What is life?

[Fido]

Originally Posted by boagie

Fido,

I am unsure of your attitude, it does almost sound like you believe we should not try to understand as it is futile. If that were the case, it would be a futile sentiment itself, for wonder is the nature of the beast. In referance to individuality, the sense of self, already with the fact that we are a community of multicellular organisms, the wonder arises of what is it of greater significance that has orchsatrated this construction. I am sure you are aware of the book, "The Selfish Gene,"which I think indicates a more elemental identity as the core of our existence. The fact that we come into this world without an identity and only aquire said identity from the context of our birth, only our contitution really a defineing quality, as it meets with context. The reality of the nature of this process I think will be most disturbing to most of us, and devastating to the religious whom will no doubt cling to denial. At anyrate perhaps my impression of your attitude is unwarrented as I doubt if without a very active curiousity you would be here at this site. No offense intended, I have been wrong once or twice before.

I know what everybody knows, but that ain't too much. I know I don't know enough in my state of confusion to kill anybody out of theirs. Certain people have been responsible for too many deaths of too many innocent.

My mother and father dropped us some food on their way to Florida. They have a winter and a summer house. In any event in this package was a jar of pickles, and they were my daughter's brand and flavor. I said: Call up your grandmother and tell her you got her pickle gene. People are taught to be selfish. No one is completely selfish. But we just do not have the same sense as primitives had that sacrifice is the price of community.

[justinupitt]

Hi, I am new to the forum and would like to give a brief description of my understanding of the situation called reality. I feel like often the specifics are talked about, but the general is misunderstood. It seems logical to me to think that, in order to understand something specifically, one must also understand it generally; for what are terms like specific or general if not opposites of each other.

I also think that we want to learn something specifically about our reality (science, botany, genetics, etc.).

I will attempt to describe the general as I understand it. Forgive me if I rehash old points, I do so in ignorance.

I think of my existence in several ways. One way is physical, for what is physics if not my thrown ball decelerating by way of air. Another is metaphysical, which is to say, the stuff that makes the physical (similar to taking a step back and looking at the whole, only the whole can seem impossibly large at times).

I doubt that anyone will argue that we exist in a physical reality. What people will argue is how we exist in that physical reality. This is the nature of metaphysics, and also tends to be the "ignorant" nature of spirituality. I use the word ignorant not to offend, but to only describe the nature of spirituality as generally being devoid of pure scientific reason (god does not need science to prove he exists in order for people to believe he exists). This label applies only in the context of science, where statements do need to be "proven" in order for people to "truly" believe them.

I use prove and true in a tentative sense here, as I believe that the truest nature of truth can not be known unless it is already known. But I digress.

When I try to find the center of my existence, I continuously find myself referring to a point inside of my jaw/head/neck. Perhaps because that is where my brain stem is(biology), or perhaps because of where I breath(psychology). Despite differing explanations, the fact remains. Then I think, am I a little person shaped figure when I visualize myself, or am I a sphere? I usually find a sphere to be more correct. I actually can never really visualize exactly where the location actually is, so I don't think of it as either. I think of it as an infinitely small point, so small that it becomes invisible, and even forgotten.

This is to be expected though, as by my way of perceiving the world I would expect to have an infinitely small point, mainly because I don't think of it as a shape even though I can still locate it.

So if my consciousness emerges from a central point in my head, does it have to move to my different conscious faculties, or does it permeate them. This conception is often referred to in Eastern culture as chi. I don't quite view it the same, as I am talking about my consciousness now, and not my energy. Generally I have to debate this question. It must permeate me in a sense, as I am able to control my body at a moments notice (generally the time of neural pathways), so it must be continuously flowing of sorts. But when I think of specific action, is it my consciousness that travels to each fingers as I instruct them to type these words? Or are their movement merely results of my conscious power. I would hope this is not the case, as I do not want to think of my body from being separate from me, even if I do. I would rather think that we are one, functioning in harmony, the body is a direct source to access the physical world, and to cause change in it. The mind, in similar fashion is the direct source to itself. That is to say all of the memories incurred in a life time (memory being thought to be the retainment of sensory information, and understanding for access of that information).

The interesting perception is to perceive these two differing views in unity, each existing in its own right as it does. Mind and body being simultaneously united and separated.

