body is also heated. Therefore I propose that there is an energy within the body that is seperate from matter, and it is called life. When this energy is present, the matter is called alive, when it is gone the matter is called dead, and becomes cold. You might say that it is the matter which causes the energy, but that is incorrect because all of the matter is still present when the body is dead. So you are saying that the functioning body is the self, and I am saying the energy which causes the body to function is the self. edit: this self is independent of the decaying body and just as it takes on a new body every seven years, it leaves the body at death. When I say it i refer to the self.
I don't really follow you here. IMO, things that can feel pain, are aware of their surroundings, etc. are the types of characteristics required for me to consider something as living (as in human type life). Trees, plants, etc. are also living, but there is a difference between a living plant and a living animal. IMO, the difference is basically its conciousness. If a plant could feel pain and think, I would consider it alive as I do a person. From humans on down the list, I make no distinction what-so-ever as long as it can think, feel pain, etc. A dog is definitely a conscious animal, so is a squirrel, a bird, a fish, and so on. I also believe that death is exactly the same for all animals. I make no distinction between my death and a frog's. It will be nothingness for both. You do raise an interesting issue when you ask about at what stage is life, down to the amoeba, etc. In general, my answer would be that life is kind of like a scale. The more advanced the creature, the more consciousness/life it will have. When you get down to amoebas, it's a tough subject. It would depend on what your standard of living is. I'm not an amoeba expert, so it's hard for me to give you an answer regarding them. An easier way to answer your question is this: I don't like to kill things (animals, bugs, etc.) and I don't eat meat. All I have to do to determine if I would eat something or not is ask myself if the object can feel pain. If it can, I don't eat it. Although there may be things that are living and don't feel pain, like I said, IMO, life is like a scale. The more evolved it is, the more awareness/life it has. It's not necessarily a yes or no answer. It's more like there are degrees of life.