It is disconcerting that while we invest inexhaustible resources--and time searng for the beginning--we (intellingent beings) after millenia of existence on earth--are not able to explain the most basic of things--life.
Is beingness (life) the beginning or did the beginning come before intelligent conceptualisation of there being a beginning?. If the begining is a priori to consciousness---how then shall we ever know it is the beginning? On Dec 27 2010, 1:13 pm, einseele <einse...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Life always struck me as having an absolute property. A thing is > > either alive of not alive – there is no gradual progression in- > > between. > > What is striking you here above is nothing else that a simple property > of any discreet chain/group, where there is nothing in between its > elements (actually the instance in between is not "nothing", but > "null") > For instance integers, ASCII, or the apples in that basket, if you > simplify enough, you get just one concept which is a discreet group. > > So is not worth to say it so complicated as "the absolute property of > life", which besides is not as simple as you stated, why do you think > a "thing is either alive or not alive" ?, and why do you believe that > the answer has anything to do with Life. > > When you say Life is a concept, and not a matter of words or > abstractions, what does that suppose to mean, will you describe a > concept which is not an abstraction. > > > > > > > My personal inclination is towards the possibility of an unknowable > > origin and sustaining force of life itself. This force which keeps the > > whole from disintegrating into its constituent parts. It is > > “unknowable” in the sense that our reasoning faculties are part and > > parcel of “our being alive” and we can not objectively stand back to > > sufficiently examine the subject at hand. > > > I would thus discard the phrases “meaningless” and “in language only” > > for the concept of “life” used by some responders while retaining the > > phrase “eluding definition” when such a definition is sought for the > > concept of “life” in general. We can at most define “life” for very > > specific applications as some responders have emphasized. > > > On Dec 24, 12:11 pm, Awori <awori.ach...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > In heated discourse about the meaning of nature---I was one time asked > > > to define life. This is what I said: "Life is a moment in space and > > > time". To my disappointment--I got no reaction from the group. Is it > > > because I was absurdly wrong? I have continued to use this response as > > > my standard explanation of what life is. Has anyone in out there given > > > this age old subject a better look? > > > > AA- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to epistemology@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to epistemology+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en.