Now that I have established my understanding of myself (which is the simultaneous separation and unity of my mind and body), I can hope to establish my understanding of my reality, for what is reality but all of the things that makes me, my memories and my current perceptions (sight, sound, and the memory of those perceptions long after they have passed, even the continual memory of those perceptions long after they have passed).

At this stage I try to be an external observer (as most do) and visualize all of reality. It is very difficult to visualize as there are points that are "infinitely specific" and also those that are "infinitely general".

I use specific and general here again because they are defined simply by themselves. This enables their meaning to be abstracted to describe what they must. I use them to describe the description of the universe. That is to say that I view a infinitely specific point in the universe as something that, at time t, can be perfectly described in every aspect that description would be applicable to. This is probably impossible to do. But to give an example of my meaning, a specific point in the universe at time t would be a picture I see on my laptop. That point existed for me, even if only temporally. I use general to mean exactly the opposite of the same thing.

I can then only visualize the universe as a sphere. The outermost "layer" so to speak, would be infinity, ie something that can not be reached. It is a sphere because anywhere you were in the universe, you would never be able to reach beyond, or even to, infinity. If one wants to visualize a relatively large space ship moving towards the edge of the sphere from the center, and it is so big and fast that it actually will move "through" the edge of the sphere, or so we would think. As it approached infinity it would be "squashed". It would continue to maintain its velocity and would continue to move into space (maybe empty, maybe not). But in relation to the whole sphere, the parts of the ship closest to the edge would move less and less distance, and the parts of the ship farthest from the edge would "fall into" the parts "in front of" them. Relative to matter the spaceship could observe, the spaceship would maintain its velocity and acceleration (if any) and would continue to move into real, open space; ie, the ship could fly 100 light years towards the edge of the sphere, and encounter a galaxy where they lived, and the could travel forever towards the sphere and find an infinite # of galaxies. Even though the spaceship would never appear to move in relation to the sphere again (it would also appear infinitely "squashed") it would still be able to travel towards the edge of the sphere permanently.

The summarization of my visualization is merely a sphere with a property of not having a center merely because it would be infinitely small and not be able to be found. Similarly to the location of my consciousness, I still have an idea of where the center would be, imagining the sphere as small (baseball or bowling ball). It also has the property of changing, that is to say the things which move about in it are defined by the construction of the universe itself, and so as they approach the outer wall of the sphere, they never reach it, even though they could honestly travel forever towards it.

I will stop here, as I am new to the forum, and am unsure of how far I overstepped any bounds.

-Justin

[404erased]

Life is a question that cannot and will never be fully answered by living organisms in other ways than death, when life becomes nothing but it's nonliving building blocks. Questioning is of thought is of brain is of life is of existence. We simply, in death, become the answer to life. We stop thinking and questioning what is, and are just it, in a thoughtless but conscious state. Unless thought is separate from the brain.. which I find unlikely, and may be my theory's major flaw. Consciousness, though, is separate from the brain, from thought. Consciousness is what I believe to be existence.

Existence is infinite. You can never reach infinity. Physically or mentally. I think it is just something we have to accept. Otherwise we'll just keep going and going, searching for an edge, thinking we're almost there, and failing to realize there is no edge. It is just all there is. So I think infinity or existence is one of the things that is best left at infinity, existence. It just is. You can't reach it with thought. You just have to except the concept of infinity, which best explains existence, and cannot be explained, cannot be reached mentally.

Maybe I am reaching it by realizing it just exists? By symbolizing it with the lazy eight and saying "that's it." Maybe to reach it is to just realize it. Have I reached infinity? Whoaa! Maybe I have! I might as well just keep saying "whoa" from now to infinity..

In a sense I really don't know what I'm talking about.

[Ecstasy]

Why ask what life is, why not just live it to the fullest? At the end I am sure we'll come up with the answers on our own. I also want to add that each person's answer will be diffrent from the other as it will be based on their own experiences.
I know I am not thinking philosophically right now but lately I have been loving life so much that I stopped asking questions.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by Ecstasy

Why ask what life is, why not just live it to the fullest? At the end I am sure we'll come up with the answers on our own. I also want to add that each person's answer will be diffrent from the other as it will be based on their own experiences.
I know I am not thinking philosophically right now but lately I have been loving life so much that I stopped asking questions.

No one thinks about nothin that don't give them trouble. If life is livin for you; live it and never look back. And don't say you are not thinking philosophically. All thinking is philosophical. But, if you are at the end of philosophy; which is a happy life, don't think looking at it under a microscope will make it more charming. Lub it if its lubbable.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by 404erased

Life is a question that cannot and will never be fully answered by living organisms in other ways than death, when life becomes nothing but it's nonliving building blocks. Questioning is of thought is of brain is of life is of existence. We simply, in death, become the answer to life. We stop thinking and questioning what is, and are just it, in a thoughtless but conscious state. Unless thought is separate from the brain.. which I find unlikely, and may be my theory's major flaw. Consciousness, though, is separate from the brain, from thought. Consciousness is what I believe to be existence.

Existence is infinite. You can never reach infinity. Physically or mentally. I think it is just something we have to accept. Otherwise we'll just keep going and going, searching for an edge, thinking we're almost there, and failing to realize there is no edge. It is just all there is. So I think infinity or existence is one of the things that is best left at infinity, existence. It just is. You can't reach it with thought. You just have to except the concept of infinity, which best explains existence, and cannot be explained, cannot be reached mentally.

Maybe I am reaching it by realizing it just exists? By symbolizing it with the lazy eight and saying "that's it." Maybe to reach it is to just realize it. Have I reached infinity? Whoaa! Maybe I have! I might as well just keep saying "whoa" from now to infinity..

In a sense I really don't know what I'm talking about.

When I was Eighteen and the highschool informed me that they wouldn't press charges if I didn't come back I laid around for about a week starring at the tile ceiling above my bed that was full of countless little holes which I tried to count, and some of my brother's powerpuke from one of our wilder parties. It is amazing what qualities of color can show up in cheap wine puke on a dusty basement ceiling when it is given enough time to mature. But I digress. All the time my family was wondering if I would ever make more of my life then eating, sleeping, and thinking; I was laying there expending a minimum of effort and a maximum of brain power trying to figure everything out about existence. Thirty five odd years later I don't know if I have much progressed beyond that leisurely time of thought.

It is never a question in my mind of what we know, which will never be answered to our satisfaction; but, since we clearly know enough, of what shall we do with it. Second, and I want you to trust me on this; when we are young we wish our lives away. This is a mistake. Waiting for birthdays, Christmas, summer vacation, and finally for pay day and the weekend leads one to an infinite sort of wishing on what is equally infinitely slow in coming. It will get there on its own. Start getting ready for it before it gets by you. Life is the slippery slope. The incline is so slight that you have to push to ride, but after a while gravity takes up your slack. About thirty five you start smelling your brakes smokin; and after that holidays and birthday start slappin you in the face like a fan blade. You will find that life at least is not infinite, and when I bury a relative I feel like the Goddamned angel of death. I look at these people I have seen in their prime, and they're gone. All I can say about them is that they know. The smartest man I ever knew, we buried, and I knew then that he knew everything, certainly more than I for seeing both ends of life. We only have one form of infinity as people, and it is immortality, and all we can do to have that is to tap into existence in the form of other people. Do good. Make an impression. Be a fair witness to their lives and perhaps they will witness to yours. Have children to know pain. Have childen so you can learn to see with a child's eyes all over again. Peddle some energy into the cycle of life.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by justinupitt

Hi, I am new to the forum and would like to give a brief description of my understanding of the situation called reality. I feel like often the specifics are talked about, but the general is misunderstood. It seems logical to me to think that, in order to understand something specifically, one must also understand it generally; for what are terms like specific or general if not opposites of each other.

I also think that we want to learn something specifically about our reality (science, botany, genetics, etc.).

I will attempt to describe the general as I understand it. Forgive me if I rehash old points, I do so in ignorance.

I think of my existence in several ways. One way is physical, for what is physics if not my thrown ball decelerating by way of air. Another is metaphysical, which is to say, the stuff that makes the physical (similar to taking a step back and looking at the whole, only the whole can seem impossibly large at times).

I believe, and have said as much that the moral is opposed to the physical, while the metaphysical is not physical at all nor moral. But in reality, our reality questions are either physical or moral. And yes, specific knowledge begins with general knowledge. One is a natural extension of the other. Every bit of specific knowledge lets us say more of the genral character of anything.

I doubt that anyone will argue that we exist in a physical reality. What people will argue is how we exist in that physical reality. This is the nature of metaphysics, and also tends to be the "ignorant" nature of spirituality. I use the word ignorant not to offend, but to only describe the nature of spirituality as generally being devoid of pure scientific reason (god does not need science to prove he exists in order for people to believe he exists). This label applies only in the context of science, where statements do need to be "proven" in order for people to "truly" believe them.

I use prove and true in a tentative sense here, as I believe that the truest nature of truth can not be known unless it is already known. But I digress.

If you are seeking a definition here, try this: Religion and philosophy both seek truth, but religion takes much on faith and deals with iniinites as no philosophy of worth would.

When I try to find the center of my existence, I continuously find myself referring to a point inside of my jaw/head/neck. Perhaps because that is where my brain stem is(biology), or perhaps because of where I breath(psychology). Despite differing explanations, the fact remains. Then I think, am I a little person shaped figure when I visualize myself, or am I a sphere? I usually find a sphere to be more correct. I actually can never really visualize exactly where the location actually is, so I don't think of it as either. I think of it as an infinitely small point, so small that it becomes invisible, and even forgotten.

Most of us learn that the mind is the center of our being, and everyone else believes their belly is. I go with the belly believers only because I can't play the score without my organs.

This is to be expected though, as by my way of perceiving the world I would expect to have an infinitely small point, mainly because I don't think of it as a shape even though I can still locate it.

So if my consciousness emerges from a central point in my head, does it have to move to my different conscious faculties, or does it permeate them. This conception is often referred to in Eastern culture as chi. I don't quite view it the same, as I am talking about my consciousness now, and not my energy. Generally I have to debate this question. It must permeate me in a sense, as I am able to control my body at a moments notice (generally the time of neural pathways), so it must be continuously flowing of sorts. But when I think of specific action, is it my consciousness that travels to each fingers as I instruct them to type these words? Or are their movement merely results of my conscious power. I would hope this is not the case, as I do not want to think of my body from being separate from me, even if I do. I would rather think that we are one, functioning in harmony, the body is a direct source to access the physical world, and to cause change in it. The mind, in similar fashion is the direct source to itself. That is to say all of the memories incurred in a life time (memory being thought to be the retainment of sensory information, and understanding for access of that information).

Are you talking about cosciousness or self consciousness?

The interesting perception is to perceive these two differing views in unity, each existing in its own right as it does. Mind and body being simultaneously united and separated.

Now that I have established my understanding of myself (which is the simultaneous separation and unity of my mind and body), I can hope to establish my understanding of my reality, for what is reality but all of the things that makes me, my memories and my current perceptions (sight, sound, and the memory of those perceptions long after they have passed, even the continual memory of those perceptions long after they have passed).

At this stage I try to be an external observer (as most do) and visualize all of reality. It is very difficult to visualize as there are points that are "infinitely specific" and also those that are "infinitely general".

I use specific and general here again because they are defined simply by themselves. This enables their meaning to be abstracted to describe what they must. I use them to describe the description of the universe. That is to say that I view a infinitely specific point in the universe as something that, at time t, can be perfectly described in every aspect that description would be applicable to. This is probably impossible to do. But to give an example of my meaning, a specific point in the universe at time t would be a picture I see on my laptop. That point existed for me, even if only temporally. I use general to mean exactly the opposite of the same thing.

I can then only visualize the universe as a sphere. The outermost "layer" so to speak, would be infinity, ie something that can not be reached. It is a sphere because anywhere you were in the universe, you would never be able to reach beyond, or even to, infinity. If one wants to visualize a relatively large space ship moving towards the edge of the sphere from the center, and it is so big and fast that it actually will move "through" the edge of the sphere, or so we would think. As it approached infinity it would be "squashed". It would continue to maintain its velocity and would continue to move into space (maybe empty, maybe not). But in relation to the whole sphere, the parts of the ship closest to the edge would move less and less distance, and the parts of the ship farthest from the edge would "fall into" the parts "in front of" them. Relative to matter the spaceship could observe, the spaceship would maintain its velocity and acceleration (if any) and would continue to move into real, open space; ie, the ship could fly 100 light years towards the edge of the sphere, and encounter a galaxy where they lived, and the could travel forever towards the sphere and find an infinite # of galaxies. Even though the spaceship would never appear to move in relation to the sphere again (it would also appear infinitely "squashed") it would still be able to travel towards the edge of the sphere permanently.

The summarization of my visualization is merely a sphere with a property of not having a center merely because it would be infinitely small and not be able to be found. Similarly to the location of my consciousness, I still have an idea of where the center would be, imagining the sphere as small (baseball or bowling ball). It also has the property of changing, that is to say the things which move about in it are defined by the construction of the universe itself, and so as they approach the outer wall of the sphere, they never reach it, even though they could honestly travel forever towards it.

I will stop here, as I am new to the forum, and am unsure of how far I overstepped any bounds.

-Justin

[justinupitt]

Originally Posted by Fido

Are you talking about cosciousness or self consciousness?

I am talking about my conception of my personal consciousness as I can not "look in on" other's consciousness' in the same way that I can with my own. If you are asking if I believe that we share a universal consciousness, I dont know, but I visualize and understand my actual perception of reality as a unique and individual consciousness.

[Fido]

Originally Posted by justinupitt

I am talking about my conception of my personal consciousness as I can not "look in on" other's consciousness' in the same way that I can with my own. If you are asking if I believe that we share a universal consciousness, I dont know, but I visualize and understand my actual perception of reality as a unique and individual consciousness.

Well, I guess I was trying to say that all animals are conscious except for the ones leg up on the road, but humans can sometimes be consciously self concsious. It is possible to be conscious of yourself in the process of being conscious, of being one step removed in the process of your life. I do think it is also possible to be conscious of the press and will of humanity. Sometimes we can be conscious of being a part of or against some great push of humanity for progress or reaction. I think for us Americans that spirit of conquest and necessity has motivated us long after the world saw through it. The common will is a hard thing to deny.

[404erased]

Originally Posted by Fido

When I was Eighteen and the highschool informed me that they wouldn't press charges if I didn't come back I laid around for about a week starring at the tile ceiling above my bed that was full of countless little holes which I tried to count, and some of my brother's powerpuke from one of our wilder parties. It is amazing what qualities of color can show up in cheap wine puke on a dusty basement ceiling when it is given enough time to mature. But I digress. All the time my family was wondering if I would ever make more of my life then eating, sleeping, and thinking; I was laying there expending a minimum of effort and a maximum of brain power trying to figure everything out about existence. Thirty five odd years later I don't know if I have much progressed beyond that leisurely time of thought.

It is never a question in my mind of what we know, which will never be answered to our satisfaction; but, since we clearly know enough, of what shall we do with it. Second, and I want you to trust me on this; when we are young we wish our lives away. This is a mistake. Waiting for birthdays, Christmas, summer vacation, and finally for pay day and the weekend leads one to an infinite sort of wishing on what is equally infinitely slow in coming. It will get there on its own. Start getting ready for it before it gets by you. Life is the slippery slope. The incline is so slight that you have to push to ride, but after a while gravity takes up your slack. About thirty five you start smelling your brakes smokin; and after that holidays and birthday start slappin you in the face like a fan blade. You will find that life at least is not infinite, and when I bury a relative I feel like the Goddamned angel of death. I look at these people I have seen in their prime, and they're gone. All I can say about them is that they know. The smartest man I ever knew, we buried, and I knew then that he knew everything, certainly more than I for seeing both ends of life. We only have one form of infinity as people, and it is immortality, and all we can do to have that is to tap into existence in the form of other people. Do good. Make an impression. Be a fair witness to their lives and perhaps they will witness to yours. Have children to know pain. Have childen so you can learn to see with a child's eyes all over again. Peddle some energy into the cycle of life.

I agree with you. That life is a thing to be lived amongst ourselves. I feel like maybe you misunderstood me, like you thought I was saying death is the ultimate goal. But what I was saying is that life shouldn't be questioned in life because we will find the answer in death. Thus leaving more time to live, to witness, to be witnessed, to do good.

The problem is that we do die. Our brains do stop thinking. And we can't help but worry about death. And realizing that death is just the answer to life will put us at peace, and allow us to live uninhibited.